New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Stuff that’s happening in the world that may pertain to our survival. Please keep political debates off the forum.

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13076
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Home where my thought's escaping

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by Stercutus » Tue Mar 26, 2019 6:21 pm

Sarin formula is already available on line. Not a easy as making it out of flour but still.

Likely it does not get made more often because well, it kills people really easily and will very likely kill whoever is trying to make it, especially in a home lab or even a well equipped terrorist lab. The stuff is really fucking dangerous.


People get killed making meth all the time and that formula is everywhere, often on YouTube.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

User avatar
moab
* * * * *
Posts: 3536
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 7:07 pm

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by moab » Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm

I wrote a long tactical piece on this after watching the video. Because I didn't believe I could have an opinion without first seeing what happened.

But now after reading the entire thread. I don't think it's necessary. And I don't wish to post it. I'm barely able to post this. As I fear retribution. As anyone with a pro gun rights stance these days gets labeled a white supremacist, redneck, imbecile that likes to beat his wife. Or someone without the wherewithal to have an intelligent discussion on the subject. So that conversation should be banned?

The aftermath of these shootings and much of today's media goals is really about the rich controlling the poor. From our rights to self defense. To our freedom of speech. To how we think about climate change because big business doesn't want us doing anything about it - that might infringe on their ability to make more money.

The US government will only go so far in curbing our rights as long as there are enough guns to control them and not the other way around. Or at least put up a good fight. And for those that think a semi automatic rifle can't take on a tank. It's hard to get soldiers to kill their own people. A revolution would be messy at best. No sure winner. At least not until the powers that be tie up all the guns. "To protect us."

But at least we're talking about the potential causes, ramifications and solutions here. And not on how to simply avoid this tactically in the future. Like take away guns. Harden sites. Etc. etc.

I've watched the video. Any number of guns could have accomplished the same task. Taking away assault weapons isn't going to change that.

What really alarms me is posts like those from our NZ member. Please don't take any offense to this. I don't mean any. And I am generalizing. But it seems like a forgone conclusion that you just do as your masters say. Because that's your culture? Someday you will wake up. The seemingly little things we are fighting now in terms of rights in the US. Will be gone. And a whole other level of control will encompass countries like yours. Just like it has for hundreds of years. Because people didn't understand the important place guns hold in a democracy.

The reason the US "culture" on guns is different. Is because we fought against that forgone conclusion that we should follow our masters. And fought and died to defend that idea. Which grew into democracy. And flawed or not. You have to decide if your going to be a sheep and accept control easily or stand up for your rights as a human being. And live like a person that deserves everything a rich person does. Or a person in control. Or a tyrannical government does. Or whatever you want to call it. When you take guns out of this equation you damage democracy. And it's ability to protect itself. I don't support gun rights so I can shoot a home intruder or a bear. I believe in gun rights as a balancer in the government's ability to control the populace. And that's exactly what NZ is doing to its citizens now. And they are so brainwashed. They're going along with it like the livestock they care for. Again, no offense. But it's true. There's been little if any resistance to this change in gun ownership rights. Because the elites - state it so.

And no. I'm not a MAGA hat wearing republican. I'm actually very liberal about most of my beliefs. Maybe a libertarian. I don't know. I just know that you don't have to be a genius to see what's going on in the world. It's completely run by greed. And those with the power will not stop to solidify that power. Into something that can never be questioned. Thankfully here in the US we can question. We can discuss. We can protest. And we can work on solutions that curb this kind of heinous behavior. While still trying to keep our democracy in tact. And taking away guns isn't the answer. That's only going to get us further away from our rights. Because the actual real life foundation that upholds those rights is our ability to keep a tyrannical government in check. And it seems to me we've got way too many tyrannical governments solidifying power - with guns of their own. And a greed backed corporate elite that will stop at nothing to solidify power.

If this is to political. I don't apologize. We of all groups should be having these discussions. Because it's issues like this that will affect the very reason we are here - the potential for chaos in the world. Whether it be man made or from nature.
"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why would we let them have ideas?" Josef Stalin

User avatar
flybynight
* * * * *
Posts: 2694
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by flybynight » Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:13 pm

moab wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm
I wrote a long tactical piece on this after watching the video. Because I didn't believe I could have an opinion without first seeing what happened.

But now after reading the entire thread. I don't think it's necessary. And I don't wish to post it. I'm barely able to post this. As I fear retribution. As anyone with a pro gun rights stance these days gets labeled a white supremacist, redneck, imbecile that likes to beat his wife. Or someone without the wherewithal to have an intelligent discussion on the subject. So that conversation should be banned?

