STOP EXTREME GUN CONTROL BILL H.R. 127

[Nithavela]

If you don't punish people for doing something, more think they can get away with it. So at the end of the day you end up with a LOT more people doing it and, therefore, STILL more people being incarcerated. People always think that they will be the one that gets away with it. When NOBODY does, they are less likely to believe that.

To apply hypothetical numbers. If 2 poeple out of the ten that actually commit a crime get incarcerated, it may incentivize 500 more to do it, with 40 of them getting arrested and incarcerated. So being soft causes MORE people to be incarcerated because you've literally incentivized MORE crime.

Five Things About Deterrence

In short, you're half right. Higher enforcement of the law deters crime. But harsher punishment doesn't.

 

[Paulos23]

An armed society is a polite society.

The problem with this trope is it hides the amount of violence it encourages underneath the obvious meaning.

People own weapons for two reasons: Preservation of self and Domination of others.

People of the first type don't need the trope since they see the weapon as a tool. To hunt or to protect, not to brandish it around. This doesn't need to apply to them for they are already 'polite'.

The problem comes with the second type, for they will find the smallest insult to use their weapon to their advantage. One could certainly argue that two people (of the second type) who are equally armed and of equal status will be more polite to each other out of a justified fear, though my general sense of that kind of 'politeness' merely means that they are more opaque and indirect in their insults. The problem, of course, is that the treatment of people they view as inferiors can be deeply brutal. One might think of the age of Andrew Jackson, where 'polite' duels over insults were common enough in upper-crust society, but where insults delivered by slaves or native Americans might easily result in a peremptory gunshot to the head. Generally speaking, any society that allows the possibility of lethal force over matters of damaged pride opens a floodgate on violence, since pride is notoriously brittle.

 

[Pommer]

I find it strange that Christians are continuously being lectured and belittled by liberals and even atheists on this Christian forum. I don’t seem to run into that on other Christian forum sites.

Yes, you have to suffer (old meaning) with us here; later you get Paradise. You’ll be okay.

 

[Nithavela]

Some are. Some are not. It's up to them. I know that if I participate less in "rapist like" behavior, I'm less likely to get shot by a woman.

An armed society is a polite society.

Your views of the world are in stark contrast with reality.

 

[Direct Driver]

Seat belts help in more accidents than guns do in assault situations. In some cases, the gun makes it worse.

Don't try to stretch the analogy beyond the point it is making. Besides, though rare, there actually are cases where people died because they could not get out of a burning or sinking car. i.e. it DOES happen.

But at its core, this whole "guns to defend ourselves" thing comes down to two basic principles:

1. When seconds count, police are only minutes away.
2. Give me liberty, or give me death.

Fact is, it is really only about ONE thing: Control over your own life. That is also called liberty. In the US it is at a premium. Fact is, you could actually be safer walking down the street in Berlin, unarmed, than in Detroit, carrying a gun. But in both cases, if someone DOES attack you and kill you, at least you don't feel utterly helpless in Detroit. i.e. there is more of a chance you "went down fighting", not like a Gazelle with its neck in a lion's mouth. And that really is the bottom line for many.

Of course even that really misses the point. We have gun ownership in the US to protect us from our government. "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."

I here there is a fair amount of protesting going on in Europe right now. What's that all about?

 

[tall73]

No, just pointing out that the "Gun laws don't work--just look at Chicago" argument is ridiculous.

It is not ridiculous for a few reasons.

a. If Chicago has high rates because of surrounding areas with more lax gun laws, then we would expect the same high rates in the surrounding areas as well. Chicago crime is related to Chicago dynamics. And as with most large metro areas, not even all sections of Chicago experience high rates of homicide.

As with most cities, there are particular neighborhoods and blocks where most of the violence happens.

What’s the Homicide Capital of America? Murder Rates in U.S. Cities, Ranked.

In 2016, five police districts overseeing only 8 percent of Chicago’s population recorded around 32 percent of its murders. Two Chicago neighborhoods, Burnside and Fuller Park, counted a rate of more than 100 killings per 100,000 people. People living in them were nine times more likely to be shot in their neighborhood than in the city’s safest quarters.

