Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What a puzzle huh. By description, he would be a gun-loving republican voter, like many of his victims. But while I'm not one of them it would be the sort of concert I could well have been at.

 

And he had 2 planes... i wonder what they were and thank goodness he didn't use a plane to crash into the crowd.

 

 

Posted
And he had 2 planes... i wonder what they were and thank goodness he didn't use a plane to crash into the crowd.

Mind you... I don't know that crashing a 172, or similar, even into a crowd like that would've killed more than 58 people. Plus the injury count probably wouldn't be as high. And there's always the chance that he would've buggered the "approach" and speared into something else.

 

Multi-millionaire apparently. Jeez - single, rich, owns planes. Could've enjoyed his life or done so much good for other people. Wonder what screwed him up so much.

 

 

Posted
"There should be a special place in hell for those disgusting humans who mould gullible peoples' mindsets"OK your above quote really is condemning all yanks. That is what the Yanks have been doing for many years. Just look back in history at how some of the wars started. Cuba was lies, The Phillipines was started by lies. Viet Nam another one.

 

They have never stopped lieing, in fact they openly expect all people to lie.

 

The next war will be founded on lies. North Korea is a rogue state they say. That is after USA has had 30000 troops lined up just below the 38th parallel pointing their weapons at the North Koreans. They are just behaving like the school bully, both at home individually and abroad collectively.

You forgot Hawaii, California, Texas, New Mexico and the way the locals were traded away in Louisiana and Alaska - just sayin'

 

 

Posted
I hear that the shooter has been granted honourary Muslim status, for services rendered.

Nope - Life Membership of the NRA for marksmanship and commitment to the 2nd Amendment.

 

 

Posted

The three Australian ideas Barack Obama wanted for America- an excellent, easy to read analysis for those still mystified why the nation that brought us Voyager, iPhones and National Geographic insists on letting cretins buy machine guns:

 

Peter Hartcher: The three things Obama wanted to give America from Australia

 

Which includes this gem:

 

The guns example is a case study in what the American political philosopher Francis Fukuyama has categorised "vetocracy". That is, the US system is not a democracy dominated by the "demos", the Greek word for people. In a vetocracy, it is the veto that is all-powerful.

 

 

Posted
Nothing's going to change. Despite the majority of Americans wanting some sort of gun control, the NRA owns too many politicians - including the turd who's floated to the top. He wanted their support during the election and promised to say whatever they wanted him to say in return.

You could have a mass shooting every day, the pollies would all wring their hands and say it's terrible and their prayers are with the victims, but if someone tried to limit the 2nd amendment by suggesting that mental patients don't really need semi-automatic assault weapons, they'd whistle and look the other way.

Can't argue with your take on Trump Marty. I remember seeing extracts of his rallies,. . each time he mentioned protecting the second amendment, there was a tumultuous cheer from the faithful there present. . . I still shake my head in despair when I read about the continual massacres and humungous gun murder statistics primalrily caused by lax gun laws in the U.S. which appear completely insane to an outsider.

 

 

Posted

"Vetocracy"

 

At last I have the word to describe our political system. I've long held the belief that we don't practice true democracy.

 

And to think that a yank coined the phrase!

 

Thanks for that gem.

 

 

Posted

Vetocract.

 

Doesn't that remind you of the United Nations. A true American style democracy. Everyone votes, but if the Yanks or Russians don't like it, it can't pass.

 

 

Posted
Vetocract.Doesn't that remind you of the United Nations. A true American style democracy. Everyone votes, but if the Yanks or Russians don't like it, it can't pass.

Or the french

 

 

Posted
Vetocract.Doesn't that remind you of the United Nations. A true American style democracy. Everyone votes, but if the Yanks or Russians don't like it, it can't pass.

Not just the Yanks and Russians; all the major powers who won WWII.

 

India, Japan, Germany, Italy, Brazil etc. don't get a veto.

 

 

Posted

While ' "Privileged" member s only hold veto powers, the UN is a farce. Like George Orwell's Animal farm was it? ALL...... are equal but some are more equal than others. Nev

 

 

Posted

True, but if I was paying the lions share of the costs, I would want the lion's share of the power. Fair dos, I say... Although I am not sure how much Russia pays in... Maybe it has to be reconstituted...

 

 

  • 1 month later...
Posted

When did you last have a good, honest politician?

 

Our legal system may not seem good to a Yank, but I can assure you that the Yank system is no better. As for arming police in USA, how do you go about a policeman killing an Australian and refusing to answer questions about it. I havn't heard of any charges being laid, but then the killing was done by a Yank and also a policeman and the victim was not important enough to worry about, because she was an Australian.

 

Your system works so that if a serving american commits an offence while in Australia he will be shipped back to the USA and Australia will have no chance of even questioning him.