The aftermath of these shootings and much of today's media goals is really about the rich controlling the poor. From our rights to self defense. To our freedom of speech. To how we think about climate change because big business doesn't want us doing anything about it - that might infringe on their ability to make more money.

The US government will only go so far in curbing our rights as long as there are enough guns to control them and not the other way around. Or at least put up a good fight. And for those that think a semi automatic rifle can't take on a tank. It's hard to get soldiers to kill their own people. A revolution would be messy at best. No sure winner. At least not until the powers that be tie up all the guns. "To protect us."

But at least we're talking about the potential causes, ramifications and solutions here. And not on how to simply avoid this tactically in the future. Like take away guns. Harden sites. Etc. etc.

I've watched the video. Any number of guns could have accomplished the same task. Taking away assault weapons isn't going to change that.

What really alarms me is posts like those from our NZ member. Please don't take any offense to this. I don't mean any. And I am generalizing. But it seems like a forgone conclusion that you just do as your masters say. Because that's your culture? Someday you will wake up. The seemingly little things we are fighting now in terms of rights in the US. Will be gone. And a whole other level of control will encompass countries like yours. Just like it has for hundreds of years. Because people didn't understand the important place guns hold in a democracy.

The reason the US "culture" on guns is different. Is because we fought against that forgone conclusion that we should follow our masters. And fought and died to defend that idea. Which grew into democracy. And flawed or not. You have to decide if your going to be a sheep and accept control easily or stand up for your rights as a human being. And live like a person that deserves everything a rich person does. Or a person in control. Or a tyrannical government does. Or whatever you want to call it. When you take guns out of this equation you damage democracy. And it's ability to protect itself. I don't support gun rights so I can shoot a home intruder or a bear. I believe in gun rights as a balancer in the government's ability to control the populace. And that's exactly what NZ is doing to its citizens now. And they are so brainwashed. They're going along with it like the livestock they care for. Again, no offense. But it's true. There's been little if any resistance to this change in gun ownership rights. Because the elites - state it so.

And no. I'm not a MAGA hat wearing republican. I'm actually very liberal about most of my beliefs. Maybe a libertarian. I don't know. I just know that you don't have to be a genius to see what's going on in the world. It's completely run by greed. And those with the power will not stop to solidify that power. Into something that can never be questioned. Thankfully here in the US we can question. We can discuss. We can protest. And we can work on solutions that curb this kind of heinous behavior. While still trying to keep our democracy in tact. And taking away guns isn't the answer. That's only going to get us further away from our rights. Because the actual real life foundation that upholds those rights is our ability to keep a tyrannical government in check. And it seems to me we've got way too many tyrannical governments solidifying power - with guns of their own. And a greed backed corporate elite that will stop at nothing to solidify power.

If this is to political. I don't apologize. We of all groups should be having these discussions. Because it's issues like this that will affect the very reason we are here - the potential for chaos in the world. Whether it be man made or from nature.
Copied for future quote use,reread and posterity
As of now I bet you got me wrong

John Titor was right

drop bear
* * *
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by drop bear » Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:57 pm

moab wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm
I wrote a long tactical piece on this after watching the video. Because I didn't believe I could have an opinion without first seeing what happened.

But now after reading the entire thread. I don't think it's necessary. And I don't wish to post it. I'm barely able to post this. As I fear retribution. As anyone with a pro gun rights stance these days gets labeled a white supremacist, redneck, imbecile that likes to beat his wife. Or someone without the wherewithal to have an intelligent discussion on the subject. So that conversation should be banned?

The aftermath of these shootings and much of today's media goals is really about the rich controlling the poor. From our rights to self defense. To our freedom of speech. To how we think about climate change because big business doesn't want us doing anything about it - that might infringe on their ability to make more money.

The US government will only go so far in curbing our rights as long as there are enough guns to control them and not the other way around. Or at least put up a good fight. And for those that think a semi automatic rifle can't take on a tank. It's hard to get soldiers to kill their own people. A revolution would be messy at best. No sure winner. At least not until the powers that be tie up all the guns. "To protect us."

But at least we're talking about the potential causes, ramifications and solutions here. And not on how to simply avoid this tactically in the future. Like take away guns. Harden sites. Etc. etc.

I've watched the video. Any number of guns could have accomplished the same task. Taking away assault weapons isn't going to change that.

What really alarms me is posts like those from our NZ member. Please don't take any offense to this. I don't mean any. And I am generalizing. But it seems like a forgone conclusion that you just do as your masters say. Because that's your culture? Someday you will wake up. The seemingly little things we are fighting now in terms of rights in the US. Will be gone. And a whole other level of control will encompass countries like yours. Just like it has for hundreds of years. Because people didn't understand the important place guns hold in a democracy.

