Gun deaths by country.
Why is the US so far down the list? What are the differences in US law compared to the law in the other countries? Why should the US have five times the gun deaths per 100,000 people than the US has? Our culture and standard of living are almost identical. Are The people in countries above the US in great danger of being unable to protect themselves because they don’t have gun laws like the US has? If you had a choice, where would you choose to live?
Sorry for the mess of figures. It was more readable when I composed this message. I was unable to remove the extraneous figures. The first column is the only one that needs to be read. To see the whole chart in readable form, go here: List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia
List of countries by firearm-related death rate
List of countries by firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population.
Deaths by firearm
Poland 0.25 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.12 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.09 (2010) Guns in Poland
United Kingdom 0.25 (2010) 0.04 (2010) 0.18 (2010) 0.01 (2010) 0.02 (2010) Guns in United Kingdom
Kuwait 0.36 (mixed years) 0.36 (1995) 0.00 (1999) 0.00 (2000) 0.00 (2000) Guns in Kuwait
Netherlands 0.46 (2010) 0.20 (2010) 0.24 (2010) 0.01 (2010) 0.01 (2010) Guns in Netherlands
India 0.48 (incomplete) 0.30 (2009) 0.14 (2008) 0.04 (2008) unavailable Guns in India
Spain 0.62 (mixed years) 0.15 (2010) 0.42 (2010) 0.05 (2010) 0.00 (2007) Guns in Spain
Hungary 0.87 (mixed years) 0.13 (2009) 0.72 (2009) 0.01 (2008) 0.01 (2002) Guns in Hungary
Taiwan 0.87 (mixed years) 0.60 (2008) 0.12 (1994) 0.11 (1994) 0.04 (1994) Guns in Taiwan
Cyprus 0.96 (mixed years) 0.24 (2010) 0.48 (2010) 0.12 (2009) 0.12 (2010) Guns in Cyprus
Kyrgyzstan 1.01 (2010) 0.53 (2010) 0.07 (2010) 0.28 (2010) 0.13 (2010) Guns in Kyrgyzstan
Moldova 1.03 (2011) 0.45 (2011) 0.42 (2011) 0.08 (2011)) 0.08 (2011) Guns in Moldova
Australia 1.06 (2010) 0.13 (2010) 0.73 (2010) 0.07 (2010) 0.13 (2010) Guns in Australia
Germany 1.24 (2010) 0.20 (2010) 0.94 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.08 (2010) Guns in Germany
Italy 1.28 (2009) 0.36 (2009) 0.81 (2009) 0.08 (2009) 0.03 (2009) Guns in Italy
Latvia 1.43 (2010) 0.18 (2010) 0.94 (2010) 0.04 (2010) 0.27 (2010) Guns in Latvia
Denmark 1.45 (2006) 0.30 (2009) 1.16 (2006) 0.04 (2006) 0.02 (2003) Guns in Denmark
New Zealand 1.45 (mixed years) 0.26 (2009) 1.14 (2007) 0.05 (2006) 0.00 (2006) Guns in New Zealand
Sweden 1.47 (2010) 0.19 (2010) 1.20 (2010) 0.06 (2010) 0.01 (2010) Guns in Sweden
Iceland 1.57 (mixed years, incomplete) 0.32 (2007) 1.25 (2009) unavailable unavailable Guns in Iceland
Slovakia 1.75 (2010 0.18 (2010) 0.94 (2010) 0.39 (2010) 0.24 (2010) Guns in Slovakia
Czech Republic 1.76 (2010) 0.12 (2010) 1.39 (2010) 0.10 (2010) 0.15 (2010) Guns in Czech Republic
Portugal 1.77 (2010) 0.48 (2010) 1.09 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.18 (2010) Guns in Portugal
Norway 1.78 (mixed years) 0.04 (2010) 1.72 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.00 (2008) Guns in Norway
