Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » The Dutch are better than Americans (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: The Dutch are better than Americans
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There's this image in liberal circles that Dutch people, the Netherlands as a country is 'better' than America, meaning that we are more down to earth and pragmatic on some social issues, and that we are basically more liberal. First, sad to say, this is less and less the case, and sometimes I doubt that it has ever been so.
And secondly, it's quite easy to be more liberal than the U.S.A. ... [Wink]

Right now, there's a huge terrorism trial going on, where 8 of 14 suspects are only on trial for 'membership of a terrorist organization with a destructive goal'. They haven't done anything, but the Secret Service thinks they might do something.

Also, suspects aren't all that well protected in the Netherlands. Recently there was this child abuse case, where a 10 yo girl was raped and murdered and her 11 yo classmate, a boy was beaten up, in a park. At first, they suspected the classmate, which seems stupid, but not criminally stupid. But they also interogated the boy by quasi strangling him, shouting at him, in other words treating him like an adult. There was no lawyer or parent/guardian present, for several hours. Who was present, was a child psychologist, who condoned all the actions by the interrogating policemen. No recording was made.
On top of this, they wrongly convicted someone, and when the actual perp confessed and DNA evidence supported this, the DA's on two levels wilfully ignored this. It took them four months to actually release the guy. The really bad thing is that heads didn't roll. None. To this day, all DA's who were manipulating evidence and expert witnesses, have not been punished.

Also, anybody who followed the Natalee Holloway case, knows that in Holland, suspects can be locked up without charge fore 3 months. I'm assuming this period is far less in the USA?

Also, in matters of free speech, we recently had 11 illegal immigrants burn to dead in an airport-detention-centre. The responsible immigration minister was then taunted on banners in Amsterdam, with texts like 'Murderer' and 'Deportation' etc. these banners were then swiftly removed by the Amsterdam police!. Sometimes I really feel this is not my country anymore. I mean, when a jewish social-democratic mayor feels the need to do this ... And in Holland, jewish still means liberal intellectual.

So my point is, there's no utopia, and the Netherlands is certainly no liberal utopia. Americans can feel less alone in knowing that a swing to the right is not just happening/reinforced in their country.


PS
To be fair, somethings are still 'better' in the Netherlands:
- we have the lowest teen pregnancy in the world, 6 per 1000, USA/UK is like 105/95 per 1000.
- no death penalty, and far less crime rate, 21 cases of life imprisonement on a population of 16 mill. (lotsa gangland-bosses killings though;))
- we have still a huge middle class
- gay marriage with adoption rights (this is where the UK followed us [Smile] !!)
- not a big budget deficit, if any. we don't borrow from the chinese like you lot do.
- we don't allow children below the age of 12 in the justice system in any way. (I understand that in Minnesota, if a 10 year old boy pull down the pants of a 7 yo. girl, he's penalized in some way.)
- also, mentally retarded people cannot be prosecuted like in the US.
- legal euthanasia
- legal and taxpaying prostitution.

Feel free to give arguments against any of my points! [Smile] I'm human too ... [Wink]

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
- we don't allow children below the age of 12 in the justice system in any way
What happens if a 12 year old murders someone?

quote:
also, mentally retarded people cannot be prosecuted like in the US.
How mentally retarted is "retarted enough not to be prosecuted"?


Let me ask you one final question: What's the tax rate?

Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Americans can feel less alone in knowing that a swing to the right is not just happening/reinforced in their country.
Not one thing you named is part of the policy, ideals, etc. of "the right", at least as known in the United States.

[ December 05, 2005, 11:43 PM: Message edited by: javelin ]

Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I went to de Vreij, many years ago, but I have kept up some. Overall I would say yes. I would exclude Drenthe and Friesland, however -- which can be as provincial as Alabama and Mississippi! One reason that the Netherlands is more advanced is that it has a large urban population. The % of urbane to hick in the Netherlands is high, in the US only middling.

The biggest difference is corruption. The Netherlands is nowhere near so corrupt as America is, Prince Berhardt an exception. The religious right claims that this is due to a straying from "the true path" of the Bible; the Netherlands is proof that it is not due to that cause at all.

