Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
Post Reply

Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Equality: I want citizens to have the same access to guns as cops under the same general conditions for each (e.g. similar safety training, background checks, minimum age requirements, etc.)
8
47%
Cops Armed; Citizens Disarmed: I want cops and government agents to have access to more powerful guns than similarly trained and similarly qualified citizens.
7
41%
Cops Disarmed; Citizens Armed: I want trained citizens to have have access to more powerful guns than similarly trained cops.
2
12%
 
Total votes: 17

User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5765
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

ernestm wrote: January 19th, 2022, 3:03 pm Well frankly it seems to me the entire argument is misdirected. As to what people 'want,' there is what we 'can do' and what we 'should do.' What we can do is defined by rights in law, and is mistaken for what we should do. What we should do is [...]
I disagree. For reference, I am the OP (Original Poster).

This topic is explicitly and intentionally not about what "should" be done or "ought" to be done, whatever such things mean.

Thus, any mentions or arguments about 'shoulds' or 'oughts' are misdirected/off-topic.

The Original Post contains some very specific points and asks some clear understandable specific questions, none of which have anything to do with 'shoulds' or 'oughts'.

That is, of course, because I don't believe in 'shoulds' and 'oughts'. More on that can be found in my following topics:


- There is no "Is-Ought Problem" because there is no 'ought'.

- Do you agree there is no problem of evil?

- The Clarity of Amorality

- How Unassertiveness Leads to Aggression and the Illusion of 'Shoulds' and 'Oughts'

- Man Is Not Fit to Govern Man: My Philosophy of Non-Violence, Self-Government, Self-Discipline, and Spiritual Freedom
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
mrlefty0706
Premium Member
Posts: 55
Joined: November 3rd, 2022, 10:16 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by mrlefty0706 »

I believe that neither the police nor citizens should have powerful guns and weaponry. If citizens and criminals cannot obtain these powerful weapons then the police would have no need to have them either. There have been 35 mass shootings in the U.S. so far this calendar year. When does this senseless killing of innocent people end?

Citizens that claim they have a constitutional right to these guns are misinterpreting the Bill of Rights. People can protect their property and families with non-automatic pistols and rifles, hunters do not need automatic weapons since they see hunting as a sport and therefore the animals should have a fighting chance. If a hunter can shoot a deer with a non-automatic rifle, then so be it but don't waste the animal, either prepare it as food or give it to a shelter to feed the homeless. To kill large animals with no intention of using the animal for food then they should be stopped. Countries that have banned automatic weapons do not have the mass killings that we have in the U.S.
User avatar
Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
The admin formerly known as Scott
Posts: 5765
Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
Contact:

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes »

mrlefty0706 wrote: January 25th, 2023, 3:24 am I believe that neither the police nor citizens should have powerful guns and weaponry.
I think we both agree then with the 3-answer poll question, in that it sounds like we both chose option #1: "Equality: I want citizens to have the same access to guns as cops under the same general conditions for each (e.g. similar safety training, background checks, minimum age requirements, etc.)"

Thank you for your reply! :)
My entire political philosophy summed up in one tweet.

"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."

I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
Amy Luman
Premium Member
Posts: 18
Joined: November 3rd, 2022, 10:16 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Amy Luman »

Ideally, we wouldn’t need to have more and more powerful weapons. Since we do, weapons, along with safety training should be available to all. If one group had more access than the other, they would take advantage.
Damian Keyes
Premium Member
Posts: 12
Joined: December 15th, 2022, 1:41 pm

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Damian Keyes »

I believe responsible citizens and cops should be able to own guns. If in one instance that a citizen or cop has been proven to incorrectly used a gun, then they should no longer be able to get another one. It should be marked on their record and put into a database that every gun shop can pull up to see that this person cannot buy a weapon. If you take someone's life with a gun and it was not called for, then you should automatically give up your right to ever own a gun because that life cannot be brought back.
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Mounce574 »

