'White people are afraid of black people because of violent tendencies' says the white officer that just violently manhandled a 98 lb woman ostensively for being black.
OK, so then he agrees that people should absolutely fear the police then, right? Because FAR more of them commit violent acts per capita, and overall, than black people. And if 'fear' is an excuse for trained, well equipped police with backup to kill unarmed black men, do not armed black men have more reason to fear police and kill them? They really need to rethink their MO, and the thought process behind excusing homicide with the blanket excuse of 'fear', because that excuse goes both ways.

Slippery slope fallacy.
"If we allow gays to marry, what's next? Can I marry my dog?"

No-one is talking about banning guns. I wouldn't support that myself. I have friends who are hunters and target shooters.

But be reasonable; you can have a gun for target shooting or hunting or even "home defence" (if you're really that paranoid), but you don't need an AR-15 or anything with a high capacity magazine and it's not unreasonable to make sure that people who own guns aren't complete nutjobs.

NZ is in the top 15% of gun ownership rates per capita (22 guns per 100 people), but our average annual firearm homicide rate for the last 30 years or so is ~0.2 deaths per 100k people.

Compare that to the USA. The US tops the chart of gun ownership with 112 guns per 100 people. So the gun ownership rate is 5 times that of NZ, but the average annual firearm homicide rate is 4 deaths per 100k people. That's 20 times the number of murders. Even if you allow for the higher gun ownership rate, you're still 4 times worse than NZ.

And the difference is simple: we have sensible gun ownership laws.

I saw a great post the other day.
"The conservative mind:
Abortions? BAN THEM!
Gay Marriage? BAN IT!
Marijuana? BAN IT!
Guns? eh, banning things never works"

But hey, you're gonna need those guns for when Donary Trumpton ushers in a tyrannical dictatorship. Good luck with that; let me know how you get on with an AR-15 versus a predator drone.

Knives are just as deadly as guns, guns simply allow you to kill people quicker. Of course, I consider a knife to be an actual knife, 3.5 inches or greater and not a simple pen knife.

As far as the statistic, I simply typed in Google something along the equivalent of "Number of violent crimes by country per capita". That was literally one of the first results. The per capita is important because obviously the greater population will skew the stats otherwise. The fact is that crime is going to happen as long as underlying social issues remain unfixed. What weapon you are hurt or killed with really doesn't matter.

He makes a great point that's often missed with 'how are we 'the land of the free', yet we have more people, and also more per capita, in prison that ANY other country'?
He did miss the follow up that should have gone something like ... 'How are we 'the home of the brave' when most of us are terrified of silly, barely dangerous things that hurt few if any people, but are conversely willing to ignore actually extremely dangerous and deadly things if they make us money or support our political stances'?

Well, I guess no one ever called us 'the country of the rational' or 'the United States of the sane'.

"Access to guns" certainly plays a role, but I'm not convinced that it is even the biggest factor. In web researching gun violence rates and mass shooting rates by country *per capita*, I've found that the US isn't really as much of a "wild west" / lawless nation as the media portrays it.

For example:
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197-obama-said-mass-shootings-dont-happen-in-advanced-countries-like-in-us-one-chart-proves-him-wrong/
has interesting data. It is *clearly* biased / written with an "agenda", and there are other problems with it (small countries with one or two incidents rule the top of the chart), but it is interesting nonetheless.

I think culture has as big or bigger impact as anything else.


As to your final paragraph, I'm hesitant to paint all "terrorists and mass-shooters" with the "pathetic little shit" brush. I think the tendency to dismiss them in that way when trying to delve deeper into the questions of *why* does us a disservice in terms of preventing and/or limiting those people and incidents.

It's sorta like examining Hitler. Went about as evil and wrong as a human being has ever gone, and so we often want to just leave it at that. But I think that there have probably been plenty of garden-variety non-famous people who have been as evil and wrong as Hitler, but simply didn't have the unique level of power and opportunity to, uh, "sink to his depths".