The problem of murder inequality is not unique to Chicago. Last year in St. Louis, most killings were concentrated in neighborhoods like Greater Ville and the adjacent JeffVanderLou, which sit just a few miles from the city’s downtown, and each recorded a murder rate of 162. The same disparities exist for gun violence overall. Forty percent of non-fatal shooting incidents in 2017 occurred in only 10 of St. Louis’s 88 neighborhoods, according to police data.

b. Such importation from other regions is almost impossible to prevent. The same issue works on a larger scale. There are hundreds of millions of guns in the USA. Even if you outlawed them all today it would be almost impossible to remove them all from criminal hands. And then you have even more throughout Central and South America for large criminal networks to obtain.

These are far higher numbers than were present in the UK, Australia, countries of Europe, etc. because they did not have as large of a gun culture to begin with. Yet even where they did not have as many weapons initially weapons are still being acquired:

Gun Use Surges in Europe, Where Firearms Are Rare

Some quotes;

Strict registration requirements don’t account for—and may exacerbate—a surge in illegal weapons across the continent, experts say.

Europe’s unregistered weapons outnumbered legal ones in 2017, 44.5 million to 34.2 million, according to the Small Arms Survey. Many illegal weapons come from one-time war zones, such as countries of the former Yugoslavia, and others are purchased online, including from vendors in the U.S.

“Europe represents the largest market for arms trade on the dark web, generating revenues that are around five times higher than the U.S.,” concluded a recent Rand Corp. report.

Belgian applications for shooting licenses almost doubled after the terrorist attacks by an Islamic State cell in Paris in Nov. 2015 and four months later in Brussels, offering “a clear indication of why people acquired them,” said Mr. Duquet.

A Belgian would-be gun owner must pass almost a year of shooting and theory tests, plus psychological checks, said Mr. De Thomaz.

The gun-range owner questions the impact of that policy. “With each terror attack, the legislation gets stricter,” he said. “For the black market, everything stays the same.”


European crime organizations and terrorists have been resilient in getting weapons when needed, despite broad regional controls. They shift them in from neighboring areas.

How Europe's Terrorists Get Their Guns

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said in September that police have seized nearly 6,000 weapons from criminal groups each year since 2013, 1,200 of which were military assault weapons. And in the three weeks following the Nov. 13 attacks, Cazeneuve said French police seized 334 weapons, 34 of them military-grade.

Once European terrorists realized the strategic advantages of guns, they quickly discovered they were surprisingly easy to find. Just beyond the countries of Western Europe, with their restrictive gun laws, lie the Balkan states, awash with illegal weapons left over from the conflicts that raged there in the 1990s. According to the Switzerland-based Small Arms Survey, there are anywhere between three million and six million firearms in circulation in the Western Balkans—and possibly more.

Officials say the increase in foreign fighters returning from conflicts abroad—some 5,000 Europeans have joined ISIS and other jihadist groups in Iraq and Syria—is especially worrying considering the vast pool of weapons available in nearby Eastern Europe and North Africa, the detritus of past and current wars. “It’s a relatively new phenomenon, but there’s a growing number of people who have been trained to use automatic weapons, assault rifles and grenade launchers,” says Ivan Zverzhanovski, who heads the U.N. Development Program’s project in Belgrade to control small arms in southeastern and eastern Europe. “That will cross-fertilize in a way with the Balkans.”

Christophe Crépin, spokesman for France’s national police union, told TIME a few days after the Nov. 13 attacks. “There are links between organized crime and terrorists, and a route that goes from the Balkans.”

Though not authorized to speak on the record, three officials and two gun experts with information on the Charlie Hebdo investigation confirmed to TIME that the weapons used in the attacks came from the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Some were deactivated weapons from Slovakia, converted to be live-firing.

This shows the difficulty in controlling weapons, even in an area where most of the nations have more strict gun control. If there are stores of weapons there is incentive for criminal and terrorist elements to find and utilize them.

As long as there are regions that still produce such weapons they will not be eliminated from organized criminal or terrorist groups.

 

[Nithavela]

I here there is a fair amount of protesting going on in Europe right now. What's that all about?

You'll have to be a bit more specific than "in europe" if you want an answer to that question.

 

[Direct Driver]

Your views of the world are in stark contrast with reality.

