Libertarian

Page 1 of 106

Wealth Distribution

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • Dude_Mon
    34 points Aug 15,2018, 10:59pm

    Proper grammar in your memes porfavor

  • sledge2k
    37 points Aug 15,2018, 11:58pm

    Shapiro's certainly pro Israel, but has he ever actually endorsed the US sending money there?

  • russiabot1776
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 10:56am

    Shapiro has never once advocated for this.

  • linkns_86
    14 points Aug 16,2018, 4:27am

    What's bad about this isn't necessarily that it's a lie, though it is. It makes the false assumption that because Shapiro is Jewish, he puts religion before political consistency. This isn't the case, and just reflects a racial stereotype.

  • CalRipkenForCommish
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29am

    Poor Americans? Sick Americans? Help with astronomical college costs? Bridges and roads need fixing? Fuck you, Israel needs it more!

    /s

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:13pm

    So wait do we not support our allies, we support allies so they can support us. Do we not do this?

  • NichS144
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:41pm

    Gotcha!

  • notaedivad
    -5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:57am

    I still don't quite get how someone can be so logical and rational in his arguments, but still believe in a magical man in the sky.

  • orangewristband
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:00am

    Israel takes like .1%. And I’m cool with helping those we care about and care about us. It’s like giving your buddy 20 bucks and saying yeah you get the next sixer.

  • kkota
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:25am

    And the artificial supply restrictions in the healthcare market are ok because his wife is a doctor who paid her dues to the cartel went to med school for a long time. Standard republican hypocrite. A dumb guy’s idea of a smart guy because he talks twice as fast as average to say what can be said with half as many words.

  • MisterCharlton
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:19am

    “Israel is occupying Palestine!!!”

  • Supringsinglyawesome
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:16pm

    At least give some actual criticism not made up stuff about Ben Shapiro. Oh wait you can’t because he’s destroyed every liberal argument ever

  • jaedgy
    -1 points Aug 15,2018, 11:48pm

    Die for 🇮🇱🇮🇱🤥

  • Drink_the_ocean_dry
    -2 points Aug 16,2018, 4:37am

    Ruben Shapiro is of course, a jew first and conservative second.

  • No_Fake_News
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 10:29am

    Shapiro is a Zionist hawk, but I've not heard his actual position on foreign aid. There are some Zionists who will go the "it's better if we don't take US money, we don't want strings attached, blah blah blah".

  • Like1OngoingOrgasm
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 11:48am

    The asshole who said that Arabs prefer to live in sewers.

  • Daghi
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:29pm

    This is like the 50th repost

COMMENTS

  • Dude_Mon
    34 points Aug 15,2018, 10:59pm

    Proper grammar in your memes porfavor

  • sledge2k
    37 points Aug 15,2018, 11:58pm

    Shapiro's certainly pro Israel, but has he ever actually endorsed the US sending money there?

  • russiabot1776
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 10:56am

    Shapiro has never once advocated for this.

  • linkns_86
    21 points Aug 16,2018, 4:21am

    Cool. So now we're just making up fake quotes.

    Shapiro is right about 95% of the time. If you want to criticize his position, go about it in a way that doesn't strawman him.

  • linkns_86
    14 points Aug 16,2018, 4:27am

    What's bad about this isn't necessarily that it's a lie, though it is. It makes the false assumption that because Shapiro is Jewish, he puts religion before political consistency. This isn't the case, and just reflects a racial stereotype.

  • CalRipkenForCommish
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29am

    Poor Americans? Sick Americans? Help with astronomical college costs? Bridges and roads need fixing? Fuck you, Israel needs it more!

    /s

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:13pm

    So wait do we not support our allies, we support allies so they can support us. Do we not do this?

  • NichS144
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:41pm

    Gotcha!

  • notaedivad
    -5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:57am

    I still don't quite get how someone can be so logical and rational in his arguments, but still believe in a magical man in the sky.

  • orangewristband
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:00am

    Israel takes like .1%. And I’m cool with helping those we care about and care about us. It’s like giving your buddy 20 bucks and saying yeah you get the next sixer.

  • kkota
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:25am

    And the artificial supply restrictions in the healthcare market are ok because his wife is a doctor who paid her dues to the cartel went to med school for a long time. Standard republican hypocrite. A dumb guy’s idea of a smart guy because he talks twice as fast as average to say what can be said with half as many words.

  • MisterCharlton
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:19am

    “Israel is occupying Palestine!!!”

  • Supringsinglyawesome
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:16pm

    At least give some actual criticism not made up stuff about Ben Shapiro. Oh wait you can’t because he’s destroyed every liberal argument ever

  • jaedgy
    -1 points Aug 15,2018, 11:48pm

    Die for 🇮🇱🇮🇱🤥

  • Drink_the_ocean_dry
    -2 points Aug 16,2018, 4:37am

    Ruben Shapiro is of course, a jew first and conservative second.

  • No_Fake_News
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 10:29am

    Shapiro is a Zionist hawk, but I've not heard his actual position on foreign aid. There are some Zionists who will go the "it's better if we don't take US money, we don't want strings attached, blah blah blah".

  • Like1OngoingOrgasm
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 11:48am

    The asshole who said that Arabs prefer to live in sewers.

  • Daghi
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 3:29pm

    This is like the 50th repost

● ● ●

Communism will win

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • FF1911
    22 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    Time to hang up the flag. We have been defeated.

  • MisterCharlton
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 9:26am

    The Canuck.

  • SonOfDadOfSam
    7 points Aug 16,2018, 2:40pm

    That's not communism or socialism. That's a mutually beneficial voluntary agreement. The basis for capitalism.

  • hastagelf
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    Kerala

  • D0mm0n
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 8:48am

    At killing the most people. It always does.

  • lordhugh
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 11:18am

    Originally, human hunter gather groups were probably proto-communist/socialist

  • StrangeReception5
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 11:29am

    me and my sisters used to gamble our Halloween candy in games of black jack, I think our economic system should be based on that.

  • killianfaust
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:42pm

    Only way that example is considered communism or socialism is if their parents, using the threat of physical punishment and/or grounding, forced them to share, and not just with themselves, but with other people not in their family, to the point where they had far less than they would have had if their parents weren't communism/socialist.

  • leavethehouse
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:35pm

    soviet union anthem plays

  • fernoklumpen
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 11:32am

    If we're going by the American definition of socialism then we can point to most of Europe

COMMENTS

  • FF1911
    22 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    Time to hang up the flag. We have been defeated.

  • MisterCharlton
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 9:26am

    The Canuck.

  • SonOfDadOfSam
    7 points Aug 16,2018, 2:40pm

    That's not communism or socialism. That's a mutually beneficial voluntary agreement. The basis for capitalism.

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    7 points Aug 16,2018, 12:14pm

    That’s a private contract, and a fucking genius one at that

  • hastagelf
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    Kerala

  • D0mm0n
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 8:48am

    At killing the most people. It always does.

  • lordhugh
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 11:18am

    Originally, human hunter gather groups were probably proto-communist/socialist

  • StrangeReception5
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 11:29am

    me and my sisters used to gamble our Halloween candy in games of black jack, I think our economic system should be based on that.

  • killianfaust
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:42pm

    Only way that example is considered communism or socialism is if their parents, using the threat of physical punishment and/or grounding, forced them to share, and not just with themselves, but with other people not in their family, to the point where they had far less than they would have had if their parents weren't communism/socialist.

  • leavethehouse
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:35pm

    soviet union anthem plays

  • fernoklumpen
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 11:32am

    If we're going by the American definition of socialism then we can point to most of Europe

● ● ●

Oh Yeah They Did!

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • Mathieulombardi
    27 points Aug 16,2018, 8:58am

    Lol. Just give me five more minutes to reload tho

  • klarno
    19 points Aug 16,2018, 10:31am

    Based on Revolutionary precedent (namely the cannon at Concord), the 2nd amendment was meant to go as far as to support the right of the people to keep and bear artillery.

  • d00ns
    27 points Aug 16,2018, 9:00am

    This would be a much better picture if it had the dates of invention for each gun

  • machocamacho88
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 1:00pm

    The Founding Father's definitely couldn't have predicted the internet, so naturally the First amendment doesn't apply on it.

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:08pm

    HAVE you heard of the Girardoni Air Gun it was silent, fired 22 shots automatically and was magazine feed. THIS was OWNED by Thomas Jefferson

  • OhNoItsGodwin
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 12:34pm

    Those aren't founding fathers weapons largely, and 18th century multibarrel firearms were very rare as they were impractical and explicitly not common.

    Want a real 1774 weapon that can fire 3 times a minute? Brown bess. The Charleville Musket. The standard issue weapon of war.

  • ThatGuyYouKnow999
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 10:28am

    The smaller one in the top left is a pepperbox pistol. It was popular with women for self defense lol.

    https://www.guns.com/2011/07/07/pepperbox-guns-the-big-and-the-small/

  • Time4Red
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 10:53am

    The supreme court established the common use interpretation/precedent, based on the idea that only guns that are commonly used are/were protected. That's why it's unconstitutional to outright ban handguns today. None of those weapons from the OP were common use at the time.