Alias wrote: April 13th, 2021, 11:05 pm How does the equation become limited to police and citizenry? Where are the criminals? Significantly, the organized, mechanized, heavily armed drug-, gun-, organ- and migrant- runners.
How about setting up a cops vs criminals situation, where the law-abiding citizens are unarmed but respected and protected by the police?
My answer is a question: Order food and call the police at the same time and see which one reaches you first. The average response time from the time you call 911 to the arrival of the police is 26 minutes. The average time it takes to a home invasion from start to finish is 8 minutes.
Now imagine you can't get to the phone. You don't know where the invader is or if there is more than one person. If you have children, are they safe? You have no weapon- what do you do? Hope they don't intend to kill you and your family. That's a heavy gamble with life.
Imagine you have a weapon. You can at least defend your life and your children's lives. Many robbers, even armed tend to flee when the homeowner has a gun and is willing to use it. If they engage in shooting at you, you know your home and still reduce your chances of being cornered and executed.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Mounce574 »

mrlefty0706 wrote: January 25th, 2023, 3:24 am I believe that neither the police nor citizens should have powerful guns and weaponry. If citizens and criminals cannot obtain these powerful weapons then the police would have no need to have them either. There have been 35 mass shootings in the U.S. so far this calendar year. When does this senseless killing of innocent people end?

Citizens that claim they have a constitutional right to these guns are misinterpreting the Bill of Rights. People can protect their property and families with non-automatic pistols and rifles, hunters do not need automatic weapons since they see hunting as a sport and therefore the animals should have a fighting chance. If a hunter can shoot a deer with a non-automatic rifle, then so be it but don't waste the animal, either prepare it as food or give it to a shelter to feed the homeless. To kill large animals with no intention of using the animal for food then they should be stopped. Countries that have banned automatic weapons do not have the mass killings that we have in the U.S.
Automatic weapons without a special permit are illegal. The ban that is being proposed is towards semi-automatic long barrel rifles like the AR-15. The difference between the two is that you have to pull the trigger for each round discharged in a semiautomatic. An automatic only requires the holding the trigger to keep firing uninterrupted. The permit is extremely difficult to obtain- requiring training, testing, and a legitimate reason for possessing the weapon. It is also required to be registered in a government database.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by LuckyR »

Mounce574 wrote: February 6th, 2023, 7:57 pm
mrlefty0706 wrote: January 25th, 2023, 3:24 am I believe that neither the police nor citizens should have powerful guns and weaponry. If citizens and criminals cannot obtain these powerful weapons then the police would have no need to have them either. There have been 35 mass shootings in the U.S. so far this calendar year. When does this senseless killing of innocent people end?

Citizens that claim they have a constitutional right to these guns are misinterpreting the Bill of Rights. People can protect their property and families with non-automatic pistols and rifles, hunters do not need automatic weapons since they see hunting as a sport and therefore the animals should have a fighting chance. If a hunter can shoot a deer with a non-automatic rifle, then so be it but don't waste the animal, either prepare it as food or give it to a shelter to feed the homeless. To kill large animals with no intention of using the animal for food then they should be stopped. Countries that have banned automatic weapons do not have the mass killings that we have in the U.S.
Automatic weapons without a special permit are illegal. The ban that is being proposed is towards semi-automatic long barrel rifles like the AR-15. The difference between the two is that you have to pull the trigger for each round discharged in a semiautomatic. An automatic only requires the holding the trigger to keep firing uninterrupted. The permit is extremely difficult to obtain- requiring training, testing, and a legitimate reason for possessing the weapon. It is also required to be registered in a government database.
All true and thus irrelevant.

Legitimate debate doesn't revolve around fully automatic weapons, rather on high capacity magazines and/or registration of all weapons.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Mounce574 »

Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by LuckyR »

Mounce574 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:55 am Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
Excellent examples of what-about-ism.

I would love to hear about an actual case where a home invasion defense failed because of a lack of magazine capacity, otherwise I'll consider my comment unopposed.

Still waiting for a reason against universal registration. And "it won't solve every problem" is not a reason.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Sculptor1 »

Mounce574 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:55 am Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
Arguably the constitution allowed citizens to carry guns, which took 30 seconds to re-load in the hands of an expert, and in a time when there was a real threat from "native" peoples who were suffering a systematic genocide from the whites.

Oddly this seems to mean that any clown with enough cash can buy any weapon he wants for any reason he sees fit.