Not so far.

BTW, I've not had television in my home since the late 20th century. It may be the reason I disagree with quite a few people on a LOT of things. My news sources are many, international in nature, and from many sides of each issue. It is only then I feel comfortable making an informed decision and forming an opinion. For those that get it from Fox, CNN, the NYT, BBC, etc., well, as Ronald Reagan said, "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”

When I'm at friends' homes and am exposed to the modern news media, I'm shocked at how much nonsense is reported as factual, and repeated over and over and over.

 

[Nithavela]

Not so far.

BTW, I've not had television in my home since the late 20th century. It may be the reason I disagree with quite a few people on a LOT of things. My news sources are many, international in nature, and from many sides of each issue. It is only then I feel comfortable making an informed decision and forming an opinion. For those that get it from Fox, CNN, the NYT, BBC, etc., well, as Ronald Reagan said, "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”

When I'm at friends' homes and am exposed to the modern news media, I'm shocked at how much nonsense is reported as factual, and repeated over and over and over.

And yet your points are easily refuted with readily available statistics from primary sources.

 

[tall73]

If so many "get away with it’, why are our incarceration rates so high? Help me understand why that’s not a circular argument.

You’re promoting a "tough on crime" stance that has been tried, and failed. It doesn’t line up with what we know about why people commit crime. It also involves a classist interpretation of what we choose to criminalize and which crimes are deemed more serious.

Yes, our incarceration rates are quite high. I would rather see a legalization of drugs to take some of the profit out of turf wars and lower incarceration for non-violent criminals.

We could borrow a Biblical concept and require more restitution for property crimes, which would allow the person to still function in society, and pay back a debt to the person harmed.

Breaking up homes through high incarceration rates likely results in high crime and other poor outcomes over time as well.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...5/father-absence-father-deficit-father-hunger

Fatherless children have the following correlations:

• Diminished self-concept and compromised physical and emotional security: Children consistently report feeling abandoned when their fathers are not involved in their lives, struggling with their emotions and episodic bouts of self-loathing.
• Behavioral problems: Fatherless children have more difficulties with social adjustment, and are more likely to report problems with friendships, and manifest behavior problems; many develop a swaggering, intimidating persona in an attempt to disguise their underlying fears, resentments, anxieties and unhappiness.
• Truancy and poor academic performance: 71 per cent of high school dropouts are fatherless; fatherless children have more trouble academically, scoring poorly on tests of reading, mathematics, and thinking skills; children from father-absent homes are more likely to play truant from school, more likely to be excluded from school, more likely to leave school at age 16, and less likely to attain academic and professional qualifications in adulthood.
• Delinquency and youth crime, including violent crime: 85 per cent of youth in prison have an absent father; fatherless children are more likely to offend and go to jail as adults.
• Promiscuity and teen pregnancy: Fatherless children are more likely to experience problems with sexual health, including a greater likelihood of having intercourse before the age of 16, foregoing contraception during first intercourse, becoming teenage parents, and contracting sexually transmitted infection; many girls manifest an object hunger for males, and in experiencing the emotional loss of their fathers egocentrically as a rejection of them, may become susceptible to exploitation by adult men.
• Drug and alcohol abuse: Fatherless children are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol, and abuse drugs in childhood and adulthood.
• Homelessness: 90 per cent of runaway children have an absent father.
• Exploitation and abuse: Fatherless children are at greater risk of suffering physical, emotional, and sexual abuse, being five times more likely to have experienced physical abuse and emotional maltreatment, with a one hundred times higher risk of fatal abuse; a recent study reported that preschoolers not living with both of their biological parents are 40 times more likely to be sexually abused.
• Physical health problems: Fatherless children report significantly more psychosomatic health symptoms and illness such as acute and chronic pain, asthma, headaches, and stomach aches.
• Mental health disorders: Father-absent children are consistently overrepresented on a wide range of mental health problems, particularly anxiety, depression, and suicide.
• Life chances: As adults, fatherless children are more likely to experience unemployment, have low incomes, remain on social assistance, and experience homelessness.
• Future relationships: Father-absent children tend to enter partnerships earlier, are more likely to divorce or dissolve their cohabiting unions, and are more likely to have children outside marriage or outside any partnership.
• Mortality: Fatherless children are more likely to die as children, and live an average of four years less over the life span.

