Fornits
General Interest => Open Free for All => Topic started by: BuzzKill on September 22, 2006, 11:34:10 PM
-
I was watching this tonight, until we lost the station. It got me thinking - how unusual is our murder rate, and why?
How many people do you all know, who were murdered - or who murdered someone else? I don't mean that you know about - but that you actually know - spent time with on at least a few occasions.
I can count The Lovesay Brothers. They beat their land lord to death with an ash try stand.
Lester Rose and Randy Arrowood - they shot two men to death and would have shot the girl - but she got away.
Whimper killed his wife and left her in the trunk of her car at the airport.
Pudd shot and killed GW.
And these are just the cases I know of - among the people I know. I've left out the suicides and accidental shootings.
Is this normal?
And is it true that our murder rate is astronomical compared to other "western" nations? In the case of Canada - the gun ownership rate seem equal to or greater than our own - and they have the same media influences (Music; Movies; violent games) According to Moore, so why do they have a much lower shooting rate? Any thoughts?
Moore seemed to be trying to argue it is all a big race war - but that doesn't fit the facts. *Generally* whites kill whites and blacks kill blacks. Of corse there are exceptions - but this is a general rule of thumb. Whites aren't killing blacks by the score because we fear or hate them - nor are they killing us in large numbers for such reasons. So, racial strife can not account for it. So, what does?
And as for Columbine - and the many other cases of school shootings - what can explain it? BTW - I've n oticed they have occured in rural or small town school systems. It is not a product of urban rot and ruin, as some assume. Any thoughts?
-
I dont know whether the violent crime figures Moore quoted were correct or not. I have always questioned what urban civilians in the US or anywhere would want with violent weapons though. If a gun is not required to kill pests becuase you live on a farm and you do not work in law enforcment or the military, the right to bear arms seems like a fairly random thing to have in any constitution. it kinda sets a rather negative tone for the way a country expects her citizens to conduct themsleves. There is something a bit paranoid to it.
-
Our right to bear arms attitude comes from our history. The British tried to take the Colonists guns away at some point. They ran around collecting them. This doesn't work in a colony that uses guns for hunting, pest control, and protection against the natives and roaming 'bad guys.'
The Constitutional reasoning for the gun thing was that each State had a militia and the federal army was rather weak. The States and the Nation wanted the ability to call every able bodied man quickly in times of strife.
The culture of the USA does contain an element of paranoia, especially towards authority and government. One of the modern traits of anti-gun control people seems to be they want protection not just from the criminal element, but from the government should the government go too far in its oppression. Our Country is home to several so-called militia groups that feel this has already come to pass. These groups are armed to the teeth and talk of the conspiracy of One-World-Government and mysterious black helicopters watching over things.
Personally, I think the violence thing is cultural. In the USA the underdog and even the outlaw are romantic figures that are admired. Billy the Kid is considered a hero even though in real life he was cowardly, ruthless killer. Watch those violent movies and you find a wronged man after revenge against a stronger foe is the most common theme. This is Americas anti-hero than developed in the movies during the 1970s. The quintessential example was the movie Taxi Driver.
These movies reflect and nurture the idea that violence is still a valid option for solving disputes. Look at Bush and Iraq, for example. The current Administration is filled with so-called 'tough guys.' There is a man in my office that has the following posted in his cubicle: "It is God's job to judge the terrorists. It is the Marines' job to arrange the meeting."
When taken to the urban ghetto, fear is mistaken for respect. The violent gang leaders become heros against the oppressive establishment. Just listen to Hip-Hop lyrics.
And fuck all u cops u ain't shit to me
But hoes with guns playin hard for fun
So stay off my dick because I ain't the one
For anyone tryin to bust me up
U better chill with that tryin to fuck me up
And if you're talkin shit I'm gonna shut ya up
And all ya wack D.J.'s I'm gonna cut ya up
Cuz I don't give a fuck about no one
And when I wax I tax and that's just how it goes son
- Kid Rock (Three Sheets to the Wind)
I know, I know, Kid Rock isn't really hip hop. He is a white guy from the suburbs, but that is my point. This is mainstream music, not some fringe group. This is what your son is listening to at age 15 in the USA.
What I liked about Bowling for Columbine, is that Michael Moore really did not point to one particular issue and blame that for the violence in America. He basically questioned the whole situation giving both arguments for and against each issue; access to guns, violent media, America's violent history, etc.
-
Whites aren't killing blacks by the score because we fear or hate them - nor are they killing us in large numbers for such reasons. So, racial strife can not account for it. So, what does?
And as for Columbine - and the many other cases of school shootings - what can explain it? BTW - I've noticed they have occured in rural or small town school systems. It is not a product of urban rot and ruin, as some assume. Any thoughts?
Well I can say that there is nothing quite so satisfying as the 'high' attained during the act of brutally murdering someone. Anyone who tries to claim otherwise probably hasn't had the pleasure! However, only a coward would resort to using a pistol instead of a cleaver or knife.
-
Thank you for your thoughts Butcher. I'll keep them in mind.
Pls Help we are a paranoid people, I think.
Atomic Ant - I know your right about the history and the culture - but is this culture really unique to the States? I wouldn't think so. For example, The successful cat burglar is respected in most all western cultures - and even those who kill if they seem to kill for 'good' - reason - or even if they don't - think the Godfather - a movie very popular the world over.
How many people do you personally know who have been murdered - or have committed murder?
If our numbers really are as wildly out of proportion to the rest of the "civilized" world - there has got to be something more behind it than a love for the under dog and a history of rebellion.
-
Moore did focus on an issue, "Culture of Fear" and Fear begets Violence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_fear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_fear)
http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/libr ... /index.php (http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/library/fear/index.php)
http://www.earthlight.org/2002/essay47_deboer.html (http://www.earthlight.org/2002/essay47_deboer.html)
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199607--.htm (http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199607--.htm)
There are some good clips from the movie here:
http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/media/clips/ (http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/media/clips/)
Interview with Marilyn Manson-"Poster boy of Fear"
"I Loves My Gun" animation (Brief History of America)- Awesome, hilarious, and very direct to the point.
Despite the presence of guns in 7 out of 10 Canadian homes, there is less than one gun-murder in Canada for every 100 gun-murders in the United States.
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
And white collar crime exceeds street crime exponentially.
-
I will have to look at those sites deborah. I am aware that there is a certain level of suspicion of govt. i find this interesting because it means that private enterprise is trusted more. i would argue that govt is supposed to enforce somekind of minimum standard of practice on the private sector so that the enrons of the world dont take place. I also understand why at the time of the war of independence people felt strongly about bearing arms. But not now.
I can remember seeing bowling for columbine when it came out. What scared me was not the nuts. they exist everywhere. It was that there seems to be a pro gun movement among fairly mainstream citizens in some parts of America in spite of the fact that there are crazy militia groups in the US. if i knew that my mad neighbour felt strongly about over throwing the govt and shooting anyone who got in his way, i would want his access to lethal weapons limited. This would make me feel more relaxed.
The ultimate irony of this culture of fear is that it seems in a lot of towns in the US there is a strong sense of community and that people seem to really care about each other. You guys seem to be more philanthropic for example than your Australian counterparts. When i stay with relatives in the US I am always surprised that they actually know their neighbours. Where I live that is really rare. if anything between such strong communities and statistically well behaved kids who in some parts ponder what jesus would do before remembering to call adults mam and sir, you guys probably have less to fear. :wink:
-
We have guns because they are an effective tool, and work well for what they were designed to do. I don't think it's much more complicated than that. You cannot uninvent the wheel. If your goal is to kill, is it any surprise the user seeks out the most effective means of accomplishing this? Will there not be laser school shooting two hundred years from now, or are they simply a byproduct of the tool, the gun, our culture, or both?