Might be lies but an fyi:

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/09/20/441457924/gulf-states-fend-off-criticism-about-doing-little-for-syrian-refugees


"The Saudi Foreign Ministry challenged the charges by issuing official numbers that are impossible to verify independently, saying "the Kingdom has received around 2.5 million Syrians since the beginning of the conflict." A Saudi scholar told the BBC that thousands of Syrians receive free health care and education in Saudi Arabia.

An op-ed in the New York Times by Yousef al-Otaiba, the UAE's ambassador in Washington, contested the widely reported statistic of "zero" refugees in the Gulf. "Since the beginning of the Syrian crisis, the U.A.E. has welcomed more than 100,000 Syrians, joining 140,000 already residing in the emirates," he wrote. "The Emirates' per capita commitment to the Syrian crisis exceeds virtually every other country's participation."

I don't want guns banned, but I want them to be like in most other civilized countries where shootings, mass shootings and gun suicides are far less per capita. Severely controlled.

America has an obsession and even addiction to guns, which is shown in the people trying to blame everything else - @Mordhaus you say stuff like "incorrectly secured gun" as if the incorrectly secured somehow negates the gun part. If it was a incorrectly secured handgrenade, what then? Or an incorrectly secured machete?

I'm not saying you're a bad person at all (or tha other pro-gun people are), but this is what alcoholics or substance abusers do about their substance.

Nope. Sorry. You're wrong.
I lived in East Palo Alto during the time it was the most dangerous (most murders per capita) city in the US (perhaps the world, I forget). At the time it was well over 90% 'black'. It didn't make me racist.
So I have 'walked in their shoes', except for the arresting and abusing people parts. I'll NEVER sing their tune.
I was raised by a beautiful woman of color, and have known hundreds of others that were good people, so I know full well all dark skinned people are not criminal low lives. I've also known many a white person that was a piece of shit low life scumbag that I avoid at all costs. These officers should walk a few miles in my shoes and sing a different tune, not the other way around.

I would love to spend less time thinking about the US and how messed up parts of it are. Unfortunately, I live in a world where that's not possible.

At least until China buys you out, the US is still the biggest influence on the rest of the world.. economically, politically and militarily.

Right now, NZ is part of the TPPA talks that will directly affect the way country is run.

So yeah, I comment on the US.

Besides, this is the 21st century. The people in my life are not decided by anything as archaic as national boundaries or even geography. I have friends and family all over the globe.

And @Mordhaus Norway has
- 6th highest per capita income (US is 10)
- 3rd highest educational attainment (US is 5)
- 5th highest on the anti corruption index (US doesn't even make top 10)
- 10th on environmental health (again, US doesn't make top 10)
- 8th in the "Good country" index (US is 21)
- 7th on Forbes list of "best for business" (US is 18)

On pretty much any ranking you look at, Norway is rated as a great place to live. Objectively, it outperforms the USA on almost every metric. As does NZ and Ireland

The US is actually a great country. It has an amazing natural landscape, has fantastic science and technology and the people are (for the most part) incredibly friendly. But it's held back by its refusal to acknowledge its faults and its frankly appalling political system. You do lots of things extremely well, but self-reflection is not one of them.

I feel like both of you likely made mistaken 'assumptions' in your arguments.
I can't understand how a survey can say 'consumer prices are 36.9% higher there' yet 'local purchasing power is 14.29% higher in the US'...Those numbers don't seem to jibe, or really mean anything without more info. Is that per dollar, per capita, average salary, mean salary, what? If things really cost 36.9% higher there, we SHOULD have near 25% more 'purchasing power' per dollar here, not 14....but you also have to ignore that they have far more dollars per person (even after paying higher taxes) to make your point...and you must also count 'national oil revenue' as 'personal tax' to come up with your numbers...if you did the same for the US, I would accept that, but you don't...as if the fed only gets money from personal taxes.

EDIT: Also, are your numbers AFTER tax income? I note they are AVERAGE incomes, and in the US, most people make far less than the average, because the top 5% takes 50%GDP (+-). Remove the top 5% and the bottom 5% and you'll see the numbers change drastically, and it will give you a much more realistic picture of the average person's income. I seriously doubt the wage disparity is nearly as pronounced in Norway, but I don't really KNOW.

