Apparently New Zealand is governed by morons
" Put it in the context of my main points. 1) I don't know enough about the legislation to really say if I'd be for or against it. 2) Legislation like this virtually always has opponents who use scare tactics and misinformation to sway public opinion. The only information I have is what's in the linked article. My comment about the heavily lopsided vote was one piece of information that stood out in my mind. I still don't know enough to say if I'd be for or against it. But that vote is a strong, but not absolute, indicator that it's not as bad as some make it out to be. Something I've seen many times when there is widespread support for bad or ineffective legislation, is when people get worked up into a frenzy over something. Very often it's either nationalistic or reactionary to certain events. I don't know what led to this in NZ, but just for example if some kids commit suicide because of cyber bullying. If they hear about this several times in a short period of time, the population reacts very strongly. They can put tremendous pressure on legislators to do "something" about it. The legislators themselves can be reactionary as well. This can lead to bad legislation that may have good intent, but was done quickly just to be doing something. It's done quickly and not well thought out. One reason I asked if NZ was a common law country is that in common law, bad legislation has a better chance of being worked out. In common law, specific court cases tend to alter the law into something more realistic and workable. I don't fully understand all the differences between common law and civil law, but I think civil law (most of the world including most of Europe) is less flexible in this way. |
|
" People in power don't always represent the educated opinion. Case-in-point: Russian federal parliament, the Duma.
Spoiler
Just a couple days ago they passed a law regarding the so-called right to be forgotten, except in an incredibly perverted way: the new law will enable anyone to force an internet search engine (i.e. Google) to delete indexes to publicly available information they consider "wrong, outdated, or illegally distributed", where "outdated" means three or more years after the described event, and "wrong" is up for anyone's interpretation. "I don't like it/don't agree with it" works if you can write it out in a believable way. All of this without a court order, and the search company must comply within a pretty short timeframe (up to 10 workdays), otherwise it will be facing legal troubles. (And "illegally distributed"? Up for the court to decide, but see below.) Much like forum owners, search companies aren't enabled in any way to judge whether the content is indeed outdated and such, and they're all business enterprises, so it's less of a hassle for them to delete something on first notice rather than being forced by the court, with potential repercussions.
All of this is exactly as abusable as it sounds (more so if you know the specifics of law application in Russia). To put it in an easier context to digest, anyone with a shady or shameful past can now only be (easily) trackable for at most the last three years to the time of querying. Now, the vast majority of Russian parliament, incidentally, has shady and/or shameful past, at least those with ties to the current ruling party, which is, put put it concisely a cesspool of corruption and embezzlement. The ruling party also incidentally controls the courts themselves, so all the traces of concluded court movements, such as the amnesty of Anatoly Serdyukov, are about to vanish from easy access within three years, tops, and information not officially agreed upon in court will vanish instantly—whereas the suspended or actively served sentences of the opposition members, often constructed on the spot with laughable premises, will remain. Fascinating stuff, really. Best part? It was passed with an overwhelming ratio of 435:1. Now, I do realize that NZ's parliament isn't remotely as deep in its own bullshit, but if there's anything to learn from the Russian Duma, it's that a parliament is not quite as representative of popular opinion, intelligence, or virtue, as it sounds in theory. (On the other hand, you could make a compelling case that by that logic Russia is, indeed, also populated by morons—and I wouldn't argue otherwise.) <Tyrfalger> Exactly, the next act is going outside Sarn and into those wheat fields (see the map) to become a farmer. Then we can spend our days endlessly farming. Wait a minute... Last edited by moozooh on Jul 2, 2015, 2:40:42 PM
| |
"People in power sometimes just outright lie:  SO what is your point exactly? And worst change is putting almost all bosses in new version of maps into fucking small areas, where you can't kite well or dodge stuff. What a terrible idiot invented that I want say to him: dude flick you, seriously flick you very much.
| |
|
This is a great thread ^.^ Anyways... I think its important to note there are over 7.5 billlion humans on earth, if the world comes to an end (knock on wood) your greatest threat isn't starvation, hunger or disease... Sadly it's another human. This idea is is further realized when you jump onto any forums, online community, chat (whatever you want to call it) and just read at some of the comments (cruel comments) some people make in order to satisfy, in my opinion a barbaric human nature... a "one upper."