Go to a grade school play yard and watch the little boys play cops and robbers, cowboys and indians, or any other sort of game and realize the people stay the same, only the toys get bigger and more dangerous. Some of us choose sides, and the rest are stuck in the middle. Welcome to Sparta, the new warrior culture; you know what they say you live by the sword...
-
On the topic of Moore, I don't really like his films too much. I think he grandstands for his own publicty, and builds his fame off dead kids and bad presidents (he has stocks portfolios of tens of millions including haliburton, etc). I think the idea that you can get a free .22 rifle at a bank, is some how connected to school shootings to be ridiculous. I think he used a tragedy such as Columbine to serve his own agenda. As did the anti-video game people, and everyone else. Something terrible happens, and they bandwagon on to explain the cause. I don't think such a complex situation can be explained away by such a simple answer, and he is insulting the audiences intelligence by suggesting so. In most school shooting the kids steal the guns from their parents, why are they not held responsible. Parents want the government to do everything from drug test their children, diganosis mental illness to making sure they don't have guns. Shall we employ half the population as government agents to dearm, diagnosis and surveil the rest? It seems like that is where we are heading. If parents locked up their guns this would be a non-issue, like so many other issues being debated. I haven't seen banks handing out guns to 16 year olds. But then again, 20 somethings are shooting up schools in Montreal. I bet Moore is all over that one, eh?
-
I somewhat agree that moore is a bit of a grnadstander. But the resons why i would argue that in any civilised country a govt should strictly limit the ownership of weapons which serve no purpose but to kill is because it makes no sense for people to own them. The idea that your average citizen can own something that can kill people in order to protect themself does not make any sense. This is what police officers and home security systems are for. It seems to contribute to a culture of fear. What is so free about that?
-
I somewhat agree that moore is a bit of a grnadstander. But the resons why i would argue that in any civilised country a govt should strictly limit the ownership of weapons which serve no purpose but to kill is because it makes no sense for people to own them. The idea that your average citizen can own something that can kill people in order to protect themself does not make any sense. This is what police officers and home security systems are for. It seems to contribute to a culture of fear. What is so free about that?
Complete nonsense! The government should not ban guns, despite the fact that they're for cowards! {I much prefer the cleaver or knife in mortal combat.} You trust the gov't that much, eh?
-
***I think he grandstands for his own publicty, and builds his fame off dead kids and bad presidents (he has stocks portfolios of tens of millions including haliburton, etc).
Really? You believe he ?builds his fame off dead kids?? Hmm. I saw him advocate for the victims of Columbine and desperately try to explain what pressures those boys were under to send them off the deep end.
As for stock, if this is true, can you fathom any reason (other than he?s a hypocrite) for him owning stock in the very companies he criticizes? Activism sometimes requires Guerilla tactics. Just as some have encouraged people to work in programs in order to get an inside view. When you own stock you can attend shareholders meetings, vote, and are privy to a lot more information. And what better than to use the proceeds earned from an investment in a given company to expose it?
Makes perfect sense to me. But the fact that so many people chose to buy the ?hypocrite? party line that was spun, is a perfect example that the average American is ?stupid?. Incapable of critical thinking, can?t see beyond what someone puts on the surface for them to see.
***I think the idea that you can get a free .22 rifle at a bank, is some how connected to school shootings to be ridiculous. I think he used a tragedy such as Columbine to serve his own agenda.
I didn?t get that he was making a connection there. While I think people should have the right to bare arms, and I agree with you that parents should be responsible for keeping them locked up away from children, the point is the fascination with guns in a Culture of Fear. I think it speaks volumes that a bank would offer a rifle as an incentive to open a $10,000 CD. Why not a lawnmower or TV or tickets to the symphony?
***As did the anti-video game people, and everyone else. Something terrible happens, and they bandwagon on to explain the cause. I don't think such a complex situation can be explained away by such a simple answer, and he is insulting the audiences intelligence by suggesting so.
Did you watch the interview with Marilyn Manson? I?m wondering because it directly refutes what you just wrote. Moore spent a good deal of time debunking the fear-mongering that the right was spinning about Manson etal being responsible for inspiring Columbine. I think Manson made one of the most intelligent comments in the movie when asked what he?d say to the Columbine kids, ?Nothing. I wouldn?t say anything. I?d listen to what they had to say. Which is what no one did.? Moore also interviews someone from Littleton to depict the attitude and pressures kids live under in that high pressure MC burb. He did not use kids or the tragedy for his own gain. Did you really watch this film? Or have you forgotten the details?
***In most school shooting the kids steal the guns from their parents, why are they not held responsible. Parents want the government to do everything from drug test their children, diganosis mental illness to making sure they don't have guns. Shall we employ half the population as government agents to dearm, diagnosis and surveil the rest? It seems like that is where we are heading. If parents locked up their guns this would be a non-issue, like so many other issues being debated.
Agreed. And I was impressed that they were able to pressure Kmart to stop selling ammo. Does it make sense that kids would be able to purchase bullets? He targeted Kmart because that?s where the boys had purchased the ammo used to shoot up Columbine. What was missing in that segment is the fact that the shooter was taking antidepressants, like the other school shooters, which can cause suicidal/homicidal thoughts and behaviors.
***But then again, 20 somethings are shooting up schools in Montreal. I bet Moore is all over that one, eh?
Now, let?s talk about someone capitalizing on dead kids. Why do you think Ladonne?s ?Super Columbine Massacre RPG!? was so popular with kids? The Montreal shooter listed it as a favorite.
http://tinyurl.co.uk/d913 (http://tinyurl.co.uk/d913)
-
Really? You believe he ?builds his fame off dead kids??
Yep, that is what I really believe. I was the same age as the kids at Columbine when it happened, and in my opinion he doesn't come even close to the real reasons for the tragedy. I think he picks an issue, in this case gun control, and goes with it. Like you said about this new shooter in Montreal, I am sure the anti- video game crowd will be all over that... but can a video game really explain why someone becomes a killer and kills themself? I don't think so, and I don't think that gun restrictions would stop school shootings either. I feel that Moore's film is misdirection, rather than address the issues that lead to school shootings in society it's simplified and the audience is given a mantra to repeat, in this case no more guns. Moore could have easily blamed it on Marilyn Manson, as some politicians and others have done, if that was his issue. Or he could of gone the anti-depressant route. He didn't even mention it, again he gets to frame the issue, and in my opinion he missed the mark, dismissaly.
As far as the stocks. The guy makes a movie mocking the president for having financial connections to the bin ladins, and saudis, and war profiteering. Now that the guy has tens of millions of dollars he wants to keep safe, he invests in coporations that actually kill people like halliburton. He owns stock of a company who's job it is to provide mercenaries in a war zone, while making a film against said war. You can't get any more hypocritical than that, so why should we believe a work of his movies?
-
post was mine
And what better than to use the proceeds earned from an investment in a given company to expose it?
How would you feel about teen advocates taking jobs or investing with WWASPS.... how do you think that would go over ?
-
And what, in your opinion, is the "mark he missed" HorseEater? What's the "real reason" Columbine, and the other school shootings, happened?
Yeh, he gets to frame the issue, based on the information he has at the time, the same thing all film makers do, or what anyone with an opinion does, for that matter. He may not have known about the antidepressant issue. He certainly addressed the unrealistic pressures kids in school deal with. And personally, I think this is a significant issue.
***How would you feel about teen advocates taking jobs or investing with WWASPS.... how do you think that would go over ?
Given that I know Barbe, I'd assume she had a good motive, until proven otherwise.
It wouldn't make sense that she worked for WWASPS while simultaneously hosting a forum that is critical, would it?
As I said, sometimes you have to look a little deeper than what's on the surface.