Macedonia1.85 (mixed years) 1.07 (2010) 0.63 (2010) 0.15 (2010)) 0.00 (1997) Guns in Macedonia
Israel 1.87 (2009) 0.94 (2009) 0.71 (2009) 0.03 (2009) 0.19 (2009) Guns in Israel
Georgia 1.92 (mixed years) 0.60 (2010) 0.09 (2009) 1.00 (2009) 0.23 (2009) Guns in Georgia
Luxembourg2.02 (mixed years) 0.60 (2009) 1.00 (2009) 0.22 (2004)) 0.20 (2009) Guns in Luxembourg
Bulgaria 2.35 (2011) 0.23 (2011) 0.87 (2011) 1.14 (2011) 0.11 (2011) Guns in Bulgaria
Canada 2.38 (mixed years) 0.5 (2009) 1.79 (2006) 0.08 (2001) 0.01 (2006) Guns in Canada
Belgium 2.42 (2006) 0.29 (2006) 1.96 (2006) 0.01 (2006) 0.16 (2006) Guns in Belgium
Slovenia 2.49 (mixed years) 0.05 (2010) 2.34 (2010) 0.05 (2009) 0.05 (2010) Guns in Slovenia
Estonia 2.54 (2010) 0.30 (2010) 1.57 (2010) 0.07 (2010) 0.60 (2010) Guns in Estonia
Austria 2.95 (mixed years) 0.18 (2010) 2.68 (2010) 0.01 (2009) 0.08 (2010) Guns in Austria
Barbados 3.0 (incomplete) 3.0 (2000) unavailable unavailable unavailable Guns in Barbados
France 3.01 (2009) 0.22 (2009) 2.33 (2009) 0.05 (2009) 0.41 (2009) Guns in France
Philippines3.24 (incomplete) 3.24 (2002) unavailable unavailable unavailable Guns in Philippines
Croatia 3.54 (mixed years) 1.1 (2009) 2.35 (2010) 0.07 (2010) 0.02 (2010) Guns in Croatia
Finland 3.64 (2010) 0.26 (2010) 3.34 (2010) 0.02 (2010) 0.02 (2010) Guns in Finland
Chile 3.73 (mixed years) 2.2 (2005) 1.09 (2002) 0.4 (2002) 0.04 (2001) Guns in Chile
Peru 3.73 (mixed years) 2.60 (2009) 0.11 (2000) 0.90 (2000) 0.12 (2000) Guns in Peru
Switzerland3.84 (mixed years) 0.52 (2010) 3.15 (2008) 0.10 (1998) 0.07 (1994) Guns in Switzerland
Serbia 3.90 (2010) 0.62 (2010) 2.81 (2010) 0.18 (2010) 0.29 (2010) Guns in Serbia
Greece 4.76 (mixed years) 0.59 (2009) 0.97 (2009) 0.08 (2009) 0.00 (1998) Guns in Greece
Costa Rica 6.28 (mixed years) 4.6 (2006) 1.27 (2002) 0.07 (2002) 0.24 (2000) Guns in Costa Rica
Nicaragua 7.29 (mixed years) 5.90 (2008) 0.46 (2002) 0.91 (2002) 0.02 (2001) Guns in Nicaragua
Paraguay 8.16 (mixed years) 7.30 (2009) 0.58 (2000) 0.26 (2000) 0.02 (2000) Guns in Paraguay
Montenegro8.55 (2009, incomplete) 2.06 (2009) 6.49 (2009) unavailable unavailable Guns in Montenegro
United States10.3 (2011) 3.60 (2011) 6.30 (2011) 0.30 (2011) 0.10 (2011) Guns in United States
Sources
(Krug 1998) EG Krug, KE Powell and LL Dahlberg. “Firearm-related deaths in the United States and 35 other high- and upper-middle-income countries.”, International Journal of Epidemiology 1998.[72] Statistics among 36 countries between 1990 and 1995.
(UNODC 2002)The Eighth United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (2001–2002). United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2005.[73] This report provides more updated information on homicide by firearms, but not on suicide by firearms.
(UNODC 2000)The Seventh United Nations Survey on Crime Trends and the Operations of Criminal Justice Systems (1998–2000). United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2002.[74] This report provides more updated information on homicide by firearms, but not on suicide by firearms.
