djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 17, 2024 17:35:14 GMT -5
taking copj long again.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 17, 2024 12:08:15 GMT -5
it's interesting though, right?
i think it is SO COOL to get this much insight into how the sausage is made!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 15:13:01 GMT -5
PS- this is one of MANY letters on this subject. if you want more i can provide it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 14:33:21 GMT -5
i forgot to note that what i sometimes call Amendment 1.5 never made it to the floor. Jefferson was fervently against monopolies. he was also against perpetual corporations. he felt that both would lead to oligarchy. if you leave that part out, the passage above approximates the reasoning for the first and second amendment from the perspective of the guy who crafted them.
edit: if you are wondering what corporations or monopolies should be tolerated for fourteen years, it is those that serve a public interest, like making a transcontinental railroad (an example that he would have supported) or sending a man to the moon. his feeling was that such corporations should be dissolved as soon as their work is done.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 14:30:01 GMT -5
PS- i would gladly post some of the exchange between Madison and Jefferson, if you haven't read it scgal . i think it is really interesting, and important. but i don't want to bore you with it if you are not curious about it. I am interested ok. one of the more interesting ones is posted here: press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch14s46.htmlhere is the most relevant part. if you carefully review this, you will find that most of these negative laws* form the bill of rights in order. this passage at the end of this letter ended up forming the first and second amendment: A declaration that the federal government will never restrain the presses from printing any thing they please, will not take away the liability of the printers for false facts printed. The declaration that religious faith shall be unpunished, does not give impunity to criminal acts dictated by religious error. The saying there shall be no monopolies lessens the incitements to ingenuity, which is spurred on by the hope of a monopoly for a limited time, as of 14. years; but the benefit even of limited monopolies is too doubtful to be opposed to that of their general suppression. If no check can be found to keep the number of standing troops within safe bounds, while they are tolerated as far as necessary, abandon them altogether, discipline well the militia, and guard the magazines with them. More than magazine-guards will be useless if few, and dangerous if many. No European nation can ever send against us such a regular army as we need fear, and it is hard if our militia are not equal to those of Canada or Florida. My idea then is, that tho' proper exceptions to these general rules are desirable and probably practicable, yet if the exceptions cannot be agreed on, the establishment of the rules in all cases will do ill in very few. I hope therefore a bill of rights will be formed to guard the people against the federal government, as they are already guarded against their state governments in most instances.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 8:32:18 GMT -5
except that Clinton was a choir boy compared to FDR and Kennedy.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 8:28:49 GMT -5
PS- i would gladly post some of the exchange between Madison and Jefferson, if you haven't read it scgal. i think it is really interesting, and important. but i don't want to bore you with it if you are not curious about it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 8:27:15 GMT -5
me too. are you familiar with the letters that Jefferson and Madison exchanged on the Bill of Rights? i find it fascinating. Jefferson was quite clear in those documents what the second amendment was for. Wilson undermined the 2nd amendment considerably. the Supreme Court's error in 2010 was nothing compared to that error, which is now over a century old. i am less concerned with what the SCOTUS did than what Wilson did. i would very much like to get back to the original meaning and intent of the 2nd amendment, but i fear we have completely lost the forest for the trees at this juncture. the constitution also binds us to treaties, which is another issue we discussed recently. Article 2, section 2, requires us to abide by treaties as if they were constitutional law. OK we can talk about the 2a. W hy was Wilson wrong in saying that you have the right to keep guns to protect yourself and property? It makes perfect sense to me. It keeps in step with the 2010 SC decision. As far as treaties personally I think they are bullshit something nice to put on paper but since I also don't recognize united nations at all I don't care if they are broken.no. Wilson never said that. in fact, what he did undermines the second amendment considerably. i would say that the SCOTUS decision has some teeth without Wilson. with him? it is in direct conflict, imo. treaties have the force of law through our constitution. it actually doesn't matter how anyone "feels" about that, just as it doesn't matter how anyone "feels" about the 2nd amendment. it just is a matter of fact, law, and consistency.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 1:14:11 GMT -5
