Younger Americans Cite Liberalism as Defining Aspect, Poll Says

[Ali G. 37]

Police are suppose to be servants of the people. but with too much power, they become the bane of the people.

You can easily reduce drunk driving by making the consequences of drunk driving much more severe. In Sweden, it is illegal to have a BAC of .02 or higher, and a BAC of .10 will result in a punishment of 2 years or more in jail. Compared to the US, Sweden has a fraction of the traffic accidents that we do.

You also don't have some sort of ACLU crying murder regarding rights and amendments in Sweden. The police also have the power to do their job in most other countries.

Police should be there to uphold law and order. Police should not be required to walk around with lawyers, in order to insure they don't use the wrong color pen when filling out a form, which would result in a case being thrown out of court because of a technicality. It's just bizarre to me that Americans prefer to allow criminals roam freely, than police be given the tools necessary for them to do their job. People seem to forget they are dealing with criminals here, rather than some honest Samaritan that works at UNICEF.

[Dan J 277]

You also don't have some sort of ACLU crying murder regarding rights and amendments in Sweden. The police also have the power to do their job in most other countries.

Police should be there to uphold law and order. Police should not be required to walk around with lawyers, in order to insure they don't use the wrong color pen when filling out a form, which would result in a case being thrown out of court because of a technicality. It's just bizarre to me that Americans prefer to allow criminals roam freely, than police be given the tools necessary for them to do their job. People seem to forget they are dealing with criminals here, rather than some honest Samaritan that works at UNICEF.

There are civil rights groups in just about every country. Most developed countries do a pretty good job protecting civil rights and may not need a group as aggressive as the ACLU to defend them.

We do have the right for an accused to be considered innocent until proven guilty. But for you everyone is guilty of something unless proven otherwise.

[Peikko 1,575]

The UK has also started putting cameras in families homes....don't you find that mildly disturbing?

They have? I assume your SO is from the UK and that is where you have received the information from, but I was certainly not aware of this, any links?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Cynicism has its uses.

Example?

[Ali G. 37]

There are civil rights groups in just about every country. Most developed countries do a pretty good job protecting civil rights and may not need a group as aggressive as the ACLU to defend them.

We do have the right for an accused to be considered innocent until proven guilty. But for you everyone is guilty of something unless proven otherwise.

I don't agree with that at all. It's honestly laughable to think that legal systems abroad are anything close to that of the US. No ACLU group gets to influence public policy in Australia as they do here. They're allowed to voice their opinion, but that is about it. They sure as hell are not permitted to sue a school for millions solely because they 'disagree' with something and feel it's 'unconstitutional'. Heck, I had not even heard of that term used prior to moving here. Sorry but that is not a democracy. Rather than decisions being made behind the closed doors of courtrooms, we the people decide our country's fate in Australia. Furthermore, we don't even have a bill of rights yet are still ranked second in the world, as the best overall country to live in, judged by the world.

This attitude towards the world is my biggest pet peeve with this country and a good reason why so many things are they way they are. Many here just don't have any common sense or deductive reasoning to ponder that if our approach is so great, why does no other country use it? Why are we not winning any international accolades for it? etc etc All I hear is denial and excuses; or my favorite, the 'you're being anti-American / go home' rhetoric.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Peikko 1,575]

One certainly should be cynical of politicians who do not bother to present the voter with a manifesto of political actions they would take were they to be elected into office but simply ask the voter to 'like' them

[Dan J 277]

I don't agree with that at all. It's honestly laughable to think that legal systems abroad are anything close to that of the US. No ACLU group gets to influence public policy in Australia as they do here. They're allowed to voice their opinion, but that is about it. They sure as hell are not permitted to sue a school for millions solely because they 'disagree' with something and feel it's 'unconstitutional'. Heck, I had not even heard of that term used prior to moving here. Sorry but that is not a democracy. Rather than decisions being made behind the closed doors of courtrooms, we the people decide our country's fate in Australia. Furthermore, we don't even have a bill of rights yet are still ranked second in the world, as the best overall country to live in, judged by the world.

This attitude towards the world is my biggest pet peeve with this country and a good reason why so many things are they way they are. Many here just don't have any common sense or deductive reasoning to ponder that if our approach is so great, why does no other country use it? Why are we not winning any international accolades for it? etc etc All I hear is denial and excuses; or my favorite, the 'you're being anti-America / get out' rhetoric.

Which is why the internet censorship is being expanded to include any site that hosts material to anything that has been refused classification. Which includes quite a few mature video games.

I guess playing a mature video game is a crime of some sort, so you would be all for it.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

They have? I assume your SO is from the UK and that is where you have received the information from, but I was certainly not aware of this, any links?

It was happening while I was there. It even was posted in OT awhile back. I think its a borough of london. Have you also heard about the Stratford upon Avon game? People log in to catch people using cctv

Here is one link http://www.infowars.com/uk-government-to-i...-private-homes/ (i'm a little leery about accuracy because the Daily Mail was the first to report, but a few more repudible sources have also mentioned it now.)