(Barrow 2000) Greg Barrow. “SA gun deaths rise”, BBC, 2000-02-15.[75]
(Kaiser 2004) Deaths Due to Injury by Firearms per 100,000 Population, 2004. StateHealthFacts.org, 2008-04-08 [76]
(GunCite 2008) International Homicide Comparisons. GunCite.com, 2008-04-08 [77]
(CDC 2012) Fatal Injury Mapping (2004–2006). CDC.gov, 2012-02-05 [78]
(GunPolicy 2012) Global Impacts of Gun Violence. GunPolicy.org, 2012-02-10 [79]
(UNODC 2012) UNODC Homicide Statistics 2012 [80]
(Victims of crime survey 2011) Victims of crime survey 2011 – 9.7 The use of weapons when crime is committed [81]
(WHO 2012) European Detailed Mortality Database [82] ICD-10: W32-W34,X72-X74,X93-X95,Y22-Y24
GunPolicy.org. 2011. ‘Calculated Rates – Australia.’ UN World Population Prospects – Total Population (both sexes combined)
Why is the US so far down the list? What are the differences in US law compared to the law in the other countries? Why should the US have five times the gun deaths per 100,000 people than the US has? Our culture and standard of living are almost identical. Are The people in countries above the US in great danger of being unable to protect themselves because they don’t have gun laws like the US has? If you had a choice, where would you choose to live?Lois, this is statement is confusing. Are you comparing the US to the UK? BTW for those of us decrying the US as a police state, yes we're being spied on, photographed, fingerprinted videotaped watched by low flying aircraft while driving and now drones may be delivering packages to our doors in the near future. Except for the latter this has been standard practice since the beginning if the "Red Scare" in 1949. It accelerated in the sixties with the war protest and civil rights movements. I was part of both and FBI agents told us that we were being photographed and info collected on all of us (SDS), especially the leaders. So somewhere in J. Edgar's files is a picture of me, much slimmer, flipping him and his minions the bird. After all this time I was only jailed once for an illegal teacher's strike. I know this is anecdotal, but there are thousands of us old farts still kicking and still active and not being hassled by "government goons". When The government shuts down the semi sovereign power of the fifty States, places heavily armed soldiers in all municipal buildings, closes churches, outlaws all firearms, even black powder weapons (we own 300 million plus including military weapons), rounds up all of the militia nuts, executes Clive Bundy for treasonous activities, nationalizes industries, totally controls the media, creates "work camps" for political dissidents, then we can talk police state. The municipal police BTW are greatly outnumbered and outgunned by the criminals. Most towns and cities (not the megalopolises) can't afford the equipment nor the manpower to control the general public. And don't forget that our military, all five branches must swear allegiance to the Constitution and not the State. Their task is to protect the rights of the citizenry, not the central government. In that vein the NSA should be held accountable for gathering intel on citizens and if we don't raise a hue and a cry then it's on our own heads. Cap't Jack
VA don’t spoil the party here. There’s so much good, healthy agitation going on here.
Why try to bring a level headed approach to the table?
I remember my grandpa telling me when airplanes first started flying around everyone thought their civil liberties and privacy was going to go out the window too. Bunch of Barnstormers flying around peaking in people’s backyards. :lol:
That was a joke…my grandpa never said that.
My guess is the people who are so willing and ready to give away freedom and liberty in America are also those who don’t have clue what it actually cost.
IMO, having the government spy on possible subversive activity is far more preferable than having another 911.
Freedom does not depend on how intrusive the government is in our lives. It is what the government does with the information it gathers that determines your freedom to say or do what you want withing the confines of the Constitution.
As long as I don’t see police action against dress mode or expressing controversial viewpoints, I consider myself lucky. I am much more afraid of a bunch of skin heads or neo-nazis that the police.
btw. Lois
Why is the US so far down the listIn that table you submitted, the US is actually at the top of the list, but even then this is not from police actions, but private individual accidents or killings. The US is a very violent country, due to the very freedoms we have, but apparently do not fully appreciate.
My guess is the people who are so willing and ready to give away freedom and liberty in America are also those who don't have clue what it actually cost.First off, you ain't American. You're a Canadian. You should worry about your own country. But I'd love to hear you tell me what freedom actually cost. Go ahead.
VA don’t spoil the party here. There’s so much good, healthy agitation going on here.
Why try to bring a level headed approach to the table?
I remember my grandpa telling me when airplanes first started flying around everyone thought their civil liberties and privacy was going to go out the window too. Bunch of Barnstormers flying around peaking in people’s backyards.
That was a joke…my grandpa never said that.
Sorry about the rant Vy, but some of us were beginning to sound like the conspiracy theory nuts you read on Facebook. I agree that we have to be concerned, but Americans love, no crave individuality, e.g. let one politician just try to sponsor a restrictive gun law. His ass will be on the street after the next election or his constituents will have him impeached. The majority of us still believe in the patina of Democracy even if it's really an oligarchy. Revised bumper sticker: "they'll take my individual freedom when they peel my cold, dead fingers from around it". Remember that phrase when we're all choking to death on coal dust and frying from global warming because John Q. Won't give up his monster truck. The mighty government can't even regulate fossil fuels, e.g. Obama's caving on the pipeline.
