[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

Nope I only need 1 shot. Besides bolt action rifle not good home defense weapon. Shotgun works much better.

Police don’t keep pumping round now they will be charged with excessive force and murder.

The opportunities for shotguns are few.

Police training is still, shoot until the threat is gone.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Well, partially. The issue is "adequately paid". Try working in the sun in southern CA or southern FL bent over for 8 hours, carrying heavy loads. It is hard physical work. Farmers would have to pay a lot more to get Americans to give up their unemployment and work the fields. The price of food would skyrocket.

On the other hand, being a liberal and being in favor of fair liberal wages, I agree with you, that the farm workers (actually everyone) should be paid better, even potentially a "living wage" for the area. Of course, there are consequences for paying higher wages, that being shoppers have to pay higher prices to cover it. BUT, for farm goods, I think I read the other day that $0.15 of every dollar of the retail price of food goes to the farmer. So, assuming farm workers make up half of the farmer's burdened cost ( and it is NOT that high ), that only comes to $0.08 per dollar retail price, doubling what the workers are paid would only increase retail food prices - or an 8% increase in food prices at the retail store. 8% is a serious increase in food costs, but it is one time and not "sky rocketing".

Sadly, most companies when faced with increased production costs pass on more than the increase to the consumer - you know might as well make a little extra - just look a the fossil fuel industry for an example.

Most "so-called" farmers are NOT small farmers. They are more like factory farmers or small Corporations. They have business risks like crop failures, but they can take out crop insurance to mitigate against a really bad year. I know several farmers who harvest their crops in an AIR CONDITIONED huge piece of specialized harvesting equipment. Some large factory farmers use GPS technology to steer their harvesting equipment It can be pretty high-tech. For farmers like that much of their costs are in advanced, specialized equipment and the loans and interest expense to buy them. They would also have high diesel fuel costs.
..........So, their labor costs might be fairly low and their PROFITS fairly high. With such an operation a few SKILLED WORKERS could get raises and yet pass little or nothing in the way of costs along to the consumer.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Most "so-called" farmers are NOT small farmers. They are more like factory farmers or small Corporations. They have business risks like crop failures, but they can take out crop insurance to mitigate against a really bad year. I know several farmers who harvest their crops in an AIR CONDITIONED huge piece of specialized harvesting equipment. Some large factory farmers use GPS technology to steer their harvesting equipment It can be pretty high-tech. For farmers like that much of their costs are in advanced, specialized equipment and the loans and interest expense to buy them. They would also have high diesel fuel costs.
..........So, their labor costs might be fairly low and their PROFITS fairly high. With such an operation a few SKILLED WORKERS could get raises and yet pass little or nothing in the way of costs along to the consumer.

Here is a Pew Research Center breakdown of who does what (2020) and if the "illegals" are going jobs Americans don't want. 7.6 million undocumented in the US. BTW, the IRS also shows undocumented pay a significant amount on income tax, SS, and Medicare taxes which they will never collect on, and so contribute to ours.

Most Americans say immigrants mainly fill jobs US citizens don’t want | Pew Research Center

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

king rambler & queen rambler enjoy cutting and pasting lots of information to impress themselves...................not impressing anyone else.

again.

[MartinSE]

///

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

You are saying that NOTHING can be done to prevent MASS shootings and murders because if the AR-15 style rifle was banned then another model of rifle could take its place. That is ALL incorrect because Australia and New Zealand HAVE already (since about 1985) SOLVED their MASS MURDER problem - and look no further than Canada which is currently SOLVING its GUN murder PROBLEM. So, that PROVES that what you wrote IS incorrect. The US IS the only 1st world nation with a mass GUN murder problem. And the PROBLEM is going to get WORSE as the summer continues.
..........The whole idea that US Citizens should be able to own UNLIMITED types of GUNS is a mindset that is NOT shared by the UK and all other western nations. Their citizens do NOT have to FEAR gathering ing groups like for adults at church or for children at school. They ELIMINATED all those fears by simply banning certain CLASSES of GUNS. It instantly dropped their GUN crimes to near ZERO. In those nations, GUNS were NOT eliminated, just the types of GUNS most likely to be used to shoot up a large crowd or do drive-by shootings.
........As to the M1 carbine being a BETTER man-killer than the AR-15. Just NOT true. The M1 carbine IS a GOOD man-killer, but not as good as the AR-15. The M1 carbine is a military weapon designed to have low recoil so that it was easy for a soldier to get used to the recoil and become proficient with it. The AR-15 has even lower recoil......advantage AR-15. The M1 carbine uses a LOW-VELOCITY pistol cartridge that limits its effective range due to bullet drop to about 200 yards. The AR-15 uses a HIGH-VELOCITY rifle cartridge with an effective range of 550 yards with less bullet drop. ........advantage AR-15 again! The high-velocity of the AR as compared to the M-1 causes a greater WOUND channel in soft human tissue. Again advantage AR-15 as a MILITARY man-killing weapon of war.
..........BOTH the AR-15 and the M1 carbine are banned by ALL the civilized nations of the world except the US for use by CIVILIANS.

Some points regarding the quoted post:

1. Bullet drop and range is not a factor as mass shootings such as the recent one in Texas are point-blank.

2. The AR-15 is not a "MILITARY man-killing weapon of war". The original model was produced by Colt and It was produced solely for the civilian market. Once Colt's patent expired the model was made available by several other companies: the one used in the Uvalde shooting, for example, was manufactured by Daniel Defense located in Georgia.

3. The .223 was never a round used by the U.S. Military. The .223 round is manufactured for sale to the civilian market, not the Military. The military round, 5.56 NATO, which is utilized by the American Military in the M4/M4A1 rifle. The rounds LOOK similar but in reality the 5.56 NATO has far better ballistic performance. Even if a civilian owner of an AR-15 obtained some 5.56 ammo, it won't work in a .223.

[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

Farmers have repeatedly tried to hire American's to do the field work, and they typically last a day or two. You are right. Who will work the fields. But, the good news is, if not no one does the prices of food will skyrocket, and well, all the people here will have more things to bitch about.

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by Number 10 GI

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

Thank you, I was aware there was such a program, I didn't know if it was still in effect. And yes, that program helps. If anything it should be expanded to offer those fleeing here for asylum a possible way to come in work and leave while waiting for their asylum hearing.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Number 10 GI

There is already a system in place that addresses this problem. Temporary work permits where workers come to the country and work during the harvest season and then go back home when finished.

Yeah that's great, except the process to get that permit is not simple, and they still have to get past the border - and past all the angry anti-immigrant people who demand that they go back to their own country. It's also a problem because many farmers aren't all that fussy about who picks the oranges off their trees. They hire a contractor, who hires a guy with a truck, who loads up a bunch of people at a designated stop and brings them in for the day. Then delivers them back to that designated stop at the end of the day. The farmer doesn't know, and doesn't want to know, and doesn't care if the worker is documented or not. They only care that the worker gets the quota required.