    The problem is that common use changes over time. I think it's a bad precedent, but it's still a test the courts use.

  • lordhugh
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 11:05am

    I love these crazy old designs

  • Brucy56
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:35pm

    Does "the 2nd" afford me the right to possess a bomb that discharges 30 pieces of shrapnel in 6 seconds in the direction I choose?

  • MeatsimN64
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:19pm

    The founding fathers also wanted taxation, somehow the sacredness of their words ends after guns but before taxes

  • bearrosaurus
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:24pm

    When the Founding Fathers wrote all the amendments, they didn't expect any of them to apply to state law.

    Case in point, North Carolina's Constitution says only Protestants can hold public office.

  • flaming_hot_cheeto
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:06pm

    As a libertarian this makes me cringe

  • ceddyc09
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:10am

    I'm pretty sure most of these are civil war era guns

  • MisterCharlton
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:23am

    These are civil war era guns.

  • LordJesusChrist_
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:48am

    Yeah I have that in my home for defense, whatever that is in the lower left corner

  • spread_thin
    -8 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    As soon as 3D printed guns really take off, we should be arming the homeless in every city and guiding them to the nearest gated community.

COMMENTS

  • Mathieulombardi
    27 points Aug 16,2018, 8:58am

    Lol. Just give me five more minutes to reload tho

  • klarno
    19 points Aug 16,2018, 10:31am

    Based on Revolutionary precedent (namely the cannon at Concord), the 2nd amendment was meant to go as far as to support the right of the people to keep and bear artillery.

  • d00ns
    27 points Aug 16,2018, 9:00am

    This would be a much better picture if it had the dates of invention for each gun

  • AristotleGrumpus
    14 points Aug 16,2018, 10:05am

    Yes, there were some repeating arms around in the late 18th century but it doesn't matter anyway; the framers were obviously aware that technology advances and they mentioned it explicitly in multiple contexts.

    The principles are what matters, and they explained very clearly that the issue at hand was the right of self defense, both individual and collective.

    Anyone who argues that the 2nd Amendment only applies to the technology of the time it was written must also hold that the 1st only applies to live spoken words, quill pens, and 18th century manual presses.

    It's mind boggling that so many people seem to be unaware that there is a freaking MOUNTAIN of documents from that period... hearings, essays, newspaper articles, books, etc... exploring in excruciating detail just what thinking is behind every bit of the Constitution and the amendments - including the issues they ignored, like slavery.

    You can disagree with original intent, but there's no question about what the original intentions actually were.

  • machocamacho88
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 1:00pm

    The Founding Father's definitely couldn't have predicted the internet, so naturally the First amendment doesn't apply on it.

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:08pm

    HAVE you heard of the Girardoni Air Gun it was silent, fired 22 shots automatically and was magazine feed. THIS was OWNED by Thomas Jefferson

  • OhNoItsGodwin
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 12:34pm

    Those aren't founding fathers weapons largely, and 18th century multibarrel firearms were very rare as they were impractical and explicitly not common.

    Want a real 1774 weapon that can fire 3 times a minute? Brown bess. The Charleville Musket. The standard issue weapon of war.

  • ThatGuyYouKnow999
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 10:28am

    The smaller one in the top left is a pepperbox pistol. It was popular with women for self defense lol.

    https://www.guns.com/2011/07/07/pepperbox-guns-the-big-and-the-small/

  • Time4Red
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 10:53am

    The supreme court established the common use interpretation/precedent, based on the idea that only guns that are commonly used are/were protected. That's why it's unconstitutional to outright ban handguns today. None of those weapons from the OP were common use at the time.

    The problem is that common use changes over time. I think it's a bad precedent, but it's still a test the courts use.

  • lordhugh
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 11:05am

    I love these crazy old designs

  • Brucy56
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:35pm

    Does "the 2nd" afford me the right to possess a bomb that discharges 30 pieces of shrapnel in 6 seconds in the direction I choose?

  • MeatsimN64
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:19pm

    The founding fathers also wanted taxation, somehow the sacredness of their words ends after guns but before taxes

  • bearrosaurus
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:24pm

    When the Founding Fathers wrote all the amendments, they didn't expect any of them to apply to state law.

    Case in point, North Carolina's Constitution says only Protestants can hold public office.

  • flaming_hot_cheeto
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:06pm

    As a libertarian this makes me cringe

  • ceddyc09
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:10am

    I'm pretty sure most of these are civil war era guns

  • MisterCharlton
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:23am

    These are civil war era guns.

  • LordJesusChrist_
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 9:48am

    Yeah I have that in my home for defense, whatever that is in the lower left corner

  • spread_thin
    -8 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    As soon as 3D printed guns really take off, we should be arming the homeless in every city and guiding them to the nearest gated community.

● ● ●

5 Facts that Gun Control Advocates Hate

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • FreedomNinja1776
    57 points Aug 16,2018, 10:00am

    I like informational pics like this, but you could leave out the dis to gun control advocates. They will see that and ignore all the information.

  • anarchy404x
    60 points Aug 16,2018, 9:05am

    "God made men, but Sam Colt made them equal."

    The firearm is best thing to ever happen to liberty.

  • Shamalamadindong
    23 points Aug 16,2018, 11:36am

    Nazi Germany loosened strict gun regulations imposed by the Weimar republic. They just didn't loosen them for Jews.

  • Locke92
    37 points Aug 16,2018, 11:12am

    1) This is sort of a cart and horse issue, places that were considered vulnerable to shootings were made into gun free zones. The actual explanatory power of this statistic is questionable.

    2) Great, but all violence and crime has been dropping since about '93. This is less about guns than about overall trends towards lower crime rates.

    3)The real issue here isn't FFL dealers at gun shows, it's private transfers that are facilitated by being at a gunshow, turning people who did nothing wrong (private sales don't require background checks) into unwitting straw buyers. The fix here is to make the background check system better and available to (and possibly required for) private sales as well.

    4) Good? I'm certainly not opposed to people protecting themselves. That said this statistic doesn't mean much in the absence of context, how many defensive uses vs. criminal uses? What proportion of gun owners end up needing to defend themselves? This really needs more context.

    5) There is at least some misinformation here, for instance the Nazis actually expanded private gun rights and then specifically targeted the groups they didn't like with gun control.

    So you've got a couple of strawmen, one or two pieces of data that don't really support what you're saying they do, and one that, while relevant to the debate, doesn't really tell us much without more context.

    Okay guys, downvote away.

  • MisterCharlton
    15 points Aug 16,2018, 9:24am

    All we need are background checks and MAYBE mandatory safety courses. Anything more would be both needless and a violation of our second amendment rights.

  • weekend-guitarist
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 2:09pm

    I’m all for actual statistics, but where does this 2.5million self defense uses or incidents per year come from?

    It seems large and rather unverifiable. Rounding numbers off the nearest half million just doesn’t feel like an actual stat. If anyone has link to a non-agenda driven page I would love to look into it further.

  • Typical_Samaritan
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 11:38am

    I'm a firearms owner. I've had a G20 for, shit, almost ten years now.

    The gun show loophole point is relying on inaccurate language that doesn't really address the issue. There's a reason it's called a loophole and not a "gun show exemption". The loophole exists because of failures of the language in existing laws to appropriately define what constitute a business that deals with guns. While we can easily cover "gun stores", private sales are not adequately covered by the law. So they do not necessarily fall into the category of entities that substantially devote time and effort into the doing "business" of gun selling. So there might not be any legal language that "specifically" exempts anyone. But that's not really the issue.

  • NoMoreNicksLeft
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 10:49am

    Hate? It's unlikely they're acquainted with facts enough to know that those exist.

  • Mikegaede
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 11:04am

    This is one of few topics that a lot of you here would disagree with me on..

    I firmly believe in the right for every citizen to own firearms. Which should be the libertarian view regardless.

    However, I see a lot of comments here that make me get the idea that most here on r/libertarian believe that not all individuals should be allowed to own firearms(based on criminal history, DV, etc..). I just can’t get myself to support any individual, or group of individuals, adding stipulations to a constitutional right, and treating it as a privilege instead.

    I am also curious, from the viewpoint of someone who was 100% libertarian, what would be the stance on this? If a person were 100% libertarian, would they stand by the mentally disabled being allowed to own firearms? (This is the one group whom I believe should at least be evaluated on an individual basis for firearm ownership)

  • Agent_Utah_
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 11:28am

    Careful with the 50% stat. One could argue the 94 “Assault weapon” ban is what set that in motion

  • WheresSmokey
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 8:58am

    So.... The gun show exemption isn't a thing itself, but private transfer of firearms is absolutely a thing. Private sale does not require background checks in a lot of places. It's just that most gun show sales are considered private.

