Oz, Land of the Free and Home of the...

[Ronan]

Here's the kicker, I don't think stricter gun control in the US will work either; it's too late. Something is going to have to give, however, and when it does the transition will be far more painful than it needed to be as a direct result of failing to act sooner.

Give how, why? Violence is decreasing. More people drown in swimming pools* than are killed in mass killings. Very few people believe the cost of a firearms ban** would exceed the benefits. Polls show people are increasing against more gun control; my own state may soon be open-carry.

* Swimming pools would be a lot easier to ban, because they're much harder to hide.

** one day I hope politicians and voters will learn them some econ and realize what a poor idea prohibitions are in general. If you believe legally-obtained firearms carry a negative externality then the proper governmental response is to tax them, not ban them.

[Ronan]

Voter turnouts:
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=231
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=GB
The US turnout is much lower on non-presidential election years.

You're not comparing like with like. The closest thing we have to a 'Non-presidential election' are the regional elections, i.e., non-general elections and bi-elections for local office, and for those turnout is ~30-40%.

Well its the % people who vote for national parliament (or congress and the senate, in our case). I'm not sure we can get any better than that? The reasons why people show up at the polls doesn't say anything about the figures themselves.

[I-KP]

Here's the kicker, I don't think stricter gun control in the US will work either; it's too late. Something is going to have to give, however, and when it does the transition will be far more painful than it needed to be as a direct result of failing to act sooner.

Give how, why? Violence is decreasing. More people drown in swimming pools* than are killed in mass killings. Very few people believe the cost of a firearms ban** would exceed the benefits. Polls show people are increasing against more gun control; my own state may soon be open-carry.
* Swimming pools would be a lot easier to ban, because they're much harder to hide.
** one day I hope politicians and voters will learn them some econ and realize what a poor idea prohibitions are in general. If you believe legally-obtained firearms carry a negative externality then the proper governmental response is to tax them, not ban them.

It's this kind of logic that neatly exemplifies just how different we are, as nations. We share a language (almost) but my god we're so very, very different in most other regards.

[I-KP]

Voter turnouts:
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=231
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=GB
The US turnout is much lower on non-presidential election years.

You're not comparing like with like. The closest thing we have to a 'Non-presidential election' are the regional elections, i.e., non-general elections and bi-elections for local office, and for those turnout is ~30-40%.

Well its the % people who vote for national parliament (or congress and the senate, in our case). I'm not sure we can get any better than that? The reasons why people show up at the polls doesn't say anything about the figures themselves.

I've already stated why you're not comparing like with like. I can't really do any more than that without just repeating myself.

[Swift]

Voter turnouts:
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id=231
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=GB
The US turnout is much lower on non-presidential election years.

You're not comparing like with like. The closest thing we have to a 'Non-presidential election' are the regional elections, i.e., non-general elections and bi-elections for local office, and for those turnout is ~30-40%.

Well its the % people who vote for national parliament (or congress and the senate, in our case). I'm not sure we can get any better than that? The reasons why people show up at the polls doesn't say anything about the figures themselves.

Compulsory voting like Australia would fix that if you really wanted to. Plus it would increase government revenue when you fine everyone who does not vote a small amount.

It would be a very un-democratic thing to do (I vehemently disagree with Australia having and enforcing that policy) but it would work and would save presidential campaigns hundreds of millions in 'Get out to vote' dollars.

[Ronan]

It's this kind of logic that neatly exemplifies just how different we are, as nations. We share a language (almost) but my god we're so very, very different in most other regards.

I'm not sure about arriving at that conclusion from the above logic. Most people will devote far more resources into stopping harm coming from other humans vs. accidental or environmental harm. Its a very well-known cognitive bias I am cognisant of, but many are not. Ergo I don't expect nearly anyone to agree with me on the swimming pool point; it is an example to highlight inconsistent logic, not any sort of illustration of national opinion or thought process. Edit: In other words, we have larger things to worry about than mass-murders; they aren't worth tearing the country apart.

I am relatively certain most Americans would be horrified at any proposition that we take action against swimming pools before mass-murderers!

I've already stated why you're not comparing like with like. I can't really do any more than that without just repeating myself.

I was kind of hoping you'd go into more detail.

[Ronan]

It would be a very un-democratic thing to do (I vehemently disagree with Australia having and enforcing that policy) but it would work and would save presidential campaigns hundreds of millions in 'Get out to vote' dollars.

Well you could offer a small tax credit to voters. For people who pay taxes this is technically the same thing as lowering taxes and imposing a fine, but oh-so-much-more palatable!

[I-KP]

I've already stated why you're not comparing like with like. I can't really do any more than that without just repeating myself.

I was kind of hoping you'd go into more detail.

General Elections would be the equivalent of the US’s Presidential Elections whereby governments, be them sole or coalition, are formed and mandated to govern for not more than five years; these are the elections whereby typical turnout has recently been at roughly 60-65%. There are five other types of elections that take place at various times throughout any given term of office in the UK, some scheduled ahead of time, others more fluidly timed, and of those five the Local Elections are perhaps considered to be of the next greatest important after General Elections, and local authorities are decided in such elections (I don’t know what the US equivalent of these elections would be); typically turnout for these has been at roughly 30-40%. I don’t know exactly why turnout is so low for these, perhaps most feel that local government isn’t as important as national governance; such elections are certainly not exposed through expensive advertising campaigns, as the General Elections usually are, so there’s probably also a component of ‘out of sight, out of mind’ involved.

[Galadorn]

holy snore attack


....when do the fighter, wizard, cleric and thief burst through a door into a 10' square room where 1 Orc is sitting on a chest full of GEEPEES??


sorry do go on