 

I really don't think Yanks should criticise other systems until they get their own system into good shape.

 

 

Posted

Not sure what the legal system is there in regards to the cop refusing to talk. I don't think we have the same thing here (someone like Kaz would know better than me) - I do know there's no 5th amendment rights here, despite 60% of the population thinking there is... too much "Law & Order" being watched methinks.

 

 

Posted

Sorry I upset you. I called you a Yank, because that is the usual shorthand for citizen of the USA. I could have called you American, but in my opinion that encompasses all America, which is a continent, not a state.

 

I will have to google David Eastman, as his name does not ring a bell.

 

We in Australia are a bit worried about soft sentencing, but we are also worried about innocent people being found guilty.

 

That has happened here and also in the UK, plus even more in USA.

 

 

Posted

Chixaluv we hope you're not offended, but we Aussies get a bit protective because so much of our culture is being assaulted by Americanisms- from your redicuously medieval measurement system to the takeover of many of our national icons by US firms. (For me, the last straw will be when our ANZAC biscuits are relabelled ANZAC Cookies.)

 

A disturbing proportion of America's people are locked up. Most of them seem to be young black men on drug charges, for whom a prison sentence translates into a life of opportunities denied. Australia has tended to follow American trends, even those that don't work, but at least we still believe in reforming criminals. (I know of one person who, after serving his sentence for dealing drugs, rose to become head of a state education system.)

 

America has many problems, many caused by ignorance. Fortunately, the US also generates many great solutions, particularly when commonsence and science are applied. Recently several US states have closed prisons and moved to rehabilitation programmes.

 

 

Posted

[uSER=488]@Chixaluv[/uSER] - Yank is no more offensive in Australia than Aussie, Skip, and a few others... Often these terms start off as offensive terms, but morph into common day parlance. May times, especially in my early days moving from Aus to the UK, I inadvertently caused offence...

 

Each legal system has its comparative advantages and disadvantages. I have been out of Australia for a while now, but its legal system has been based on innocent until proven guilty and it is better to see a man not found guilty of an offence committed than an man found guilty of an offence he didn't commit. Of course, this stems from around 15th century (hence man and not person) English law; when there were effectively two laws - one for the gentry and one for the peasantry. This referred to the gentry.

 

There will always people who game systems, be they legal, political, welfare, sports (look at soccer primadonnas these days), etc. The challenge is to create a fair and consistent system that can be universally applied to all. I think it is not safe to say just because someone exercises their legal right to appeal and they keep losing, means they can no longer appeal. Often these cases are borderline, with the more blatant gaming attempts swiftly dealt with.

 

Incarceration by itself has long been accepted as destructive and, unless you want to keep them in forever, usually enforces and breeds criminal behaviour. There is no doubt some people are just bad, but with the ever increasingly complex web of societal relationships, norms, expectations and pressure, mental illness is increasingly prevalent especially amongst young people, rehabilitation does seem to offer a better chance. Yes, there are victims and their voices and suffering should be heard. But, ironically, it is the third party bystander (i.e. the general public) more often than the victims that are baying for bloody retribution.

 

Of course, I am not suggesting we give perpetrators of crimes fluffy pillows and doonas (duvets, quilts, etc), but it is a more balanced approach that is needed. And of course, I am one who may bay for blood for the more heinous crimes (vicious murder, rape, pedophilia, etc). But, for instance, I saw on a US show where a man of about 60 was jailed for 20 years for "stealing" grapes (he merely tried one before he bought at a supermarket grocery department).

 

The Aussie criminal justice system has its flaws, but there is one area where it trumps most of the state US criminal justice system - that is of Jury veto (well, certainly in Vic, anyway - not sure of the other states). There are limited circumstances in which either the prosecution and defence can veto a jury member; and a limited number iof times, too. In the US (e.g. California), the prosecution basically have to accept a hand-picked defence jury - how do you think OJ Simpson got off? Also, we don't televise court cases - so when there's a high profile case, there is not the additional pressure of live media and millions watching you.. Judge Lance Ito's behaviour in the OJ Simpson case has been called into question by numerous commentators...

 

[uSER=488]@Chixaluv[/uSER] - if the above is wasted as you don't return - it would be a shame as it would be a case of mistaken definition due to cultural differences (and I guess Aussies are goign to use more Aussie-directed language on an Aussie website). I have been on here a while and have rarely, if ever, seen genuine spite between players.

 

 

Posted
[uSER=488]@Chixaluv[/uSER], we Aussie's have a perverse sense of humour, using what appears as an insult as a reverse endearment...In fact quite often, the more offensive the insult, the friendlier the relationship...

...which explains why SDQDI and I never miss an opportunity to pour sh1t on each other.

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...