  • Dsnake1
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:56pm

    I don't think #1 would actually do any more than push them to want to ban guns nationwide. If they blame the non-gun free parts for bringing the guns in, wouldn't that want to eradicate those parts?

  • MrPopperButter
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:19pm

    Agree with most of it, but #5 is pretty close to "whatabout-ism". Also, why does #4 show a soldier when talking about self-defense?

  • LordCamcapI
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:30pm

    Ottoman Turkey did not commit a genocide. Yes killing people is bad. War is bad. They did not commit a genocide against Armenians though. Western powers instigated rebellions all through Turkey and Turkey fought back. Yes they may have killed innocent Armenians which is bad but the Armenians killed Turks too. It was war.

  • shane_c
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:07pm

    One Fact That Gun Rights Advocates Hate: The 50% drop in gun violence since 1993 is because of Roe v Wade. You get rid of Roe v Wade you get more criminals commiting gun violence and then more gun control.

  • Selethorme
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:13pm

    This is a pretty disingenuous “fact” sheet, with massive amounts of spin and omitted facts to make the claims that it does.

  • tiggertom66
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:49pm

    You shouldnt add a diss it makes people want to ignore it.

  • nova_nectarine
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:50pm

    What is the importance of the first fact since I assume that most mass shooters do not buy their guns in gun-free zones?

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:03pm

    Actually it is less than 1% according to the crime prevention center (taking about massing shootings in pro gun zones) meaning more than 99% of all mass shootings occur in gun free zones

  • lordhugh
    -2 points Aug 16,2018, 11:13am

    5: Why not list all the nations that initiated tougher gun controls only to not commit genocide. OR nations that committed genocide without strengthening gun control?

COMMENTS

  • FreedomNinja1776
    57 points Aug 16,2018, 10:00am

    I like informational pics like this, but you could leave out the dis to gun control advocates. They will see that and ignore all the information.

  • anarchy404x
    60 points Aug 16,2018, 9:05am

    "God made men, but Sam Colt made them equal."

    The firearm is best thing to ever happen to liberty.

  • Shamalamadindong
    23 points Aug 16,2018, 11:36am

    Nazi Germany loosened strict gun regulations imposed by the Weimar republic. They just didn't loosen them for Jews.

  • sew_butthurt
    16 points Aug 16,2018, 11:12am

    For #5, can we add Venezuela to the list?

  • Locke92
    37 points Aug 16,2018, 11:12am

    1) This is sort of a cart and horse issue, places that were considered vulnerable to shootings were made into gun free zones. The actual explanatory power of this statistic is questionable.

    2) Great, but all violence and crime has been dropping since about '93. This is less about guns than about overall trends towards lower crime rates.

    3)The real issue here isn't FFL dealers at gun shows, it's private transfers that are facilitated by being at a gunshow, turning people who did nothing wrong (private sales don't require background checks) into unwitting straw buyers. The fix here is to make the background check system better and available to (and possibly required for) private sales as well.

    4) Good? I'm certainly not opposed to people protecting themselves. That said this statistic doesn't mean much in the absence of context, how many defensive uses vs. criminal uses? What proportion of gun owners end up needing to defend themselves? This really needs more context.

    5) There is at least some misinformation here, for instance the Nazis actually expanded private gun rights and then specifically targeted the groups they didn't like with gun control.

    So you've got a couple of strawmen, one or two pieces of data that don't really support what you're saying they do, and one that, while relevant to the debate, doesn't really tell us much without more context.

    Okay guys, downvote away.

  • MisterCharlton
    15 points Aug 16,2018, 9:24am

    All we need are background checks and MAYBE mandatory safety courses. Anything more would be both needless and a violation of our second amendment rights.

  • weekend-guitarist
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 2:09pm

    I’m all for actual statistics, but where does this 2.5million self defense uses or incidents per year come from?

    It seems large and rather unverifiable. Rounding numbers off the nearest half million just doesn’t feel like an actual stat. If anyone has link to a non-agenda driven page I would love to look into it further.

  • Typical_Samaritan
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 11:38am

    I'm a firearms owner. I've had a G20 for, shit, almost ten years now.

    The gun show loophole point is relying on inaccurate language that doesn't really address the issue. There's a reason it's called a loophole and not a "gun show exemption". The loophole exists because of failures of the language in existing laws to appropriately define what constitute a business that deals with guns. While we can easily cover "gun stores", private sales are not adequately covered by the law. So they do not necessarily fall into the category of entities that substantially devote time and effort into the doing "business" of gun selling. So there might not be any legal language that "specifically" exempts anyone. But that's not really the issue.

  • NoMoreNicksLeft
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 10:49am

    Hate? It's unlikely they're acquainted with facts enough to know that those exist.

  • Mikegaede
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 11:04am

    This is one of few topics that a lot of you here would disagree with me on..

    I firmly believe in the right for every citizen to own firearms. Which should be the libertarian view regardless.

    However, I see a lot of comments here that make me get the idea that most here on r/libertarian believe that not all individuals should be allowed to own firearms(based on criminal history, DV, etc..). I just can’t get myself to support any individual, or group of individuals, adding stipulations to a constitutional right, and treating it as a privilege instead.

    I am also curious, from the viewpoint of someone who was 100% libertarian, what would be the stance on this? If a person were 100% libertarian, would they stand by the mentally disabled being allowed to own firearms? (This is the one group whom I believe should at least be evaluated on an individual basis for firearm ownership)

  • Agent_Utah_
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 11:28am

    Careful with the 50% stat. One could argue the 94 “Assault weapon” ban is what set that in motion

  • WheresSmokey
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 8:58am

    So.... The gun show exemption isn't a thing itself, but private transfer of firearms is absolutely a thing. Private sale does not require background checks in a lot of places. It's just that most gun show sales are considered private.

  • Dsnake1
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:56pm

    I don't think #1 would actually do any more than push them to want to ban guns nationwide. If they blame the non-gun free parts for bringing the guns in, wouldn't that want to eradicate those parts?

  • MrPopperButter
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:19pm

    Agree with most of it, but #5 is pretty close to "whatabout-ism". Also, why does #4 show a soldier when talking about self-defense?

  • LordCamcapI
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:30pm

    Ottoman Turkey did not commit a genocide. Yes killing people is bad. War is bad. They did not commit a genocide against Armenians though. Western powers instigated rebellions all through Turkey and Turkey fought back. Yes they may have killed innocent Armenians which is bad but the Armenians killed Turks too. It was war.

  • shane_c
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:07pm

    One Fact That Gun Rights Advocates Hate: The 50% drop in gun violence since 1993 is because of Roe v Wade. You get rid of Roe v Wade you get more criminals commiting gun violence and then more gun control.

  • Selethorme
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:13pm

    This is a pretty disingenuous “fact” sheet, with massive amounts of spin and omitted facts to make the claims that it does.

  • tiggertom66
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:49pm

    You shouldnt add a diss it makes people want to ignore it.

  • nova_nectarine
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:50pm

    What is the importance of the first fact since I assume that most mass shooters do not buy their guns in gun-free zones?

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:03pm

    Actually it is less than 1% according to the crime prevention center (taking about massing shootings in pro gun zones) meaning more than 99% of all mass shootings occur in gun free zones

  • lordhugh
    -2 points Aug 16,2018, 11:13am

    5: Why not list all the nations that initiated tougher gun controls only to not commit genocide. OR nations that committed genocide without strengthening gun control?

● ● ●

when asked if you are a democrat or republican

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • treebeard____
    11 points Aug 16,2018, 12:37pm

    Lol what's this from

  • moti987
    13 points Aug 16,2018, 12:12pm

    me when asked the same question

  • Exelereight
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 4:25pm

    I'll say I'm a Republican depending on how much I hate the liberal asking me the question.

  • freelibertine
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 5:15pm

    I love my own individual free will. . . so I really hate Democrats and Republicans.

  • MeatsimN64
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 6:09pm

    Isn't the lesson here that Treebeard tries to stay above the conflict going on around him but is shown/convinced how thats impossible for him to do because like it or not he's part of the world and affected by the conflict, therefore he must act and take a side?

  • spread_thin
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 12:53pm

    You're on the side of wealthy executives and trust fund heirs. Go hang out with them.

  • marx2k
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:12pm

    ...buuuuut.... Going to vote Republican anyway so....

  • puntiospilatos
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:48pm

    There is no curse in commie, nazi, or in the tongues of neoliberals for this treachery.

  • ilikeike777
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:45pm

    I still vote 60/40 dem.

COMMENTS

  • treebeard____
    11 points Aug 16,2018, 12:37pm

    Lol what's this from

  • moti987
    13 points Aug 16,2018, 12:12pm

    me when asked the same question

  • Exelereight
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 4:25pm

    I'll say I'm a Republican depending on how much I hate the liberal asking me the question.

  • AlphaTangoFoxtrt
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 12:53pm
  • freelibertine
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 5:15pm

    I love my own individual free will. . . so I really hate Democrats and Republicans.