-
And what, in your opinion, is the "mark he missed" HorseEater? What's the "real reason" Columbine, and the other school shootings, happened?
It must be all the flouride in the water.
It wouldn't make sense that she worked for WWASPS while simultaneously hosting a forum that is critical, would it?
It says to me, the individual does not believe what they are selling.
-
Really? You believe he ?builds his fame off dead kids??
Yep, that is what I really believe. I was the same age as the kids at Columbine when it happened, and in my opinion he doesn't come even close to the real reasons for the tragedy. I think he picks an issue, in this case gun control, and goes with it. Like you said about this new shooter in Montreal, I am sure the anti- video game crowd will be all over that... but can a video game really explain why someone becomes a killer and kills themself? I don't think so, and I don't think that gun restrictions would stop school shootings either. I feel that Moore's film is misdirection, rather than address the issues that lead to school shootings in society it's simplified and the audience is given a mantra to repeat, in this case no more guns. Moore could have easily blamed it on Marilyn Manson, as some politicians and others have done, if that was his issue. Or he could of gone the anti-depressant route. He didn't even mention it, again he gets to frame the issue, and in my opinion he missed the mark, dismissaly.
As far as the stocks. The guy makes a movie mocking the president for having financial connections to the bin ladins, and saudis, and war profiteering. Now that the guy has tens of millions of dollars he wants to keep safe, he invests in coporations that actually kill people like halliburton. He owns stock of a company who's job it is to provide mercenaries in a war zone, while making a film against said war. You can't get any more hypocritical than that, so why should we believe a work of his movies?
I did not get the anti-gun message from the movie. He made several statements that contradicted that 'availability of guns' is to blame. He pointed out that in Canada there are more guns per person than in the USA, the same violent media (games, movies, etc) and yet a much lower crime rate (and gun crime rate) than the USA. He used the same argument to say that media is not to blame. The film really gave no definitive answers. It only asked the question and explored possibilities.
As for gun control, the advantage of a handgun ban would be that most gun related deaths are not crimes. They are accidents. These accidents often involve children and if they did not have access to the guns, they would not have been harmed.
I grew up in an area where guns outnumbered people some ten to one. Everyone owned them. They still close the public schools on the first day of hunting season. Crime was relatively low there. But most of knew that you had a better chance of getting shot by your own gun, by accident, than you had of actually successfully defending yourself with it. As my best friend's father told me when I was about 12, "There are more people in cemetaries that got shot by empty guns than got shot by loaded ones." Obviously, you have to discount war related casualities, but the point remains valid.
A friend of mine was shot in the face when he only nine years old. Fortunately, the bullet went in one cheek and out the other and missed all bones, teeth, etc. The gun was 'empty.' His brother was in the next room cleaning it.
I personally do not know anyone who is a murderer or was a murder victim. I knew two people, (personally, but not that well) that killed themselves with guns.
The last point I would bring up has to do with human impulse and emotion. If someone gets angry or falls into depression and a gun is right on the table, it is far more likely to be used. If they have to take time and steps to access a gun (a waiting period), chances are they will cool off and not even bother.
For the record, I am against banning guns. At the same time, there are no guns in my home.
-
My take on what I saw of the film was the same as Atomic Ants - it didn't seem like he made any kind of conclusion - just tossed out theories - which he then largely disproved.
From what I could gather he was working up to blaming racial tension (the cartoon you liked so much Deb) but if he went on to dismiss that theory, I missed it. If he stuck to that theory, I think he is wrong.
I found it interesting there was a bank giving away guns - but that was all. I didn't feel it proved anything much. I assumed that bank was in a rural community where hunting is a major pass time.
I was surprised at how much sence M. Manson made. I too, was impressed with his comment that he would have listened to the boys - but when you think about it - he is assuming no one listened to them. He doesn't know any such thing - and neither do we. No one knows what made them snap. No one knows that they were ignored, or if they were listened to by family, or therapist. We're just guessing.
People come down so hard on the parents - that they didn't know what was going on with the kids. But how were they to know? You can't expect the boys would tell them - no matter how much mom and dad tried to get them to open up.
And I know about the controversy about the pipe bombs and weapons in the boys rooms - but then I go and look in my own son's room - and I think "no way I would know what he has hidden under all that junk" - the piles of clothes and old boxes and bags - and just junk.
I do occasionally go in there and clean up (b/c I just can't Stand it!) but in the between times - he could hind a lot of weaponry if he wanted to.
Maybe these boy's parents were self absorbed and inattentive block heads. But maybe not. I do feel for them. I can not imagine the pain they must be in. As obsessed as "we" are with the hows and whys of this situation - imagine how they must obsess over it.
As to the "why" Q: In each school shooting case that I am aware of, the boys in question were said to be victims of bullying - or at least a good deal of teasing. But in this case, other than their class mates saying they were strange and loaners I didn't hear that these boys were really picked on. If they came across as strange, that's b/c they were trying hard to do just that. If they were loaners - it seems to be the way they wanted it.
So, I don't think we can lay the blame for Columbine on bullies - except in that Harris and Klebole were themselves bullies in the same extreme sort of way that the SS were bullies.
And even in the cases where the boys were clearly picked on - why did that make them killers - when generations of American boys have been picked on, and not turned into spree killers. What has changed?
What about our society has changed in the last generation?
And leaving school shootings aside - back we come to Why do we have such a murder rate in this country - when we are otherwise much like any other western nation?
Suppose it could be genetics? Its just in our blood to kill? Maybe some weird combination of our genetic make-up and the weather. Maybe our Scotch/ Irish/ Viking blood gets to hot in the heat of the American south and southwest??
Black on Black murder could be a hold over from tribal warring - in fact - so could the feuding that takes place in the mountains - among those of generally scotch/ Irish lines. The clans were always at war.
Wonder if anyone ever looked at that?
-
PS -
I also agree with your comments about access and accidents and so on. Your quite right. But I was primarily wondering about the murder rate - which is why I left out suicide deaths by gun shot. I know several of those as well.
One was once a good friend of mine. She was with her boy friend and his friends. They were playing cards and she was frying potatoes and everyone was high. She turned the potatoes, then walked into the room where the card game was going on - turned with out a word and went up the stairs to her bed room - and shot herself in the head.
She was a sad case - a long history of mental illness that went ignored by everyone who should have been paying attention.
-
Black on Black murder could be a hold over from tribal warring
That'd be drug related in most cases.
-
Black on Black murder could be a hold over from tribal warring -
stop smoking angel dust
-
Did you watch the interview with Marilyn Manson? I?m wondering because it directly refutes what you just wrote. Moore spent a good deal of time debunking the fear-mongering that the right was spinning about Manson etal being responsible for inspiring Columbine.
I couldnt agree more! I still wonder. What does make America so fearful?
-
Ignorance, rampant social isolation.
-
Sorry it was me who forgot to log in (who wonders what makes the US so fearful and agreed with deborahs post)
i also agree that Moore raised more questions than provided answers with that film. His comparison between Canada and the US was if anything an argument against gun contol alone.
the thing is, bad trip, that Australia has also had a history of isolation and many of us shamefully dont really know a lot about what goes on internationally. in part because we are so far away from anywhere and also are an island so share no borders with anyone. But intil the War on Terror, there has not really been much of a culture of fear. We have never had any strong militia movement and the attitude to kids misbehaviour is far more benign. In part it is apathy. But i wonder what the difference really is.
moore did not look at this issue but does anyone think religion may play a part?
-
///I couldnt agree more! I still wonder. What does make America so fearful?///
The media.
Michael Crichton's newest book "State of Fear" deals with this issue.
Moore touched on it - how there is always some new thing to be afraid of - and how the media fans the flames. The public is kept in a state of fear.