There is more 'faith' in the secular system in the Netherlands, especially in the courts. Huge swaths of American culture do not believe they can get a fair trial; they're right.

Where I think that Dutch culture is well advanced over American culture is in education -- particularly in science and engineering but their comprehension of world history is miles ahead of Americans (who are shockingly provincial in some ways). Americans travel more broadly, but its Tuesday and Belgium to them.

The greatest advantage the Netherlands has over the States, however, is in its % of middle class to rich and poor. It was in my day, and I think still is, the most middle-class nation in the world. I saw Queen Juliana (then the indisputably richest woman on earth) on a bicycle one day, a grandchild and a shopping bag on the back.

But what struck me most? It was clean, almost compulsively clean. Minnesota clean [Wink] . It has little patriotism -- and enormous self-respect. They respect their land; they had to make it. America has little self-respect -- and a surfeit of patriotism.

And the American idea that the Netherlands is homogenous would be dead wrong. It's as cosmopolitan as as Europe gets.

I'm not suggesting there aren't backwaters of Biblical boers in the Netherlands -- and I think the modern architecture of Holland is catastrophic, but overall I would say, yes, the Netherlands as a whole is more civilized than the States as a whole. One would have a very hard time finding bums under bridges in Holland -- and no trouble find them at all in the States.

The price for this in taxes is terrific; but noone can deny it doesn't work over all. The Dutch have beaten Aemricans in the thing that Americans pride themselves in most: satisfaction with being bourgeois.

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Dutchie, what you think the "Right" is, is about the worst liberal mischaracterization I've heard.

Conservatism is not equal to Facsism.

Europe is coming out of a "Golden Age" where the Europeans have been able to live their lives undisturbed while the U.S. and Russia stared each other in the eye for a few decades. Now reality is catching up.

Be grateful. We only had the Clinton years as a lapse from reality (if you can call 4 bombings and Northern Watch as "peace")

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Not one thing you named is part of the policy, ideals, etc. of "the right", at least as known in the United States.

Not all of it, but it is true that the whole issue of rights for terrorism suspects is being fought pretty exclusively from the right. Not everyone on the right may believe in secret detention and having detainees without legal status or rights, but it is the right wing of American politics that is making these things happen.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Where as the Left believes that the Constitution IS a suicide pact.

Considering the damage that lawyers have done to our terrorist investigations in the past, I would be glad to hear some suggestions on how we fix this.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sure there are plenty out there. I'm just suggesting that abandoning rule of law isn't a good one.

Adam

edited to add: Its interesting when people believe that, in Iraq, the 100,000 or so innocent civilian deaths as a result of the invasion are acceptable, because the country as a whole has (theoretically) a chance at freedom; yet.. here in America, those same people think that we need to give up freedom to prevent terrorists from killing us. Considering that even if we did literally nothing to prevent terrorism, they could still be hard pressed to kill as many people as have died in Iraq, how is this consistant?

[ December 06, 2005, 11:09 AM: Message edited by: Adam Masterman ]

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ssci
Member
Member # 1053

 - posted      Profile for ssci   Email ssci   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Interesting perspective of the grey area. I like the way you expressed that.
Posts: 442 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mormegil
Member
Member # 2439

 - posted      Profile for Mormegil         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Adam, that is a very interesting point.
Posts: 800 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zyne
Member
Member # 117

 - posted      Profile for Zyne   Email Zyne   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
There's this image in liberal circles that Dutch people, the Netherlands as a country is 'better' than America, meaning that we are more down to earth and pragmatic on some social issues, and that we are basically more liberal.
The same sentiment is true for many in the US, except it's because the US is less liberal.

quote:
Also, anybody who followed the Natalee Holloway case, knows that in Holland, suspects can be locked up without charge fore 3 months. I'm assuming this period is far less in the USA?
Yes, unless it's terrorism or related to the war on Iraq, in which case anything goes.

quote:
we don't allow children below the age of 12 in the justice system in any way.
Except that you yourself gave an example involving an 11 year old child.

quote:
also, mentally retarded people cannot be prosecuted like in the US.
I'm not inclined to believe that's all there is to that.
Posts: 4003 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
I'm sure there are plenty out there. I'm just suggesting that abandoning rule of law isn't a good one.