  • MeatsimN64
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 6:09pm

    Isn't the lesson here that Treebeard tries to stay above the conflict going on around him but is shown/convinced how thats impossible for him to do because like it or not he's part of the world and affected by the conflict, therefore he must act and take a side?

  • spread_thin
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 12:53pm

    You're on the side of wealthy executives and trust fund heirs. Go hang out with them.

  • marx2k
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:12pm

    ...buuuuut.... Going to vote Republican anyway so....

  • puntiospilatos
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:48pm

    There is no curse in commie, nazi, or in the tongues of neoliberals for this treachery.

  • ilikeike777
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:45pm

    I still vote 60/40 dem.

● ● ●

Perspective

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • lordhugh
    616 points Aug 16,2018, 11:07am

    Just a nitpick but the green on blue is a bad choice

  • anangusp
    219 points Aug 16,2018, 12:07pm

    This point is somewhat moot, though, as it's not so much the relative risk between certain ways of dying that people care about - you are of course way, way likelier to die in a car crash than to be shot in a mass shooting, but the crash is likely an accident and something you had (at least some, or the feeling of) control over, whereas the shooting isn't. The malice of intent differs greatly, which is why terrorism too receives a lot more public concern and government prevention effort than other much bigger causes of death - though granted, the purpose of the government here is to take the rational action rather than the emotional and irrational response of the general public. Thus people will always be disproportionately concerned about shootings and terrorists than the mundane shit like obesity and car crashes.

  • 57ashdot
    527 points Aug 16,2018, 10:56am

    Pretty sure complications due to obesity (heart disease being primary) are the leading cause of death in America. If regulators gave an actual shit, they would ban fat people lol.

    Edit: apparently people are missing my sarcasm

  • nattypnutbuterpolice
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 2:10pm

    Eh TBH the left side is pretty worthless since everyone dies eventually and murders are pretty miniscule comparatively even in failed states. Maybe compare it to all deaths by unnatural causes.

  • xMassTransitx
    40 points Aug 16,2018, 10:55am

    I think the fear is that you could be a non-gang-member, and get killed in a mass shooting. Even if it only happens 0.x% of the time, it's scary for a lot of people.

    People are likely looking for an easy and visible and cheap solution (limiting access to Eg: assault weapons), rather than a complicated and invisible and expensive solution (changing the education & mental health & poverty situations).

  • Dessert42
    117 points Aug 16,2018, 9:41am

    MASS SHOOTINGS - THE ACTUAL NUMBERSby Kevin Ryan

    In the wake of the Florida shooting, news outlets and politicians are already scrambling to politicize the tragedy, decrying the plague of mass shootings afflicting our country and offering various estimates of the number committed. Some even claim there are hundreds of such attacks per year.

    The reason there are so many disparate estimates is that the definition of a mass shooting isn’t standard. Different sources use different numbers. Some include shootings that only injure, some say any shooting with multiple victims is a mass shooting, etc.

    But the FBI actually has a definition of what it considers a mass shooting: four or more homicides (excluding the shooter) occurring during the same incident. Using that criteria, Mother Jones (not exactly a conservative, pro-gun source) created a database of all mass shootings in America since 1982.

    They found that mass shootings are extremely rare, averaging 2.3 attacks killing 21 people per year for the last 36 years. The be sure, that number has been increasing, with an average of 3.9 mass shootings accounting for 41 deaths per year over the last 10 years. But to put that in perspective, consider the following:

    In 2016, there were 323,127,513 people in America. 2,744,248 died of all causes that year, equaling 0.8% of the population. Of those, 19,103 were killed by homicides, or 0.6% of all deaths. And of those, 65 were killed in mass shootings, or 0.3% of all homicides.

    Which isn’t to trivialize the tragedy of mass shootings, or any of these deaths, for that matter. But rather to keep it in perspective, especially when considering new laws and sweeping policy changes. Policymakers would likely be far more successful in their approach to gun violence by addressing the motives behind the majority of murders and suicides (crime, depression, and mental illness) instead of the means used to commit them.

    SOURCES: https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder#twohttps://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.htmlhttp://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdfhttp://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv11.pdfhttps://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/table-10

    Note: Mother Jones actually lists all shootings that killed 3 or more people. My figures use the FBI definition of a mass shooting: 4 or more deaths.

  • Firemans_ham
    132 points Aug 16,2018, 9:17am

    The murder rate in the US is shockingly high compared to European countries no matter how you look at it.

    The fact that all the mass shootings that we hear about in the media is only a tiny fraction of the overall murder rate is not a positive thing overall.

  • ChocolateSunrise
    29 points Aug 16,2018, 11:42am

    The reason people care about murder is obvious. It is one member of the species killing another member of the species.

    It isn't 30 years of McDonald's causing a heart attack. Or a car accident. Or an act of god. Or an engineering error.

    It is one person choosing to end the life of another.

  • Nighthawk6857
    31 points Aug 16,2018, 2:04pm

    Why don't we work to make that number 0%?

  • billybobthongton
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:14pm

    I'd also like to see this split a few more times, such as taking deaths and doing just shootings, then non-gang related shootings, then non-gang mass shootings, And take the non-gang related shootings and pull out suicides and self-defence shootings seperately.

    I'd also like to see the spread between "assault rifles" and non-"assault rifles" (since I'd assume most shootings are from pistols and shotguns over any form of rifle really).

  • Continuity_organizer
    50 points Aug 16,2018, 11:39am

    Unbiased America

    This visualization is the definition of making an ideological argument with data.

    I'm not saying it's wrong or not useful, but it's clearly not unbiased.

  • drfritz2
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 12:10pm

    Why is this a libertarian issue?

  • db8rlife
    11 points Aug 16,2018, 1:24pm

    Complacency defined in one picture

  • mtipton99
    14 points Aug 16,2018, 1:13pm

    This doesn’t mean that mass shootings are not an issue. Where as most death in America is of people who have live full lives, mass shootings disproportionately affect young people who would have otherwise live many more years.

  • sedfat
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 11:37am

    I don’t think the fixation on mass shootings is that it’s a certain amount of the population, it’s the fear it causes us and the fact that it is happening at all.

  • flarn2006
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29pm

    So then your point is that murders in mass shootings don't really count as murders? /s

  • ilikeike777
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 6:13pm

    Can we add a third circle that shows how many of the right pie is scary murder rifles?

  • bellbo
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 1:11pm

    This leaves out suicides by classifying it as “murder.” I do believe gun regulation advocates also talk about suicide.

  • MilerMilty
    18 points Aug 16,2018, 10:24am

    sounds like ya'll need to ban handguns

  • _fitlegit
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 12:35pm

    Mass shootings have a large negative impact on the survivors, family members, community members, hell the entire damn country and culture, that things like heart attacks and cancer simply don’t. To call looking at only the number dead without considering broader implications “perspective” is a really bad joke.

  • Booney134
    15 points Aug 16,2018, 12:16pm

    Driving accidents kill more people than guns do.

    Nobody thinks banning cars is a good idea.

    Sacrificing individual freedoms for the benefit of the whole is not what this country was founded on.

  • ceelogreenicanth
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:52pm

    Yeah now apply this same logic to immigration, and terrorism. Probably won't feel the same way.

  • PyroTracer
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:53pm

    Mhmm and this is where I unsub

  • ReadACoffeeTableBook
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:54pm

    It’s not that they happen often, it’s that they happen at all. The people who want to regulate guns more than you libertarians don’t think mass shooting happen a lot. I’m sure most sensible people aren’t going to be surprised by this statistic at all. They think it happens too much because it happens at all. They are unnecessary and only happen because, let face it, people just like their guns, and don’t want to give them up..

    This graph is fighting an argument few people are going to stand by for long anyway. It’s kind of pointless.

  • ParadigmaticThinker
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:16pm

    “In my career I’ve probably made 100,000 phone calls, and no more than 1% were inappropriate.”

    “So you’ve made a thousand inappropriate phone calls?”

  • Syndaril
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:18pm

    I didn't realise the murder rate in the USA was so high. This should really be quite alarming to people based on that alone.

  • PeasantSteve
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:19pm

    So, you're saying we should focus on the blue bit? Great. A large portion of them are going to be thanks to health reasons. One thing you can do to help is to make sure people have good access to healthcare. And that is something that most European nations have already figured out.

  • tisdue
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:34pm

    Libertarianism: Racism with extra steps.

  • hofcake
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:46pm

    How many deaths would be avoided if we eliminated the drug cartels by legalizing drugs?

  • retardvark
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:55pm

    And that 0.2% of 0.6% represents about half of what the media talks about

  • scsean
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:58pm

    Curious is there any data to go along with backing up this claim by this graph? Tried searching for an article by Unbiased America, could find a what appears to be a one man blog site not updated since 2017 and there's a Facebook page but nothing else. Seeing as it's graphic that just has a logo and some percentages slapped on it people believe this?