Conspiracy theorist will say this is to help facilitate the mass brain washing of the public at large. Other says it is just commercialism - fear sells.
But like with the other possible explanations - I would think this would be true of other western nations. Moore argued that in Canada the news wasn't nearly as loaded with crime and disaster as in the states. So, maybe a state of fear is partly to blame. But in the cases I know of - fear had nothing to do with it. It was just cold blooded murder.
In the case of the school shootings - the boys might have been angry about being teased - afraid of more teasing maybe - but not in fear for their lives. None of them felt their lives were in danger. And in the case of Columbine - they killed themselves.
So - how can a general state of fear - or paranoia - explain it?
Religion being a factor? Well I don't see how. We're not talking murder for reasons of idealism when we talk about the murder rate in the USA. Not generally anyway.
In two of the school shooting cases, people claim that Christian students were targeted - but its just as likely they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. In the Paducah KY case - the prayer group had just broken up, and happen to be milling around in the hall, when the shooter came upon them. And the girl in the library in Columbine being shot b/c she admitted believing in God, might also have been shot had she answered no - and as it turns out, her comments are disputed by others anyway.
I might argue that a Lack of religion is causing this - but again - this "lack" is just as much a factor in other western nations as in ours - and even more so in most cases. So - that can't explain the difference.
Someone mentioned drugs. I do feel that this is a factor in our high murder rates. But aren't drugs also a common problem in other nations? What could it be about our drug use, that differs from theirs, that gets people killed?
-
let me tell ya'll what it's like
being male, middle class and white
it's a bitch, if you don't believe
listen up to my new cd
sham on
i got shit running through my brain
so intense that i can't explain
all alone in my white boy pain
shake your booty while the band complains
i'm rocking the suburbs
just like michael jackson did
i'm rocking the suburbs
except that he was talented
i'm rocking the suburbs
i take the checks and face the facts
that some producer with computers
fixes all my shitty tracks
i'm pissed off but i'm too polite
when people break in the mcdonalds line
mom and dad you made me so uptight
i'm gonna cuss on the mic tonight
i don't know how much i can take
girl give me something i can break
i'm rocking the suburbs
just like quiet riot did
i'm rocking the suburbs
except that they were talented
i'm rocking the suburbs
i take the checks and face the facts
that some producer with computers
fixes all my shitty tracks
in a haze these days
i pull up to the stoplight
i can feel that something's not right
i can feel that someone's blasting me
with hate and bass
sending dirty vibes my way
cause my great great great great grandad
made someone's great great great great grandaddy slaves
it wasn't my idea
it wasn't my idea
it never was my idea
i just drove to the store
for some preparation h
ya'll don't know what it's like
being male, middle class and white
it gets me real pissed off and it makes me wanna say
fuck
just like jon bon jovi did
i'm rocking the suburbs
except that he was talented
i'm rocking the suburbs
i take the checks and face the facts
that some producer with computers
fixes all my shitty tracks these days
i'm rocking the suburbs
you'd better look out because i'm gonna say fuck
-
The one thing I really liked about that film is that it opens questions w/o quite as much of shoving foregone conclusions down the audience's throats as I've come to expect from Michael Moore.
I don't think guns are the problem. I do think one of the main reasons for upholding the right to bear arms (not priviledge) is for the express purpose of defending ourselves from our own or another government.
It's not usually explicit conflict. Think about it. Say your a thug and you want to go rob a store so you can go party this weekend. Which one are you going to rop? The one in the city where it's patently illegal for most people to arm themselves or the one out of town located between the sporting goods store and the town minicipal building? Me? I'm goin for the inner city convenience store cause I'm a whole lot less likely to get shot. That's saying I were I thug, which I'm not, of course.
A well armed society is a polite society because people expect to defend themselves and for others to do the same. So they don't even try to pull the same shit on one another as they do when they know that they've got however much time it takes to get a cop on the scene and interested as a head start before any defense can be mounted.
First, American society isn't really the most violent in the world. That's just propaganda. Sure, there are murders here and barroom brawls that sometimes spill out into the street. Compare that with your typical Irish Soccer game crowd or the AUC playing soccer with the heads of slain suspects in front of the recently departed's grandchildren.
Here's a little commentary on the Austrailian experiment:
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/conte ... p?aid=8073 (http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=8073)
Interesting quote from that:
Here is the comparison in violent crime trends between Australia and the United States for the period of 1995 to 2001, calculating rates by dividing the number of crimes reported (7) by the population figures. (8,9). (Negative trends are in parentheses.)
Homicide: AUS ? (11%) US ? (32%)
Assault: AUS ? 39% US ? (24%)
Rape: AUS ? 19% US ? (14%)
Robbery: AUS ? 70% US ? (33%) (10)
Looks like the difference between Americans and Aussies is that we damned shaw mean business!
-
I think the 'root cause' of a lot of different kinds of breakdowns, though, is as simple as industrialization. During the Industrial Revolution, the population of this country rushed from 80/20 rural/urban to the polar opposite over just a generation or so. Families were broken, homes and communities abandoned, old ways and traditions obsoleted and atrophed. We haven't got the solid foundation these days to maintain sanity and civility. As a culture, we're dying of a broken heart.
And yet I'm hopeful. Check out OutlawHorseEater's posting on LEAP. And the influence of really good, old roots folk music in some really good new stuff coming out. I hope we're somewhere near the extreme in this pendulum swing. What does that mean? When to ppl go all nostalgic like this and what happens next? There's nothing really new under the Sun. History never does really repeat itself, but it always rhymes.
-
www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australi ... tml?page=2 (http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australias-a-lot-safer-than-we-think/2006/01/19/1137553708823.html?page=2)
The above article looks at the growing culture of fear over here. Thought you may be interested.
I had a look atBad trip's article. It was interesting. Perhaps guns do make the US more "polite" but it strikes me as an extreme way to do it. I also wonder if the reason for an increase in violent crime being recorded everywhere is because society had changed and women feel more comfortable reporting violent crime. Particularly domestic violence and sexual assault. If this is the case I dont think it is such a bad thing.
I would also argue that if Australians are capable of beating the wife, getting into violent pub brawls (A long standing tradition in some parts) and generally beating the crap out of each other at a higher rate than you guys, then it is a good thing that we dont have as many guns to help us :wink:
Also this article higlighted to me that in spite of Australia potentially being more violent we murder each other much less not out of any greater virtue but because we have less access to weapons.
I would also wonder if good manners vary slightly from culture to culture. I can remeber when i was young and stupid being pulled over in the US for speeding & doing what everyone immediately does here and opening the car door to get out and talk with the cop. It was a valuable lesson in etiquette! The cop immediately put his hand on his gun and ordered me to remain within the vehicle. I was eventually berated for my stupidity by my American cohorts who (and i dont know if there was some poetic licence) told me that this was a good way to get shot.
Finally, i have to question this idea that you may need to defend yourself against your own govt. This is the whole point of democracy. if you dont like your govt just vote em out! I have never come across a country where some kind of violent uprising has produced a more stable and fair system than the guys who were being over thrown. Usually things go from bad to worse
-
www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australias-a-lot-safer-than-we-think/2006/01/19/1137553708823.html?page=2
The above article looks at the growing culture of fear over here. Thought you may be interested.
Cool, thanks, I'll go and read that after I answer this:
I had a look at Bad trip's article. It was interesting. Perhaps guns do make the US more "polite" but it strikes me as an extreme way to do it.
I disagree. In fact, I think you've got it backward. Entrusting our most vital needs to government has prove, again and again, to be an extremely reckless thing to do. Here are a couple of quips from America's founding fathers:
" Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? ... If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? "
-- Patrick Henry
" If you believe that people cannot be trusted to govern themselves, then can they be trusted to govern others?"