Cap't Jack
VA I think there is more than enough room for public discourse on policy, politics, crime, economic policy etc.
More than enough room.
Good reasoned debate begins to get clouded with this internet fueled, fringe, malcontented spirit that seems to just arbitrarily sling mud
and find conspiracies and shadows lurking around every corner and under every bed.
If you go back and sift through the pages on this thread alone you will find some of the most ridiculous, hyperbolic, untrue statements ever.
But it seems like everyone is just in on the feeding frenzy and doesn’t even realize the BS is starting to rise above their waders.
IMO, having the government spy on possible subversive activity is far more preferable than having another 911. Freedom does not depend on how intrusive the government is in our lives. It is what the government does with the information it gathers that determines your freedom to say or do what you want withing the confines of the Constitution. As long as I don't see police action against dress mode or expressing controversial viewpoints, I consider myself lucky. I am much more afraid of a bunch of skin heads or neo-nazis that the police. btw. LoisYou wrote: "IMO, having the government spy on possible subversive activity is far more preferable than having another 911." We don't have that choice. That's a false dichotomy. "The US is a very violent country, due to the very freedoms we have, but apparently do not fully appreciate." What good are freedoms if we're dead? Would you give up the life of a loved one for your right to carry a gun? How could the US be on the top of the ist of gun deaths? I never said out abysmal record is because of police actions. It's because we allow criminals, potential criminals, and the mentally challenged to have guns. Perhaps you are one of those who would allow your loved ones or yourself to be killed rather than give up the right to own and carry a gun. Your chances of having that happen are manytimes greater in the US than most other countries. I would love to hear you hold a press conference in front of the people whose children were killed in Santa Barbara and at Sandy Hook and explain to them how having an armed public is keeping them safe and how their children died for the right for the public to own and carry guns. What would you say? LoisWhy is the US so far down the listIn that table you submitted, the US is actually at the top of the list, but even then this is not from police actions, but private individual accidents or killings. The US is a very violent country, due to the very freedoms we have, but apparently do not fully appreciate.
Once again Lois, I’m pretty sure you misinterpreted 99% of what someone wrote in their post.
This is exactly what I was talking about. Tone down the raving and ranting. Take the time to read what someone posted.
I’m pretty sure Write4you wasn’t conveying anything you seem to be rebutting or rebuking.
Agreed and I think that GdB hit the nail in the head when he stated that when you have to fear retribution from the State, then you have the beginning of a police state. Statements on this forum alone prove we have no worries in that regard. And just hop on over to the flaming sites, e.g. Alex Jones and his ilk. We could call them the “miner’s canaries” of free speech. So far no repression and no one’s been rounded up. The Klan’s still on Springer, a former rock star still pumps out racist rants about the Prez and even attended the last State of the Union speech, no giant posters of Obama with a condescending look on his face plastered on municipal buildings to impress the public of his massive power, no secret police on every street corner listening for a disparaging word about the government and no soldiers armed with M16s at the entrance to the local Walmart. I just threw that in. You see that a lot in Mexican cities. Also, all of the watchdog organizations including the ACLU are still operating.