If anyone here has ever been a victim of online bullying or similar (this applies externally) self-depricating humor is your best form of defense ^.^ New Zealand may just be helping young fragile minds of our time...Countless suicides from young adults because of online bullying or from their environment. If only we could turn time back and be better role models. "Another... Solwitch thread." AST
Current Games: :::City Skylines:::Elite Dangerous::: Division 2 "...our most seemingly ironclad beliefs about our own agency and conscious experience can be dead wrong." -Adam Bear | |
" Obama is right, stuff like that doesn't happen in other advanced countries. There are exceptions, of course, but they are once-in-20-years kind of exceptions. And the number of people killed by the police? It's staggering, and again, you won't find a number like that in other advanced countries. Not even remotely close. So what is your point? | |
" Statistics corrected for population: http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/348197-obama-said-mass-shootings-dont-happen-in-advanced-countries-like-in-us-one-chart-proves-him-wrong/ Numbers don't lie, but then, numbers don't run for office, either. =^[.]^= ETA: The comments section on that article makes for interesting reading. =^[.]^= basic (happy/amused) cheetahmoticon: Whiskers/eye/tear-streak/nose/tear-streak/eye/ whiskers =@[.]@= boggled / =>[.]<= annoyed or angry / ='[.]'= concerned / =0[.]o= confuzzled / =-[.]-= sad or sleepy / =*[.]*= dazzled / =^[.]~= wink / =~[.]^= naughty wink / =9[.]9= rolleyes #FourYearLie Last edited by Raycheetah on Jul 3, 2015, 5:10:23 AM
|
|
" C'mon this chart is even more misleading! Norway first - and will stay there for long unless something as big as the Brevnik massacre happens in another small country - lol if you do this kind of corrected charts at least take a longer timeframe! I'd like to see the last 50 yrs, not only 4. And btw US has more deaths and way more mass shootings than all the other nations combined, but the populations are about the same - 314millions vs. around 300millions combined, this alone says a lot! "Metas rotate all the time, eventually the developers will buff melee" PoE 2013-2018 Last edited by Wazz72 on Jul 3, 2015, 6:16:27 AM
| |
" So, yeah, drop Norway... What about Finland, Slovakia, Israel, and Switzerland? Oh, right, not "advanced" countries. First-world privilege not to endure mass shootings, I guess. Which makes the whole Charlie Hebdo thing inapplicable, presumably. It comes down to this: Who's doing all the shooting in the US, mass and otherwise? Is it the vast majority lawfully-armed citizens whom Obama and the Progressives wish to disarm? Or is it a combination of lone-wolf flake-outs, terrorists, and members of gangs and other criminals? Gun control laws only affect those willing to abide by them, i.e., law-abiding citizens. They're not the ones out shooting up Chicago every night, or gunning down the congregations of churches in hopes of sparking a race war. I'd say more about the disproportionate demographics of violent crime rates in the US, but I'd prolly be probated for racism. ='[.]'= =^[.]^= basic (happy/amused) cheetahmoticon: Whiskers/eye/tear-streak/nose/tear-streak/eye/
whiskers =@[.]@= boggled / =>[.]<= annoyed or angry / ='[.]'= concerned / =0[.]o= confuzzled / =-[.]-= sad or sleepy / =*[.]*= dazzled / =^[.]~= wink / =~[.]^= naughty wink / =9[.]9= rolleyes #FourYearLie |
|
|
@Raycheetah: I'm not so sure about this chart. How was it compiled? And where are the numbers of 2014 and the first half of 2015, i.e. the time of Obama's statement?
It might be true that the data from a handful of countries - out of over 30 in the OECD - prove Obama statistically wrong: One or two shootings in a country with a tiny population make for a greater frequency than a dozen in the USA, when set in relation to the size of the population. But is strict numbers crunching really the way to go here? Are "outliers" - like what has happened in Norway in 2011 - really comparable to what is happening in the US? How many mass shootings have been in Finland or Switzerland or Norway since the end of 2013? And how many in the US? Not to forget, it's a widely known fact that the general murder rate in the US is way higher than in culturally and economically comparable countries. That's not what Obama was talking about, but it is sort of the same issue, isn't it? So, instead of being nitpicky and overly literal, maybe one should try and concentrate on the truth in his statement, which would be that violence, and especially gun violence, is a problem that the US has to tackle. | |
|
Regarding your statement about racism: You're probably referring to black on black (or white, yellow, brown) murder rate being higher than any other murder rate. But what difference does it make? It's murder, it's in the US, from US citizens to US citizens. It is a problem about which the USA has to do something. Not go, yeah the blacks are ruining our statistics, and let's just leave it at that. No, find the reasons for that, and try to bring about change.
Last edited by Jojas on Jul 3, 2015, 7:15:28 AM
|