Ask what are the reasonable means necessary for a citizen to protect himself, and does that include an automatic weapon? Maybe a grenade launcher, or a tank?
You seem to suggest that it is just too difficult to define what is an appropriate weapon so why even try.

And it is rather obvious that the US has descended into a deeper and deeper spiral of fear and escalation.
User avatar
Count Lucanor
Posts: 2318
Joined: May 6th, 2017, 5:08 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Umberto Eco
Location: Panama
Contact:

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Count Lucanor »

Scott wrote: April 13th, 2021, 10:37 pm

With that said, I feel that whatever the gun laws happen to be at any given local, state, national, federal, or global level, I strongly prefer that those gun laws are applied equally to citizens as well as police and other government agents in that jurisdiction.

I could not vote, because I prefer there are no guns for anyone, and that this becomes the gun laws.
The wise are instructed by reason, average minds by experience, the stupid by necessity and the brute by instinct.
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Mounce574 »

Sculptor1 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:20 pm
Mounce574 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:55 am Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
Arguably the constitution allowed citizens to carry guns, which took 30 seconds to re-load in the hands of an expert, and in a time when there was a real threat from "native" peoples who were suffering a systematic genocide from the whites.

Oddly this seems to mean that any clown with enough cash can buy any weapon he wants for any reason he sees fit.

Ask what are the reasonable means necessary for a citizen to protect himself, and does that include an automatic weapon? Maybe a grenade launcher, or a tank?
You seem to suggest that it is just too difficult to define what is an appropriate weapon so why even try.

And it is rather obvious that the US has descended into a deeper and deeper spiral of fear and escalation.

I don't think automatic weapons should be available to everyone.
Reasonable mean: Castle doctrine/stand your ground laws (these vary by state) allows for a person to use deadly force if in reasonable fear for bodily harm of self or a third party (children, spouse, etc). If you miss hitting the person but they still flee, you cannot pursue them as they are not longer a threat. That is a job for law enforcement to do.
Most of the gun homicides that occur in the United States are with hand guns that hold a regular capacity magazine (10 to 12 rounds).
Personally, I have several weapons. For concealed carry I use a Ruger SRC that holds a 12 rounds clip. My 7 mag rifle is a semi-automatic with a 5 round clip. I also have an AR-15 which fires the same size ammunition as the the 7 mag, has a 10 round clip, and the kickback is not as hard. I have a black powder rifle but it is a family heirloom that will never be used and is in a locked display case. Then I have a pump style shot gun capable of slug or bird shot.
Of the above weapons I just listed, which one would a home intruder fear the most? Surprisingly, it would be the shot-gun which is less capable of killing a person at a distance, but the bird shot spreads and is likely to do more than leave a mark. I am more accurate with the AR-15 and 7-Mag. My concealed carry is a .40 caliber and holds hydra-shocks. It's purpose is to debilitate a person who threatens me within a 20 foot range.

I reiterate that by registering a weapon, it does nothing but produce a paper. What is the purpose? To obtain a weapon, there are already laws where a background check is run, you have to provide identification- which is copied, and provide a way to prove your address. That is just to purchase one. What else should be added to this?
Grenade launchers on the M16 style weapons were highly ineffective (I was in the Army and know this from experience). A tank requires licensing.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Sculptor1 »

Mounce574 wrote: February 12th, 2023, 3:41 am
Sculptor1 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:20 pm
Mounce574 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:55 am Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
Arguably the constitution allowed citizens to carry guns, which took 30 seconds to re-load in the hands of an expert, and in a time when there was a real threat from "native" peoples who were suffering a systematic genocide from the whites.

Oddly this seems to mean that any clown with enough cash can buy any weapon he wants for any reason he sees fit.

Ask what are the reasonable means necessary for a citizen to protect himself, and does that include an automatic weapon? Maybe a grenade launcher, or a tank?
You seem to suggest that it is just too difficult to define what is an appropriate weapon so why even try.

And it is rather obvious that the US has descended into a deeper and deeper spiral of fear and escalation.