Cap’t Jack
How could the US be on the top of the ist of gun deaths? I never said out abysmal recordis because of police actions. T’s because we allow criminals, potential criminals, and the mentally challenged to have guns. Perhaps you are one of those who would allow your loved ones or yourself to be killed rather than give up the right to own and carry a gun. Your chances of having that happen are manytimes greater in the US than most other countries.Hence the freedom we experience in this country. In a police state the only "gun deaths" would be those executed for crimes against the State. Now to your statement, the major problem lies with that freedom. As I've mentioned many times before, regulations vary from state and the loopholes allow nuts like this spoiled rich kid to gun down the innocent because his parents felt that he wasn't dangerous. Federal regulations aren't being followed and they aren't strict enough to catch these killers before they act Until we do these atrocities will continue. Meantime the debate continues. When will it end? Will the American people give up their freedom to own weapon? According to posters here that would just another method of state control, which I'm in favor of BTW. Cap't Jack
VA don’t spoil the party here. There’s so much good, healthy agitation going on here. Why try to bring a level headed approach to the table? I remember my grandpa telling me when airplanes first started flying around everyone thought their civil liberties and privacy was going to go out the window too. Bunch of Barnstormers flying around peaking in people’s backyards. That was a joke…my grandpa never said that. Sorry about the rant Vy, but some of us were beginning to sound like the conspiracy theory nuts you read on Facebook. I agree that we have to be concerned, but Americans love, no crave individuality, e.g. let one politician just try to sponsor a restrictive gun law. His ass will be on the street after the next election or his constituents will have him impeached. The majority of us still believe in the patina of Democracy even if it's really an oligarchy. Revised bumper sticker: "they'll take my individual freedom when they peel my cold, dead fingers from around it". Remember that phrase when we're all choking to death on coal dust and frying from global warming because John Q. Won't give up his monster truck. The mighty government can't even regulate fossil fuels, e.g. Obama's caving on the pipeline. Cap't JackYes, except it isn't as nice and quaint as you're trying to portrait it. America is now effectively being run by corporations that have vested interests that are often diametrically opposed to the near let alone long term interests of Americans. For instance it's in the interest of a company like BP to drill, ship and refine petroleum products as cheaply as it can which has led to death and ecological destruction all over the country. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_Refinery_explosion
On the March 23, 2005, a hydrocarbon vapour cloud explosion occurred at the ISOM isomerization process unit at BP's Texas City refinery in Texas City, Texas, killing 15 workers and injuring more than 170 others. The Texas City Refinery was the second-largest oil refinery in the state, and the third-largest in the United States with an input capacity of 437,000 barrels (69,500 m3) per day as of January 1, 2000.[1] BP acquired the Texas City refinery as part of its merger with Amoco in 1999.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prudhoe_Bay_oil_spill
The Prudhoe Bay oil spill (2006 Alaskan oil spill) was an oil spill that was discovered on March 2, 2006 at a pipeline owned by BP Exploration, Alaska (BPXA) in western Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Initial estimates of the five-day leak said that up to 267,000 US gallons (6,400 bbl) were spilled over 1.9 acres (7,700 m2), making it the largest oil spill on Alaska's north slope to date.[1] Alaska's unified command ratified the volume of crude oil spilled as 212,252 US gallons (5,053.6 bbl) in March 2008.[2] The spill originated from a 0.25-inch (0.64 cm) hole in a 34-inch (86 cm) diameter pipeline. The pipeline was decommissioned and later replaced with a 20-inch (51 cm) diameter pipeline with its own pipeline inspection gauge (pig) launch and recovery sites for easier inspection.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/9680589/A-history-of-BPs-US-disasters.html That's just one company, you'd think if there was the slightest concern for individual's rights at all it would have been put out of business. If there was actually any response to citizens interests action would have been taken on global warming years ago but that would mean politicians stop taking massive "donations" from ExxonMobil, the Southern Company, Shell and the lot. How about Dick Cheney and the Iraq war. As Sec Def he changed how the US military performed it's duty, many traditional roles were turned over to private contractors. He then went into the private sector with Halliburton. Upon returning to government he did everything he could to start a war that has probably killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of Americans and left tens of thousands permanently disabled. Largely so that well connected corporations like Halliburton could get rich. Corporations have been getting more and more power while individuals are almost completely left out. Who can afford to buy politicians off but the ultra rich, which has led to downsizing outsourcing and eventually complete removal of an employment and tax base to provide for individual needs. Wall Street has turned into a massive shell game which has essentially been robbing honest investors for years. Bernie Madoff may have been the most prominent of the scam artists but he never would have been able to do what he did without extensive help from the system. Any real oversight or control of the market has been shoved to the side in corporate interests against individual. I guess if you can get the people who are supposed to be regulating your behaviour to marry into your family that's one way to get rich in America, but it's not the country I was brought up in. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/WallStreet/story?id=6471863
A top Securities and Exchange Commission compliance official who worked for the SEC when it found no problems at Bernard Madoff's firm in 2005, later began to date and married Madoff's niece, who was a compliance lawyer for the company. A spokesman for Eric Swanson, who has since left the SEC, said Swanson "did not participate in any inquiry of Bernard Madoff Securities or its affiliates while involved in a relationship" with Shana Madoff. The failure of the SEC to detect the alleged fraud carried out by Madoff, estimated by Madoff himself at $50 billion, has raised questions about the SEC's performance.Hey you can watch a video about how they had almost a decade to catch this crook. http://www.alluc.to/documentaries/watch-chasing-madoff-2010-online/402847.html The only thing that brought Madoff down was the bigger fraud that caused the financial system to implode in 2008, when they looked to Bernie to bail them out they realized he'd been pulling an even bigger Ponzi than they had for years, where was anyone protecting individual investor interests? The list goes on and on, the problem in America isn't that there's too much individual rights, it's that if you don't have a couple of hundred million you effectively cease to exist in the nation. And things like building a massive domestic spying system are there to make sure it stays that way. Take things much further than they've already gone and there won't be an America any more. Something a lot of people seem to be missing as they're so focused on distractions they're missing the real event. America was set up so the citizens could assert their idea of freedom on the state, not the other way around. It's pretty damn hard to do that when a program started under Bush's total awareness initiative or whatever it was called is now being implemented. How do citizens even organize to assert their rights when they're afraid to even start? It has nothing to do with a problem of Americans wanting too much individualism, the problem is that those who already have almost all the wealth think that those without it no longer qualify as humans let alone Americans. But don't let any of that get in the way of showing how clever you can be.