Adam

edited to add: Its interesting when people believe that, in Iraq, the 100,000 or so innocent civilian deaths as a result of the invasion are acceptable, because the country as a whole has (theoretically) a chance at freedom; yet.. here in America, those same people think that we need to give up freedom to prevent terrorists from killing us. Considering that even if we did literally nothing to prevent terrorism, they could still be hard pressed to kill as many people as have died in Iraq, how is this consistant?

Your analogy fails because the loss of liberty in wartime is temporary. Almost every US war has involved temporary loss of citizen liberty, and these liberties have always been restored -- often with new safeguards and liberties -- after the conflict is over.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pelegius
Member
Member # 2399

 - posted      Profile for Pelegius     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete, we are not at "war" and have not been since 1945. We have been involved in numerous "conflicts" since then, but these do not, under U.S. law as I know, justify the loss of any degree of liberty by U.S. citizens.
Posts: 1644 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well said, Pelegius. The policy makers are constantly telling us that the WOT could go on indefinately. If one is concerned about the loss of liberty due to things like the PATRIOT act, it would be foolish to assume they are going to go away once we "win" the war on terror. That should happen just after we win the war on drugs.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Zyne:
quote:
we don't allow children below the age of 12 in the justice system in any way.
Except that you yourself gave an example involving an 11 year old child.

quote:
also, mentally retarded people cannot be prosecuted like in the US.
I'm not inclined to believe that's all there is to that.

Okay, I admit on being a bit sloppy about the kids thing, children under 12 can be questioned, but they cannot be prosecuted for criminal offenses. If ever they commit a murder, they will get supervision but they won't be put in jail with older children. Kids 12-18 can be consulted by the judge in divorce cases.

On the retarded thing I'm looking it up.

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pickled shuttlecock
Member
Member # 1093

 - posted      Profile for pickled shuttlecock   Email pickled shuttlecock   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
Its interesting when people believe that, in Iraq, the 100,000 or so innocent civilian deaths as a result of the invasion are acceptable...

I'm sorry, but the number you're quoting is absolutely useless.

Short version: The Lancet study said the war caused, with 95% certainty, between 8,000 and 194,000 deaths.

That's an awfully wide confidence bound. You get bounds like that from unreliable data and unreliable survey methods.

That's one problem; here's the second. I can say with 100% certainty that the Iraq war caused between 0 and 30,000,000 deaths, and I don't even need data (besides the population of Iraq) to do it. Should I then claim that the Iraq war caused 15,000,000 deaths? Obviously not - that's only the middle of a very wide confidence interval (and it's an accurate one!), not the truth.

Yet journalists, being statistics-stupid and biased toward sensationalism (at best), reported just the mean value. It suited their purposes better to claim 98,000 rather than "as low as 8,000 and as high as 194,000." Anyone reading the latter would intuitively see that the study results are weak.

Which I hope you do now, and lay off the 100,000 number in the future.

IIRC, there have been more criticisms of that study and more studies on the actual toll, but I don't have the patience to look it all up.

[ December 07, 2005, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: pickled shuttlecock ]

Posts: 1392 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pickled shuttlecock
Member
Member # 1093

 - posted      Profile for pickled shuttlecock   Email pickled shuttlecock   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I reject the notion that one person's definition of "liberal" (Dutchie's) defines "good."

In other words, stick it.

Posts: 1392 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
pickle, don't get excited, if you read carefully, you'll see that that's the reason the word better was in quotes.
So, to be reciprocal, you stick it.

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pickled shuttlecock
Member
Member # 1093

 - posted      Profile for pickled shuttlecock   Email pickled shuttlecock   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pick a different word, then?

How about the Dutch are more liberal than Americans?