--Thomas Jefferson
The term "gun ban" is deceptive. We're not really banning guns at all. We're just relagating the right to bear and use them to law enforcement and the military via the legislation. Well you just go and check on these people's track record! Cops and soldiers are notorious for wife beating and other violent crimes and Congress is still the only distinctive criminal class in this land, just as they were in Samuel Clemens' day.
No, as much as I don't know about my next door neighbor or the stranger walking down the street, I trust them both more with a weapon than I do a cop. A cop brings a certain bigotry to every situation in which they're involved. There's a broadly held perception that law enforcement is a very dangerous line of work, but the OSHA stats don't bear that out. More dangerous than law enforcement are fishing, taxi driving and convenience store clerk. But no avocation is more dangerous than being a dark complected unarmed suspects in some places in this country. New York is bad, Cincinatti is probably worse, Florida's no place for a spunky young black boy to go wandering around without a camera crew in tow.
No, I don't trust the cops more than my neighbors. They don't care much for hippies either.
I also wonder if the reason for an increase in violent crime being recorded everywhere is because society had changed and women feel more comfortable reporting violent crime. Particularly domestic violence and sexual assault. If this is the case I dont think it is such a bad thing.
Yup.
I would also argue that if Australians are capable of beating the wife, getting into violent pub brawls (A long standing tradition in some parts) and generally beating the crap out of each other at a higher rate than you guys, then it is a good thing that we dont have as many guns to help us :wink:
No, people tend not to let things heat up so often when there's very likely an armed drunk or three hanging around. Well armed = polite.
Also this article higlighted to me that in spite of Australia potentially being more violent we murder each other much less not out of any greater virtue but because we have less access to weapons.
I thought ya'll were just lazzy. ;-)
I would also wonder if good manners vary slightly from culture to culture. I can remeber when i was young and stupid being pulled over in the US for speeding & doing what everyone immediately does here and opening the car door to get out and talk with the cop. It was a valuable lesson in etiquette! The cop immediately put his hand on his gun and ordered me to remain within the vehicle. I was eventually berated for my stupidity by my American cohorts who (and i dont know if there was some poetic licence) told me that this was a good way to get shot.
Yup, like I said, the cops here are extremely paranoid. They're not really joking when they say things like "There are two kinds of people; officers and suspects."
Finally, i have to question this idea that you may need to defend yourself against your own govt. This is the whole point of democracy.
Well, glad you mentioned democracy. Sometimes it breaks down. Case in point, the Troubled Parent Industry. I've been involved in this nightmare for over 30 years now, since I was a little kid. Since I was around 6, I've had good reason to fear the cops who would bring kids back to the Seed or Straight without even entertaining the notion that maybe we has some damned good reasons for running away. And just look at where the principal players in Straight and the Seed have landed up! Charlie Crist, very likely a Seed graduate, is the GOP's nominee for Florida Governor. Brother Jeb Büsh (current governor, brother to the president) is tied nine ways from Sunday to the Program. Guy Tunnell, the guy who established Bay County Boot Camp, is affiliated with DFAF (formerly known as Straight, Inc.) Bay County Boot Camp is where where guards beat 14yo Martin Lee Anderson to death last January, knowing they were being filmed. Martin's crime had been joy riding in his grandmother's car. The grandmother didn't want him locked up. The government insisted.
Yeah, I'd say we have good reason to fear our government over here! Here's some more on direct ties between the Program and our government. http://thestraights.com/gop.htm (http://thestraights.com/gop.htm)
if you dont like your govt just vote em out!
:rofl: Ya' just gotta love that down under sense of humor! Oh, shit! You're serious! Here's a nice intro the the state of Democracy in America today:
http://www.votefraud.org/ (http://www.votefraud.org/)
And, just for shits and giggles, try plugging this into google.com
+sembler vote fraud
-
www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australias-a-lot-safer-than-we-think/2006/01/19/1137553708823.html?page=2
The above article looks at the growing culture of fear over here. Thought you may be interested.
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins; all of them imaginary."
H.L. Mencken, 1923
-
You can vote, but you can't choose.
- Emma Goldman
-
Bill Clinton is Satan! The Trilateral commission & the Bildeburgers run everything. Christianity will soon be outlawed in the U.S. like it was in ancient Rome.
-
I thought ya'll were just lazzy. :wink:
Yeah we pretty much are ::bwahaha::
Shooting your neighbour is such a bloddy hassle!
And i take your point about Police and corruption. The Qld police were widely known as being openly corrupt for over 30 yrs until their was a big inquiry to try & clean them up. Everyone pretty much just ignored the corruption and went about their daily business in QLD as if there was no law. Then again this was the state that allowed Mel Semmbler to set up a private jail!
However. If police cant necessarily be trusted with guns why can ordinary citizens? particularly since there is no way of guaranteing that people even know how to correctly handle them or enforce safety. Moreover I would argue that private citizens should not be allowed to protect their property with lethal weapons. The police may not be perfect but they are there to do a job.
-
However. If police cant necessarily be trusted with guns why can ordinary citizens?
Because the police have as their primary function to apprehend suspects accused by at least two wittnesses and to make arrests. That's what they do and they go into every situation looking first and foremost for an enemy. That's their job and their role and just as it should be. However, we should not forget that when all you've got is a hammer, every thing looks like a nail.
Law enforcement is not a good tool for every situation. Among those problems that law enforcement is not at all equipped to do are immediate self defense and avoiding situations that lead up to the need for immediate self defense. That's actually been supported by American courts when citizens have tried to sue police departments for failure to protect them from violence, avarice and various other kinds of bad behavior. The defense came down to 'hey, es no mi yhob' and the courts agreed.
The ordinary citizen comes at everything but their own vocation from a completely different perspective. He wants to be comfortable, well fed, liked and admired and pretty much left at peace. He'll do just about anything he has to do to avoid anything that threatens his get peace and prosperity. He's not looking for trouble, that's the cop's job.
particularly since there is no way of guaranteing that people even know how to correctly handle them or enforce safety.
See above. Mishandling of fire arms tends to fuck up one's prospects at peace, prosperity and friendly terms w/ the neighbors.
Moreover I would argue that private citizens should not be allowed to protect their property with lethal weapons. The police may not be perfect but they are there to do a job.
Again, see above. It's not their job. It's not even remotely possible to hire enough cops to protect each citizen.
"He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion."
James Burgh 1774
I don't know much at all about Australian law. But we do share the same heritage to a large degree. Aren't these ideas from the Magna Carta sort of part of the Australian identity too?
-
In answer to your question. yes sort of. Being a member of the commonwealth we largely go by the British model. until the 70s we were members of the Privy Coucil. To this day our way of doing things legally is much closer to britian than the US. We do have a High Court though. I guess where Australia differs largely form the US is that we are more concerned with what is best for a society overall than individual liberty. We tend to be more utilitarian. For instance we have the option of taking out private health insurance but a public health care system. We also have mostly public universities. Most students pay their portion of the fees off in tax once they start working.
As to police in the US being trigger happy. Again this is why I dont like guns. They make an otherwise friendly and cheery culture paranoid!
Here wehn you get pulled over for speeding you get out and have a bit of a chat with the constable, he writes you a ticket or lets you off and you are done. Where you are he assumes you may be packing!
I also dispute that All citizens are only concerned with peace and prosperity. Crazy people and jealous husbands arent. Nor are those so desperately unhappy that they want to end their own life. The ability and rgiht to own a lethal weapon anly makes it easier for these people to harm themselves and others. This impedes the other persons right to "Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" because it makes them afraid.
BTW i have always found this pursiut of happiness concept fun and quirky. I used to invisiage Americas founding fathers on field trips to Disneyland. Where did it come from?