The reason the US "culture" on guns is different. Is because we fought against that forgone conclusion that we should follow our masters. And fought and died to defend that idea. Which grew into democracy. And flawed or not. You have to decide if your going to be a sheep and accept control easily or stand up for your rights as a human being. And live like a person that deserves everything a rich person does. Or a person in control. Or a tyrannical government does. Or whatever you want to call it. When you take guns out of this equation you damage democracy. And it's ability to protect itself. I don't support gun rights so I can shoot a home intruder or a bear. I believe in gun rights as a balancer in the government's ability to control the populace. And that's exactly what NZ is doing to its citizens now. And they are so brainwashed. They're going along with it like the livestock they care for. Again, no offense. But it's true. There's been little if any resistance to this change in gun ownership rights. Because the elites - state it so.

And no. I'm not a MAGA hat wearing republican. I'm actually very liberal about most of my beliefs. Maybe a libertarian. I don't know. I just know that you don't have to be a genius to see what's going on in the world. It's completely run by greed. And those with the power will not stop to solidify that power. Into something that can never be questioned. Thankfully here in the US we can question. We can discuss. We can protest. And we can work on solutions that curb this kind of heinous behavior. While still trying to keep our democracy in tact. And taking away guns isn't the answer. That's only going to get us further away from our rights. Because the actual real life foundation that upholds those rights is our ability to keep a tyrannical government in check. And it seems to me we've got way too many tyrannical governments solidifying power - with guns of their own. And a greed backed corporate elite that will stop at nothing to solidify power.

If this is to political. I don't apologize. We of all groups should be having these discussions. Because it's issues like this that will affect the very reason we are here - the potential for chaos in the world. Whether it be man made or from nature.
That was a very nice emotional piece. I liked the use of masters and sheep.

But nope. It is not backed on evidence.

If I wanted a system that produced freedom. I would find out the most free countries in the world and model my system after theirs.

If I wanted to prevent mass shootings or terrorism I would find countries that have been successful in doing that and model that system after theirs.

The idea that democracy, accountability and a free balanced fair society is created because of individual access to a semi automatic rifle is about the most nieve thing I have ever heard. (Except for avocados curing cancer)

And why people from New Zealand with it ts statistically proven more freedom is looking at your argument like it wasn't very well thought out.

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13076
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Home where my thought's escaping

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by Stercutus » Wed Mar 27, 2019 4:15 am

If I wanted to prevent mass shootings or terrorism I would find countries that have been successful in doing that and model that system after theirs.
I guess. Although the US is actually 56th in the world in per capita mass shootings. That is excluding a lot of things like wars and insurgencies. Not sure what all needs to be done to improve things but some things might help. Maybe looking at some universal factors like who is taking Xanax who has sworn allegiance to ISIS or Al Queda on Facebook lately might help.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/30/america-d ... shootings/
If I wanted a system that produced freedom. I would find out the most free countries in the world and model my system after theirs.
Measuring Freedom is a little more subjective. The Human Freedom Index puts New Zealand 1st and the US 17th. Not sure how that will play out after the current rounds of liberty tightening will play out. It is not going to be just about guns.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/d ... x-2018.pdf

Of the top ten on the list only the Swiss give their citizens actual assault rifles. They are ranked 2nd. Until now "Assault rifles" were legal in NZ. Switzerland is huge outlier. Their population is homogenized and wealthy. You would expect crime to be low. However Switzerland has a 45% higher per capita rate of Mass shooting than the US. Finland and Norway are also rated higher and also have a much higher rate of mass shootings than the US. Guns laws in Canada, Finland and other top ten countries tend to run lax. The UK and Ireland are notable exceptions.

At the bottom of the list Iraq and Yemen are the only countries where assault rifles are legal and there is a very low level of freedom. In truth though the legal status of assault rifles is not really enforceable in court in these countries. If the police or military catch you with one they will seize it unless you are well connected or pay them off. But most households have one anyway. Both are also involved in insurgencies and their respective governments are autocratic. So with a couple of exceptions where guns are illegal there is no freedom.

So the bottom line may be that of the top countries with the highest levels of freedom "Assault rifles" are perfectly legal and gun laws are lax in most regards. In countries where ownership is illegal or not supported there is no freedom or accountable government.