If you did that, your thread would be redundant - everyone knows that the Dutch are more liberal than Americans. On the assumption that people create threads for a reason, I'd say that you probably do think "liberal" = "good."

It's in the subtext, in other words. You stick it. [Big Grin]

Posts: 1392 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
pickled,

we've argued the statitics elsewhere - it was neither unreliable data nor methodology.

quote:
I can say with 100% certainty that the Iraq war caused between 0 and 30,000,000 deaths, and I don't even need data (besides the population of Iraq) to do it.
Except you can't say that with 100% certainty, you have no idea what the upper bound with 100% certainty is except that it is lower than the US population.

quote:
Should I then claim that the Iraq war caused 15,000,000 deaths? Obviously not - that's only the middle of a very wide confidence interval (and it's an accurate one!), not the truth.
For the articles methodology you can trade slightly less certainty for a much smaller interval, whereas your sampling method makes it impossible. All you can say with your method that it is with the interval you can't give any idea of where it is likely to lie on the interval.

quote:
Anyone reading the latter would intuitively see that the study results are weak.
And they would be wrong, I showed a few alternative ways of expressing the Iraqi deaths that were more easily understandable by the public and expressed in a more useful way that the 95% CI (note that it isn't 'as low as 8,000 or as high as 194,000 those are the bounds on the 95% CI, not the absolute bounds) - ie 95% chance of above the low end, 90% chance above a quite a bit higher threshold, and 66% above another etc. (I don't recall the exact stats I used)

LetterRip

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pickled shuttlecock:
Pick a different word, then?

How about the Dutch are more liberal than Americans?

If you did that, your thread would be redundant - everyone knows that the Dutch are more liberal than Americans. On the assumption that people create threads for a reason, I'd say that you probably do think "liberal" = "good."

It's in the subtext, in other words. You stick it. [Big Grin]

Pick another word? Well, duh ... NO! I'm happy to see that you posses the skill of distinguishing subtext. If only you could've managed to interpret it correctly. You kind of missed the point: Another word wasn't needed, SINCE there were quotes. Don't blame me for your temporary poor detection skills [Smile]

Anyway, your reaction is kneejerk and wrong, the whole point of the thread was to show that we aren't that different, but where's the fun in being explicit? Aren't you Anglo-Saxon? the kings of the eloquent double tripple hidden meaning, subtexts with loops, etc. etc.?

But if you wanna be all no-subtexty about it:
Yes, of course progressive is better than conservative ! [Wink] This is self-evident ...

+
+
+

quote:
Originally posted by flydye45:
Dutchie, what you think the "Right" is, is about the worst liberal mischaracterization I've heard.

My first reaction was: See? I TOLD you that it was EASY to be more liberal than the US of A.

But I'm not sure what you mean, so plse. expand. Did I make you too "Fascist" or too "Liberal"?

[ December 07, 2005, 01:57 AM: Message edited by: Dutchie ]

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
What happens if a 12 year old murders someone?

How mentally retarted is "retarted enough not to be prosecuted"?
Let me ask you one final question: What's the tax rate?

So Josh, would you let the decision whether or not to excute 12 year olds and retards depend on the tax rate? How's that work?

And about kids who commit murder: We really don't convict or even try kids like Nathaniel Abraham, who had to be tried like adult at age eleven!. That's kinda barbaric. We surely don't execute them, and also don't convict to any sort of prison sentence. Eleven years old ... it is these sort of things that make Europeans care less about American suffering under terrorism. There are two countries in the world that don't wanna sign the International treaty on Childrens rights in the world, Somalia ..... and the USA. This means countries like China, Iran, Afghanistan etc. HAVE signed. I really have to ask, what is this need you people feel to (be able to) execute kids? Also, the fact that a disproportianate large number of these kids is black .... I guess it's easier to convict those, isn't it?