I don't think automatic weapons should be available to everyone.
Reasonable mean: Castle doctrine/stand your ground laws (these vary by state) allows for a person to use deadly force if in reasonable fear for bodily harm of self or a third party (children, spouse, etc). If you miss hitting the person but they still flee, you cannot pursue them as they are not longer a threat. That is a job for law enforcement to do.
Most of the gun homicides that occur in the United States are with hand guns that hold a regular capacity magazine (10 to 12 rounds).
Personally, I have several weapons. For concealed carry I use a Ruger SRC that holds a 12 rounds clip. My 7 mag rifle is a semi-automatic with a 5 round clip. I also have an AR-15 which fires the same size ammunition as the the 7 mag, has a 10 round clip, and the kickback is not as hard. I have a black powder rifle but it is a family heirloom that will never be used and is in a locked display case. Then I have a pump style shot gun capable of slug or bird shot.
And does the fact that you carry guns make you feel big?
Do you feel like a real man?
[/quote]
Of the above weapons I just listed, which one would a home intruder fear the most?
[/quote]

Do you stay inside during a storm?
And do you wear rubber gloves when unplugging an appliance?
What is the chance that your home is going to be invaded?
Is it more or less than being struck by lightning?
User avatar
Mounce574
Premium Member
Posts: 156
Joined: October 8th, 2021, 2:24 am
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Who do you want to have access to significantly more powerful guns and weaponry: cops or citizens?

Post by Mounce574 »

Sculptor1 wrote: February 12th, 2023, 5:55 am
Mounce574 wrote: February 12th, 2023, 3:41 am
Sculptor1 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:20 pm
Mounce574 wrote: February 10th, 2023, 4:55 am Define high capacity? And how would registering a weapon do anything? It's a piece of paper that doesn't change how a person will handle the weapon when they leave the store. Also, in regards to a high capacity magazine, what if the person carries multiple 10 round magazines?
From what I understand, if you shoot someone in self-defense, say a home invasion, you want to have as many shots available to you to stop the deadly threat.
Arguably the constitution allowed citizens to carry guns, which took 30 seconds to re-load in the hands of an expert, and in a time when there was a real threat from "native" peoples who were suffering a systematic genocide from the whites.

Oddly this seems to mean that any clown with enough cash can buy any weapon he wants for any reason he sees fit.

Ask what are the reasonable means necessary for a citizen to protect himself, and does that include an automatic weapon? Maybe a grenade launcher, or a tank?
You seem to suggest that it is just too difficult to define what is an appropriate weapon so why even try.

And it is rather obvious that the US has descended into a deeper and deeper spiral of fear and escalation.


I don't think automatic weapons should be available to everyone.
Reasonable mean: Castle doctrine/stand your ground laws (these vary by state) allows for a person to use deadly force if in reasonable fear for bodily harm of self or a third party (children, spouse, etc). If you miss hitting the person but they still flee, you cannot pursue them as they are not longer a threat. That is a job for law enforcement to do.
Most of the gun homicides that occur in the United States are with hand guns that hold a regular capacity magazine (10 to 12 rounds).
Personally, I have several weapons. For concealed carry I use a Ruger SRC that holds a 12 rounds clip. My 7 mag rifle is a semi-automatic with a 5 round clip. I also have an AR-15 which fires the same size ammunition as the the 7 mag, has a 10 round clip, and the kickback is not as hard. I have a black powder rifle but it is a family heirloom that will never be used and is in a locked display case. Then I have a pump style shot gun capable of slug or bird shot.
And does the fact that you carry guns make you feel big?
Do you feel like a real man?
Of the above weapons I just listed, which one would a home intruder fear the most?
[/quote]

Do you stay inside during a storm?
And do you wear rubber gloves when unplugging an appliance?
What is the chance that your home is going to be invaded?
Is it more or less than being struck by lightning?
[/quote]

I am a 5'3 115lb woman. So, no I don't feel like a man because I have never been nor will I ever be a man. I carry one because it makes me secure and capable of eliminating a threat if necessary. I am a veteran and very certain I know how to properly use my weapons appropriately. I do stay inside during storms. Your comparison of a gun is similar to whether a person wears the proper PPE when doing a job. If I don't and something happens to me, it was because I made the choice not to. However, if I was to be mugged on the street and didn't have a gun, is that the same? I don't think so.
"Facts don't care about your feelings." Ben Shapiro
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." NF from Motto
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Politics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021