Correlation does not always equal causation but there a lot of people who think it does.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

drop bear
* * *
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by drop bear » Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am

Stercutus wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 4:15 am
If I wanted to prevent mass shootings or terrorism I would find countries that have been successful in doing that and model that system after theirs.
I guess. Although the US is actually 56th in the world in per capita mass shootings. That is excluding a lot of things like wars and insurgencies. Not sure what all needs to be done to improve things but some things might help. Maybe looking at some universal factors like who is taking Xanax who has sworn allegiance to ISIS or Al Queda on Facebook lately might help.

https://nypost.com/2018/08/30/america-d ... shootings/
If I wanted a system that produced freedom. I would find out the most free countries in the world and model my system after theirs.
Measuring Freedom is a little more subjective. The Human Freedom Index puts New Zealand 1st and the US 17th. Not sure how that will play out after the current rounds of liberty tightening will play out. It is not going to be just about guns.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/d ... x-2018.pdf

Of the top ten on the list only the Swiss give their citizens actual assault rifles. They are ranked 2nd. Until now "Assault rifles" were legal in NZ. Switzerland is huge outlier. Their population is homogenized and wealthy. You would expect crime to be low. However Switzerland has a 45% higher per capita rate of Mass shooting than the US. Finland and Norway are also rated higher and also have a much higher rate of mass shootings than the US. Guns laws in Canada, Finland and other top ten countries tend to run lax. The UK and Ireland are notable exceptions.

At the bottom of the list Iraq and Yemen are the only countries where assault rifles are legal and there is a very low level of freedom. In truth though the legal status of assault rifles is not really enforceable in court in these countries. If the police or military catch you with one they will seize it unless you are well connected or pay them off. But most households have one anyway. Both are also involved in insurgencies and their respective governments are autocratic. So with a couple of exceptions where guns are illegal there is no freedom.

So the bottom line may be that of the top countries with the highest levels of freedom "Assault rifles" are perfectly legal and gun laws are lax in most regards. In countries where ownership is illegal or not supported there is no freedom or accountable government.


Correlation does not always equal causation but there a lot of people who think it does.
Or guns mostly just don't factor.

I was thinking of looking at things like poverty. New Zealand scores well on economic freedom.

Looking at how many people are in prison. And how much crime there is. How many people police shoot. All effect peoples liberty.

There is a list of least corrupt governments which New Zealand scores very well with.

Be interesting to see how impartial their news agencies are.

Even looking at their national debt and how much tax money is being wasted.

We could look at how easy it is to access education. Especially job skills like apprenticeships or traineeships.

How easy it is to relocate.

Even looking at health care and whether or not you can be financially crippled by an unforeseen accident.

I mean when I think freedom I think of how easy is it to determine my own destiny. And what role guns would play in that

If for example I am poor. But I have an Ak. I am still poor. I don't get any freedom from that. If I use the Ak I go to jail and loose freedom there. If I use an Ak and am rich I am more likely to be innocent. Because I have a better lawyer.

If there is an Avenue to get education and therefore a better job and not be poor. Then my freedom increases. And guns don't play a role in that.

Now I could suggest that owning a gun gives me freedom from assault. But then you need to factor in how often that happens.

This inflated concept of guns and liberty is mostly unfounded and I think it changes the definition of liberty to liberty for the strong. Which to me isn't freedom.

User avatar
NT2C
ZS Global Moderator
ZS Global Moderator
Posts: 7423
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:37 pm
Location: Outside of your jurisdiction officer

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by NT2C » Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:47 am

moab wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 7:47 pm
... if your going to be a sheep and accept control easily or stand up for your rights as a human being.
Ahem... I already made one new member rewrite something recently where he/she used the "sheep" comparison. We do not do this on this forum.

Everyone is encouraged to refamiliarize themselves with the basic rules of this forum, starting with this one:

http://www.zombiehunters.org/forum/view ... 5#p1729120

You all may now return to your otherwise thought-provoking discussion.
Nonsolis Radios Sediouis Fulmina Mitto. - USN Gunner's Mate motto

Sic quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit; occidentis telum est - Seneca the Younger, Epistles

User avatar
woodsghost
* * * * *
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by woodsghost » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 am

You have some great points here, and I"d like to address a few.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am

