Would you eat at a restaurant where the workers are armed?

I know, right? And people are being led to hate the “evil rich” who’s net worth is $1.2 million because they own a house and 160 acres of farmland used to produce food for others. Ain’t class warfare grand?!

 

Well, I'd rather eat at a place where the waitresses are armed than places such as THIS ...

...or THIS:

Something tells me these guys would not have pulled these stunts at Shooters.

 

To be fair, that photo represents haute cuisine in Oz. I'm unsure if they even know what silverware is in New Zealand, though.

 

I have ate there and it is good eating. Very friendly people too. You won’t see BLM lighting fires in that business. They would be stopped pretty quick

 

Guns save lives.

 

We are off topic but for the fun of joining some, I believe Wyatt Earp was born and raised in Los Angeles and died there. His wife was from a wealthy SF family and she buried him in the family part of the cemetery.

 

Yes, I believe that people today are even MORE stupid (more correctly, "stupider") than they were in the latter part of the 19th century, but one has to qualify the statement. For example, do you mean educated people? Educated to what level? Many many people completed partial or full grammar school only. College was for students who wanted to be teachers, and of course, the children of wealthy people. Young women from a degree of affluence were often enrolled in "finishing schools," to learn not only how to behave properly (much better than most people today--for example how to eat food without looking like you just jumped down from a tree), but also to learn subjects roughly at the high school level. I am going to simply assume that we are referring to "the hoi poli" , the masses, the commoners as they are still referred to behind closed doors, the "baby makers" as the Romans called them, ("populares.")

So, now the rubber hits the road: The IQ of Americans, (not counting Mexicans and Canadians, whom we must remember are North Americans too), has consistently been dropping. It is now at the level of Poland's. I am appalled at how ignorant, poorly informed and arrogant about their ignorance are so many Americans. We have an enormous amount of learning possibilities, yet many people, being herd animals, (tribal), have been propagandized to shut out the better ones and to listen to the disreputable ones which reinforce what they have been brainwashed to believe. (That is a major reason I will not debate--because so many have become extremists.)

Bye the way, putting it very simply, evolution does not mean that everyone will increase in physical nor mental attainment, nor even growth in any characteristic, just that nature and Chance will determine that some will survive in evolving conditions depending upon their characteristics. For example, the horse has weak legs and ankles, yet has managed to survive in various terrain over the millenia, despite what evolutionary scientists might have predicted. Many insect species seem to be able to live indefinitely over the eons. But, there are many species which should have rationally survived, but did not. For example most of the fauna and flora which was obliterated when the meteor hit the Gulf of Mexico; or during the great ice age. Chance plays a big role in what happens to all life, including us. For example, what rational people would have predicted that Americans, in a country with so much wealth and opportunity for educational growth, would have behave so stupidly and demonstrate so little knowledge and comprehension? Pin worms? Alien probes into the brains? Too much sugar consumption? Disinclination to learn out of pride or shame? Breakdown of our mass education system? Nothing happens for one or a few reasons. Everything happens because of everything that has happened or failed to happen before.

You know, there are many Americans today who are angry and resentful toward more intelligent educated people. It is a phenomena of our times. When I was a young man, people respected intelligent and educated people, and listened to their views and advice. Now, many want to degrade and criticize them. This I think in a function of the dysfunctional socio-economic environment which the oligarchs who own everything and control our society have allowed to fester for generations, and which is now manifesting itself in deterioration of our civilization. One only has to look at art and design, both degraded in comparison to what was available, even to less affluent people, only a couple of generations ago. We are living in a period of profound transformation, in great part due to the acceleration of time via technology. The presence of armed wait staff in a restaurant is a psychological plea for this transformation to magically be stopped, (by threat of force if necessary, like the June D.C. treasonous attack on the Republic.) There is nothing which will stop evolution of society, because people will continue to procreate, and demographics will call the shots, depending of course on Chance. For example, populations continue to rise, unwisely but predictably, but a natural disaster or plague on an epic scale could delay the net increase.

 

So, would you eat in that or any restaurant where the waitressed were armed with pistols?

 

You go from guns are common where I "live" to now its "my line of work"? Two very different things. You have to euthanize an animal once a week? A very uncommon practice. You are the exception in any demographic including the upper 10% to 1%. Your perspective that everyone around you has a firearm within reach seems to be a niche view. I have rural family, I know plenty of people in urban and suburban areas and none have a gun within reach. A few do own guns but no one carries one and I think that is the overwhelming demographic in normal America.....but not poor urban areas.

I prefer to trust an old west historian's opinion over yours.

Your quote why you can't "trust" the Smithsonian because it dissed Haber's invention of fixing nitrogen as Faustian (yes I know what that means) is misguided to say the least (nonsense). The Faustian choice was in order to get nitrogen out of the atmosphere huge amounts hydrocarbons need to be burned and the CO2 put in the atmosphere. That is the Faustian bargain man has chosen. Get it ? Then you yammer on about other animals that can fix nitrogen which are beside the point when talking about the industrial production and application of fertilizer.

