birth of liberty, 800 years ago in Britain.

[Seth]

Not really. It's the results that matter.

The results for the 200 years after independence were crap. Even today, I would suggest that my country is more free than the USA. Our racial minorities do not get shot by police for no reason.

Indeed. But the reason minorities get shot 'for no reason' by the police in the US is for the reason that a police officer cannot reasonably assume that the minority individual concerned is not themselves bearing arms - a problem that generally does not arise within a disarmed population.

Completely wrong. Any police officer anywhere in the world who does not consider EVERY person they approach to be armed and act with appropriate officer-safety protocols is an idiot. Once again, criminals do not obey gun ban laws. As a police officer, one interacts with the criminal element much more often than the average person does, and therefore one is more likely to encounter an armed criminal willing to use that weapon to avoid arrest. Every competent police officer and department on the planet knows this.

And if one assumes that any member of the population has the potential to deploy lethal force against a police officer then it seems only 'reasonable' for the officer to employ lethal force first, to protect life, or whatever.

Nonsense. If you ask street officers in the US (not command staff, who have a political objective) they have no problem with law-abiding armed citizens and actually appreciate those of us who take the trouble to get permits and carry arms because it makes their job easier and safer by dissuading criminals from trying to victimize people. One simply has to use good judgment when interfacing with an armed citizen, who ipso facto cannot be MORE dangerous than an armed criminal, who any officer is always expecting to encounter. The procedures for dealing with an armed citizen are exactly the same as they are for dealing with ANY PERSON the police approach. Good (and living) officers know how to use proper defensive procedures with everyone they contact to minimize the chances and opportunity that one of them will pull a gun and be able to shoot them. For example, that's why police usually work in pairs in the US, and why they have specific roles and positions in contacting citizens, any one or more of whom may be armed at any time, regardless of the laws against being armed.

Add that to the fact that to a large extent the Black man is demonised in the US and you have a recipe for, well, shooting minorities for no reason, which somewhat impinges blanket claims that the nation represents the normatives of freedom and liberty to which all other nations should aspire.

Well, if you call pointing out that it happens to be a fact that young black men are involved in violent crime in major metropolitan areas than any other ethnic group "demonization" I suppose you might be right. As it stands, police in urban areas have a very good reason to treat young black men (and increasingly women) with greater caution than other ethnic groups.

That, however, does NOT excuse poor procedure or prejudiced treatment of any individual, anywhere, based solely on ethnicity. Using greater caution is not the same thing as racist treatment of the individual.

That being said, there are certainly an unfortunately large number of police/minority interactions that are clearly inappropriate and unlawful.

On the other hand, it is also true that some ethnic social behavioral norms exacerbate the perfectly natural and reasonable fear that police officers have for their own safety. Sensible people understand the difficult nature of police work and the dangerous uncertainties that officers face every minute of every shift and they act sensibly and carefully when interacting with the police in order not to make things worse. Idiots get all upset about the interaction and not infrequently do stupid things that give police plenty of cause to treat them like violent dangerous suspects because, for some stupid reason, they think that the police do not have the authority to approach, detain and investigate them even if they know they are not involved in some nefarious activity.

The more "attitude" you throw at an officer who is trying to determine if you're involved in something you shouldn't be involved in, the more attitude you're going to get from the officer, who has the need, and the legal right, to control the situation and your movements using whatever degree of physical force is reasonably required. Act like a jerk and you'll be treated that way. Act like a responsible law-abiding citizen and you'll likely be given due respect.

Which is not to say that there aren't bad cops out there. But copping an attitude with a bad cop is a much worse plan than copping an attitude with a good one, so one should really not cop an attitude with an officer, ever. Be polite, be respectful, do what he says and keep your hands where he can see them and the vast majority of the time you'll be quickly released to go about your business...unless you're a crook, in which case you'll be arrested and during that arrest you'll be treated as you treat the officers, which is perfectly appropriate.

[Blind groper]

Seth

You are in denial. The USA has major problems with gun violence. Even Barack Obama admitted in a public speech that other nations in the west do not have the same level of mass killings.

American police are trigger happy. The police in my country are trained to approach even criminals with courtesy, and the result is much, much less police violence.

The USA is not a free country. You cannot live with fear and be free.

[Seth]

Seth

You are in denial.

No I'm not, you are.

The USA has major problems with gun violence.

Well, it has problems, that's true, but not as "major" as many other nations. Which isn't to say something doesn't need to be done, it does. And we're doing it by expanding legal concealed carry nationwide, which is reducing violent crime markedly everywhere it is legal.

Even Barack Obama admitted in a public speech that other nations in the west do not have the same level of mass killings.

"Even Barack Obama..." He's one of the most zealous anti-gun zealots there is and always has been. He'd say there are too many guns if there was only one gun on the planet.

American police are trigger happy.

Some of them are. But the reason you hear about those officers is because it is relatively rare so when it happens it makes the news.

The police in my country are trained to approach even criminals with courtesy, and the result is much, much less police violence.

On this point we agree completely. It is true, in my opinion, that the relationship between the people and the police in some (few) major cities has become far too adversarial, and part of the reason for that is the "militarization" of our police that began with Daryl Gates and the LAPD when he invented the SWAT team concept and with the "military style" organizational structure and training that created a para-military mindset in large police police departments.

That was a huge mistake. "The police are only persons who are paid to give full-time attention to the duties incumbent on all citizens in the interest of community safety." Sir Robert Peel, founder of the London Metropolitan Police, the first organized police force in history.

I avoided having to fight with people my whole career by treating them with respect and remembering two things: They are, each and every one, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and I work for them, not vice-versa.