Looking at how many people are in prison. And how much crime there is. How many people police shoot. All effect peoples liberty.
Crime is a result of 1) culture, 2) access to victims, and 3) detection of criminals. Of those, detection of criminals and reducing access to victims reduce crime. This is proven in the Criminal Justice and Criminology fields. Gun ownership affects the accessibility of victims. So does putting victimizers behind bars for long periods of time. However, that is somewhat financially costly and some feel it is socially costly.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
There is a list of least corrupt governments which New Zealand scores very well with.
This is true. I am pretty sure the US scores well on this too. Rule of Law is pretty important to economic growth.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Be interesting to see how impartial their news agencies are.
At one time I would have said US News agencies are pretty biased and foreign ones are pretty impartial. I no longer feel this way. But others may disagree. I think those with power have noticed they can gain more power by controlling people's information flow.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Even looking at their national debt and how much tax money is being wasted.
Don't even get me started on this one. I don't know how Australians or New Zealanders feel, but a number of Americans are very upset with what is going on in our country and are looking for people who will actually provide solutions.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
We could look at how easy it is to access education. Especially job skills like apprenticeships or traineeships.
There is VERY easy access to these in the US. However, we are told if people are to have value they need to go through the official education system, take on heavy debt, and find they have few marketable skills at the end of things. There is a growing backlash against this in the US. Time will tell how this shakes out in the US. How are things in Australia?
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Even looking at health care and whether or not you can be financially crippled by an unforeseen accident.
In my experience in the US, it is hard to be financially crippled by an unforeseen accident. It IS possible to be financially inconvenienced, and where I see more crippling is in chronic conditions. My experience is health care was less expensive back before we started changing laws. Insurance costs could be rougher if one had a preexisting condition back then. I have been both insured and uninsured, and feel there were/are advantages and disadvantages to both. I also feel there is a lot of utility in non-Western medicine and healthy lifestyles.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
I mean when I think freedom I think of how easy is it to determine my own destiny. And what role guns would play in that

If for example I am poor. But I have an Ak. I am still poor. I don't get any freedom from that. If I use the Ak I go to jail and loose freedom there. If I use an Ak and am rich I am more likely to be innocent. Because I have a better lawyer.

If there is an Avenue to get education and therefore a better job and not be poor. Then my freedom increases. And guns don't play a role in that.
You may disagree, but I see a conflating of "freedom" and "security." I like the idea of "determining one's own path." But the idea seems that if I have the opportunity given to me to move up to a level of desired financial comfort I am free. I may be twisting things a little, so let me know if I'm missing the mark. That said, to me, freedom is the opportunity to succeed or *fail* in one's efforts to improve financially. What I see in many places is an effort to allow people to succeed but then to limit how hard or how low they fail or fall. This is when a lot of control gets introduced into systems, and where I think people start losing freedom to the promise of security.

When I look at Venezuela I see a people who were disarmed so their government could more easily control them. I see other historical examples of this. Governments who distrust or wish to control their people then disarm their people. This idea was clearly articulated in Machiavelli's "The Prince."

I also look at the UK and France and Spain and Italy and I feel they have far less freedom to determine their own destiny (financially or otherwise). I see a set of countries which are really struggling to empower their citizens while also employing more social control.

What I see is governments which wish to exert control choose to reduce freedom and this is extended to both *guns* and other human choices.

The flip side to all this, really, is "how do people feel?" And I don't care for this question. But the answer is "a lot of how people feel is culturally determined and shaped." I prefer to ask "what are the numbers" with an understanding that culture will affect those numbers. In America I don't think we don't have the cultural stomach to actually deal with crime or criminals so it is stunning that our crime rates are not actually worse. Also, if one looks at regions where crime is concentrated one can have a lively debate on the external vs internal influences on crime and criminal choices.

For financial opportunity and security, America does well and does better than any other country I have looked at, according to the measures I pay attention to.
Last edited by woodsghost on Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13076
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Home where my thought's escaping

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by Stercutus » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 am

I was thinking of looking at things like...
I guess I wasted my time posting that since you did not read anything at the link. All those things that you talk about are in the report.

Now I could suggest that owning a gun gives me freedom from assault. But then you need to factor in how often that happens.
Owning a gun does not give you freedom from assault. Armed people get assaulted several times a day in the US. What it does give you is the ability to retaliate against your attacker and possibly preserve your life, the lives of others and maybe your property, business and resources.

How often does it happen? All the time in the US due to the lax drug laws and poor border controls to keep such poisons out of the US. NZ and most other nations not in the Americas do not have this problem to the degree we have it in the US. South and Central American countries typically have it much worse.
This inflated concept of guns and liberty is mostly unfounded and I think it changes the definition of liberty to liberty for the strong. Which to me isn't freedom.
I am going to have to agree to extent that liberty and freedom are not for the weak. The weaker you are the tougher it is to be free. The stronger you are the more free you will be. A baby for example has zero freedom because they are completely helpless and dependent on others. As a human grows and progresses in life they attain more freedom and liberty: to travel, work, marry etc. Sometimes privileges are earned such as driving a car on a public roadway or carrying a gun in public. Not everyone can or wants to drive a car or carry a gun. Some things require skills, basic knowledge, a sound mind, etc.

The stronger, faster, smarter, harder working people will nearly always (in a free society) amass more resources for themselves. Typically in a free society more resources mean even more liberty and freedom. They can travel farther, faster and with fewer encumberances than a person with less resources as an example. More resources could also mean more power to influence the enviornment around them and creating more freedoms for themselves.