-
BTW i have always found this pursiut of happiness concept fun and quirky. I used to invisiage Americas founding fathers on field trips to Disneyland. Where did it come from?
I don't know, but I'd guess Franklin. He was a real hedonist.
But I didn't say all citizens are pleasant and stable. Just most of us whereas all cops, almost down to a man, go at everything like a war game. It wasn't always like this. We didn't used to fear each other the way we do now. And there were fewer gun laws. The very idea of someone being armed was not cause for alarm, still isn't out in the country.
But things have changed. When the cops showed up at Columbine, they were shamefully unhelpful. They were so focused on securing the scene and controling everyone they could see that they actually threatened to shoot a paramedic if he dared cross their imaginary line to save a person from bleeding to death over the course of about an hour. Now, if that scene had played out in rural WV it would have gone down much differently. Very likely, more than one of the students would have had a hunting riffle in their truck or locker. The mere sight of an armed teenager doesn't have the same disorienting impact in areas where hunting is very popular. That alone wouldn't give a kid much of an advantage.
Same goes for the jealous husband or anyone else who's having a particularly bad day. If it's generally illegal to bear arms then law breakers know they have an advantage over others just by going armed.
-
I always figured "the Pursuit of Happiness" was about enabling citizens to rise above their rank - to move up through the levels of society and have the finer things in life. It was a short to the point way of striking down the concept of a permanent, unchangable, social ranking.
In America, there was to be no royalty - no royal titles - no Aristocracy. No nobles and no surfs. Any man might aspire to greatness, and possibly achieve it, in America. In theory, anyway.
Its true enough, that social climbers are looked down upon by both those above and below them - but still - they can climb if they want to. They have the Right to pursue happiness.
-
Whats that you say Ginger - about a dog chasing his tail . . .
Police: School gunman says he has bomb
POSTED: 4:00 p.m. EDT, September 27, 2006
Adjust font size:
Decrease fontDecrease font
Enlarge fontEnlarge font
(CNN) -- Two schools were evacuated Wednesday after a gunman claiming to have a bomb opened fire and took hostages at a high school near Bailey, Colorado, officials said.
One hostage, a young girl, was released, but the gunman was still holding four others Wednesday afternoon, said Lance Clem, spokesman for the Colorado Public Safety Department. The Colorado State Patrol is assisting, Clem said.
Several shots were fired at the school, and the gunman is inside, said Jefferson County Sheriff's spokeswoman Jackie Kelley.
She had no information on injuries, but said a bomb squad and SWAT team had been dispatched to the scene.
The Park County Sheriff's office would not provide further details, but said it is dealing with a hostage situation.
The 450 students at Platte Canyon High School and the 340 youngsters at the adjacent Fitzsimmons Middle School were evacuated, officials said.
The students were evacuated to a safe place about 12:10 p.m. (2:10 p.m. ET), the Park County School District superintendent's office said.
-
I always figured "the Pursuit of Happiness" was about enabling citizens to rise above their rank - to move up through the levels of society and have the finer things in life. It was a short to the point way of striking down the concept of a permanent, unchangable, social ranking.
Buzz, come on now. You know that the Constitution was written for white elite males. Women, people of color (particularly blacks), children, working class/poor did not have the right to "Pursuit of Happiness". They had to fight for basic rights, forget the "finer things".
And as far as "rising about their ranks". Not possible. You can't have obnoxiously rich class of people without a large economically oppressed working class. There is most definitely an "unchangable, social ranking".
In America, there was to be no royalty - no royal titles - no Aristocracy. No nobles and no surfs. Any man might aspire to greatness, and possibly achieve it, in America. In theory, anyway.
In theory. They just changed the names and instead of one King, there were many, and all white males. They allowed other to begin the ascent up the ladder when it was politically correct to do so and generated more profit.
-
///You know that the Constitution was written for white elite males. Women, people of color (particularly blacks), children, working class/poor did not have the right to "Pursuit of Happiness". They had to fight for basic rights, forget the "finer things". ///
Sure. I know. But it is the constitution that laid the foundation for the ability to win those basic rights when people did fight for them.
It was a revolutionary idea at the time - this notion that there should be no "fixed" social classes. Of corse there will always be rich and poor - and outrageously rich, and profoundly poor as well - but the declaration of independence and the constitution that followed, make it *possible* , if not probable, to move from one group to the next.
As for the "economically oppressed working class", I'd argue that in this country, and in those like this country - these folks have a far more opportunity to pursue happiness than in ages past, or in other less "flexible" societies.
Anyway - what ever your opinion of ones ability to pursue happiness - I think the phrase in the constitution has more to do with this ability to rise up threw the ranks of society, than trips to amusement parks. :)
-
Buzz, come on now. You know that the Constitution was written for white elite males. Women, people of color (particularly blacks), children, working class/poor did not have the right to "Pursuit of Happiness". They had to fight for basic rights, forget the "finer things".
They just changed the names and instead of one King, there were many, and all white males. They allowed other to begin the ascent up the ladder when it was politically correct to do so and generated more profit.
Yes, a conspiracy of white males has been oppressing you ever since we climbed out of the trees.
It can all be blamed on WHITE MALES.
If you are white and have a dick, you are evil.
-
Buzz, come on now. You know that the Constitution was written for white elite males.
This concept of no class system is something Australia likes to pretend it does not have either. Of course we do. Although there was a time when we had a really big middle class. We also have a history of good minimum wages. it is slowly being dismantled. I do think that it is a nice idea though. At least by putting this into its constitution the US was apparently aiming for an egalitarian system. Even if it is kinda tokenistic. The British to this day are pretty open about there being a clear class system.
-
Watch the double negatives.
-
***I do think that it is a nice idea though. At least by putting this into its constitution the US was apparently aiming for an egalitarian system. Even if it is kinda tokenistic.
Let me reiterate. The Constitution DID NOT APPLY TO WOMEN, PEOPLE OF COLOR, WORKING CLASS/POOR or CHILDREN. The white boys who wrote it were just coming off of being oppressed themselves and wanted to make damn sure that they weren't oppressed again. They had no intention of it applying to the general population.
Women didn't vote or work outside the home, considered property and subject to hubby's "persuit of happiness". Poor people didn't vote and worked for slave wages for their boss's "persuit of happiness"- was/is that any better than being a serf? Children worked in factories, to further the owner's "persuit of happiness". Blacks, well they got the raw end of the deal, working for nothing to enrich the liberated white guys, which definitely furthered their happiness. If you didn't tow the religious party line you were given a trial by water and/or hanged or burned at the stake.
And what has really changed except we have more than one King, a larger class of Nobles, and the majority still work hand-to-mouth. Change the names, pretend we have a new script, but the roles remain the same.
Instead of one Ponzi scheme, we have many, with all the wealth sucked to the top of the pyramid.
And what a noble idea, that a few may work their way out of poverty so they can be in debt their entire life.
Buzz, where have you read about this "revolutionary" idea/notion that there should be no "fixed" classes? Sounds like a la-la fairy tale to me. Is that true today or then? Without a class system we wouldn't have Capitalism. Do you also believe a poor child can become president? I highly recommend "The People's History" by Howard Zinn. Google his name and I'm sure you'll find some tidbits of reality that 'weren't' in your history book.
Americans like warm fuzzy stories of how philanthropic their government is. Few notice the stark discrepency between the story and reality, because they'd rather believe the myth. As Carlin said, "They call it the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it."
I think "Persuit of Happiness" meant the freedom of white men to rape and pillage- Manifest Destiny- take what you want, by force if necessary, with god's blessings. Did the Native Americans deserve the right to "Persuit of Happiness"?
And has this changed? Not in my view. Manifest Destiny is alive and well. The bully is still throwing his weight around and terrorizing the world. Instilling fear into its citizenry to gain their support for more raping and pillaging. We "the people" are paying for their r&p which will further enrich them and keep our gas tanks full a little longer, for a hefty price of course.