[ December 07, 2005, 02:02 AM: Message edited by: Dutchie ]

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Paladine
Member
Member # 1932

 - posted      Profile for Paladine   Email Paladine   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Welcome to Ornery; you are wrong.

quote:
Also, the fact that a disprotianate number of these kids is black .... I guess it's easier to convict them, isn't it?
Your arguments are weak enough without ridiculous snark like this.

quote:
So Josh, would you let the decision whether or not to excute 12 year olds and retards depend on the tax rate? How's that work?
His question probably had a lot to do with:

quote:
- not a big budget deficit, if any. we don't borrow from the chinese like you lot do
Or do you not think that tax rates have anything to do with budget deficits.

Incidentally, do you not think that most 12 year olds who murder someone don't know better? How about 14? It's easy to make sarcastic comments about where we draw our lines, but where are yours? A 16 year old is a child, but he damn well knows what he's doing if he shoots someone in the head.

So you pick. Are you in favor of convicting children or letting murderers go free because they happen not to have attained their legal majority?

Posts: 3235 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks for the welcome, you are wrong.
It's of course better to let children who have killed someone go into rehab or something than to convict and execute them. Don't you see the insanity of your society, where you're not allowed to have sex at 17, but can be executed at eleven?
You cannot drink beer, but you can be executed at age eleven?
And you're probably anti-abortion, but you're in favour of execution of eleven year olds?

I don't get it.

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And paladine, what's your explanation then for the consistent lower crime rate in the Netherlands than in the states? Despite our lower punishments?

I finally found it, for murder as an under 18, you get 2 years jail, with concurrent 6 years mandatory psych. Psych can be renewed upon doctors recommendation, and can be restrained.

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Paladine
Member
Member # 1932

 - posted      Profile for Paladine   Email Paladine   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
t's of course better to let children who have killed someone go into rehab or something than to convict and execute them. Don't you see the insanity of your society, where you're not allowed to have sex at 17, but can be executed at eleven?
You're allowed to have sex at 17 in my society. Maybe you should learn a little bit more about it before you make condemn it. Just a thought.

But no, sometimes it's better to convict someone than to rehabilitate them. You're so caught up on generalizations that you're missing the obvious: the best course of action in sentencing criminals is situationally determined.

Some 16 year olds have the mental capacity of an adult. Some can understand the consequences of their actions. In fact, most can. Most 14 year olds can't, but some can. Very few 12 year olds can. Some 30 year olds can't.

So to make blanket statements about the mental capabilities of people at different ages is a bit ridiculous. Development varies situationally, and should be judged accordingly.

quote:
And you're probably anti-abortion, but you're in favour of execution of eleven year olds?
I never told you that I was anti-abortion. I also never said that I favored the execution of anyone. Read and respond to what I write, not what your speculation about my probable beliefs leads you to conclude.
Posts: 3235 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Adam, did a lawyer pass along intelligence garnered from a closed trial to terrorist advesaries? Does the ACLU attempt to make the communication of the captured terrorists with their cohorts more easy? Do the questions asked by the intelligence community indicate their areas of interest to those interrogated? Are these people U.S. citizens?

All the answers except the last are yes. I am and always have been foresquare on Pedilla etc as getting all their civil rights. Achmed from Pakistan can rot. So misapplying American civil rights is a non-starter for me. Mischaracterizing the Patriot Act, which requires judicial oversight , as a slam against civil liberties, is also a bit hyperbolic.

That being said, the sneak and peek aspects of the Patriot Act I do disagree with. The librarians huffing and puffing? Please.

Here's the rub for me. If Bush and Co. LISTENED to your concerns, dropped the Patriot Act, released willy nilly the detainees we had no hard evidence on but lots of suspicions, and gave them all habeas corpus, I KNOW that these same whining civil rights leaders would slam him as a "do nothing" president if one person got harmed as a result. So political choice, try to keep people safer as best Bush sees it, or make my political enemies happy...
[Wink]

And your proposition that the terrorist would be hard pressed to kill 10,000 of us is valid. Of course, we used to think they would be hard pressed to kill 1,000...

Edited to add: What exactly is the number of dead you will accept for having a judge check on library books? For having foreigners who shot at us to have their day in open court?