 

[tall73]

Yet things like that rarely happen. What is less rare is that a suicidal member of your family uses the gun to kill themself.

And women get raped primarily by men they know, whom they have already invited in, are visiting, or live with. A gun in my purse on the other side of the room, or in a safe won’t help prevent rape.

It would not prevent most rapes. It could prevent the type of a known threatening ex-partner or person who is not deterred by a restraining order.

 

[Direct Driver]

Five Things About Deterrence

In short, you're half right. Higher enforcement of the law deters crime. But harsher punishment doesn't.

My focus really is not on the harshness of the punishment, but the enforcement. If the law is not enforced "very much", you'll actually end up with MORE people incarcerated.

It is similar to how, if you raise taxes too much, you'll actually get LESS tax revenue. i.e. you get the exact opposite of what you expected. But with "soft on crime" enforcement it's worse, because you get both more crime AND more people being incarcerated.

 

[Nithavela]

It is similar to how, if you raise taxes too much, you'll actually get LESS tax revenue. i.e. you get the exact opposite of what you expected..

How would that work?

 

[Direct Driver]

Yes, our incarceration rates are quite high. I would rather see a legalization of drugs to take some of the profit out of turf wars and lower incarceration for non-violent criminals.

We could borrow a Biblical concept and require more restitution for property crimes, which would allow the person to still function in society, and pay back a debt to the person harmed.

Breaking up homes through high incarceration rates likely results in high crime and other poor outcomes over time as well.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...5/father-absence-father-deficit-father-hunger

Fatherless children have the following correlations:

• Diminished self-concept and compromised physical and emotional security: Children consistently report feeling abandoned when their fathers are not involved in their lives, struggling with their emotions and episodic bouts of self-loathing.
• Behavioral problems: Fatherless children have more difficulties with social adjustment, and are more likely to report problems with friendships, and manifest behavior problems; many develop a swaggering, intimidating persona in an attempt to disguise their underlying fears, resentments, anxieties and unhappiness.
• Truancy and poor academic performance: 71 per cent of high school dropouts are fatherless; fatherless children have more trouble academically, scoring poorly on tests of reading, mathematics, and thinking skills; children from father-absent homes are more likely to play truant from school, more likely to be excluded from school, more likely to leave school at age 16, and less likely to attain academic and professional qualifications in adulthood.
• Delinquency and youth crime, including violent crime: 85 per cent of youth in prison have an absent father; fatherless children are more likely to offend and go to jail as adults.
• Promiscuity and teen pregnancy: Fatherless children are more likely to experience problems with sexual health, including a greater likelihood of having intercourse before the age of 16, foregoing contraception during first intercourse, becoming teenage parents, and contracting sexually transmitted infection; many girls manifest an object hunger for males, and in experiencing the emotional loss of their fathers egocentrically as a rejection of them, may become susceptible to exploitation by adult men.
• Drug and alcohol abuse: Fatherless children are more likely to smoke, drink alcohol, and abuse drugs in childhood and adulthood.
• Homelessness: 90 per cent of runaway children have an absent father.
• Exploitation and abuse: Fatherless children are at greater risk of suffering physical, emotional, and sexual abuse, being five times more likely to have experienced physical abuse and emotional maltreatment, with a one hundred times higher risk of fatal abuse; a recent study reported that preschoolers not living with both of their biological parents are 40 times more likely to be sexually abused.
• Physical health problems: Fatherless children report significantly more psychosomatic health symptoms and illness such as acute and chronic pain, asthma, headaches, and stomach aches.
• Mental health disorders: Father-absent children are consistently overrepresented on a wide range of mental health problems, particularly anxiety, depression, and suicide.
• Life chances: As adults, fatherless children are more likely to experience unemployment, have low incomes, remain on social assistance, and experience homelessness.
• Future relationships: Father-absent children tend to enter partnerships earlier, are more likely to divorce or dissolve their cohabiting unions, and are more likely to have children outside marriage or outside any partnership.
• Mortality: Fatherless children are more likely to die as children, and live an average of four years less over the life span.