-
pursuit, not "persuit."
-
Americans like warm fuzzy stories of how philanthropic their government is.
I would say that americans seem to have a mistrust of govt and a belief that the desires and needs of the individual are more important than that of the populace. There seems to be less of an ideology of the common good. This is only going to allow the rich and powerful to assert their own interests over those of the poor and disenfranchaised everytime.
BTW who is the spelling and grammar nazi on this thread?
-
Americans like warm fuzzy stories of how philanthropic their government is.
I would say that americans seem to have a mistrust of govt and a belief that the desires and needs of the individual are more important than that of the populace. There seems to be less of an ideology of the common good. This is only going to allow the rich and powerful to assert their own interests over those of the poor and disenfranchaised everytime.
BTW who is the spelling and grammar nazi on this thread?
I am. Don't call me a nazi or I'll gun you down. An American should fucking well know how to spell "pursuit," for fuck's sake.
-
Americans like warm fuzzy stories of how philanthropic their government is.
I would say that americans seem to have a mistrust of govt and a belief that the desires and needs of the individual are more important than that of the populace. There seems to be less of an ideology of the common good. This is only going to allow the rich and powerful to assert their own interests over those of the poor and disenfranchaised everytime.
BTW who is the spelling and grammar nazi on this thread?
The US govt is serving the 'common good' for those with the money to buy influence and power. This is a govt. run for and by the corporations. The US govt. does not serve the US people, it has declared war on them. I don't think any american views our govt as something that is designedto help the common man (or woman). The same corporations distract... bread and circuses... and make the issues of our time based on emotional irrationality, debates which can go either way. And while the populace is arguing over social issues such as abortion and guns the corporations are passing legislation to expand their influence globally with no restraint, even at the cost of the American people. It's a bait and switch, and we've all been had.
We are not free. The US govt can send a SWAT team into your house because they suspect you of having a few ditch weeds growing in your backyard. LA county wanted a nice piece of land, as did the federal government so they hatched a little plan to murder a man and steal his property. This was in the 1990's, in California, USA. How could anyone trust the police when they conspire at the highest levels of government to kill someone to obtain land?
http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/scott.htm (http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/scott.htm)
The US has 2 million people in prison, out of a total population of around 300 million. Even though China has a billion more citizens, they imprison around 1 million, as does Russia, who's image cannot escape that of the gulag. America is only behind Rwanda for total prisoners based on population, and that is only because their jails are filled with people from the massacre in 1994, a non developed nation.
Prison population per 100,000 inhabitants
USA 725
Russia 713
UK 124
Canada 102
Germany 98
Italy 92
France 80
Vietnam 75
Sweden 64
Denmark 61
Iceland 29
Land of the free? We are more like the land of prisons. There are more US citizens in jail than reside in Alaska, North and South Dakota combined, it's the 51st state.
from wiki
"In terms of federal prison, 57% of those incarcerated were sentenced for drug offenses. Currently, considering local jails as well, almost a million of those incarcerated are in prison for non-violent crime. "
A million people in prison for non violent crimes. Over half of those in federal prison are there for drug crimes. Tax payers are paying for their incarceration, while federal prison is being privitized and corporations are making large profits from this growing industry. Check out the company Correction Corp of America (CCA). They are currently the largest private prison company, with over 60 thousand prisoners in their control. Check out their stock price, their growth expectation and you see the trend.
Trusting our govt? :rofl: I trust them to jail me for smoking reefer, that's about it.
-
Americans like warm fuzzy stories of how philanthropic their government is.
I would say that americans seem to have a mistrust of govt and a belief that the desires and needs of the individual are more important than that of the populace. There seems to be less of an ideology of the common good. This is only going to allow the rich and powerful to assert their own interests over those of the poor and disenfranchaised everytime.
The populace and the government are both made up of individuals. Individuals are always better at looking after our own interests. Whether they're pretending paternalistic benevolence or not, that's what we do best.
Just came accross this compliments of Nihles. Looks like Smell Sembler, private prisons and the TOUGHLOVE hategroup are not the only things we're exporting downunder. Behold the beam in your own eye, PlsHlp.
nihilanthic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_Cor ... _Terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_Corpus#Suspension_during_the_War_on_Terrorism)
nihilanthic: the fact that its specifically for non citizens is probably why most people are going "huh what" at you and me raising alarm
nihilanthic: JESUS FUCK
nihilanthic: look at what Australia is trying to do!!!!!
nihilanthic: The proposed legislation is currently being debated in both the federal and state parliaments and some legal experts have stated that the Act is unconstitutional because it abolishes habeas corpus, due process, and the presumption of innocence. Some Solicitors-General also consider the Act violates the separation of powers. Under the Act, a person can be detained without charge or trial for a period of one year. Amendments made that were proposed by some Premiers and Liberal backbenchers include a greater right of appeal of a detained person, and the case to be considered on the basis of merit, rather than points of law.
The proposed bill is considered contrary to habeas corpus because it allows people to be imprisoned by a decision of the executive branch of government rather than the
nihilanthic: the judiciary, to be imprisoned indefinitely without charge or trial, and it makes it an offence to even talk about somebody being imprisoned. One of the more controversial aspects of the legislation is the requirement that a parent, if informed of their child's detention, may not inform any further person, including the other parent. This clause also applies to detention of adults.
nihilanthic: turning it into a fuckin program
EudoraDreamt: Holy shit
nihilanthic: yeah.
nihilanthic: they cant even talk about it
EudoraDreamt: I'm a copy and paste this to Tacitus realm, k?
nihilanthic: sure thing
Damned smart kid, in' he?
-
i would liketo share that i did not vote for these fuckers!!!!
ASIO (our eq) of the CIA have actually been doing this since the "war on terror" begun! it is a breach of the constitution and is currently being fought. Probably unsucessfully because our PM is a fcktard who loves bush. i dont even know if bush knows who or where we are! Apparently this has taken off more than tough love did! We also decided to let David Hicks rot in Gtmo bay wihtout invervening even tho you guys still have not charged him! We kiss the US ass on a daily basis since the war on terror began!
But i dont see this as a reason to throw out the broader concept of the role of govt. Taxes both here and in the US are paid for a reason. I therefore expect a govt will use them to give me a pension when i am old, make sure my kids get a higher education if this is what they choose, get me better when i am ill and provide adequate policing so that i dont have to shoot criminals myself!
Because our current PM is a fucktard I plan to vote for the other guy. Obviously the majority of Australians were pretty retarded in their thinking when they voted for him. This kind of retardation is possibly a reflection of the way they conduct their everyday life.Then again our most famous people throw phones! Such is life :P
-
Taxes both here and in the US are paid for a reason. I therefore expect a govt will use them to give me a pension when i am old, make sure my kids get a higher education if this is what they choose, get me better when i am ill and provide adequate policing so that i dont have to shoot criminals myself!
T'is a belief against all experience. Look, just remember that governments are staffed by people. You give people power, they abuse it. The more power you give them the harder it is to control the abuse. The whole idea of the American republic was to keep a very limited government authorized to do only three things; defend against foreign attack, maintain peaceful trade among (not within) the several states and to levy such taxes, imposts and duties as needed to do those other two things.
Get much more complicated than that and the whole thing falls apart. In other words, to err is human but to really foul things up requires government funding.
-
I think this video is symbolic of the nature of American society at the moment.
Be sure to watch the ending.... (the sound doesnt work until :16)
-
You give people power, they abuse it
Which is why it would be silly to move toward communism. Its a fine line tho. Neither system is perfect. But as i see Australia move more toward an American system of unfettered fre enterprise and further away from the traditional principals of a fair go for all i dont feel any more free.