[ December 07, 2005, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Mischaracterizing the Patriot Act, which requires judicial oversight , as a slam against civil liberties, is also a bit hyperbolic.
To say that the PATRIOT act erodes civil liberties isn't hyperbole, its a fact. Even its supporters agree to that. The question is whether its justified. My point was that it seems a double standard to value freedom over lives for Iraqis, and lives over freedom for Americans.

quote:
Here's the rub for me. If Bush and Co. LISTENED to your concerns, dropped the Patriot Act, released willy nilly the detainees we had no hard evidence on but lots of suspicions, and gave them all habeas corpus, I KNOW that these same whining civil rights leaders would slam him as a "do nothing" president if one person got harmed as a result. So political choice, try to keep people safer as best Bush sees it, or make my political enemies happy...

This is a strawman rationalization. No one is asking for a weak prosecution of the war on terror, they are saying that the disregard for rule of law is unnecessary and counterproductive. And regardless, the disparity remains: The administration justifes the loss of life in Iraq by the new freedom they enjoy, and at the same time justifies loss of freedom at home by lives being saved. Downplaying the loss of civil liberties at home does not make this contradiction go away.

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
No one is asking for a weak prosecution of the war on terror, they are saying that the disregard for rule of law is unnecessary and counterproductive
This is an inaccurate statement, IMO. First, a lot of the Patriot Act seems to deal with technical innovation, essentially letting the rule of law catch up to the internet and cell phones. So denying good tools is part of "weakening the prosecution". If we have intelligence sources which get killed because of open trials and lawyers passing along information to their cohorts, that is "weakening the prosecution". This is, as you say, a fact. But it is a valid point that you may not think our "erosion" (not, I note, removal) of civil liberties as being worth the changes.

Additionally, the Patriot act is LAW. Whether it is good law or not is another point. So we are not "disregarding the rule of law". We are making laws you don't like. We are denying legal courtesies to terrorists that we are not denying German tourists. If you can offer other examples, I would be happy to reconsider.

And to a certain extent, I agree with you. I don't want police checkpoints everywhere. I didn't like the subway cameras, with which I disagreed with several Conservatives (this in no way means they don't have a point. I just disagree with the precedent, efficacy, and value of liberty vs. real danger) So I would be resigned to "lose" some American lives and live as Americans. To tweak a few rules to give us the most bang for the buck against terrorists is a different question, which is where the Patriot Act lies with me, at least most of it. I don't like taking my shoes off at the airport, but I (sort of) see the reasons.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dutchie:
So Josh, would you let the decision whether or not to excute 12 year olds and retards depend on the tax rate? How's that work?

I'm just going to assume you're sincere here and tell you that's not what I meant at all. I had asked three disparate questions about your statements, and I hadn't made any statement of my own. I simply had questions.

The problem I have with 12 year olds being able to dodge the law is that it is extremely exploitable. Any 12 year old who knows it can get away with killing anyone he wants.

Any father that murders his wife can have his loyal son step in and say "I did it." without serious fear of repurcussion.

I also find the execution of young children to be apprehensible, but I ALSO find it insane that your country refuses to prosecute them at all.

I am really intersted in the answers to all three of my questions. I'll quote them here for ease.

quote:
What happens if a 12 year old murders someone?
quote:
How mentally retarted is "retarted enough not to be prosecuted"?
quote:
What's the tax rate?

Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dutchie:
It's of course better to let children who have killed someone go into rehab or something than to convict and execute them.

This sort of logic is just laughed at here. Support your convictions or don't make them.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dutchie:
And paladine, what's your explanation then for the consistent lower crime rate in the Netherlands than in the states? Despite our lower punishments?

Lower crime rate doesn't necessarily mean less crime. It could just mean looser laws and less effective crime fighting apparatus. It could also be due to less large urban areas. It could also be due to Americans being blood thirsty animals.

My point is, you cannot possibly try to accurately figure out WHY the netherlands have a lower crime rate until you look at more data. Any explaination offered would be simply speculation.

Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh yeah?!! Say that to our face!

