What does it take?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... BTW,  income taxes are not (60%) as high as you suggest. There are for 2016 basically 3 tax brackets, 36.55% (low incomes) , 40.4% (middle income), and a maximum of 52% for the highest incomes.

Back in the 90s, I used to work for several American companies in Europe and had several Dutch colleagues. I remember the 60% from one of them, not as a income tax bracket, but as a totality of taxes he ultimately ends up paying in various forms from his paycheck.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Back in the 90s, I used to work for several American companies in Europe and had several Dutch colleagues. I remember the 60% from one of them, not as a income tax bracket, but as a totality of taxes he ultimately ends up paying in various forms from his paycheck.

Not all that important for the discussion, but it (income tax) used to be higher, but also with more deductibles. There are also constructions possible where much less tax is paid on an annual basis. And of course if one (as a private person) purchases lots of things, then one also pays a lot (in absolute amount) of VAT (which is lower for essential goods and services, and higher for more 'luxurious' items), but that's the same percentage for all income classes, and separate from income tax.

We need some of that to keep dry feet, with roughly 1/3rd of the country below sea-level. The taxes e.g. make sure that those on higher ground (highest 'mountain' is 323 metres above average sealevel), help to pay for those (most) living below sea level (lowest point 6,76 metres below average sea-level). Some call that socialism, I call it solidarity.

And while we are juggling statistics, on a scale of 10 the Netherlands scores a 9.0 which is an 8th position (a 7.3 score or 15th position for the USA) on the OECD Better Life score, for Life Satisfaction. We're overall a pretty happy bunch, but not without (self-)criticism and topics needing improvement.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

There you go:

No racial bias in police shootings, study by Harvard professor shows

A study by a (black) Harvard professor shows:

no evidence of racial bias in police shootings even though officers were more likely to interact physically with non-whites than whites

The 63-page study, “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force,” appears to support research conducted at Washington State University showing that officers in simulation tests were actually less likely to shoot at blacks than whites.

...movements such as Black Lives Matter should seek solutions within their own communities rather than changing the behaviors of police and other external forces,” he said in the study’s conclusion.

[RSL]

But, if the above isn't achieved, then what it will take are teachers also carrying, being trained in gun use, to quickly and effectively DOA any defective students who bring guns to school.

Exactly, John. It's what I've been recommending ever since I read about Professor Liviu Librescu holding the door in his Virginia Tech classroom while most of his students escaped through the windows. Seung-Hui Cho shot him through the door and killed him (along with 31 others, including one of his students who didn't make it out the window). As far as I'm concerned, every professor should be required to carry a gun and qualify on the range at least once a year. Any professor who refuses to do this should be summarily fired -- at least until colleges and universities cease being "gun free zones."

The idea that you can create a gun free zone is shot in the head by shootings like Hungerford, UK in 1987, Sollies-Pont & Cuers, France in 1995, Zug, Switzerland in 2001, and more recently Cardiff, UK in 2012, Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands in 2011 (according to Bart a gun free country), Liege, Belgium in 2011, etc., etc., etc.

If you think you can eliminate guns and shootings without arming the people who can put a stop to them you're whistling Dixie.

[Justinr]

Exactly, John. It's what I've been recommending ever since I read about Professor Liviu Librescu holding the door in his Virginia Tech classroom while most of his students escaped through the windows. Seung-Hui Cho shot him through the door and killed him (along with 31 others, including one of his students who didn't make it out the window). As far as I'm concerned, every professor should be required to carry a gun and qualify on the range at least once a year. Any professor who refuses to do this should be summarily fired -- at least until colleges and universities cease being "gun free zones."

The idea that you can create a gun free zone is shot in the head by shootings like Hungerford, UK in 1987, Sollies-Pont & Cuers, France in 1995, Zug, Switzerland in 2001, and more recently Cardiff, UK in 2012, Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands in 2011 (according to Bart a gun free country), Liege, Belgium in 2011, etc., etc., etc.

If you think you can eliminate guns and shootings without arming the people who can put a stop to them you're whistling Dixie.

I appreciate that you won't be able understand it when I note that it is that sort of idea that makes people outside of America despair of there ever being any sensible approach to gun possesion in the US, but I would urge you to try sometime.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

The gun-free zones are an absolutely, mind-bogglingly, idiotic concept.

Unless there are metal detectors, manned by armed guards BEHIND a bullet proof glass, at the only entrance(s) into the zone, they are simply a paradise playground for an active, determined shooter. It is like leaving a big sign at your front door: "We are on a two-week vacation, please come in and help yourself."

[Peter McLennan]

every professor should be required to carry a gun and qualify on the range at least once a year. Any professor who refuses to do this should be summarily fired -

OMFG
And this in the Land of the Free.

So, no matter what, the solution to the gun problem is more guns?