I am disappointed that Biden and Trump are going to debate. Not sure how it will help either of them. Trump will bully and say nothing useful. It could be a minefield for Biden even if Trump stumbles over multiple words and thoughts. I think it would be a fair debate if there was 1 moderator from CNN and 1 from FOX. And no ear pieces feeding notes to them. No leaked questions to either. debates are bullshit, in the current configuration. ever since the LWV stopped running them they have become carefully scripted campaign events. neither candidates are allowed earpieces, however. that is a hoax, rip.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 16, 2024 1:11:51 GMT -5
during the space race, we had common cause. we need something like the space race to bind us together. environmental issues would seem like an obvious choice.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 15:18:33 GMT -5
i asked you earlier when we were discussing global problems: do you believe in the constitution as a governing document? Yes me too. are you familiar with the letters that Jefferson and Madison exchanged on the Bill of Rights? i find it fascinating. Jefferson was quite clear in those documents what the second amendment was for. Wilson undermined the 2nd amendment considerably. the Supreme Court's error in 2010 was nothing compared to that error, which is now over a century old. i am less concerned with what the SCOTUS did than what Wilson did. i would very much like to get back to the original meaning and intent of the 2nd amendment, but i fear we have completely lost the forest for the trees at this juncture. the constitution also binds us to treaties, which is another issue we discussed recently. Article 2, section 2, requires us to abide by treaties as if they were constitutional law.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 13:12:28 GMT -5
Tennesseer - so, just to be clear here, you are saying that if i type something as a question in google, and it responds in a way that does not link to any article or source, i am required to track that source down? that seems burdensome to me. but maybe that is the policy. laura/moon- care to comment? if you don't know what i am talking about, we can set up a 1:1 discussion, so i can send you screen shots. As to the first part of your reply, the data had to come from some internet source if it answered your question. There may be differing opinions as to the results of your question. Which would mean there are several linked sources on the internet. It may be burdensome to you but we cannot just throw out data as proof when there is no way to verify the source of the data. yes. it came from Google. i would send you a screen shot, but it reveals too much personal detail. there was no link cited. and for the record, i am ok with people doubting me. sometimes i am wrong. in this case i didn't verify the information. from now on, i will either write a disclaimer for each post without citation, or better yet, add it to my footnotes so it is on every post.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 13:06:33 GMT -5
I totally disagree. The purpose and reason for the second amendment hasn't been true for decades. So I think what follows should not be true either. I think it is also intentionally misinterpreted. The right to bear arms was not to be infringed so that a standing US army did not need to exist. It did not mean the right to have any old damn firearm that could be created. The reason for the existence of the amendment has long gone. It needs rewriting, but it would be a tough sell as many of the people who idolize their guns also idolize the idea of America having the biggest standing army on the planet. The amendment was not intended so anyone could own whatever damn gun they wanted for sport shooting or killing school children. It was so citizens could defend the country when needed. The 2a is what the supreme court says it is period. I'm good with trying to rewrite it even democrats will barely touch that subject. They will hoot and hollar but they won't get it done. i asked you earlier when we were discussing global problems: do you believe in the constitution as a governing document?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 13:05:03 GMT -5
CC - moon/Laura DJ-I decided to search Google for your statement of : "Their latest estimate found that approximately 251,000 lives are claimed each year because of medical error - about 9.5 percent of all deaths annually in the United States." The very first result of the search which contained your statement was the site where the statement came from. Hardly burdensome. MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMSyeah, i got that. but the "article" is from some unknown law firm. the original data lies elsewhere.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 13:03:06 GMT -5
To be honest, I'm not really sure what "larger problem" DJ is referring to. It could be many things. I'd like to think that he is referring to my nation's love enduring love affair with inequality but I'm not entirely sure about that. it was brought up on the gun thread. lack of social cohesion. lack of empathy. disrespect for government. we have a hermit and tribal mentality. it works against pretty much everyone, except the uber wealthy.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 10:56:52 GMT -5