For the first time since the 50s Unversities have set aside some full fee places for rich dumb kids.
Junk food is making our kids fat. We dont have cheese in a can yet but give it time.
Civil liberties have been strongly curtailed. Particularly if your name is something like Al haddad. (the only wayt this govt has decided to involve itself!!!!!)
Out much lauded industrial relations system is being dismantled so that employers can pay low level workers whatever they like regardless of whether it is fair
But i ddont feel any freer under a system where we are moving toward minimal public interference and assistance. i am also wondeering why under this minimal interference sysyem i am paying as much if not more tax than ever.
-
I just got back from the courthouse. I've been spending as much time as possible as far as possible from centers of commerce and county seats and not watching much tv, so the contrast is stark. In this little po dunk court house they have metal detectors and an xray machine and no less than 4 armed officers guarding the door.
I carry a very small pen knife. Last time I was there my daughter called me while I was getting a lecture about the requirement to declare any and all weapons. Not enough to hand it to the little eraser-head who takes his stupid job way too seriously.
This trip, same thing. If I had been thinking I could have put the thing in my metal stash box and sent it through the x-ray machine in my purse. Instead of walking through the metal detector before remembering the thing, I emptied my pockets into the tray. "Hey, you've been here before haven't you? And didn't I tell you you have to declare your weapon?" "I just put it down right in front of you!" "No, you have to state outloud to him that what you're handing me is a knife."
On the way out the door, I handed the little dweeb my official slip wittnessed and signed by anothre officer and asked for my dangerous weapon back. He took two steps over to the lock box, open it and another compartment inside and retrieve my dangerous weapon. I think the whole point of it is just to make sure that anyone who has any dealings in the courthouse is made most uncomfortable to even carry an object that may remind someone that weapons exist.
But I am now fully and officially Ginger McNulty again. :-)
-
Ginger's story about the pen knife reminds me of my recent flight from NJ to NC. The rule is no liquids on the plane, even you purchased them after going through security.
Apparently, one of the boarding agents wasn't paying attention because a woman brought bottled water onto the plane.
The flight attendant asked the woman if the person outside had explained that you cannot bring liquids onto the plane. The woman, surprised, said no. The flight attendant had her take it back off the plane, where she drank the rest of the water and tossed the bottle.
Then, to my amusement, the flight attendant announced on the PA that anyone who has brought liquid onto the plane must remove it immediately.
I, and the man next to me, laughed out loud. He looked at me, and said, "She just made a bunch of innocent people throw away their water."
And of course any terrorists gladly would have taken their dangerous liquids back off the plane. They were caught fair and square, right?"
-
Incredible about the water. Why does no one have any common sense any more?
I also used to carry a knife. It wasn't a little pen knife - but it was perfectly legal. I was always getting in trouble with it. They'd search my purse and there was this knife - and they'd be all shocked and surprised - you got a knife in there, they'd say. Well yeah - so? This always upset them. I often had to argue and insist it was in fact legal. Usually they just wanted to hold it until after the show or when we otherwise left the building or premises - but a few times they tried to confiscate it. I eventually quite caring it. It just wasn't worth the hassle.
Ginger - I assume that is good news - about the name change? But do we now have to worry about the Mcnutty agenda - as opposed to the Warbus agenda? I always kinda liked the sound of that - the Warbus agenda. ;)
-
No, I suppose now we have to worry about the rest of the McNulty tribe getting upset with the affiliation. :rofl:
-
Six Killed In Lancaster School Shooting
POSTED: 11:47 am EDT October 2, 2006
UPDATED: 1:58 pm EDT October 2, 2006
The Lancaster County coroner said six people were killed during a school shooting in Lancaster County, Pa., in the town of Paradise.
Police said the situation is now under control.
"So far six confirmed dead and the helicopters are pulling into (Lancaster General Hospital) like crazy," Lancaster County Coroner Gary Kirchner said.
State police said the shooter is killed, but it is not clear if he is one of the six referred to by Kirchner.
Witnesses told WGAL-TV in Lancaster that a man went into the school and took hostages. Some children were able to get out of the school. They ran through a meadow to a nearby farm and alerted the family there to what was happened. Police were then contacted. Negotiations took place. But at some point, at least 10 shots were fired within the school, WGAL reported.
Numerous medical personnel were called to the scene and people were seen being evacuated by helicopter to Hershey Medical Center.
Officials at the Hershey Medical Center confirm that victims are being admitted there. A spokeswoman says the hospital anticipats treating more than one patient, but the spokeswoman does not know how many.
Three people were also taken by ground to Lancaster General Hospital. One of them is reportedly in critical condition.
The Wolf Rock School is a one-room Amish school located on Mine Road.
NBC 10 will have details on this developing story and our John Blunt is at the shooting scene.
http://www.nbc10.com/news/9981916/detail.html (http://www.nbc10.com/news/9981916/detail.html)
-
Oh Geez.
I'm struck nearly speechless. I meant to ask earlier and it slipped my mind. I have now been reminded. . .
How mush of this do you suppose is Copy-Cat work?
Has blowing away school kids, become 'the' way, those who want to go out with a bang, now chose to go - as a result of the notoriety of Columbine?
-
Yes, and it's about damned time the media quit picking on postal people. I bet the UPWU had something to do with the change in editorial policy.
-
Speaking of is this where the american expression "to go postal" came from?
-
yes.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_postal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_postal)
My dad was a postman and all but one of us six kids have done a turn through the USPS. I can well understand how that place might drive someone to a homocidal rage. That's why I quit after a couple of 90 temp terms.
-
Teen foiled as gun jams
JOPLIN, Mo. -- Fascinated by the Columbine bloodbath, a 13-year-old boy in a black trenchcoat and mask carried an assault rifle into his school yesterday, pointed it at students and fired a shot into a ceiling before the weapon jammed. No one was hurt.
"Please don't make me do this," he was quoted as telling administrators.
His arrest ended what police called a "well-thought-out" plan to terrorize his school.
Police said a note in the student's backpack indicated he had planted an explosive in the school but no bombs were found.
Police described his weapon as a Mac-90, a replica of an AK-47 assault rifle, which belonged to his parents.
Lieut. Geoff Jones said the boy's motives were unclear. School officials said the student had no major discipline problems.
POINTED GUN
The seventh-grader, whose name was not released, pointed the gun at two students inside Joplin Memorial Middle School but was confronted by an administrator who tried to talk him into putting the gun down, Jones said.
The boy refused and fired a shot into the ceiling of an entryway. He tried to continue firing but the rifle jammed. It was not clear whether he was aiming at anyone. He left and officers arrested him behind a nearby building.
Superintendent Jim Simpson said police told him the boy had a fascination with the Columbine High shooting that left 15 people dead near Littleton, Colo., in 1999.
The boy was wearing a black trenchcoat -- like the student gunmen at Columbine -- and had a T-shirt over his head with eye holes cut out, Officer Curt Farmer said.
Farmer said that along with the note indicating an explosive was placed in the school, the boy's backpack held military manuals, instructions on assembling an improvised explosive device and detailed drawings of the school.
PLANNED 'FOR LONG TIME'
"This was quite well-thought-out," Farmer said. "He had been planning this for a long time."
Farmer said it is not uncommon for people in the area to own assault weapons.
Joplin, which has 41,000 residents, is on the Kansas state line about 225 km south of Kansas City, Mo.
Schools across the U.S. have been on alert since three deadly school shootings in three states in a week. In Pennsylvania, church bells tolled yesterday morning in remembrance of the five young Amish girls killed at their one-room schoolhouse one week earlier.
http://torontosun.com/News/World/2006/1 ... 3-sun.html (http://torontosun.com/News/World/2006/10/10/1992143-sun.html)