Here is the link for the game: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/c...icle6862398.ece

http://interneteyes.co.uk/

Booyah, DUI checkpoints operate differently in the US.

[Peikko 1,575]

It was happening while I was there. It even was posted in OT awhile back. I think its a borough of london. Have you also heard about the Stratford upon Avon game? People log in to catch people using cctv

Here is one link http://www.infowars.com/uk-government-to-i...-private-homes/ (i'm a little leery about accuracy because the Daily Mail was the first to report, but a few more repudible sources have also mentioned it now.)

Here is the link for the game: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/c...icle6862398.ece

http://interneteyes.co.uk/

Booyah, DUI checkpoints operate differently in the US.

I had heard about that, and couldn't imagine why anyone would do something like that, it's the equivalent of watching paint dry and was hoping that it would be so boring no one would do it, and it would die an ignominious death. We shall see, but I don't agree with it at all.

[Peikko 1,575]

Realistically, I doubt that report is accurate regarding putting cctv in homes - I can't find a sensible ref to it. I suspect that something has been done, but it's probably not as reported, that's normally what one finds out if you delve deeper into these type of stories.

[Ali G. 37]

Which is why the internet censorship is being expanded to include any site that hosts material to anything that has been refused classification. Which includes quite a few mature video games.

I guess playing a mature video game is a crime of some sort, so you would be all for it.

I think you will find that pretty much every other civilized first world country does not permit the propagation or access to numerous questionable things that are freely available here.

The thought that anything on the net like children being abused, graphic photos or videos of people being killed, instructions on carrying out illegal actives etc should be accessible by all, is lunacy. Certainly not what you would expect in a civilized and educated first world country. That is not what I am arguing anyway. My point is that those nations that restrict such filth, support their police over the so-called rights of criminals, and don't allow some ACLU to call the shots, also have a higher quality of life. Countries have choice, they can either go down the libertarian / third world / US style of do as you please approach or they can use a modern yet realistic approach which required reasonable boundaries for their society. Evidently the majority of the first world has chosen the latter. I'm not saying at all that the US should follow anyone, however, don't deny which approach is delivering the goods.

It's the same deal with health care, education, legal system, crime, immigration, etc

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Dan J 277]

I think you will find that pretty much every other civilized first world country does not permit the propagation or access to numerous questionable things that are freely available here.

The thought that anything on the net like children being abused, graphic photos or videos of people being killed, instructions on carrying out illegal actives etc should be accessible by all, is lunacy. Certainly not what you would expect in a civilized and educated first world country. That is not what I am arguing anyway. My point is that those nations that restrict such filth, support their police over the so-called rights of criminals, and don't allow some ACLU to call the shots, also have a higher quality of life. Countries have choice, they can either go down the libertarian / third world / US style of do as you please society or they can use a modern yet realistic approach towards a society, evidently the majority of the first world has chosen the latter. I'm not saying at all that the US should follow anyone, however, don't deny which approach is delivering the goods.

Everything is evil or bad to you.

http://www.refused-classification.com/Games_A-Z.htm All the games that have been refused classification in Australia. Under the prosed internet filter for Australia, any website that hosts content related to any of those games would be subject to being blocked. Which is just about every single gaming site out there. Along with a bunch of e-commerce sites that might sell those games to audiences outside of Australia. If its all to protect the children than anything might be justified.

The government does not need to go out and actively filter all the content you have trouble with. Most adults will not go seek that kind of content out. Those who do, have psychological problems that are not going to be solved by an internet filter.

As much as you hate civil rights, the ACLU does not call the shots. But the ACLU and other organizations like them such as the EFF, do challenge the law when it might be violating the civil rights of citizens. Those challenges are fought out in court, and sometimes they win, sometimes they don't. But i suppose you would rather not have that, and let corporations and corrupt politications call the shots on what should be legal and illegal. There is a story this morning about a US lobby group trying to make using open source software equivalent to piracy.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Realistically, I doubt that report is accurate regarding putting cctv in homes - I can't find a sensible ref to it. I suspect that something has been done, but it's probably not as reported, that's normally what one finds out if you delve deeper into these type of stories.

I think your right. Looking around, It looks like the cameras are going inside homes but are still aiming towards the street, ie. they are not monitoring people IN the home.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

One certainly should be cynical of politicians who do not bother to present the voter with a manifesto of political actions they would take were they to be elected into office but simply ask the voter to 'like' them

I'm cynical that tomorrow will be as dreary as the next, that way I won't be disappointed.

[Peikko 1,575]

I'm cynical that tomorrow will be as dreary as the next, that way I won't be disappointed.

Ah, you didn't really want a sensible response, just a silly one that you could counter with more sillyness. That's fine, this is after all not exactly a serious platform for debate. However, to suggest that one should always take the sunny view of politics is, I might suggest a tad juvenile. The reality is, there are are career politicians and there is a political elite and to not view that with at least a little cynicism is to play into the hands of those particular breeds. I prefer not to, thank you all the same.