IF we survive this, we will look back on this era the way we view the slavery South.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 10:38:35 GMT -5
GOD, i love this board. You are right, it is a mystery to me how you can not have healthcare. Having said that we have a smaller Country, whereas your wide open spaces are really wide and open Think I would be tempted to move to a rental nearby the hospital immediately prior to birth. it is a symptom of a larger problem here. i would like to live somewhere that did not have that larger problem.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 10:33:38 GMT -5
Tennesseer - so, just to be clear here, you are saying that if i type something as a question in google, and it responds in a way that does not link to any article or source, i am required to track that source down? that seems burdensome to me. but maybe that is the policy. laura/moon- care to comment? if you don't know what i am talking about, we can set up a 1:1 discussion, so i can send you screen shots.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 10:30:47 GMT -5
there was no link, because i didn't get the information from a "website" i got it from a google search. i am not sure what the policy is with regard to such things, but i would hope that if there is no link to post that i am not required to post a non-existent link. and yes, the same would apply to you. if you want to know more, feed the information Google gave me back into Google. maybe you will get something. If you googled it, the information came from an article which has a URL address. the article was not cited in the (first) Google result. i had to type that RESULT in Google to bring up an ARTICLE that cited the study. i never did find the study. i am not just being an obstinate dick, Tenn. i seriously had no URL. it was just a response to a question. no citation. but i can see you drew one like from my resident hater. good for you, i guess.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 10:29:55 GMT -5
How many people die from lack of healthcare? someone here has been tracking that. i think it is dondub. it is a high number. but it is not 9.5% of annual deaths.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 6:57:50 GMT -5
note: this is not intended to be a critique of medical practice in the US. i was just challenging the idea that gun deaths are greater than hospital mistakes.
they aren't.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 6:55:43 GMT -5
here you go, Tenn- i did just what i suggested you do, and here is what i got:
A 2016 Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine study found medical errors in hospitals and other health care facilities are so commonplace that preventable deaths due to medical malpractice are the third leading cause of death in the United States. Their latest estimate found that approximately 251,000 lives are claimed each year because of medical error – about 9.5 percent of all deaths annually in the United States—higher than deaths caused by stroke, accidents or Alzheimer’s. A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. Other reports claim the numbers to be as high as 440,000. Medical errors are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer. Advocates are fighting back, pushing for greater legislation for patient safety.
so it came from a 2016 Johns Hopkins study. there is no link to that, either. but i am sure you can find it. note: they make no distinction between mistakes and malpractice in the study, as far as i can tell.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 6:50:13 GMT -5
So I don't have to post a link when I post stats anymore. Thanks! I was getting so tired of posting links to back up data I post. there was no link, because i didn't get the information from a "website" i got it from a google search. i am not sure what the policy is with regard to such things, but i would hope that if there is no link to post that i am not required to post a non-existent link. and yes, the same would apply to you. if you want to know more, feed the information Google gave me back into Google. maybe you will get something.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 6:39:00 GMT -5
sorry to flip this discussion on it's head, but.... Their latest estimate found that approximately 251,000 lives are claimed each year because of medical error - about 9.5 percent of all deaths annually in the United States. might find more fertile ground on lives saved. Medical errors are not the same thing as malpractice. The studies that quote that number use a very broad definition of medical errors. Physicians, like all people, are fallible. We make mistakes. People have complications of procedures. They have reactions to medications. Medications have side effects. People are older, sicker, more frail, and more susceptible to bad outcomes than before. And that number does not take into account what would happen to them if they did not get the treatment they received. Would they be fine, die, or have some other outcome. Can we do better? Undoubtedly. We are at least trying. malpractice was grouped together with error.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 15, 2024 6:36:29 GMT -5
copper broke $5 this morning.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 13, 2024 17:29:50 GMT -5