People that are too weak to stand up for their rights can lose them quickly. "Free society" or not. So yes, freedom and liberty are for the strong and only a strong people can truly have and enjoy them. Whatever liberty and freedoms are enjoyed by the weaker segment of the population is granted to them by the stronger segment.

This may not fit your ideals of "freedom" but it is how the world works.

The entire world.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

MPMalloy
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 4130
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by MPMalloy » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:38 am

Excellent posts everyone!

User avatar
flybynight
* * * * *
Posts: 2694
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by flybynight » Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:50 am

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. Patrick Henry
As of now I bet you got me wrong

John Titor was right

MPMalloy
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 4130
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:48 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by MPMalloy » Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:04 pm

flybynight wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:50 am
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. Patrick Henry
+1776

drop bear
* * *
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by drop bear » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:28 pm

Stercutus wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 am
I was thinking of looking at things like...
I guess I wasted my time posting that since you did not read anything at the link. All those things that you talk about are in the report.

Now I could suggest that owning a gun gives me freedom from assault. But then you need to factor in how often that happens.
Owning a gun does not give you freedom from assault. Armed people get assaulted several times a day in the US. What it does give you is the ability to retaliate against your attacker and possibly preserve your life, the lives of others and maybe your property, business and resources.

How often does it happen? All the time in the US due to the lax drug laws and poor border controls to keep such poisons out of the US. NZ and most other nations not in the Americas do not have this problem to the degree we have it in the US. South and Central American countries typically have it much worse.
This inflated concept of guns and liberty is mostly unfounded and I think it changes the definition of liberty to liberty for the strong. Which to me isn't freedom.
I am going to have to agree to extent that liberty and freedom are not for the weak. The weaker you are the tougher it is to be free. The stronger you are the more free you will be. A baby for example has zero freedom because they are completely helpless and dependent on others. As a human grows and progresses in life they attain more freedom and liberty: to travel, work, marry etc. Sometimes privileges are earned such as driving a car on a public roadway or carrying a gun in public. Not everyone can or wants to drive a car or carry a gun. Some things require skills, basic knowledge, a sound mind, etc.

The stronger, faster, smarter, harder working people will nearly always (in a free society) amass more resources for themselves. Typically in a free society more resources mean even more liberty and freedom. They can travel farther, faster and with fewer encumberances than a person with less resources as an example. More resources could also mean more power to influence the enviornment around them and creating more freedoms for themselves.

People that are too weak to stand up for their rights can lose them quickly. "Free society" or not. So yes, freedom and liberty are for the strong and only a strong people can truly have and enjoy them. Whatever liberty and freedoms are enjoyed by the weaker segment of the population is granted to them by the stronger segment.

This may not fit your ideals of "freedom" but it is how the world works.

The entire world.
So a whole bunch of demographics make you free from assult. Or at least more effectively than guns do.

Interestingly the last part of the post. Is the argument for guns. What if you are not strong? Then you need artificial tools to maintain your freedom. You need artificial systems to employ those tools.

So that freedom is more available for more people.

If we had guns with no laws there would by my definition there would be less freedom. But by yours more?

Which is the issue with anarchy. Which is ideologically free. But doesn't factor in human nature.

drop bear
* * *
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:56 am

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by drop bear » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:53 pm

woodsghost wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 am
You have some great points here, and I"d like to address a few.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am

Looking at how many people are in prison. And how much crime there is. How many people police shoot. All effect peoples liberty.
Crime is a result of 1) culture, 2) access to victims, and 3) detection of criminals. Of those, detection of criminals and reducing access to victims reduce crime. This is proven in the Criminal Justice and Criminology fields. Gun ownership affects the accessibility of victims. So does putting victimizers behind bars for long periods of time. However, that is somewhat financially costly and some feel it is socially costly.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
There is a list of least corrupt governments which New Zealand scores very well with.
This is true. I am pretty sure the US scores well on this too. Rule of Law is pretty important to economic growth.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Be interesting to see how impartial their news agencies are.
At one time I would have said US News agencies are pretty biased and foreign ones are pretty impartial. I no longer feel this way. But others may disagree. I think those with power have noticed they can gain more power by controlling people's information flow.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Even looking at their national debt and how much tax money is being wasted.
Don't even get me started on this one. I don't know how Australians or New Zealanders feel, but a number of Americans are very upset with what is going on in our country and are looking for people who will actually provide solutions.
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
We could look at how easy it is to access education. Especially job skills like apprenticeships or traineeships.
There is VERY easy access to these in the US. However, we are told if people are to have value they need to go through the official education system, take on heavy debt, and find they have few marketable skills at the end of things. There is a growing backlash against this in the US. Time will tell how this shakes out in the US. How are things in Australia?
drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
Even looking at health care and whether or not you can be financially crippled by an unforeseen accident.
In my experience in the US, it is hard to be financially crippled by an unforeseen accident. It IS possible to be financially inconvenienced, and where I see more crippling is in chronic conditions. My experience is health care was less expensive back before we started changing laws. Insurance costs could be rougher if one had a preexisting condition back then. I have been both insured and uninsured, and feel there were/are advantages and disadvantages to both. I also feel there is a lot of utility in non-Western medicine and healthy lifestyles.