Agreed and I think that GdB hit the nail in the head when he stated that when you have to fear retribution from the State, then you have the beginning of a police state. Statements on this forum alone prove we have no worries in that regard. And just hop on over to the flaming sites, e.g. Alex Jones and his ilk. We could call them the "miner's canaries" of free speech. So far no repression and no one's been rounded up. The Klan's still on Springer, a former rock star still pumps out racist rants about the Prez and even attended the last State of the Union speech, no giant posters of Obama with a condescending look on his face plastered on municipal buildings to impress the public of his massive power, no secret police on every street corner listening for a disparaging word about the government and no soldiers armed with M16s at the entrance to the local Walmart. I just threw that in. You see that a lot in Mexican cities. Also, all of the watchdog organizations including the ACLU are still operating. Cap't JackThat would make sense if we were discussing the appearance of freedom, but we're discussing actual freedom which in America comes with a price tag. The fact that private sector interests are part of the surveillance system should be a huge red flag to what the intent is. And I guarantee you if you start organizing for something that threatens the economic interests of the people footing the massive bill to get their people into office in the first place, you're suddenly going to find out how much freedom you actually have.
Hence the freedom we experience in this country. In a police state the only "gun deaths" would be those executed for crimes against the State. Now to your statement, the major problem lies with that freedom. As I've mentioned many times before, regulations vary from state and the loopholes allow nuts like this spoiled rich kid to gun down the innocent because his parents felt that he wasn't dangerous. Federal regulations aren't being followed and they aren't strict enough to catch these killers before they act Until we do these atrocities will continue. Meantime the debate continues. When will it end? Will the American people give up their freedom to own weapon? According to posters here that would just another method of state control, which I'm in favor of BTW. Cap't JackWhat freedom, the right to own a gun has as more to do with the gun industry wanting to protect a multi-billion dollar market than it does with individual rights. It's impossible to get rational laws passed and enforced because the entire system is being run on fraud not the public interest. Why do you think billions are now being spent on campaigning each election? This "take their rights, it'll solve everything" nonsense is going to make things worse not better. Without real electoral reform the US will become even more of a sham than it already is. I'm pretty sure that spending billions more to collect and analyze all the information there is out there on Americans while cracking down on any activity that may interfere with private sector interests that have bought control of government qualifies as a police state in the context of what America was meant to be. You seem to have a real contempt for Americans.
So let’s get this straight, we’ve got a German, a guy who’s named after a Russian city and someone who seems to think individual freedom is anathema to actual freedom in America informing us what freedom actually is in the nation.
And they’re defending the most massive domestic surveillance program in history anywhere…kind of says it all.