as much as i would like to think that would solve the problem, i don't think it would. have you seen Bowling for Columbine? that film asks the right question: why? gun ownership is higher in Switzerland, but the murder rate is far lower. gun laws are as lax in Canada, but they don't have the problem, either. there is something in our psyche that causes the higher homicide and suicide rates. i have some guesses about it. does anyone else?There has been discussion that it has a lot to do with our sense of rugged independence and "good guy with a gun" Wild Wild West fantasies. That and as Commissioner Gordon says in Batman Begins "Cops get vests, criminals get armor piercing bullets" and also "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". When I have easy access to a gun on me at all times it becomes quite tempting/easy to start to believe it is the solution to everything. I can get you to stop a lot faster waving a gun in your face than I can trying to deescalate through words. Unfortunately the dude I am waving a gun at also has a gun. Well now he thinks he needs to shoot before I shoot him. We've created a society where everyone thinks problems can be solved with violence. I was reading an article about gun crimes in other countries. Of course they have them but they don't have nearly the amount of guns owned per individuals as we do. A lot of countries also require military training as part of being a citizen where you are going to learn how to properly handle and respect a weapon. There are regulations regarding what you can own, how many you can own and how long before you can purchase one. Less guns in less hands = less gun crimes. It's just a fact. We can't try to mental health our way out of what we have become. The fastest solution backed up by statistics is remove the weapon itself. this is the old "when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" argument, and i agree entirely. this also goes for US foreign policy, btw. what is the point of spending a quarter of your budget on weapons and then doing nothing with them? seems kinda wasteful. this attitude permeates everything we do here, imo.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 13, 2024 16:58:37 GMT -5
I believe that 2 things can be true at the same time. A person can value their right to responsibly own guns and also be very concerned about gun violence in this country. . . of course. i would guess half the people on the board feel this way. i certainly do. the 2nd amendment had a very specific purpose, which Woodrow Wilson shot down during his administration. since that time, our official policy toward defense is in contradiction with the 2nd amendment. we have two options, if we want to be consistent. one is to repeal the 2nd amendment. the second is to disban the military. i would vote for the latter, and keep 2a. but this country, and how we treat guns, would look way more like Switzerland than we do today if we did that. keeping both is unacceptable to me. it should be to every other American, as well, but i find surprisingly small acceptance of that idea. yet another reason why i feel like my "tribe" must live somewhere else.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 13, 2024 16:54:59 GMT -5
sorry to flip this discussion on it's head, but.... Their latest estimate found that approximately 251,000 lives are claimed each year because of medical error - about 9.5 percent of all deaths annually in the United States. might find more fertile ground on lives saved. Link please. google
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 13, 2024 16:47:40 GMT -5
uh, let me stop you right there. it was accepted as fact that the body had "humors" and that a doctor was responsible for healing them. it was bunkum. it was accepted that the earth was the center of everything, and was surrounded by "cosmic shells" that contained other planets, the sun, and stars. it was bunkum there were competing theories about whether all matter was made from water or air. both were wrong. bloodletting was considered a legitimate medical practice. it was bunkum. for the past couple hundred years we have relied on EVIDENCE, not intuition. you can shove your intuition up your backside, Mike. we don't enact laws based on your intuition. not yet, anyway. so, just fuck off, for now. so, here is how it will go: you PROVE there is a problem, then we will measure the width and breadth of the problem and decide whether it is worth addressing, and THEN we will craft legislation, accordingly. or not. I agree with everything except that we don’t make laws based on Mike’s intuition. We shouldn’t - but we might. I take the more cynical stance that his speech telling us he will use our collective intuition to make laws is bullshit. He is saying that so he can make laws that trample voter’s rights, skew the voting population white and keep his unlikeable party in power. I believe they have the facts to back that up - they just aren’t parading that around. my carefully crafted diatribe contained the word YET.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 13, 2024 16:19:59 GMT -5
sorry to flip this discussion on it's head, but.... Their latest estimate found that approximately 251,000 lives are claimed each year because of medical error - about 9.5 percent of all deaths annually in the United States. might find more fertile ground on lives saved.
|
|