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:22 am
I mean when I think freedom I think of how easy is it to determine my own destiny. And what role guns would play in that

If for example I am poor. But I have an Ak. I am still poor. I don't get any freedom from that. If I use the Ak I go to jail and loose freedom there. If I use an Ak and am rich I am more likely to be innocent. Because I have a better lawyer.

If there is an Avenue to get education and therefore a better job and not be poor. Then my freedom increases. And guns don't play a role in that.
You may disagree, but I see a conflating of "freedom" and "security." I like the idea of "determining one's own path." But the idea seems that if I have the opportunity given to me to move up to a level of desired financial comfort I am free. I may be twisting things a little, so let me know if I'm missing the mark. That said, to me, freedom is the opportunity to succeed or *fail* in one's efforts to improve financially. What I see in many places is an effort to allow people to succeed but then to limit how hard or how low they fail or fall. This is when a lot of control gets introduced into systems, and where I think people start losing freedom to the promise of security.

When I look at Venezuela I see a people who were disarmed so their government could more easily control them. I see other historical examples of this. Governments who distrust or wish to control their people then disarm their people. This idea was clearly articulated in Machiavelli's "The Prince."

I also look at the UK and France and Spain and Italy and I feel they have far less freedom to determine their own destiny (financially or otherwise). I see a set of countries which are really struggling to empower their citizens while also employing more social control.

What I see is governments which wish to exert control choose to reduce freedom and this is extended to both *guns* and other human choices.

The flip side to all this, really, is "how do people feel?" And I don't care for this question. But the answer is "a lot of how people feel is culturally determined and shaped." I prefer to ask "what are the numbers" with an understanding that culture will affect those numbers. In America I don't think we don't have the cultural stomach to actually deal with crime or criminals so it is stunning that our crime rates are not actually worse. Also, if one looks at regions where crime is concentrated one can have a lively debate on the external vs internal influences on crime and criminal choices.

For financial opportunity and security, America does well and does better than any other country I have looked at, according to the measures I pay attention to.
Crime would be easy to compare. You would look at how many people are in jail to how much crime there is. And then compare that to New Zealand. If they have less people comparatively in jail and less crime. Then their system is working better. More freedom.

Unbiased governments. Depends who it is compared to. This has started because of what I believe is the false assumption that New Zealand has given up its freedom.

Again there are lists of unbiased media.

Education is sort of good in Australia. Higher education is expensive and occurs debt. But they do apprenticeships and traineeships subsidized by the taxpayer. So as far as say opportunity to get a start and drag yourself out of poverty is really good.
https://www.australianapprenticeships.gov.au

Limiting ability to fail isn't all or nothing. If the risk of starting a buisness venture is starving to death. Then I don't think you are rewarding innovation but if you are an incompetent multi national that is just screwing everyone and getting government subsidies the I am not so in favor.

Health care. We have a superannuation scheme designed to take the pressure off the pension. That would probably work better than a free healthcare scheme. But even then ours is part private and part public. It is not this government controlled doctors on minimum wage thing which is the impression.

User avatar
woodsghost
* * * * *
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by woodsghost » Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:40 pm

drop bear wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:53 pm
Crime would be easy to compare. You would look at how many people are in jail to how much crime there is. And then compare that to New Zealand. If they have less people comparatively in jail and less crime. Then their system is working better. More freedom.

Unbiased governments. Depends who it is compared to. This has started because of what I believe is the false assumption that New Zealand has given up its freedom.

Again there are lists of unbiased media.

Education is sort of good in Australia. Higher education is expensive and occurs debt. But they do apprenticeships and traineeships subsidized by the taxpayer. So as far as say opportunity to get a start and drag yourself out of poverty is really good.
https://www.australianapprenticeships.gov.au

Limiting ability to fail isn't all or nothing. If the risk of starting a buisness venture is starving to death. Then I don't think you are rewarding innovation but if you are an incompetent multi national that is just screwing everyone and getting government subsidies the I am not so in favor.

Health care. We have a superannuation scheme designed to take the pressure off the pension. That would probably work better than a free healthcare scheme. But even then ours is part private and part public. It is not this government controlled doctors on minimum wage thing which is the impression.
Thank you for the reply.