[ December 07, 2005, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ender wiggin
Member
Member # 9

 - posted      Profile for ender wiggin   Email ender wiggin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This should really be hashed out on several different threads. It really is nice to have an actual Dutch person here, because we are always bringing up Dutch/Scandanavian examples in our threads and we really don't know to much about it,.

I understand trying and 11 year old for murder. I don't understand trying him as an adult. While clearly the capactiy for judging right and wrong is there in an 11 year old, generally a child is not as reponsible for his actions as an adult. At the age of 11, the parents still bear a large percentage of the responsibility for the child's actions. That is why we laws against children having sex with adults, even consensual sex, because we as a socity have decided that children are not capeable of dealing with a decision of that import. Is an 11 year old who hurts someone as responsible as a 20 year old who hurts someone? I doubt it. Should they be punished. Yes. Should they be punished the same as an adult? No.

Posts: 971 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Paladine:
You're allowed to have sex at 17 in my society. Maybe you should learn a little bit more about it before you make condemn it. Just a thought

.
In at least one state, Michigan, if you have sex with your 15 yo GF when you are 18, you will be branded a sex offender, put on a internet list, and will have to report every 3 months, for the next TWENTY FIVE YEARS Federal laws haven't stepped in to correct this, so .... it's American. Your reply, it's kinda nitpicking. but I'll make it explicit: My point was that sex is 'Verboten' for young Americans, sometimes upto a very high age, you can't watch porn until older than 18, having actual sex is a no no, you practice sticking your heads in the sand with regard to condoms (not unlike, or exactly like most of the muslim countries you're fighting now)
But ... what IS allowed, at a very young age, is the 'right' to be executed. That's sick.

quote:
Some 16 year olds have the mental capacity of an adult. Some can understand the consequences of their actions. In fact, most can. Most 14 year olds can't, but some can. Very few 12 year olds can. Some 30 year olds can't. So to make blanket statements about the mental capabilities of people at different ages is a bit ridiculous. Development varies situationally, and should be judged accordingly.

That's nonsense, since the law does nothing but make blanket statements about mental capacity and age, you can't vote at 12, nor legally drive a car or marry, even in the Deep South, even in the Midwest.
quote:
I never told you that I was anti-abortion. I also never said that I favored the execution of anyone. Read and respond to what I write, not what your speculation about my probable beliefs leads you to conclude.
Duh. Does anyone notice too, that he doesn't deny either?
Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
My point is, you cannot possibly try to accurately figure out WHY the netherlands have a lower crime rate until you look at more data. Any explaination offered would be simply speculation. [/QB]

I dunno exactly why we have less criminals in jail per capita, and yes, more data is needed, in theory. However, despite all your long prison terms, crime doesn't seem to be lowered in the usa. The death penalty hasn't been proven to be an effective deterrent.
And my feeling is, not because of watching Hollywood movies but rather documentaries about your prison system, is that you punish mostly poor people and black people. And you do so in a disproportionate rate, certainly on the drugs user side. (White kids go to rehab, black kids go to jail). So while you think that you are effective crime fighters, you might be effective poor-people-locker-uppers.
This notion is supported by the increasing privatisation of the prison: it is in the best interest of those companies to fill them with people. The easiest way to do that, is to fill them with poors and blacks since they have the weakest defence against this sort of thing. There will forces to push for harsher laws, not because of more crime, but because there's a fast buck in it.

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Adam Masterman:
quote:
Not one thing you named is part of the policy, ideals, etc. of "the right", at least as known in the United States.

Not all of it, but it is true that the whole issue of rights for terrorism suspects is being fought pretty exclusively from the right.
And sad to say, it's almost the mainstream left to demand full criminal trial rights for every single freaking war captive, something that's never been done before. We're supposed to haul our soldier out of the field and testify to prove the "guilt" of someone that they caught on the freaking battlefield. The lefties say it's either that, or give terrorist captured folks full prisoner of war status, i.e. pay them a salary and don't even interview them to try to get information. Geneva only requires that stuff for prisoners who were caught wearing uniforms and otherwise following the laws of war.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Dutchie:
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
My point is, you cannot possibly try to accurately figure out WHY the netherlands have a lower crime rate until you look at more data. Any explaination offered would be simply speculation.