Yes, except it isn’t as nice and quaint as you’re trying to portrait it. America is now effectively being run by corporations that have vested interests that are often diametrically opposed to the near let alone long term interests of Americans. For instance it’s in the interest of a company like BP to drill, ship and refine petroleum products as cheaply as it can which has led to death and ecological destruction all over the country.Quaint? Do you mean overly simplistic? If so then yeah, I'm guilty. Remember my mention that this is an oligarchy with the "patina" of democracy and that the OP concerns the concept of America as a police State Fuzzy. My comments are directed to that concept, not to an oligarchic system which you contend. Pile on your proof that Congressmen are financially blocked from the wishes of the people. That still doesn't prove that we're a police State. You want to prove oligarchy? Sure I'm with you on that point. Now go out and prove it to the man on the street. Tell him he can't drive his RV (7 miles to the gallon) to the beach. Run out and tell the four wheelers to walk into the woods and drag their deer carcass out by hand; mount a campaign in your city and town to promote mass transportation. Seriously. Join an environmental group or start a blog; tell all your pals on Facebook to fight big oil and coal. Write your Congressman even though he's probably in BP's pocket (they loathe getting handwritten letters from constitutents. I'm with you one hundred percent. Still doesn't prove that we're slipping into a police state. The problem lies with the whole concept of what constitutes the philosophy of America, individual freedom and profit, profit, profit. It's what we've been all about since the beginning. Read Charles and Mary Beard's The economic Interpretation of the Constitution. We're a country of profit seekers. "nothing wrong with making money any legal way we can. With that philosophy as our foundation what do detractors expect? Land was the original determiner of wealth so we overran the continent in a hundred years, grabbing every square inch we could scarfing up precious metal along the way. Then came coal and oil. First Rockefeller and now the mega companies. What's to stop them? A grassroots movement slowed it to be sure, a few voices spoke up e.g. Bryan and his "cross of gold" and Teddy the Progressive who fought monopolies. Who's the new Roosevelt now? Do we have a powerful Green Party? There are some thirty environmental groups making some inroads locally but the economy is veritably tied to these industries, coal, gas, oil and automobiles. Now AGW looms ever closer yet most of the public believes the deniers. How do you uncouple the American public from the very energy sources that give them the individual lifestyle they so fervently crave. ThIs isn't rhetorical. Until that happens we'll just exhaust the energy resources and either choke to death or return to the horse for transportation and the Government seems powerless to stop it. No police state here. Cap't Jack
That would make sense if we were discussing the appearance of freedom, but we’re discussing actual freedom which in America comes with a price tag. The fact that private sector interests are part of the surveillance system should be a huge red flag to what the intent is. And I guarantee you if you start organizing for something that threatens the economic interests of the people footing the massive bill to get their people into office in the first place, you’re suddenly going to find out how much freedom you actually have.No Fuzzy, I'm discussing "actual freedom", not it's appearance. And everything you do comes with a price tag; especially when you go public with a statement that contravenes or contradicts the general opinion of how things should be. It appears you're not talking about "freedom of expression" but the court of popular opinion. And yes I can rage against the machine, mount a campaign to save the environment paste a bumper sticker on my car that says "save the baby whales and fuck BP"! That's how much freedom we all have. The trick is to get people to sincerely listen, to start an anti oil meme, to play up price gouging, especially for oil and gas to teach AGW in public AND private schools then, just maybe we won't need to have this conversation in the future, if we even have one that is. Cap't Jack
Quaint? Do you mean overly simplistic? If so then yeah, I'm guilty. Remember my mention that this is an oligarchy with the "patina" of democracy and that the OP concerns the concept of America as a police State Fuzzy. My comments are directed to that concept, not to an oligarchic system which you contend. Pile on your proof that Congressmen are financially blocked from the wishes of the people. That still doesn't prove that we're a police State. You want to prove oligarchy? Sure I'm with you on that point. Now go out and prove it to the man on the street. Tell him he can't drive his RV (7 miles to the gallon) to the beach. Run out and tell the four wheelers to walk into the woods and drag their deer carcass out by hand; mount a campaign in your city and town to promote mass transportation. Seriously. Join an environmental group or start a blog; tell all your pals on Facebook to fight big oil and coal. Write your Congressman even though he's probably in BP's pocket (they loathe getting handwritten letters from constitutents. I'm with you one hundred percent. Still doesn't prove that we're slipping into a police state. The problem lies with the whole concept of what constitutes the philosophy of America, individual freedom and profit, profit, profit. It's what we've been all about since the beginning. Read Charles and Mary Beard's The economic Interpretation of the Constitution. We're a country of profit seekers. "nothing wrong with making money any legal way we can. With that philosophy as our foundation what do detractors expect? Land was the original determiner