Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 264 posts

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#211

Post by array_key_first »

mothballed wrote: post #210
array_key_first wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual paradox is that, in the US, simply having a firearm in your home increases your risk of death to gun violence.

Simply owning or encountering a seat belt also 'increases' your risk of dying in a car crash. This is the kind of nonsense causation-correlation mix-up statistics you are operating on.

It's not, because most gun death are actually from the person owning the gun or people close to them.

It's much more likely that you shoot yourself or your kid shoots you or your husband/brother/other-troubled-man has a bad day and shoots you than a criminal shooting you.

The relationship between gun deaths and guns is not correlative, it's causative. Because, surprise! Guns cause gun death.

Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple.

On a related note, less automobiles = less automobile deaths.

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#212

Post by mothballed »

array_key_first wrote: post #211
mothballed wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply owning or encountering a seat belt also 'increases' your risk of dying in a car crash. This is the kind of nonsense causation-correlation mix-up statistics you are operating on.

It's not, because most gun death are actually from the person owning the gun or people close to them. It's much more likely that you shoot yourself or your kid shoots you or your husband/brother/other-troubled-man has a bad day and shoots you than a criminal shooting you. The relationship between gun deaths and guns is not correlative, it's causative. Because, surprise! Guns cause gun death. Generally, less guns = le…

Show the evidence you have that it is causative rather than correlative.

>Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple.

It's really not, in many cases it's been found anti-correlative i.e. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns4.jpg

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#213

Post by array_key_first »

mothballed wrote: post #212
array_key_first wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not, because most gun death are actually from the person owning the gun or people close to them. It's much more likely that you shoot yourself or your kid shoots you or your husband/brother/other-troubled-man has a bad day and shoots you than a criminal shooting you. The relationship between gun deaths and guns is not correlative, it's causative. Because, surprise! Guns cause gun death. Generally, less guns = le…

Show the evidence you have that it is causative rather than correlative. >Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple. It's really not, in many cases it's been found anti-correlative i.e. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns4.jpg

> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8371731/

"Virtually all of this risk involved homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance."

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#214

Post by mothballed »

array_key_first wrote: post #213
mothballed wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show the evidence you have that it is causative rather than correlative. >Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple. It's really not, in many cases it's been found anti-correlative i.e. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns4.jpg

> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8371731/ "Virtually all of this risk involved homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance."

It does not assert what you've claimed. It found correlative association. They did not conclude that the gun was causative of the homicide.

Even thinking this through for a second, it makes sense someone expecting to be murdered by a family member or intimate partner might be more likely to keep a gun, as it might be useful in frustrating that effort.

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#215

Post by geoka9 »

nix-zarathustra wrote: post #203
kuerbel wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Germany and I'm not afraid of Russia. If they had more manpower they would have overrun Ukraine by now. They do not. I'm not saying it would be an easy fight, but Russia stands no chance. Not even with Belarus on their side or some other satellite states.

That's foolish. If Russia wins in Ukraine, they would have the two strongest armies in Europe. European states simply don't have enough ordinances and gear to survive a long war.

So true; Russian MO is to use ~18-60 year old males from occupied territories as cannon fodder. Europeans should be flooding Ukraine with weapons (and other kinds of support) and thanking their luck that somebody else is willing to risk their lives and use them against the onslaught that would otherwise be directed at the EU countries.

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#216

Post by titanomachy »

mothballed wrote: post #114
neilv wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you moved to a place that was physically safe, would gun ownership still be a top priority?

Seems paradoxical. If I'm not allowed to have guns, then I am physically unsafe, because someone from government will use violence against me if they both discover it and have the ability to do something about it. I wouldn't feel safe anywhere violence is used for malum prohibitum 'crimes.' In fact I don't feel safe basically anywhere a government exists because they all do this; this is part the reason why I live in…

Are there any examples of someone in the US successfully defending themselves from “government violence” using a gun? I mean, examples where it ultimately worked out for that person?

Maybe you could be the first!

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#217

Post by mothballed »

titanomachy wrote: post #216
mothballed wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems paradoxical. If I'm not allowed to have guns, then I am physically unsafe, because someone from government will use violence against me if they both discover it and have the ability to do something about it. I wouldn't feel safe anywhere violence is used for malum prohibitum 'crimes.' In fact I don't feel safe basically anywhere a government exists because they all do this; this is part the reason why I live in…

Are there any examples of someone in the US successfully defending themselves from “government violence” using a gun? I mean, examples where it ultimately worked out for that person? Maybe you could be the first!

Yes, American Revolution. More recently, Battle of Athens[0]. Also see the Bundys who are still (as far as I know, to this day) ranching on the land they had an armed standoff over the BLM with in Nevada [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#218

Post by titanomachy »

mothballed wrote: post #217
titanomachy wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any examples of someone in the US successfully defending themselves from “government violence” using a gun? I mean, examples where it ultimately worked out for that person? Maybe you could be the first!

Yes, American Revolution. More recently, Battle of Athens[0]. Also see the Bundys who are still (as far as I know, to this day) ranching on the land they had an armed standoff over the BLM with in Nevada [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff

Ok, I guess you’d be the first in ~100 years. Crazier things have happened. But the much more likely outcome of meeting government violence with lethal violence of your own is that you are now dead. That’s a scenario that plays out all too often in this country; no need to reach into the distant past for examples.

Kudos for engaging civilly and earnestly on this even though the majority here seem to disagree with you. It’s rare that I encounter someone coherently articulating a belief system so wildly divergent from my own.

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#219

Post by amypetrik8 »

lunias wrote: post #53

Ah, yes. Of course, in the wake of the fall of the United States, everywhere else on earth will immediately flourish. Just my 2 cents, but before you leave, you might want to talk to some immigrants about what brought them to the United States in the first place.

> some immigrants about what brought them to the United States in the first place.

What brought them to the US is that if they have a kid, now their kid is a citizen. Green card etc waived - you wouldn't deport a family would you? Now they nominally have zero income so they qualify for full on super duper welfare - food, house, medical care. Of course find a job, too - but has to be under the table because no green card. Meaning no taxes either. So free food, free house no rent, free medicine, no taxes. Medical care legally requires accomodations for foreign languages - don't need to speak English either.

I mean, if Japan said, "if you have a kid here, live here on our dime, eat on our dime, free medical care, no taxes" yea I would take that deal!! Can't blame em

Irony of the whole thing? This actually kinda solves the population crisis. Forces people to have a kid. Actually an interesting finding but poorly explored since the powers that be like to bury their head in the sand and pretend 50 million people haven't exploited this.

Other point is well, why did this even happen? Well, the landlords are quite happy to see the feds paying for rent, they'll collect that check, as with the food suppliers and the medical care practitioners - a very nice niche. And the small businesses are more than happy to pay someone under the table untaxed, lower overhead. So the people coming in illegally, they benefit, the people collecting the taxes paying for them, they benefit, everybody else, welp, there goes your tax money

Re: Leaving the U.S. for the Netherlands

#220

Post by paulddraper »

jonkoops wrote: post #41
paulddraper wrote: post #21

Lol. I know what the comments will be. And the US is one of the top immigrant countries in the world. Always worth reflecting why people choose that when there is greener gras.

Money. You get paid much better in the US, you just have to accept the physical and mental implications of what it brings with it.

That's really it.

Even adjusted for CoL and public benefits, the U.S. pays well, at least on the upper end.

Post reply on HN