Voluntary Mutual Defense lost a member, as the counter was at 21, now it is back to 20. To me it is just a number. If there were active members who actively discuss facts that matter relevant to the group topic, then there would be data which could support any conclusions made by anyone who wants to know why someone would join or leave any Group of people anywhere, anytime.

Having almost no feedback leaves me ungoverned by external powers as to what I post in this Group Forum.

In context the battle between groups of people held together voluntarily and groups of people attacking or enslaving (consuming) innocent people (liberty versus crime) it occurs to me to point out what I have learned in my study of the law (voluntary mutual defense).

People facing threats, assault, attack, and enslavement have defended themselves effectively when they banded together in numbers of groups. Numbers of groups then become significant.

12 in a group (deliberating, discussing, exchanging viewpoints, even arguing) is a significant number, such as the number of people that constitute a common law trial jury. Trial jurors, once constituted, command lawful powers, such as the power to judge the facts, judge the law, determine guilt, refuse to determine guilt (determining thereby not-guilty - which is not necessarily a determination of innocence), determine restitution, redemption, remedy, or even punishment, such as a fine for example. Those 12 also have the power to hire an executive officer if the jury demands a witness testimony requiring the issue of subpoena or arrest in order to attempt to gain that information that the jury determines to be required for the fulfillment of their duties.

24 is a group (deliberating, discussing, exchanging viewpoints, even arguing) is also a significant number, such as the number of people that constitute a common law grand jury. Grand Jurors, once constituted, command lawful powers necessary in the work required to discover, investigate, and then determine the need to assemble a trial jury when is it clear to those members of that jury that victims exist and therefore criminals exist, and during investigation on behalf of the victims, a suspect must state his case (defend his actions) before the trial jurors, in a trial by the country, which is trial by jury, which is the law of the land, the common law.

100 is an often repeated number in the history of the common law, which dates back before Magna Carta in England (1215).

Example of more recent use of the number 100:

"In the Anglo-Saxon state there was a hierarchy of courts in each shire and borough. Local courts were known as 'hundred' courts. ... Local cases would be heard in the hundred courts and it was the obligation of the hundred to organise the pursuit of escaping criminals."

Counties with large populations can afford (or need) more defenders, counties with smaller populations can afford (or need) less defenders generally.

Example:

"The state is divided into counties. In every county are appointed magistrates, called justices of the peace, usually from eight to thirty or forty in number, in proportion to the size of the county, of the most discreet and honest inhabitants. They are nominated by their fellows, but commissioned by the governor, and act without reward. These magistrates have jurisdiction both criminal and civil. If the question before them be a question of law only, they decide on it themselves: but if it be of fact, or of fact and law combined, it must be referred to a jury. In the latter case, of a combination of law and fact, it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges. But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only. And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact. If they be mistaken, a decision against right, which is casual only, is less dangerous to the state, and less afflicting to the loser, than one which makes part of a regular and uniform system. In truth, it is better to toss up cross and pile in a cause, than to refer it to a judge whose mind is warped by any motive whatever, in that particular case. But the common sense of twelve honest men gives still a better chance of just decision, than the hazard of cross and pile. These judges execute their process by the sheriff or coroner of the county, or by constables of their own appointment. If any free person commit an offence against the commonwealth, if it be below the degree of felony, he is bound by a justice to appear before their court, to answer it on indictment or information. If it amount to felony, he is committed to jail, a court of these justices is called; if they on examination think him guilty, they send him to the jail of the general court, before which court he is to be tried first by a grand jury of 24, of whom 13 must concur in opinion: if they find him guilty, he is then tried by a jury of 12 men of the county where the offence was committed, and by their verdict, which must be unanimous, he is acquitted or condemned without appeal."
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virgina, 1781

So, for those members here, or for anyone who reads this, what do you think would be the number of people in your county that passed the point at which the number was no longer an illegitimate number of defenders and this number of people constitutes a legitimate number of defenders capable of forming a Committee for Safety?

A Committee for Safety could, by right, discuss deliberately what precisely is threatening peace, prosperity, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness in their county, and they could then deliberately discuss lawful steps common to people who have, in the past, been down this same road?