  • Bilbo_Phaggins
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:59pm

    How many people die in car accidents a year? Yet 3000 people die on 9/11 and suddenly its a major tragedy

    (/s)

  • Opcn
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:13pm

    Amen! Do we know if this infographic was made using the old definition of mass shooting (the one that describes just the ones the news cares about) or the expanded definition that includes gang wars and domestic violence?

  • acox1701
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:24pm

    I'm not sure it's relevant to compare murders to people dying of old age. The overwhelming majority of people are not murdered; we know that.

    Show me a similar chart covering only "unnatural" deaths, and we can have an intelligent conversation.

  • onehashbrown
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:30pm

    "perspective" with a obvious bias because we do not post sources for information gathered. I'm for open info but make it all open don't just post a thumbnail without viable context.

  • TheFeesher
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:31pm

    It needs the mass shootings divided into “with an AR and without

  • anRoboticus
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:43pm

    Good post, too bad so many people try to divert the thread.

  • melkstake
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:49pm

    This makes me feel so much better about those 20 6yr olds that were killed in Newtown, sometimes I forget they were just a statistic! Thanks for posting

  • captainfactoid386
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:58pm

    Still too much

  • MrFlynnister
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 4:14pm

    Dave kills only 214 people a year, but cars kill way more. So let's just focus on the real problem and let Dave go about his business.

  • madmadG
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 5:03pm

    No this graphic doesn’t help with anything. Death is inevitable.

  • jakedasnake1
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 12:14pm

    Pretty sure you can go even deeper in mass shootings and pull out the even smaller percentage of those that take place in schools.

    Obviously the number should be zero, but I think we all agree here that attacking the 2nd amendment based on what accounts for like .02% of shootings or whatever is just plain illogical.

  • LibertyTerp
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 12:31pm

    Quick, give away all our rights because the media is whipping people into a frenzy over a very small issue!

  • DoctorFreeman
    7 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    51% of murders by black males, 93% of that black on black #BLM

  • NeedHelpWithExcel
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 2:11pm

    Classic T_D lite ignoring any sort of nuance or putting 5 seconds worth of thought into a topic before just slapping the Libertarian label on it and calling it a day.

    The reason these stats are meaningless is because most people don't have to worry about being murdered while at school or at a concert because most people don't live in areas with really any gun related homicides at all.

    How about instead of wasting everyone's time with pointless statistics we compare the chance of death in the town these occur in with and without mass shootings?

    Saying "Oh well even though your kid was murdered at school because "muh 2nd amendment" lots of people die every year so get over it"

    is fucking retarded but I'm honestly not surprised considering the amount of brainless trolls here

  • OhjannGolgo
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:10pm

    To actually put it into perspective. The percentage of murders in all deaths in western European countries clocks in at about 0,05%. 400 murders out of 800.000 dead.

  • wickedogg
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:46pm

    This should be in /r/til

  • blakebowers
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:02pm

    Can someone confirm these stats?

  • spockatron
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:17pm

    Wow I would not have guessed 0.6% of people are murdered. That is absolutely wild. 1/200?? Slightly more but whatever.

  • xMassTransitx
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:00pm

    Can't agree there. I think people are more afraid of the tiny possibility of getting shot when at a concert or mall than the high possibility having a heart attack if they continue to eat those damn tasty burgers for the next 20 years.

    That said - it would be great if the media made a concerted effort to improve the health of the whole population.... hang on, if they did, would we be criticizing them for attacking burger joints?

  • Mikezorz99
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:03pm

    I agree with the overall point this post is making but I would be interested to see a similar chart exclusively for high school students over the past year or two. As an analogy, sharks kill barely any people every year but if you are swimming in shark infested water those statistics aren't very comforting.

  • kerouacrimbaud
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:06pm

    Like terrorism, mass shootings are marginal--in the technical sense--events that create immense amounts of fear and paranoia in the public. Mass shooting likely require a surgical policy solution instead of blanket ones, much like terrorism is best met with surgical solutions, not blanket ones like the PATRIOT Act or carpet bombing whole mountain ranges.

  • effervescentlibation
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:30pm

    This is somewhat misleading, is this accounting for people passing due to old age? Or is it expressing the numbers of people who died of “non natural causes”. I mean sure it’s great that the number of deaths isn’t a whole 1%; but wouldn’t it be ideal if that percentage had maybe 2 more zeros in it?

  • LoleyG
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:45pm

    Source?

  • RobertAntonWilson
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:52pm

    Meanwhile...

    • nearly every captive is incarcerated by state forces

    • nearly all the stolen money and property is taken by either the state (via taxes, fines, permits, asset forfeitures, etc.) or by organizations regulated and incorporated within and by the state (wage theft, imbezzlement, blue collar crime, etc.)

  • indoobitably
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:02pm

    This doesn't fuel my fears or allow me to rant on facebook about how terrible everything is because of Current Year; therefore its false.

  • slax03
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:44pm

    I'd like to see this statistics in regard to child murders. How many minors are murdered per year and how many of them are in mass shootings?

  • Rattlerkira
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:54pm

    You should add a slice that says self defense and guns

  • Fitz2001
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:07pm

    Most murders are committed between people who know each other, or often involving other crimes. Most mass murders are random and the victims are innocent. Stopping mass murders isn’t the worst idea compared to other murders (which are impossible to stop)

  • NakedCallWriter
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:12pm

    You got a source to back that up? /s

  • sumochump
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:14pm

    I agree with you OP on what this graph is trying to relay, but I don’t think the argument now should be based on how many people have died from mass shootings. I think the frequency of the shootings is what should be focused on. In the last 10 years there have been 13 mass shootings in America. The 56 years before that there have been 13 mass shootings.

    I am not saying take anyone’s guns away, but I believe that it should be considered how often this is starting to happen.

  • nightman713
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:47pm

    Yes every mass shooting is such a big event and has been only increasing in the amount. That small percentage has a major impact on the news.

  • WileEWeeble
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:32pm

    ….YEP, how about that "deaths caused by criminal that could have been prevented by having a gun to 'defend' yourself with" (which most of us 'libtards' actually support you been able to have, its that weapon designed to spray massive rounds of bullets that servers no purpose in self-defense, except in killing masses of people, that the majority support ANYONE outside military possessing)

    ...perspective

  • pnasmaster
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:48pm

    But but, it's the cause of our times. Only the police and military can have guns.

  • baftap
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:00pm

    Just as a note, 0.2% of 0.6, is 0.0012. 0.0012% of 325.7 million (population of USA) is 3908.4 people.

  • The_Paul_Alves
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:21pm

    It's not about your safety. It's about scaring you into giving up your rights to arms so that in the future they can fuck you over and not have to worry about being shot by you.

  • dogbin
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:42pm

    I'm surprised that the murder count is as high as 0.6%

  • tacklebox
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:45pm

    What's the preventable deaths graph look like?

  • JAKERS325
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:00pm

    Curious what percentage is vehicles

  • Archangel_White_Rose
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:10pm

    My issue with gun control has to do with suicide rates. Mass shooting will happen no matter how hard you try to ban guns.

  • IHateYourOpinions
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:26pm

    deaths from murder is exponentially worse than death by natural causes. Eating bad food is not a crime because no one else is harmed by it.

  • KatnissBot
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:36pm

    Yeah, but... it could be 0.00%

  • notaedivad
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:08pm

    It's a bit like the "all muslims are terrorists" ratios.

  • seabasscampos
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:18pm

    My God, if you get murdered, you have a 2 in 1,000 chance of getting killed in a mass shooting. We must do something about this now!

    /s

  • hotdogoctopus
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:28pm

    Also true so maybe anyone can pick and choose a statistic to make a dumb point.

  • nova_nectarine
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:53pm

    I would be more interested to see percentages of murders involving guns. Also, as far as I am concerned the number of murders by mass shootings should be 0 so this is still not good.

  • pw0803
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:56pm

    The problem with doing this as a per cent is that whilst it seems mass shootings aren't as troublesome as the media portrays, it fails to deliver volumes and also fails to compare the USA to other, similar and western nations, if we did that we'd see that the USA is head and shoulders above all other western countries as a percentage overall, and definitely in volumes too.

    EDIT

    Furthermore, this statistic makes mass shootings in the USA seem far less significant than they really are because it's comparing your chances with being murdered in a mass shooting rather than examining mass shooting levels themselves.

    Ergo, compare mass shootings with USA and other western countries and let's see the graph, if you would...

  • Pake1000
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:00pm

    So what you're saying is that it's a waste of money and resources investigating murder and trying to stop mass murders since it makes up such an insignificant number of deaths?

  • LiftsLikeGaston
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 1:37pm

    Sharing something from Unbiased America unironically is the pinnacle of this sub tbh.

  • givemeadrink
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:39pm

    Why are murders compared to death by natural causes?

  • chrispiercee
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:51pm

    So that means it’s not a problem?