All you complain about them paying for (whether they use the service or not) is the same in the US, yet the (underfunded) services provided in the US for the money are almost useless, so a near TOTAL waste. Do you not understand that? We have decided that, in a society, it benefits YOU if your neighbors children get educated, and also if your neighbors don't go bankrupt over medical bills, and it benefits you to not throw destitute elderly out on the streets, and even if you don't drive, it benefits you to have roads in your area...etc.

I find it hilarious that YOU are outraged and indignant FOR THEM, while they are apparently MUCH happier with the system they live in than you are with yours. You might think about that a minute.

They have less than half the debt for other reasons, many of which are due to the fact that they have an exportable national resource.

The 3 times wage is an assumption. Norway's average monthly salary is 4,451 Euros, equivalent to 5,056 US dollars. The average US salary is 3,640 US dollars per month. I have no idea where he got his numbers from, but these are factual and not anecdotal.

Their cost of living is ludicrous compared to ours, so you have to factor that in when you compare their slightly higher wages.

Consumer Prices in United States are 36.90% lower than in Norway

Consumer Prices Including Rent in United States are 34.18% lower than in Norway

Rent Prices in United States are 27.12% lower than in Norway

Restaurant Prices in United States are 52.31% lower than in Norway

Groceries Prices in United States are 25.87% lower than in Norway

Local Purchasing Power in United States is 14.29% higher than in Norway

Their system is also inherently unfair if you do not use the 'free' stuff. Don't have kids because you are responsible? Doesn't matter, you are paying for them. Don't get unemployed because you show up to work on time and do your job well, doesn't matter, you are paying for others. We do the same in the US, but it is far below the per capita level they pay.

What they don't get, and what some people here are obviously oblivious to as well, is that NOTHING is free. Someone pays, even if you don't. Their system simply nationalizes almost every single company and forces everyone to pay for everyone else, no matter what they do or how responsible they are. Also, note that they nationalized most companies, because a company in any type of free market system faced with draconian rules and corporate taxes like Norway's will simply cut their losses and offshore their work.

So, their system is only sustainable if the government owns the companies, everyone gives up most of their personal wealth, and they are lucky enough to have oil. Yeah, I am soooooo jealous of them.

From what the police report, there were over 45 shootings by police in Chicago last year (well over 2% of the total shootings in Chicago, and 4% of shooting deaths by under .45% of the population), and well over 1/3 of those shot by cops were killed last year VS the average of only 17% of those shot by non-cops being killed, so if you're being shot, you sure don't want it to be a cop on the other end of that gun or you have at least twice the chance to end up dead over a non-cop shooting.

I think it's clear which group is most threatening per capita, and which group they usually threaten. "Blacks" are 32% of the 2700000 population, or about 864,000 people, from which there were 83 homicides, or less than .01% of that population...
The police have 12,244 from which there were 17 homicides, or .14% of that population...
...so it's 14 times more likely that any single officer will kill you than it is that any single black man will...14 times more likely!
So who's threatening now? Who's the biggest threat?

I didn't say they were killing millions, I said they were trained to kill...

US police conflict resolution is at the point of a gun as the first step. Most other countries where a reasonable rule of law exists teach conflict resolution prior to drawing weapons on people.

APC's, body armour, fully automatic weapons etc are not the tools of a police force, they are the tools of an army, but somehow small towns now feature APC's and heavily armed under trained SWAT or tactical response forces. Even US military personal have made the comment, all of the equipment, none of the training or discipline. If you are armed to the teeth and taught to shoot first/ask questions later, it's no surprises that your death by cops tally is so high...

For example, total Australian police shootings in the period 2008-2011 (for a population of 25 odd million or 1/13th of the US) came to /drumroll .... 14

And 7 deaths in Victoria over that time raised eyebrows.

http://theconversation.com/shoot-to-kill-the-use-of-lethal-force-by-police-in-australia-34578

US police, on the other hand, eclipse that total every single year, often by more than the per capita average (often by much more than the per capita average).

