In Romania, students in political science do annual practical work. The more you go on that path, the more experience you have. By the time you finish the Doctoral Thesis you have 5+ years experience in various levels

Voting businessmen in office to represent public good is a "Nono" here. This is why they dont bother to run.

China has the most efficient political meritocracy so far. By far.

This is why they are so strong. You need 30+ years ox XP before you are allowed to become part of the Political Bureau

@everyone need your help guys.. https://youtu.be/k4aB5vR24GQ

Privatisation - Public Private Partnership is very controversial in the UK.

> So the US Govt doesn't have enough administrative capacity to disarm the outlaws.. Than it's impossible to enforce other good laws in Healthcare.. Really flawed.
@Yussuki ₪

The major flaws there are that US Federal government is not Constitutionally allowed to do either of those. In fact, they have a limited opposite duty to prevent states from abridging RTKBA, as "incorporated" by our 14th Amendment. Beyond FFC or various frauds, or some import controls, their obligation for health care is to stay out of it.

This is for railways in the UK . Pretty controversial

OMG .... Free Market is a myth..

> Btw, how much does a polic officer earn in the US? I mean fresh from the Academy. Rookie
@Yussuki ₪
$23k to $140k depending on jurisdiction, and in the latter (eg, places like San Francisco), potentially $70k during academy training. More if they do the right nepotistic connections for overtime or private assignment extra duty.

Unsurpisingly, that results in some massive differences in skills. Surprisingly, some of the highest paid jurisdictions have massive civil rights violations, where cops belong dead or in prison, but also generally black markets for drugs that drive up violence and costs of not just extreme police budgets, but secondary costs of insurance, security, and repairs and replacement to vandalism and thefts.

Wow didnt know that

> Guys, just ban every weapon and problem solved
@Yussuki ₪
Why not just exterminate humans then? Far easier and cheaper.

Given that most felony assaults and homicides are perpetrated with blunt objects and "personal weapons" (human body parts), a nation of headless quadriplegics with no objects heavier than a wiffle ball but lighter than a huge boulder, would be needed for that uninformed but common suggestion. Not sure how we'd operate kitchens or many industrial operations with no knives? Firearms are used in less than a quarter of such serious crimes, but far more defensive uses, as well as being pretty serious tools around farms. And, the USA is weird internationally in that our foundational law is based around citizen rights to remove or exterminate kings or wannabes, albeit our society has been twisted in ways where if we more often shot qualified "Domestic Enemies", that'd mean most Democrats, Republicans, and many others, without clear process to ensure the alternative met Jeffersonian ideals.

Hm. Exterminating ppl is not an economically wise decision, Sir. ^_^

Guns create more problems than they solve.

I also understand that a society with fearful individuals tends to overuse violence. I also understand a time delay that would render such a decision to ban guns inefficient. Since it will take a lot of time and effort to disarm the outlaws. But its not impossible if you offer them sufficient incentives to do so 🙂

Having a Social Scoring System in which a law-abiding citizen is rewarded would be more efficient than punishing ppl (I believe)

Or?

Interesting point - Not having a choice leads to an imoral decision Hm

The USA has competing hate cult (so-called church pseudo-moralist) gangs, Blue Wall Gangs of police as mercenaries to crooked politicians, and such a conflicted system of laws that the average so-called adult perpetrates thousands of major crimes as defined by badly broken and malicious laws. We can't create Constitutionally legitimate, functional immigration policy, never mind health care systems, while the IRS, our primary Federal tax agency, is enabled by a major historic fraud when a lame duck Sec. of State (Philander Knox) fraudulently certified our 16th Amendment as if ratified, when it never legitimately was.

What defines "law abiding" when all those bad actors, if military or many government roles, are not obeying the law if they FAIL to shoot each other?

Given global warming and potential for a mass extinction event with the beyond nasty interim quality of life involved, I wouldn't be so quick to claim a few billion fewer hairless bipedal apes wouldn't be positive economic change. Pretty much all options in that arena are not exactly what most people would call desirable, admittedly.

https://cdn.mises.org/Egalitarianism%20as%20a%20Revolt%20Against%20Nature,%20and%20Other%20Essays_2.pdf

Mr Loki. You like the current state of things regarding guns ?

I don’t see the YouTube livestream

Hey im ANtiGuns 😄

Or at least Anti Big Guns. Gas pistols and pepper pistols are fine 😄

Zino stick around, i'm your Huckleberry 😉

Sure 🙏

I grew up in a farming area, where 12-15 year olds with lower caliber rifles were seen as helping the neighbors with varmint control, or learning life skills. One farmer kept firearms stored outside his house proper -- in an unlocked cabinet in the workshop over a garage out back. No one did anything that drew police or required an emergency room, as safe use and realistic risks was part of normal childhood education.

I've worked in cities where I've carried a sidearm and it's a PITA, plus elevated stress working conditions to be around risks that drive that need. I've been certified to teach firearm safety and self defense courses, several recognized as legal standards for concealed carry permits under illegal but prolific laws of many states, as a major US Constitutional right is their use to kill certain vaguely defined classes of corrupt officials (who in turn, are inherently incompetent to regulate citizens in that role). I've had more firearm safety training than some jurisdictions require of police.
I've done some training alongside police, including reckless arrogant dimwit liars who I was glad to see flunk out, and others who are mature skilled individuals. I have been in situations where I've been lawfully entitled to kill humans, but have always found other ways to handle those situations, which is a key issue of some wannabe firearm users who perhaps really shouldn't have access to them. I've worked around potentially lethal industrial environments where one could only hope that safe and reliable systems or tools as firearms are (reckless humans not included) were possible to design.

But, overall, when most safety issues where firearms are potentially needed against other humans reflect rights-oppressive drug policies, and other political corruption, if we had honest, functional government, it'd be far easier to reduce social stressors that are unhealthy to live around. Firearms are tools whose use reflects that, but are not the cause.

I see.. Hm. Loki would you agree to have a Scoring System for firearms, starting from a pepper pistol (with people of low score - fellons, antisocial, bullies and so on) and Co2 Gas pistols for people who are as responsibile as you ? People that you could count on handleing dangerous situations in a good manner?

Most situations where use of lethal force is legally and ethically justified are ones where good choices are already missing.

Yes good point

Do you have the principle of proportionality in US Gun Law? Meaning that if some1 attacks you, your reaction must be of equal proportion to the attack ?

Most states require "imminent threat of death or major bodily injury"

in order to defend yourself with lethal force

Oh. That is quite subjective..

We have that also, but it goes with the proportionality principle both when a judge decides

Shooting some1 when he attacs you with a knife is consideret unproportional.

Exception being in your home or in defence of an incapacited person or defending family

Proportional defense only applies to lesser crimes. Once someone demonstrates ability and imminent intent for felony assault (which does not require completion as battery), arson, rape, or homicides, lethal force is justified, to attempt to "stop", not kill per se.

Any restrictions on access to particular firearms is blatantly illegal were US foundational law honestly enforced. There are practical issues where any firearm one can conveniently carry, or hand hold, is marginal as to rapid stopping power. Your list of toys or sub-lethal weapons do not apply, and for citizens (unlike police who have a duty to attempt to protect perp's they arrest), there's rarely a case where sub-lethal force is lawfully justified when lethal force is not.

Guys-- Black ppl are so rare in this part of the world that when you see one, its soo exciting :))

Loki im curious: In US, when demonstrating the imminent intent for felony assault - can you use the criminal record of the attacker (his past history) ?

Is that proof admitable in court ?