  • mr_d0gMa
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29pm

    You know what an acceptable number of murders is?.... Zero

  • DonaldTrumpsNeck
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:04pm

    This makes it okay!

  • tywkeene
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:31pm

    I still don't see the part where it makes it okay that children get brutally murdered at school

    Come on guys, you're just not gonna win anyone over with this.

  • cujobob
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:47pm

    Is this graph suggesting we should ignore the mass shooting problem because it isn’t enough of a problem?

    Try telling your boss that you’re ignoring a problem at work because it’s not important enough and see where that gets you.

  • redmois
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:36pm

    OMG. More than half a one percent of deaths in America are murders? As spanish or on general european, this sounds horrible to me, like you are a country in war. Sorry if this sounds normal to you.

  • caboose979
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:49pm

    So just because it’s a small percent it’s not a problem? That 0.2% were real people. This isn’t a numbers game, those are human lives.

  • yannydoeslaurel
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:04pm

    So more than one out of 200 are murdered.

  • JetBrink
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:09pm

    Is it comforting to reduce children murdered in theirs schools to a decimal figure?

  • gagnonca
    -5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:00pm

    Holy shit libertarians are stupid.

COMMENTS

  • lordhugh
    616 points Aug 16,2018, 11:07am

    Just a nitpick but the green on blue is a bad choice

  • anangusp
    219 points Aug 16,2018, 12:07pm

    This point is somewhat moot, though, as it's not so much the relative risk between certain ways of dying that people care about - you are of course way, way likelier to die in a car crash than to be shot in a mass shooting, but the crash is likely an accident and something you had (at least some, or the feeling of) control over, whereas the shooting isn't. The malice of intent differs greatly, which is why terrorism too receives a lot more public concern and government prevention effort than other much bigger causes of death - though granted, the purpose of the government here is to take the rational action rather than the emotional and irrational response of the general public. Thus people will always be disproportionately concerned about shootings and terrorists than the mundane shit like obesity and car crashes.

  • 57ashdot
    527 points Aug 16,2018, 10:56am

    Pretty sure complications due to obesity (heart disease being primary) are the leading cause of death in America. If regulators gave an actual shit, they would ban fat people lol.

    Edit: apparently people are missing my sarcasm

  • SvenTropics
    246 points Aug 16,2018, 12:04pm

    It's true. Mass shootings are statistical noise in total shootings. There just aren't that many crazy people that want to go out and take a lot of people with them. If you really want to massively reduce gun deaths in the USA, legalize and regulate all drugs. Gangs would practically cease to exist overnight as they have no source of income.

  • nattypnutbuterpolice
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 2:10pm

    Eh TBH the left side is pretty worthless since everyone dies eventually and murders are pretty miniscule comparatively even in failed states. Maybe compare it to all deaths by unnatural causes.

  • xMassTransitx
    40 points Aug 16,2018, 10:55am

    I think the fear is that you could be a non-gang-member, and get killed in a mass shooting. Even if it only happens 0.x% of the time, it's scary for a lot of people.

    People are likely looking for an easy and visible and cheap solution (limiting access to Eg: assault weapons), rather than a complicated and invisible and expensive solution (changing the education & mental health & poverty situations).

  • Dessert42
    117 points Aug 16,2018, 9:41am

    MASS SHOOTINGS - THE ACTUAL NUMBERSby Kevin Ryan

    In the wake of the Florida shooting, news outlets and politicians are already scrambling to politicize the tragedy, decrying the plague of mass shootings afflicting our country and offering various estimates of the number committed. Some even claim there are hundreds of such attacks per year.

    The reason there are so many disparate estimates is that the definition of a mass shooting isn’t standard. Different sources use different numbers. Some include shootings that only injure, some say any shooting with multiple victims is a mass shooting, etc.

    But the FBI actually has a definition of what it considers a mass shooting: four or more homicides (excluding the shooter) occurring during the same incident. Using that criteria, Mother Jones (not exactly a conservative, pro-gun source) created a database of all mass shootings in America since 1982.

    They found that mass shootings are extremely rare, averaging 2.3 attacks killing 21 people per year for the last 36 years. The be sure, that number has been increasing, with an average of 3.9 mass shootings accounting for 41 deaths per year over the last 10 years. But to put that in perspective, consider the following:

    In 2016, there were 323,127,513 people in America. 2,744,248 died of all causes that year, equaling 0.8% of the population. Of those, 19,103 were killed by homicides, or 0.6% of all deaths. And of those, 65 were killed in mass shootings, or 0.3% of all homicides.

    Which isn’t to trivialize the tragedy of mass shootings, or any of these deaths, for that matter. But rather to keep it in perspective, especially when considering new laws and sweeping policy changes. Policymakers would likely be far more successful in their approach to gun violence by addressing the motives behind the majority of murders and suicides (crime, depression, and mental illness) instead of the means used to commit them.

    SOURCES: https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder#twohttps://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.htmlhttp://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdfhttp://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv11.pdfhttps://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/table-10

    Note: Mother Jones actually lists all shootings that killed 3 or more people. My figures use the FBI definition of a mass shooting: 4 or more deaths.

  • Firemans_ham
    132 points Aug 16,2018, 9:17am

    The murder rate in the US is shockingly high compared to European countries no matter how you look at it.

    The fact that all the mass shootings that we hear about in the media is only a tiny fraction of the overall murder rate is not a positive thing overall.

  • ChocolateSunrise
    29 points Aug 16,2018, 11:42am

    The reason people care about murder is obvious. It is one member of the species killing another member of the species.

    It isn't 30 years of McDonald's causing a heart attack. Or a car accident. Or an act of god. Or an engineering error.

    It is one person choosing to end the life of another.

  • Nighthawk6857
    31 points Aug 16,2018, 2:04pm

    Why don't we work to make that number 0%?

  • billybobthongton
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:14pm

    I'd also like to see this split a few more times, such as taking deaths and doing just shootings, then non-gang related shootings, then non-gang mass shootings, And take the non-gang related shootings and pull out suicides and self-defence shootings seperately.

    I'd also like to see the spread between "assault rifles" and non-"assault rifles" (since I'd assume most shootings are from pistols and shotguns over any form of rifle really).

  • Continuity_organizer
    50 points Aug 16,2018, 11:39am

    Unbiased America

    This visualization is the definition of making an ideological argument with data.

    I'm not saying it's wrong or not useful, but it's clearly not unbiased.

  • drfritz2
    10 points Aug 16,2018, 12:10pm

    Why is this a libertarian issue?

  • db8rlife
    11 points Aug 16,2018, 1:24pm

    Complacency defined in one picture

  • mtipton99
    14 points Aug 16,2018, 1:13pm

    This doesn’t mean that mass shootings are not an issue. Where as most death in America is of people who have live full lives, mass shootings disproportionately affect young people who would have otherwise live many more years.

  • sedfat
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 11:37am

    I don’t think the fixation on mass shootings is that it’s a certain amount of the population, it’s the fear it causes us and the fact that it is happening at all.

  • flarn2006
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29pm

    So then your point is that murders in mass shootings don't really count as murders? /s

  • ilikeike777
    3 points Aug 16,2018, 6:13pm

    Can we add a third circle that shows how many of the right pie is scary murder rifles?

  • bellbo
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 1:11pm

    This leaves out suicides by classifying it as “murder.” I do believe gun regulation advocates also talk about suicide.

  • MilerMilty
    18 points Aug 16,2018, 10:24am

    sounds like ya'll need to ban handguns

  • _fitlegit
    4 points Aug 16,2018, 12:35pm

    Mass shootings have a large negative impact on the survivors, family members, community members, hell the entire damn country and culture, that things like heart attacks and cancer simply don’t. To call looking at only the number dead without considering broader implications “perspective” is a really bad joke.

  • Booney134
    15 points Aug 16,2018, 12:16pm

    Driving accidents kill more people than guns do.

    Nobody thinks banning cars is a good idea.

    Sacrificing individual freedoms for the benefit of the whole is not what this country was founded on.

  • ceelogreenicanth
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:52pm

    Yeah now apply this same logic to immigration, and terrorism. Probably won't feel the same way.

  • PyroTracer
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:53pm

    Mhmm and this is where I unsub

  • ReadACoffeeTableBook
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 1:54pm

    It’s not that they happen often, it’s that they happen at all. The people who want to regulate guns more than you libertarians don’t think mass shooting happen a lot. I’m sure most sensible people aren’t going to be surprised by this statistic at all. They think it happens too much because it happens at all. They are unnecessary and only happen because, let face it, people just like their guns, and don’t want to give them up..

    This graph is fighting an argument few people are going to stand by for long anyway. It’s kind of pointless.

  • ParadigmaticThinker
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:16pm

    “In my career I’ve probably made 100,000 phone calls, and no more than 1% were inappropriate.”

    “So you’ve made a thousand inappropriate phone calls?”

  • Syndaril
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:18pm

    I didn't realise the murder rate in the USA was so high. This should really be quite alarming to people based on that alone.