Walter williams really gets into a lot of that and it's actually pretty well laid out in part of this video biography. The core issue is fatherlessness, and since the Great Society it's gone through the roof, especially for the black family.

 

[tall73]

I get why people feel empowered with guns, and some of the best gun owners I know of are the ones that have gone through CC training, mostly because the ones I know have training to avoid drawing that gun, to make it the last option. They know that guns are not the only option and that it should be the last option.

The way you guys talk it is like you will pick up a gun at the first sign of trouble. That is not always possible or desirable.

Yes, those folks are the under-reported reality. Those who go through the proper steps, and have proper training are often quite safe people in general.

Here is an interesting read comparing factors which make concealed carry permit holders safer in some key crime statistics than police officers.

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4831&context=lcp

 

[Speedwell]

It is not ridiculous for a few reasons.

a. If Chicago has high rates because of surrounding areas with more lax gun laws, then we would expect the same high rates in the surrounding areas as well. Chicago crime is related to Chicago dynamics. And as with most large metro areas, not even all sections of Chicago experience high rates of homicide.

As with most cities, there are particular neighborhoods and blocks where most of the violence happens.

What’s the Homicide Capital of America? Murder Rates in U.S. Cities, Ranked.

In 2016, five police districts overseeing only 8 percent of Chicago’s population recorded around 32 percent of its murders. Two Chicago neighborhoods, Burnside and Fuller Park, counted a rate of more than 100 killings per 100,000 people. People living in them were nine times more likely to be shot in their neighborhood than in the city’s safest quarters.

The problem of murder inequality is not unique to Chicago. Last year in St. Louis, most killings were concentrated in neighborhoods like Greater Ville and the adjacent JeffVanderLou, which sit just a few miles from the city’s downtown, and each recorded a murder rate of 162. The same disparities exist for gun violence overall. Forty percent of non-fatal shooting incidents in 2017 occurred in only 10 of St. Louis’s 88 neighborhoods, according to police data.

b. Such importation from other regions is almost impossible to prevent. The same issue works on a larger scale. There are hundreds of millions of guns in the USA. Even if you outlawed them all today it would be almost impossible to remove them all from criminal hands. And then you have even more throughout Central and South America for large criminal networks to obtain.

What I would expect of Chicago and other cities with high rates of gun crimes that the shootings would track with crime generally; I would not expect a high rate of gun crimes in generally lower crime suburbs, even if gun laws were less strict there.

These are far higher numbers than were present in the UK, Australia, countries of Europe, etc. because they did not have as large of a gun culture to begin with. Yet even where they did not have as many weapons initially weapons are still being acquired:

Gun Use Surges in Europe, Where Firearms Are Rare

Some quotes;

Strict registration requirements don’t account for—and may exacerbate—a surge in illegal weapons across the continent, experts say.

Europe’s unregistered weapons outnumbered legal ones in 2017, 44.5 million to 34.2 million, according to the Small Arms Survey. Many illegal weapons come from one-time war zones, such as countries of the former Yugoslavia, and others are purchased online, including from vendors in the U.S.

“Europe represents the largest market for arms trade on the dark web, generating revenues that are around five times higher than the U.S.,” concluded a recent Rand Corp. report.

Belgian applications for shooting licenses almost doubled after the terrorist attacks by an Islamic State cell in Paris in Nov. 2015 and four months later in Brussels, offering “a clear indication of why people acquired them,” said Mr. Duquet.

A Belgian would-be gun owner must pass almost a year of shooting and theory tests, plus psychological checks, said Mr. De Thomaz.

The gun-range owner questions the impact of that policy. “With each terror attack, the legislation gets stricter,” he said. “For the black market, everything stays the same.”


European crime organizations and terrorists have been resilient in getting weapons when needed, despite broad regional controls. They shift them in from neighboring areas.

How Europe's Terrorists Get Their Guns

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said in September that police have seized nearly 6,000 weapons from criminal groups each year since 2013, 1,200 of which were military assault weapons. And in the three weeks following the Nov. 13 attacks, Cazeneuve said French police seized 334 weapons, 34 of them military-grade.