I dunno exactly why we have less criminals in jail per capita, and yes, more data is needed, in theory. However, despite all your long prison terms, crime doesn't seem to be lowered in the usa. The death penalty hasn't been proven to be an effective deterrent.
And my feeling is, not because of watching Hollywood movies but rather documentaries about your prison system, is that you punish mostly poor people and black people. And you do so in a disproportionate rate, certainly on the drugs user side. (White kids go to rehab, black kids go to jail). So while you think that you are effective crime fighters, you might be effective poor-people-locker-uppers.
This notion is supported by the increasing privatisation of the prison: it is in the best interest of those companies to fill them with people. The easiest way to do that, is to fill them with poors and blacks since they have the weakest defence against this sort of thing. There will forces to push for harsher laws, not because of more crime, but because there's a fast buck in it. [/QB]

I agree with you on that. America is becoming a carceral state, and it's one of the great evils or our society, just as the trailers full of half-slave immigrants outside your main cities are an unspoken evil in your society.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lewkowski
Member
Member # 2028

 - posted      Profile for Lewkowski   Email Lewkowski       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"And my feeling is, not because of watching Hollywood movies but rather documentaries about your prison system, is that you punish mostly poor people and black people."

We punish people who break the law. The law gets broken due to a sick kind of "ghetto culture" that promotes violence, drugs, and looks down upon education and discpline as being "white." Furthermore black Americans have been bombarded with messages from black "leaders" like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and other nuts that all their problems are due to racisim. This leads to an attitude of hostility and distrust.

A poll was taken, that something like 50% of the black New Orleanions believed the levys were delibratly blown up. Say thanks to people like Al Sharpton for crap like that.

Posts: 890 | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dutchie
Member
Member # 2690

 - posted      Profile for Dutchie   Email Dutchie       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JoshuaD:
quote:
Originally posted by Dutchie:
So Josh, would you let the decision whether or not to excute 12 year olds and retards depend on the tax rate? How's that work?[/qb]

I'm just going to assume you're sincere here and tell you that's not what I meant at all. I had asked three disparate questions about your statements, and I hadn't made any statement of my own. I simply had questions.

assume all you want, i don't really care. Your original post was very sloppy, if you didn't mean to link tax rate to executions. Maybe you should apologize for that.

quote:
What happens if a 12 year old murders someone?
How mentally retarted is "retarted enough not to be prosecuted"?
What's the tax rate?

Younger than 12 kids are simply not prosecuted AT ALL. Live with it. Of course they get sent to rehab or mandatory social workers, they go on record, but prosecution? No way. Between 12 and 18, there's youth detention, murder, as stated above, by a 17 yo got 2 years with 6 years psycho. At 12, sorry, hasn't happened after the war, so no caselaw, but I imagine it would be disproportionately less punishment than the 17 yo.

Retards, I dunno, but they won't get life or be executed. They'll be treated, if necessary for life. Perhaps you imagine that here countless retards wander the streets, swaying with axes? Sorry to dissappoint you, that's not so. Still, the society that executes retards seems more sicker than the retard to me. Way more sicker.

Tax:
upto 20000 euros, it's like 38 percent, the next 50000, its 50 percent, over that its 68 percent.
Basically we have much much higher taxes and gasoline prices (4 times higher) than you.

Taxation > Components of taxation > Corporate income tax 10.1% [8th of 18]
Taxation > Components of taxation > Personal income tax 14.9% [18th of 18]
Taxation > Contribution by richest 30% 52.2% [13th of 14]
Taxation > Total tax wedge > Single worker 42.3% [13th of 29]
Taxation > Total taxation as % of GDP 41.4 % of GDP [8th of 18]
Taxation > Value Added Tax > Lower rate for dwellings NO [8th of 25]
Taxation > Value Added Tax > Professional services 17.5 [18th of 25]
Taxation > Value Added Tax > Standard rate 17.5 [18th of 25]

[ December 13, 2005, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: Dutchie ]

Posts: 93 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1