  • PeasantSteve
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:19pm

    So, you're saying we should focus on the blue bit? Great. A large portion of them are going to be thanks to health reasons. One thing you can do to help is to make sure people have good access to healthcare. And that is something that most European nations have already figured out.

  • tisdue
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:34pm

    Libertarianism: Racism with extra steps.

  • hofcake
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:46pm

    How many deaths would be avoided if we eliminated the drug cartels by legalizing drugs?

  • retardvark
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:55pm

    And that 0.2% of 0.6% represents about half of what the media talks about

  • scsean
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:58pm

    Curious is there any data to go along with backing up this claim by this graph? Tried searching for an article by Unbiased America, could find a what appears to be a one man blog site not updated since 2017 and there's a Facebook page but nothing else. Seeing as it's graphic that just has a logo and some percentages slapped on it people believe this?

  • Bilbo_Phaggins
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:59pm

    How many people die in car accidents a year? Yet 3000 people die on 9/11 and suddenly its a major tragedy

    (/s)

  • Opcn
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:13pm

    Amen! Do we know if this infographic was made using the old definition of mass shooting (the one that describes just the ones the news cares about) or the expanded definition that includes gang wars and domestic violence?

  • acox1701
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:24pm

    I'm not sure it's relevant to compare murders to people dying of old age. The overwhelming majority of people are not murdered; we know that.

    Show me a similar chart covering only "unnatural" deaths, and we can have an intelligent conversation.

  • onehashbrown
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:30pm

    "perspective" with a obvious bias because we do not post sources for information gathered. I'm for open info but make it all open don't just post a thumbnail without viable context.

  • TheFeesher
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:31pm

    It needs the mass shootings divided into “with an AR and without

  • anRoboticus
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:43pm

    Good post, too bad so many people try to divert the thread.

  • melkstake
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:49pm

    This makes me feel so much better about those 20 6yr olds that were killed in Newtown, sometimes I forget they were just a statistic! Thanks for posting

  • captainfactoid386
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 3:58pm

    Still too much

  • MrFlynnister
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 4:14pm

    Dave kills only 214 people a year, but cars kill way more. So let's just focus on the real problem and let Dave go about his business.

  • madmadG
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 5:03pm

    No this graphic doesn’t help with anything. Death is inevitable.

  • jakedasnake1
    6 points Aug 16,2018, 12:14pm

    Pretty sure you can go even deeper in mass shootings and pull out the even smaller percentage of those that take place in schools.

    Obviously the number should be zero, but I think we all agree here that attacking the 2nd amendment based on what accounts for like .02% of shootings or whatever is just plain illogical.

  • LibertyTerp
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 12:31pm

    Quick, give away all our rights because the media is whipping people into a frenzy over a very small issue!

  • DoctorFreeman
    7 points Aug 16,2018, 10:23am

    51% of murders by black males, 93% of that black on black #BLM

  • NeedHelpWithExcel
    5 points Aug 16,2018, 2:11pm

    Classic T_D lite ignoring any sort of nuance or putting 5 seconds worth of thought into a topic before just slapping the Libertarian label on it and calling it a day.

    The reason these stats are meaningless is because most people don't have to worry about being murdered while at school or at a concert because most people don't live in areas with really any gun related homicides at all.

    How about instead of wasting everyone's time with pointless statistics we compare the chance of death in the town these occur in with and without mass shootings?

    Saying "Oh well even though your kid was murdered at school because "muh 2nd amendment" lots of people die every year so get over it"

    is fucking retarded but I'm honestly not surprised considering the amount of brainless trolls here

  • OhjannGolgo
    2 points Aug 16,2018, 2:10pm

    To actually put it into perspective. The percentage of murders in all deaths in western European countries clocks in at about 0,05%. 400 murders out of 800.000 dead.

  • wickedogg
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:46pm

    This should be in /r/til

  • blakebowers
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:02pm

    Can someone confirm these stats?

  • spockatron
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:17pm

    Wow I would not have guessed 0.6% of people are murdered. That is absolutely wild. 1/200?? Slightly more but whatever.

  • xMassTransitx
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:00pm

    Can't agree there. I think people are more afraid of the tiny possibility of getting shot when at a concert or mall than the high possibility having a heart attack if they continue to eat those damn tasty burgers for the next 20 years.

    That said - it would be great if the media made a concerted effort to improve the health of the whole population.... hang on, if they did, would we be criticizing them for attacking burger joints?

  • Mikezorz99
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:03pm

    I agree with the overall point this post is making but I would be interested to see a similar chart exclusively for high school students over the past year or two. As an analogy, sharks kill barely any people every year but if you are swimming in shark infested water those statistics aren't very comforting.

  • kerouacrimbaud
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:06pm

    Like terrorism, mass shootings are marginal--in the technical sense--events that create immense amounts of fear and paranoia in the public. Mass shooting likely require a surgical policy solution instead of blanket ones, much like terrorism is best met with surgical solutions, not blanket ones like the PATRIOT Act or carpet bombing whole mountain ranges.

  • effervescentlibation
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:30pm

    This is somewhat misleading, is this accounting for people passing due to old age? Or is it expressing the numbers of people who died of “non natural causes”. I mean sure it’s great that the number of deaths isn’t a whole 1%; but wouldn’t it be ideal if that percentage had maybe 2 more zeros in it?

  • LoleyG
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:45pm

    Source?

  • RobertAntonWilson
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:52pm

    Meanwhile...

    • nearly every captive is incarcerated by state forces

    • nearly all the stolen money and property is taken by either the state (via taxes, fines, permits, asset forfeitures, etc.) or by organizations regulated and incorporated within and by the state (wage theft, imbezzlement, blue collar crime, etc.)

  • indoobitably
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:02pm

    This doesn't fuel my fears or allow me to rant on facebook about how terrible everything is because of Current Year; therefore its false.

  • slax03
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:44pm

    I'd like to see this statistics in regard to child murders. How many minors are murdered per year and how many of them are in mass shootings?

  • Rattlerkira
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:54pm

    You should add a slice that says self defense and guns

  • Fitz2001
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:07pm

    Most murders are committed between people who know each other, or often involving other crimes. Most mass murders are random and the victims are innocent. Stopping mass murders isn’t the worst idea compared to other murders (which are impossible to stop)

  • NakedCallWriter
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:12pm

    You got a source to back that up? /s

  • sumochump
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:14pm

    I agree with you OP on what this graph is trying to relay, but I don’t think the argument now should be based on how many people have died from mass shootings. I think the frequency of the shootings is what should be focused on. In the last 10 years there have been 13 mass shootings in America. The 56 years before that there have been 13 mass shootings.

    I am not saying take anyone’s guns away, but I believe that it should be considered how often this is starting to happen.

  • nightman713
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:47pm

    Yes every mass shooting is such a big event and has been only increasing in the amount. That small percentage has a major impact on the news.

  • WileEWeeble
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:32pm

    ….YEP, how about that "deaths caused by criminal that could have been prevented by having a gun to 'defend' yourself with" (which most of us 'libtards' actually support you been able to have, its that weapon designed to spray massive rounds of bullets that servers no purpose in self-defense, except in killing masses of people, that the majority support ANYONE outside military possessing)

    ...perspective

  • pnasmaster
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:48pm

    But but, it's the cause of our times. Only the police and military can have guns.

  • baftap
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:00pm

    Just as a note, 0.2% of 0.6, is 0.0012. 0.0012% of 325.7 million (population of USA) is 3908.4 people.

  • The_Paul_Alves
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:21pm

    It's not about your safety. It's about scaring you into giving up your rights to arms so that in the future they can fuck you over and not have to worry about being shot by you.

  • dogbin
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:42pm

    I'm surprised that the murder count is as high as 0.6%

  • tacklebox
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 6:45pm

    What's the preventable deaths graph look like?

  • JAKERS325
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:00pm

    Curious what percentage is vehicles

  • Archangel_White_Rose
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:10pm

    My issue with gun control has to do with suicide rates. Mass shooting will happen no matter how hard you try to ban guns.

  • IHateYourOpinions
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:26pm

    deaths from murder is exponentially worse than death by natural causes. Eating bad food is not a crime because no one else is harmed by it.

  • KatnissBot
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 7:36pm

    Yeah, but... it could be 0.00%

  • notaedivad
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:08pm

    It's a bit like the "all muslims are terrorists" ratios.

  • seabasscampos
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:18pm

    My God, if you get murdered, you have a 2 in 1,000 chance of getting killed in a mass shooting. We must do something about this now!

    /s

  • hotdogoctopus
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:28pm

    Also true so maybe anyone can pick and choose a statistic to make a dumb point.

  • nova_nectarine
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:53pm

    I would be more interested to see percentages of murders involving guns. Also, as far as I am concerned the number of murders by mass shootings should be 0 so this is still not good.