Once European terrorists realized the strategic advantages of guns, they quickly discovered they were surprisingly easy to find. Just beyond the countries of Western Europe, with their restrictive gun laws, lie the Balkan states, awash with illegal weapons left over from the conflicts that raged there in the 1990s. According to the Switzerland-based Small Arms Survey, there are anywhere between three million and six million firearms in circulation in the Western Balkans—and possibly more.

Officials say the increase in foreign fighters returning from conflicts abroad—some 5,000 Europeans have joined ISIS and other jihadist groups in Iraq and Syria—is especially worrying considering the vast pool of weapons available in nearby Eastern Europe and North Africa, the detritus of past and current wars. “It’s a relatively new phenomenon, but there’s a growing number of people who have been trained to use automatic weapons, assault rifles and grenade launchers,” says Ivan Zverzhanovski, who heads the U.N. Development Program’s project in Belgrade to control small arms in southeastern and eastern Europe. “That will cross-fertilize in a way with the Balkans.”

Christophe Crépin, spokesman for France’s national police union, told TIME a few days after the Nov. 13 attacks. “There are links between organized crime and terrorists, and a route that goes from the Balkans.”

Though not authorized to speak on the record, three officials and two gun experts with information on the Charlie Hebdo investigation confirmed to TIME that the weapons used in the attacks came from the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Some were deactivated weapons from Slovakia, converted to be live-firing.

This shows the difficulty in controlling weapons, even in an area where most of the nations have more strict gun control. If there are stores of weapons there is incentive for criminal and terrorist elements to find and utilize them.

As long as there are regions that still produce such weapons they will not be eliminated from organized criminal or terrorist groups.

I don't care what happens in Europe; they have their own problems. There is no "magic bullet" anywhere. Controlling gun crime is going to be a continuing problem requiring court and police reform as well as legislation but even that will not somehow magically solve the problem for once and all. The best we can hope for is to reduce the numbers of illegal guns getting into criminal hands.

 

[tall73]

How would that work?

I think the usual argument is that if you raise the tax rates so high that those with resources don't want to invest them to get more profit then there are fewer jobs, and productivity goes down overall.

Also, some move to lower taxed areas or countries. For instance, some leave California due to high tax rates, resulting in the loss of that person's taxes.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That's a wonderfull story, but reality is different.

Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault

What you think your educating me? You think that I think that every house that has a gun won’t become a victim? What that study fails to provide is the difference between those who own firearms and those who don’t. Yeah I could likely get shot & killed in a gun fight. Who doesn’t know that? But I can 100% guarantee you that if you don’t have a gun your 100% at the mercy of the guy who’s breaking into your house. So if his intention is to harm you, your 100% screwed. Because I have a gun I have a better chance at taking him out than he does of taking me out because I know my house, he doesn’t and I’m waiting to ambush him. I’ve already thought this out a long time ago. Anyone who breaks in my house has to break in downstairs unless they bring a ladder most thieves don’t carry around a ladder with them and even if they did they can’t climb into a broken window very quickly from a ladder. So they’ll have to enter from downstairs. I have double dead bolts on my doors so they’re going to have to break a window to get in. Then they have to come upstairs to get to me and my family. By the time they get in the window I’ve already got my gun because it’s at the head of my mattress in a holster ready to grab at a moments notice. My stairs creek as someone is walking up them and I keep the light on above the stairs at night for the sole purpose of being able to turn it off and blinding anyone coming up the stairs. My aquarium in the living room downstairs emits enough ambient light that I can see downstairs but the top of the stairs is completely dark. So when I turn off that light the guy is standing on the stairs with absolutely nothing for cover and blinded. I can see him but he won’t see anything upstairs for at least 10-20 seconds which is more than enough time to empty a clip into someone if I wanted to. He’ll see the muzzle flash no way around that but I’ve got the drop on him for sure. I’m betting the study they did take this kind of preparation into consideration.

 

[Nithavela]

What you think your educating me?

No, just the lurkers who read the thread and might need some statistics to counter-balance your story.

 

[Nithavela]

I think the usual argument is that if you raise the tax rates so high that those with resources don't want to invest them to get more profit then there are fewer jobs, and productivity goes down overall.

Also, some move to lower taxed areas or countries. For instance, some leave California due to high tax rates, resulting in the loss of that person's taxes.

I'd like the answer of the person I quoted, if you don't mind.