The USA is not a free country.

Depends on how you define "free."

You cannot live with fear and be free.

Then nobody is free, but we are more free than you are.

[Blind groper]

It is true that nobody is 100% free. We are all required to accept various restraints on our behaviour. I tend to think that the most potent such control on people is the need to earn a living. Workers are not called wage slaves for nothing.

Outside that, we have to accept restraints on our behaviour for the greater good. Not having access to guns is one such restraint. When a large part of the population carry hand guns, whether legally or otherwise, a climate of fear builds up. Living in fear makes you a slave.

By that view point, every western nation is more free than the USA.

[Seth]

It is true that nobody is 100% free. We are all required to accept various restraints on our behaviour. I tend to think that the most potent such control on people is the need to earn a living. Workers are not called wage slaves for nothing.

Outside that, we have to accept restraints on our behaviour for the greater good. Not having access to guns is one such restraint.

Only in paranoid totalitarian societies.

When a large part of the population carry hand guns, whether legally or otherwise, a climate of fear builds up.

No it doesn't.

Living in fear makes you a slave.

Living in denial gets you killed.

By that view point, every western nation is more free than the USA.

Tautological fallacy.

[Forty Two]

The USA is not a free country. You cannot live with fear and be free.

I don't deny that we have high levels of gun violence compared to Canada, Australia, and most western European countries. Mainly, it's because we have a lot of guns in comparison, so -- of course -- those guns are going to be used more than in countries that, well, don't have them. Overall, "violence" rates are not that much different, however. The person-on-person violence rates in the US is pretty much on par with that in other western countries.

And, as a long time resident of the US -- three different states in three different parts of the country -- I can tell you that people don't "live with fear" to any greater or lesser extent than in other western countries. By and large, the US is very peaceful, quite, safe and secure, and the people are not in danger. Violent crime rates in the US continue to drop year-after-year, and that's now been for more than two decades. We were far less safe 30 years ago, statistically speaking, than we were in the 1980s, despite there being more guns now than then, and a culture steeped in violent media.

[Blind groper]

Violence and violent crime has been dropping in all western nations, and indeed, in most other nations, for a long time now. In spite of this, the USA has an abnormally large rate of homicides, at 4.5 per 100,000 people per year. My country, by comparison, has 0.9. That is why I say Americans live with fear, and are less free.

[Seth]

Violence and violent crime has been dropping in all western nations, and indeed, in most other nations, for a long time now. In spite of this, the USA has an abnormally large rate of homicides, at 4.5 per 100,000 people per year. My country, by comparison, has 0.9. That is why I say Americans live with fear, and are less free.

"Abnormally large" compared to whom? The homicide rate in the US is higher than some countries and lower than other countries. And why are homicides your only concern? What about criminal victimization resulting in injury that falls short of death? Why do you consistently ignore this important segment of the public and its right not to be victimized?

[Blind groper]

As I told you before, Seth, out of the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth, the USA by itself accounts for 85% of all gun homicides. That is abnormally high.

[Hermit]

...the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth...

List them please, and tell us by what criteria they are ranked as such.

[Forty Two]

Violence and violent crime has been dropping in all western nations, and indeed, in most other nations, for a long time now. In spite of this, the USA has an abnormally large rate of homicides, at 4.5 per 100,000 people per year. My country, by comparison, has 0.9. That is why I say Americans live with fear, and are less free.

Yes, but I would suggest not viewing the US as a single entity, and compare apples to apples. The US has many states and it's a few high homicide rate areas that ruin it for the rest of us. It's very difficult to compare a country of 4 million people. A better comparison is the US state of Oregon, which has 4, 000,000 people in it, and has about 100 murders per year, and in Oregon they need no permits or licenses to buy guns (under state law). About 1 in 3 Oregonians owns a gun.

[Forty Two]

As I told you before, Seth, out of the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth, the USA by itself accounts for 85% of all gun homicides. That is abnormally high.

Only because the US has more gun owners. It's like saying the country with 85% of the pools has 85% of the pool drowning deaths. It doesn't tell us much, without further context.

[Hermit]

Violence and violent crime has been dropping in all western nations, and indeed, in most other nations, for a long time now. In spite of this, the USA has an abnormally large rate of homicides, at 4.5 per 100,000 people per year. My country, by comparison, has 0.9. That is why I say Americans live with fear, and are less free.

Yes, but I would suggest not viewing the US as a single entity, and compare apples to apples. The US has many states and it's a few high homicide rate areas that ruin it for the rest of us. It's very difficult to compare a country of 4 million people. A better comparison is the US state of Oregon, which has 4, 000,000 people in it, and has about 100 murders per year, and in Oregon they need no permits or licenses to buy guns (under state law). About 1 in 3 Oregonians owns a gun.

You're not listening, 42. On a per population basis New Zealand as a nation has has less than a quarter of murders and suicides compared to the USA as a nation. Just like the USA, New Zealand has areas where that rate is higher or lower than others, and just like in the USA, murders and homicides are way more prevalent among people who are members of criminal gangs than people who are not.

As I told you before, Seth, out of the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth, the USA by itself accounts for 85% of all gun homicides. That is abnormally high.

Only because the US has more gun owners.

That is precisely what advocates of gun control say.

[Seth]

As I told you before, Seth, out of the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth, the USA by itself accounts for 85% of all gun homicides. That is abnormally high.

Right, your standard cherry-picking fake statistical factoid. I thought so.

[Seth]

...the 24 wealthiest nations on Earth...

List them please, and tell us by what criteria they are ranked as such.

But first explain why that particular selection criteria is even relevant in the first place, because in point of fact it's not, it's cherry-picking.