  • pw0803
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 8:56pm

    The problem with doing this as a per cent is that whilst it seems mass shootings aren't as troublesome as the media portrays, it fails to deliver volumes and also fails to compare the USA to other, similar and western nations, if we did that we'd see that the USA is head and shoulders above all other western countries as a percentage overall, and definitely in volumes too.

    EDIT

    Furthermore, this statistic makes mass shootings in the USA seem far less significant than they really are because it's comparing your chances with being murdered in a mass shooting rather than examining mass shooting levels themselves.

    Ergo, compare mass shootings with USA and other western countries and let's see the graph, if you would...

  • Pake1000
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 9:00pm

    So what you're saying is that it's a waste of money and resources investigating murder and trying to stop mass murders since it makes up such an insignificant number of deaths?

  • LiftsLikeGaston
    0 points Aug 16,2018, 1:37pm

    Sharing something from Unbiased America unironically is the pinnacle of this sub tbh.

  • givemeadrink
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:39pm

    Why are murders compared to death by natural causes?

  • chrispiercee
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:51pm

    So that means it’s not a problem?

  • mr_d0gMa
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 12:29pm

    You know what an acceptable number of murders is?.... Zero

  • DonaldTrumpsNeck
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 1:04pm

    This makes it okay!

  • tywkeene
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:31pm

    I still don't see the part where it makes it okay that children get brutally murdered at school

    Come on guys, you're just not gonna win anyone over with this.

  • cujobob
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 2:47pm

    Is this graph suggesting we should ignore the mass shooting problem because it isn’t enough of a problem?

    Try telling your boss that you’re ignoring a problem at work because it’s not important enough and see where that gets you.

  • redmois
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 3:36pm

    OMG. More than half a one percent of deaths in America are murders? As spanish or on general european, this sounds horrible to me, like you are a country in war. Sorry if this sounds normal to you.

  • caboose979
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 4:49pm

    So just because it’s a small percent it’s not a problem? That 0.2% were real people. This isn’t a numbers game, those are human lives.

  • yannydoeslaurel
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:04pm

    So more than one out of 200 are murdered.

  • JetBrink
    1 points Aug 16,2018, 5:09pm

    Is it comforting to reduce children murdered in theirs schools to a decimal figure?

  • gagnonca
    -5 points Aug 16,2018, 12:00pm

    Holy shit libertarians are stupid.

● ● ●

Fines

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • mihawkancomtranshuma
    2 points Aug 15,2018, 6:21pm

    How would you remedy this

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    2 points Aug 15,2018, 7:50pm

    Wtf the government has no business knowing how much I own, how about flat fine. This idea that the rich are these race of assholes is just stupid and economically ignorant.

  • Cmarl
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 6:59pm

    How about you don’t extort money from people for no legitimate reason.

COMMENTS

  • mihawkancomtranshuma
    2 points Aug 15,2018, 6:21pm

    How would you remedy this

  • LeaveEveryoneAlone
    2 points Aug 15,2018, 7:50pm

    Wtf the government has no business knowing how much I own, how about flat fine. This idea that the rich are these race of assholes is just stupid and economically ignorant.

  • Cmarl
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 6:59pm

    How about you don’t extort money from people for no legitimate reason.

● ● ●

(He's right, you know)

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • darthhayek
    4 points Aug 15,2018, 5:50pm

    Huh, something from Sarwark I agree with. Hell just froze over.

  • AnonymousUser132
    4 points Aug 15,2018, 7:05pm

    The real problem is that people see it this way. They don’t vote for who they want more so they vote to keep away the one they want least.

    They do not view the 3rd parties as having a chance so they continue their same old voting patterns even though they dislike the result. Insanity maybe?

  • jazilli
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 8:48pm

    It has become more and more obvious that there is only one political party in this country, and that is the business party.

COMMENTS

  • darthhayek
    4 points Aug 15,2018, 5:50pm

    Huh, something from Sarwark I agree with. Hell just froze over.

  • AnonymousUser132
    4 points Aug 15,2018, 7:05pm

    The real problem is that people see it this way. They don’t vote for who they want more so they vote to keep away the one they want least.

    They do not view the 3rd parties as having a chance so they continue their same old voting patterns even though they dislike the result. Insanity maybe?

  • jazilli
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 8:48pm

    It has become more and more obvious that there is only one political party in this country, and that is the business party.

● ● ●

Reminder: Trump has not signed any new trade deals since he entered office and tarriffs played a significant role in extending the great depression

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • Cmarl
    33 points Aug 15,2018, 1:56pm

    Yeah, making goods more expensive for every American will really show em.

  • Elranzer
    8 points Aug 15,2018, 3:51pm

    This clown is less of a fiscal conservative than Hillary.

  • Opcn
    3 points Aug 15,2018, 6:16pm

    This is like a post on r/justneckbeardthings for stupid economics. I read it and wanna downvote it, but I wanna upvote for the person who brought us this painful stupidity.

  • CrazyLegs88
    -9 points Aug 15,2018, 3:00pm

    Reminder: Trump is a literal authoritarian, racist, sexist, buffoon who idolizes people like Mussolini.

    All you libertarians are worried about leftists overtaking this sub? You should pay more attention to the neo-conservatives. They are the ones with ACTUAL power.

  • antisocialistconcapi
    -1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:47pm

    Even Ron Paul once said even though he is against tariffs, he would use them as a tool to get others to lower or drop their tarrifs. Not sure why people find this concept hard to understand.

COMMENTS

  • Cmarl
    33 points Aug 15,2018, 1:56pm

    Yeah, making goods more expensive for every American will really show em.

  • Elranzer
    8 points Aug 15,2018, 3:51pm

    This clown is less of a fiscal conservative than Hillary.

  • Opcn
    3 points Aug 15,2018, 6:16pm

    This is like a post on r/justneckbeardthings for stupid economics. I read it and wanna downvote it, but I wanna upvote for the person who brought us this painful stupidity.

  • mandudebreh
    -6 points Aug 15,2018, 3:49pm

    The main difference is that it's not currently the depression. The economy is red hot right now, so much that economists fear that it is at risk of overheating.

    As the posts states, tariffs have a cooling effect on the economy. So right now, when the economy is red hot, it is the ideal time to l create some headwinds. You sure as hell wouldn't want to negotiate new trade deals when the economy is in a down turn.

  • CrazyLegs88
    -9 points Aug 15,2018, 3:00pm

    Reminder: Trump is a literal authoritarian, racist, sexist, buffoon who idolizes people like Mussolini.

    All you libertarians are worried about leftists overtaking this sub? You should pay more attention to the neo-conservatives. They are the ones with ACTUAL power.

  • antisocialistconcapi
    -1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:47pm

    Even Ron Paul once said even though he is against tariffs, he would use them as a tool to get others to lower or drop their tarrifs. Not sure why people find this concept hard to understand.

● ● ●

A handy guide to simplifying the 2nd Amendment to make it easier to understand

/r/Libertarian: Free Markets, Free Societies, Free Minds

COMMENTS

  • Gnome_Sane
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:03pm

    Yeah, but whatabout "necessity" and "Free state"?

    Just kidding man, good one.

  • MeatsimN64
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:32pm

    "Properly armed," huh?

    Yeah I like the idea of that. There's plenty of countries just as free if not freer than the US that think people should only be armed if its proper

  • Elbarfo
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 8:29pm

    The last line ruins it. It should still simply state shall not be infringed. Cant get much clearer than that.

  • shadowbanmeplz
    -12 points Aug 15,2018, 3:03pm

    For the Democrats that can't be bothered to learn the queen's good english

    Yo listen up foolz, peepz wid gatz keep freedom realz. Constitution sayz peepz can haz gatz 'n u cant do shiz boutz it

COMMENTS

  • Gnome_Sane
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:03pm

    Yeah, but whatabout "necessity" and "Free state"?

    Just kidding man, good one.

  • MeatsimN64
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 7:32pm

    "Properly armed," huh?

    Yeah I like the idea of that. There's plenty of countries just as free if not freer than the US that think people should only be armed if its proper

  • Elbarfo
    1 points Aug 15,2018, 8:29pm

    The last line ruins it. It should still simply state shall not be infringed. Cant get much clearer than that.

  • shill4bigpharma
    -2 points Aug 15,2018, 3:17pm

    This is oversimplified to the point of uselessness.

    One of the big sticking points, today and earlier in history, was infringed by whom?

    Does a property owner have a right to object to someone on their property who is armed without permission? Mostly people would likely say yes. But this is not clear at all in the words.

    Can a state or local government infringe on this right? Historically, the answer was usually yes, as the constitution was understood to only limit what the federal government could do. These days, that thinking has shifted and the bill of rights often limits state and local governments also.

    Saying the thing is really very simple doesn't make it actually that simple.

  • shadowbanmeplz
    -12 points Aug 15,2018, 3:03pm

    For the Democrats that can't be bothered to learn the queen's good english

    Yo listen up foolz, peepz wid gatz keep freedom realz. Constitution sayz peepz can haz gatz 'n u cant do shiz boutz it