 

Where I live the vast majority are involved in the same work I am. One of my wife’s relatives worked for a pork producer in the area for a while. All he did for eight hours a day was euthanize hogs with a rifle. But no, I never said I euthanize an animal every week. I said I used a firearm for practical purposes once a week on average. When you have to start making things up, we know you have lost the argument.

On income demographics of course my local peers are not representative of all those with net worths above the tenth percentile. I’ve never made that claim either. I simply pointed out that the demographic you claimed used firearms the most is not the demographic that uses firearms the most. Poor urbanites do not use firearms for practical purposes at anywhere near the rate as the people where I live. Even the majority of 10 year old boys and the large number of same aged girls that shoot a deer once a year here proves you wrong. How many 10 year olds in poor urban areas of the Midwest use a firearm once a year for a practical purpose? If your claim was true the murder rate in those areas would be 50,000 per 100,000 population or some such astronomical statistic. Or everyone’s pet cats and dogs would be dead.

No, you prefer an opinion to the actual law I provided. His opinion is in conflict with the actual empirical evidence. You are welcome to your opinion, but what I provided was not opinion. It was fact.

No you clearly do not know what a Faustian bargain is. I provided the definition just so that you would understand. For this to be a Faustian bargain the huge decrease of starvation of humans and their subsequent population increase must be evil. It is not. Furthermore, it would have had to been recognized as evil at the time we began using the Haber-Bosch process to fix nitrogen.

Smithsonian is garbage for two reasons. One, it believes a decrease in starvation and an increased population is evil. Two, they print scientific and historical disinformation to peddle the tripe of point #1.

My pull quote again supplied below is simply false.

The bolded by me is blatantly false information.

Now, Smithsonian Magazine can fool the ignorant with this garbage. They count on ignorance of the foundational science they misrepresent and they get away with it. And they know if they can get away with telling a demonstrably false lie like the above they can sell you on anything because they know you aren’t interested in facts. As long as they dress the misinformation up a bit you will swallow it without ever questioning it.

Same goes for your appeal to authority of the historian Smithsonian used. His opinions are demonstrably based on falsehoods, yet you gobble up anything he says. Even when evidence is provided Smithsonian is lying you don’t care.

I look at disinformation from places like Smithsonian the same way I do as misinformation from something like the Trump administration. The more lies are told the less I trust them. At some point neither entity has any credibility and that point has come. But because you are emotionally attached to ideas Smithsonian peddles you forgive the lies. Trump supporters forgive his lies because they are emotionally attached to ideas he peddles.

In contrast, I’m only concerned with empirical evidence. I care more about facts than how information makes me feel. I don’t take the word of pathological liars and those who have a history of delivering misinformation. In our conversations you have presented incorrect statistics on multiple occasions. Now I have to verify everything you post because I can’t assume you are credible. It’s too much work to fact check everything Smithsonian puts out and when you know most of it is false it’s best just to go to other sources with more integrity.

 

Why not?? I'm armed more often than not.

 

The question was badly worded. I probably wouldn't go there because I don't live nearby and I'd rather go elsewhere for my hamburgers. But the guns have nothing to do with it.

 

Your statement is badly worded so I have to skip this message.

 

Would not be an issue for me if they are trained and the food's great.

 

I've been to a number of hunt camps over the years with up to a hundred people, each with far more powerful weapons than handguns, good food, beer, around campfires, Coleman lanterns, and no mishaps. So why not a restaurant with a few armed servers in a more domestic setting, as long as the food is good. Bring it.

 

Reports have claimed the food is great and the service is excellent.
It is not the cuisine of France but you get the idea. It is at first a CO mountain cafe. Owned by a Female and her husband and she is a member of the National Congress, Lauren Boebert.

 

I would like to go to the café if we happen to get to that part of Colorado.

 

Lauren Boebert has to do her thing. If her establishment is clean, safe and serves great food, as I said before, I'd have no issue being a patron. If I was to make a wild guess, she's found a marketing niche that involves the 2nd amendment. It distinguishes her restaurant from the others and is a form of branding. It's a good move.

 

Earp was considered a really good LEO because he was both willing and able to enforce the law without using his guns. He made most of whatever fortune he made himself as a pimp supplying girls to the nearly 5000 Army soldiers who were stationed in Tombstone to keep the town safe from raids by Geronimo

 

You just know how it is going to go down, when they also would serve alcohol.

 

Because adults must never get alcohol?

 

Some people get violent when drunk. Is that news to you?
Seems obvious what is going to happen in such places where they serve alcohol

 

Good book. My source on Tombstone and Wyatt Earp was Vine Deloria's "Custer Died For Your Sins"

 

So you refuse to drink alcohol beverages? Because some get violent?