2015 (total: 150)
2014 (total: 625)
2013 (total: 342)
2012 (total: 611)
2011 (total: 165)
2010 (total: 227)
2009 (total: 63)

And it's just amazing in how many of those cases, the words "cleared of wrong doing by the district attorney, city paid out to a civil trial for wrongful death" appear. Or "shot while running away", "shot while unarmed" etc.

And to be absolutely clear, I have nothing but respect for most of the people that choose to bear that duty, but they are being trained to go to the gun first and foremost. If that is the first and last tool to resolve conflict, it's no wonder there are so many deaths...

How would I know what the video was about if I didn't watch it. After the first one, that was nothing but a waste of my time, juxtaposing comments and (faked? Likely considering it's made my McIntosh who makes a living faking videos) web page screenshots, I ignored the other 4 assuming you put your best foot first.

So wait, you're saying the anti Sarkeesian "faked" video you linked was made by her 'partner'?!? WTF?!? Now that is odd.

Yes, we know she's a bad example of a 'feminist' trying to change gaming. I'm not a fan, as I've said repeatedly.

You contend she's also vocally anti-sex worker (waiting for the quoted proof)...which begs the question, if she IS a well known anti-sex worker activist, why would said sex workers go to her for support?! That means this entire video is based on a fraud, by the sex workers, pretending they thought she would 'support' a sex worker rape victim when they really were just trying to troll her because they don't like her stance...allegedly.

I'm still waiting for non-faked clear evidence of what you say about her to convince me....if you care. I simply don't, I haven't thought about her since gamer gate was in the daily news. Maybe she is totally anti-sex worker, fraud, liar, trixter, hustler...but you have not provided a whit of evidence to that effect beyond her use of the words "prostituted women", which carries the connotation you bring with you so is not proof of her distain.

I'm mid 40's, white, and lived (among many other places) in the murder capital of the world (East Palo Alto) when it was just that, the murder capital of the world (more murders per capita than anywhere on the planet in the late 80's) so sheltered is not a word I would use to describe myself. Untrusting of people who have an obvious bias, yes, I am certainly that, but I am always willing to examine new information with a critical eye (but not propaganda like the first set of videos you linked, or non sequiturs like the third article you linked) and I'm always willing change my viewpoint if it seems it's wrong in light of new evidence. I'm waiting for that evidence. The 3 articles you linked were 2/3 on topic, but amounted to only commentaries lambasting her for saying two words, that's not evidence of her tone/meaning when saying them, the third was completely off topic, as was the first video (the only one I wasted my time with) and I don't take the word of someone who obviously hates her with a passion as evidence, sorry.

@radx

As I mentioned in our previous conversations, my expectation is that once significant structural reform goes through, all the things I talked about before - much of the debt will be forgiven to speed up recovery for Greece and the rest of Europe. If that's not the case, then I agree that the policy was misguided. But it's the whole issue of trust again. Debt forgiveness certainly won't come before the fact, especially when a country like Germany is the main decision maker.

Putting that in perspective, I still think Merkel is broadly making the politically realistic best of a bad situation. I mean Merkel herself, from what I have read, is facing not insignificant opposition from a euro-skeptic right. Suppose she were more bold in funding Greece, was thrown out of office, and the policy abruptly reversed, what would that accomplish?

I can't speak to the specifics, but all those examples you mention of corruption and/or bad policy throughout the austerity process do not sound good. I have no doubt there were instances of malpractice or favoritism, and I hope if they are credible, they are investigated. I can only really argue on the merits of the broad intentions of the policy.

I would agree that the general attitude towards the Greeks being lazy and reaping what they sowed is unjustified. As an example, public sector workers did enjoy unjustified job security and there was a generously low retirement age compared to the rest of Europe. But much of the population didn't benefit from that early retirement or work in the public sector. From memory, actually measures like hours worked per capita were roughly in line or higher than the rest of Europe.

But unfortunately the brunt of the repercussions are borne by the populace who at best are responsible for not demanding more from their politicians because like mentioned before, the beneficiaries have emigrated and squirreled their ill gotten money away.