Reminds me of a joke from the Cold War days.  POTUS and the Soviet equivalent are standing, waist deep in gasoline in basement. In his pocket, POTUS has 200 strike-anywhere matches and the Soviet has 275.  POTUS says, "Y'know what?  If we both had 500 matches, then we'd all be safe."

[RSL]

I appreciate that you won't be able understand it when I note that it is that sort of idea that makes people outside of America despair of there ever being any sensible approach to gun possesion in the US, but I would urge you to try sometime.

When you have a "sensible approach to gun possession" then they just use baseball bats: "Man, 64, found slumped in armchair 'four days after he was beaten to death', murder trial hears" (In Edenderry, Ireland.) The problem's with the people, Justin, not the equipment. Same thing with photography.

[Justinr]

When you have a "sensible approach to gun possession" then they just use baseball bats: "Man, 64, found slumped in armchair 'four days after he was beaten to death', murder trial hears" (In Edenderry, Ireland.) The problem's with the people, Justin, not the equipment. Same thing with photography.

Indeed, but if you were to wave a magic wand and change all the guns into baseball bats do you think the casualty rate from baseball bats would equal that from shootings RSL?

[RSL]

OMFG
And this in the Land of the Free.

So, no matter what, the solution to the gun problem is more guns?

Reminds me of a joke from the Cold War days.  POTUS and the Soviet equivalent are standing, waist deep in gasoline in basement. In his pocket, POTUS has 200 strike-anywhere matches and the Soviet has 275.  POTUS says, "Y'know what?  If we both had 500 matches, then we'd all be safe."

Go back and read my post, Peter. Virginia Tech is a "gun free zone." How the hell did that guy get a gun into a gun free zone? There shouldn't have been a gun in there. After all, it was forbidden. Don't you agree?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Indeed, but if you were to wave a magic wand and change all the guns into baseball bats do you think the casualty rate from baseball bats would equal that from shootings RSL?

Actually, Justin, baseball bat, not gun, is the #1 crime weapon of choice in America.

[RSL]

Indeed, but if you were to wave a magic wand and change all the guns into baseball bats do you think the casualty rate from baseball bats would equal that from shootings RSL?

Point is, Justin, you can't wave a wand and eliminate guns or baseball bats or knives or any other kind of equipment that can kill. Go back and check what happened in Netherlands, which from what I'm being told in this thread, is a gun free zone. They waved their wands but it didn't get the job done.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

The idea that you can create a gun free zone is shot in the head by shootings like [...] Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands in 2011 (according to Bart a gun free country)...

Not gun free, mostly no guns without license, and a few with license.  Some criminals use guns, but mostly among themselves, not that that can be tolerated. The police carry guns, as do forest rangers and a small group of hunters, and some licensed individuals who keep their guns for target practice at the clubhouse in a safe. Yes we occasionally (this was 5 years ago) get a deranged person that does crazy things. This person was mentally ill, and a flawed police check unjustly granted him a gun license in a target/sports shooting club. The procedure for license checks has been improved as a result.

BTW, gun free as you suggest, is not the same as; it's illegal to have a gun without license. And a few do have a license, and some lose that license because they fail the tests/conditions. So we rarely have incidents between law enforcement and normal citizens, or between citizens, that involves guns.

Cheers,
Bart

[RSL]

You just made my point, Bart.

[Justinr]

Actually, Justin, baseball bat, not gun, is the #1 crime weapon of choice in America.

Ah, but in 2011 496 homicides were carried out with 'blunt objects (clubs, hammers, etc.)' as opposed to 8,583 by firearms.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Ah, but in 2011 496 homicides ...

That is why I said "crime," not "homicides."

[Justinr]

Point is, Justin, you can't wave a wand and eliminate guns or baseball bats or knives or any other kind of equipment that can kill. Go back and check what happened in Netherlands, which from what I'm being told in this thread, is a gun free zone. They waved their wands but it didn't get the job done.

No, the point was that gun's make killing easier, you'd hardly likely to slaughter as many children in an infants school if you went in waving a baseball bat around.

The Netherlands has 4 guns per 100 people rather than 112 in America and the death rate by firearms in the Netherlands is o.58 per 100,000 people as opposed to 10.54 in the states.

These things are quite easy to look up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

You just made my point, Bart.

I have trouble detecting a point that makes sense, unless your point was that with lower gun possession one gets fewer gun related incidents. Yes, we do have (vastly) fewer incidents, in fact basically all countries have fewer gun deaths pro capita than in the USA. I wouldn't be proud of such a number one position.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Justin, please do not compare countries the size and population of a postage stamp with America (no offense meant, I love Holland). Holland and similar countries are small, with homogenous population, with same or similar work ethic, ethnic background and religion.

[Justinr]

That is why I said "crime," not "homicides."

Aye, but the point being made was about deaths from various weapons.