Again on crime: the argument is that New Zealand, and Australia, are primarily white. That comes with a value system and a culture which is lower in crime and more secure than other cultures. America's experience has been that geographic locations which have remained primarily white have maintained low crime and high social and academic achievement. Not necessarily high financial achievement though. When you bring in non-whites, crime goes up and academics go down. This is attributed by some to a difference in wealth. When looking at the local facts, those with jobs make the same regardless of skin color. We also see Asians who are a minority but achieve far beyond whites in academic, social, and financial success. What I"m left with is there are cultural differences in attitudes towards crime, social conformity, academic effort, and substance abuse. Whites with problematic attitudes towards these cultural values have similar life achievements to those non-whites who hold problematic cultural values. So frankly, I"m going to say "demographics matter" in maintaining security, but "only as long as demographics serve as a proxy for cultural values." I am NOT saying non-whites are bad. I"m saying 1) certain cultural attitudes have effects, 2) those attitudes cross racial lines, 3) they have the same effect on all groups who adopt those attitudes. And....

What is the REAL point of what I said above? I"m ok with not owning a gun in Japan because the culture is more secure. However, owning or not owning guns does not lead to violence. Cultural values leads to violence, and in that situation, access to weapons does not matter and does not hinder expression of violence. If cultural values are what affect expressions of violence, and limited access to guns does not hinder expressions of violence, then how do we respond when violence breaks out? How do we make a situation safe when we have no means to stop the violence?

One response is "let the government do it." Right now in America there has been an ongoing discussion of how much, exactly, do we trust the government to solve problems? I expect Australians are asking themselves that question too, but I may be wrong. In France, Belgium, Sweden, Italy, Germany, the UK, Hungary, and other European countries I think they are trying to navigate that question. Governments appear to be trying to prove they really can provide security and solutions to problems. I'll let others decide how successful those efforts are. But I'm hearing that many are still struggling to find economic success or even make economic headway, let alone navigate personal security issues. Hiliary Clinton talked about the need for European governments to actually address the issues plaguing people or risk a lot of turmoil in the near future.

So...freedom....

We have a choice to either lock down society and trust a higher authority to take care of us, or we can take individual responsibility for our lives and our futures. Preppers as a group tend towards taking individual responsibility for health, physical security, and financial security. We may wish to help our communities in times of need, and respect systems which help the helpless get back on their feet. But preppers tend to think they, personally, are responsible. The other group are "people who believe others are responsible for all that." I cannot tell people how to live. I can tell you I want the freedom to choose what I think is best for my health, my financial security, and my physical security. I am humble enough to know I'll make some wrong choices. I"m also going to say my experience with government choices leaves me more confident in my own flawed ability to decide than in their flawed ability to decide. If you want to know why, look up "the curse of dimensionality." I know my context and situation. The government is trying to juggle so many other problems, groups, needs, and issues, they cannot come up with the best solution for me. Not even close. That is where I come from.

I want to share where I am coming from, and I am open to hearing more about your own thoughts and experiences.
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.

User avatar
Stercutus
* * * * *
Posts: 13076
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Location: Home where my thought's escaping

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by Stercutus » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:00 pm

So a whole bunch of demographics make you free from assult. Or at least more effectively than guns do.

No. There is no such thing as "free from assault".
Interestingly the last part of the post. Is the argument for guns. What if you are not strong? Then you need artificial tools to maintain your freedom. You need artificial systems to employ those tools.

It isn't an argument for guns. But ultimately weapons do make a people free. Unless you believe that France would have been more free under the Kaiser. Because at the end of the day there is someone, somewhere with a gun protecting your freedom no matter where you are. The artificial part is thinking that is not true.
If we had guns with no laws there would by my definition there would be less freedom. But by yours more?

Which is the issue with anarchy. Which is ideologically free. But doesn't factor in human nature.

Anarchy is the ultimate conclusion of a lawless society. You would really have to myoptic to get that from what I wrote. Everyone learns in grade school that the we have laws to define our associations with each other, government, business and the environment. So yes, the freedom to swing your fist ends at my nose.
These days of dust
Which we've known
Will blow away with this new Son

But I'll kneel down wait for now
And I'll kneel down
Know my ground

User avatar
yossarian
* * * * *
Posts: 2130
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:09 am
Favorite Zombie Movies: Army of Darkness, Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead(remake)

Re: New Zealand Mosque Shootings

Post by yossarian » Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:49 pm

" So, brave knights,
if you do doubt your courage or your strength, come no further,
for death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth."

Post Reply

Return to “Disasters in Current Events”