of wealth so we overran the continent in a hundred years, grabbing every square inch we could scarfing up precious metal along the way. Then came coal and oil. First Rockefeller and now the mega companies. What's to stop them? A grassroots movement slowed it to be sure, a few voices spoke up e.g. Bryan and his "cross of gold" and Teddy the Progressive who fought monopolies. Who's the new Roosevelt now? Do we have a powerful Green Party? There are some thirty environmental groups making some inroads locally but the economy is veritably tied to these industries, coal, gas, oil and automobiles. Now AGW looms ever closer yet most of the public believes the deniers. How do you uncouple the American public from the very energy sources that give them the individual lifestyle they so fervently crave. ThIs isn't rhetorical. Until that happens we'll just exhaust the energy resources and either choke to death or return to the horse for transportation and the Government seems powerless to stop it. No police state here. Cap't JackYou seem to be missing the point completely, go through what Snowden has revealed and the ACLU site on how environmental groups, financial reform groups and anti-war groups are already being suppressed by the state. Snowden didn't report that at some point the intelligence services will be able to read any electronic communications, he detailed how as a contractor he could already do that. And the NSA now has the ability to store, crack any code and analyze virtually any information...in a socio-economic context that already gives every indication of having left public control for the private sector. So if say for instance you want to oppose mountain top mining in West Virginia there's a really good chance the resources of the entire state are going to be thrown at you to prevent what should be a basic right. That is that a protection of the basic conditions that allow us to be here in the first need to be protected against purely commercial interests. I suppose by your logic these are just silly individualists who just don't get how things work. http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post/nasa-climate-researcher-hansen-arre-2009-06-25/?id=nasa-climate-researcher-hansen-arre-2009-06-25
James Hansen, NASA's chief climate scientist, was arrested Tuesday while protesting against mountaintop coal mining in West Virginia. Hansen was taking part in a demonstration organized by the Rainforest Action Network and that included actress Daryl Hannah, 94-year-old former Representative Ken Hechler (D-WV), and noted environmentalist Judy Bonds. He was one of 31 people cited and released for blocking traffic and obstructing an officer on a road near Massey Energy Company's Goals Coal plant, the Associated Press reported.Where's the freedom in that. It doesn't matter if people are allowed to voice off about things that don't really speak truth to power, the true test of freedom is the right to speak truth to things that are of vital interest even when they conflict with powerful interests. And show me where that is happening in America now
What freedom, the right to own a gun has as more to do with the gun industry wanting to protect a multi-billion dollar market than it does with individual rights. It’s impossible to get rational laws passed and enforced because the entire system is being run on fraud not the public interest. Why do you think billions are now being spent on campaigning each election? This “take their rights, it’ll solve everything" nonsense is going to make things worse not better. Without real electoral reform the US will become even more of a sham than it already is. I’m pretty sure that spending billions more to collect and analyze all the information there is out there on Americans while cracking down on any activity that may interfere with private sector interests that have bought control of government qualifies as a police state in the context of what America was meant to be. You seem to have a real contempt for Americans.Ok fuzzy, I'll reply to your post from the bottom up. I'm an American. My paternal ancestors have been here for four hundred years. Tack an additional two hundred on to that since my great grannie was a Cherokee. My maternal ancestors have been here since 1776 when my German ancestor was captured by General Washington at the Battle of Trenton. That establishes my American pedigree. My Father, my hero BTW is a World War II vet, twice wounded and still kicking. He's just as upset over gun control as I am and he taught me how to shoot when I was nine. So no, I don't have contempt for my own kind. I do have contempt for stupidity however. Also, Unfortunately there are several stupid Xenophobic Americans out there who don't see beyond there nose. Ok, back to be top, BS. The right to own a gun originates from those people who for whatever reason want to own guns. Mine is historical BTW and I own several. Smith and Wesson didn't come knocking at my door demanding that I buy one of their weapons. Also, it's not the gun industry that blocks legislation but the owners themselves via their lobby the NRA. Owners contribute millions of dollars to their lobby to block legislation. In point of fact, the gun industry fears the adverse publicity from the NRA, check the Smith Wesson fiasco. The NRA called for a boycott of their weapons and they caved in immediately. You could say it's the tail wagging the dog in this case. Ok, I don't completely follow your last statement about how dissent is being outlawed in America? I've been dissenting for the last forty years, millions of us have and so far no BP guys have showed up to silence my incessant rants about price gouging. And do we need electoral reform? Hell yes! Do away with Gerrymandering, stop voting limitations, limit campaign spending, allow for full disclosure of lobby contributions, etc. etc. it really sounds to me that your the one who has contempt for Americans Fuzzy. Cap't Jack