A hypothesis is an idea. It requires no data. It requires only a direction in which one might look for data.
My hypothesis is that the floopliwuply is a random string- not a word. I can collect data on meanings of words and random strings now.

It says something about the person when insults start coming out.

M

I didn't say I was intelligent. Only that my personality type is the kind that tends to overanalyze everything, or overplan for every contingency far into the future, instead of just going on gut instinct and winging it. Doesn't mean I come to the right conclusions. That I might seem intelligent is simply your opinion's reflection of me. I never claim that I am personally (or try not to).
And yes, I'm quite aware of that effect. The rather amusing irony is that Dunning Kruger is used quite often by SA goons against bitcoiners, when they claim that Bitcoiners don't understand finance, economics, or math, because they, the SA goons, do, and thuse understand that bitcoiners wrong. That itself is actually a Dunning Kruger effect, in that the SA goons are SO convinced that Bitcoin doesn't make sense, and are so confident of their own superiority with regards to finance, that they can't even recognize the way more advanced understanding of econ and finance when presented by bitcoiners. It's effectively Dunning Kruger types suffering from the Dunning Kruger effect and accusing the actually smart ones of suffering from it.


* Anti-gun laws become obsolete as people are able to print guns and other weapons in private from home.
* Government security struggles to adjust, as tax revenue plummets due to increased cryptocurrency adoption and weakening of government fiat currencies, while at the same time having to contend with more heavily armed criminals.
* Citizens continue to lose trust in government as their currency inflates, and the quality of provided services decreases.
* Government responds to these issues with increased intensity of violence, such as swat team style raids and arrests for increasingly minor infractions, and by adding more things to the list of items it considers illegal (possible even use of cryptocurrency itself).
* The end effect is more expensive use of police powers, combined with reduced tax revenues, resulting in police answering only a limited number of calls for help, and leaving many issues that government considers minor (such as robberies) unresolved.
* As people realize the police is not as effective as they want them to be, they start to purchase or print their own guns for their own defense.
* Initially the rash of shootings increases, as criminals figure out (are more frequently surprised) that they are up against armed citizens, and citizens figure out how to handle their new guns properly. The police is either dismissive of the issue, too busy focusing on their own raids, or is caught in the middle, with increased police casualties and resulting increase in police brutality.
* As the situation comes to a head, and people believe they have had enough, they start to form their own street patrols, which quickly evolve into certain specific people taking charge, and forming their own private police force. Some of these will be neighborhood watches where everyone contributes, some of these will be gangs forming to protect their turf, and some will be started by enterpreneureal types who want to start a private security business. Regardless, they all focus on keeping the neighborhood secure by taking care of only their own small parts of town, where they actually know the people and the areas, instead of a single huge organization trying to take care of the entire city.
* As these groups build more and more reputation, they will be trusted more than the government provided police, who, as more people protest their brutality, will either form into a group protecting a sort of police dictatorship status, or will dissolve if they realize that they are simply not needed any more.
* In the end, for most areas guns will be as necessary, or unnecessary, as they are now, with protection being provided by private local groups, and possibly even competing groups, as well as advances in technology and security systems. In some areas guns will be a necessity due to rampant gang violence (same as in inner cities now), and in some areas guns will be a necessity simply because people will decide that it's cheaper to carry guns and provide their own protection instead of paying someone else, with the private security only providing investigative services.

I am an INTJ.

The laws you want are backed by guns, explosives, and nukes.

There is no reasoning with the unreasonable. Since you clearly believe that no system can exist without the initiation of violence, we cannot reach a reasonable compromise.

The NAP is not a suicide pact, it's basic tenet is that you do not INITIATE force, not that you never use force.

Duh, then the accuser is violating the NAP, and the accused can defend himself with a counter-lawsuit, such as suing for legal harassment. Same way it works now with those abusing the legal system being sued for it. It's not that complicated.

The only way the accuser can force the accused to agree is if the accused has broken the NAP first.

WTF? Private arbitration is NAP.

So, your experiences are something like this?

with that, you go on ignore.

Regarding NAP and the NAPsters' hatred for democracy. I never did get an answer from them about who determines the guilt of the accused that was satisfactory.

Fortunately it does not matter much what you think.  There are countless examples of children  defending themselves and/or their families with firearms.

These go back to when Americans had children that went to one room school houses.  There were quite a few pitched battles between those children and attacking Indians.

So I would say, based on considerable evidence, that children are quite capable of realizing what power they have in their hands.

I'm stupid. Please explain it to me.

Let's see if I can reinflate it:

Assuming lowest casualties,
Israel - 8 shootings every 10 years means a minimum of 0.8 shootings a year.
America - 323 shootings every 10 years means a minimum of 32 shootings a year!

Obviously that's not right, so the only other conclusion we can make is that every shooting in America has WAY WAY WAY WAY more casualties than every shooting in Israel. My guess the reason is because everyone in American schools is completely defenseless, so shooters can just keep shooting till they run out of bullets, while in Israel they get taken down quick.

See, that's the difference here. Some people like living in gun shows, but they are not forcing you to. You're free to live in a gun free zone if you want. You on the other hand don't want to live in a gun show, and are hoping to force everyone else to live the same way you do, too. That's the difference between others giving you the freedom to choose, and you forcing your wants on others, and is the same difference between anarchy and government.