🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 08 Nov 1999 01:41:09 GMT, nenosed@apex.met.au (Ned Latham)
wrote:

>Lugnut <ausbiz@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> nenosed@apex.met.au (Ned Latham) wrote:
>>
>> > Lugnut <ausbiz@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>----snip----
>
>> > As to those lower on crime's social ladder, gaol is a more effective teacher
>> > of criminal knowledge and attitude than the internet will ever be.
>>
>> exactly.  you cant censor the internet (yet) and you cant stop crims
>> learning more about how to perform crime when they come into contact
>> with other criminals.
>
>So, as I said, gaol is a bad idea.

hmmm.  Perhaps not in all cases?
minor offences electronic home detention - and use visual monitoring
to ensure visitors do not bring in sex/drugs/grog.

Jail (why do you spell it the American way?) for more serious crimes,
maybe for murder and crimes of violence?  Or will death or flogging be
voted in, do you think?
Ever listen to a scanner?  Its an eyeopener of what the PF has to deal
with, and of the sometimes scant resources.

snip

>> another suburb and carry on.  Perhaps you mean have a kind of 'home
>> detention' with those electronic devices?
>
>Actually, I wasn't thinking of that, but hey, not bad.
>
>> > >                                                               so whats
>> > > the answer?
>> >
>> > 1. The Law must be just, so that it is *worthy* of respect.
>> 
>> hah!  whens the next flying pig take off?   ;->
>> if we can decide on what to reform, and how - who will implement the
>> reform and when?
>
>We now have the technology to enable democracy.
>
>If Australia became a democracy (big if, I know), we could amend the
>Constitution to require that all laws have (or have imputed to them)
>a sunset clause.
>
>Eventually, everything would get considered by the poeple.

mmmm, yessss.......  <ponders>

>> > 2. It must be administered justly, humanely, and evenly.
>> > 3. The system should be aimed at motivating twho commit crimes to reform.
>>
>> yeah, it should....  but.....  will it ever?
>
>Dunno. I do know this: if we don't try for it, it won't happen; if we do,
>it might. I think the possibility makes the effort worthwhile.

yeah, thats true of most everything worth having :-)

snip

>> NS will see a lot of shit, so those from the nco's up had better have
>> good attitudes, eh?  people get ridden and it will be hard to police.
>
>Presently, it's institutionalized - heavily encouraged: the movies even
>glorify it. That encouragement can be removed.

Well I guess it can, but stuff like that is hard to move when its even
encouraged in educational institutions with a history going waaaayy
back.  I dont believe in that sort of things for schools or bullies at
school, so lets get rid of that too :-)

>I repeat, this NS is not about making soldiers.

If you want to take 12 months from someones life just to make them a
good citizen, why not make them soldiers too? (well, as much as you
can in that amount of time, given that 'citizenship' forms part of it)

snip
>
>If people have problems such that they are unsuitable for *any* job, then
>they can't support themselves: they need care; they should be wards, not
>citizens.

ho ho, I dont think that will go down too well with a lot of people.
Those who are really bad off might benefit (or might not, depending on
the level of care - they *are* still people after all, and I have seen
what lack of care does to a persons dignity (sp) and progress)

>> if you cant work in civy street, you cant work in the forces.
>> so such a person would have medical grounds/documentation to prove
>> such a medical condition or disability.
>> What would you do with pregnant women??
>> Give them a discharge or make them attend later, or not at all?
>
>It sounds like you're being wilfully obtuse here, Lug. Earlier, I said
>that it should apply to immigrants as well as natives. I also spoke of
>disfranchised convicts regaining citizenship.

me? wilfull  ;-)

Well, seeing as you have stated that this 12 months can be 'given' at
any time after the age of 16, and that you cant be a citizen until its
done..... who supports all those kids who are still at school but not
citizens?  Do they still get the same benefits the same as citizens?
What about those who have kids at an early age?
What about those who get pregnant while serving their 12 months?

>Is there any way you can avoid the conclusion that this form of NS should
>be available flexiblby?

Inflexible is it?
hmmm. just so long as all citizens dont have to have blonde hair and
blue eyes :-)  sameness.... unisex.... uniforms... ??  blech.
My point is that people *are* different, and I would like to know how
you would cater for that difference, both in wilful disobedience and
by just being human?

snip
>>
>> yeah, its not a bad life, pretty easy money and good benefits for the
>> work, I thought.   although now I believe that taxing away those extra
>> benefits is not in our interest as a country - but then again, I guess
>> we dont really rely on our armed forces to defend us, do we? 
>
>We have too little. As Lang Hancock said: ``Singapore could take us by
>telephone''.

we *do* have too little - so can you tell me why you think we have any
forces at all?

>----snip----
>
>> > We'd be able to field volunteer forces comparable to those we
>> > fielded in WW 1. And more quickly.
>> 
>> ahhh, but the kids of today have some idea that war is a nasty thing
>> and many that did NS wont volunteer again.
>
>It *is* nasty.

I just said that.

>Many won't volunteer, many will.
>
>>                                             Has patriotism ever been
>> as high as it was back then?
>
>Australia was a progressive country back then, and the majority of
>people believed in its future. The politicians and the establishment
>have destroyed that, but there's no reason it can't be restored.

I feel its gone downhill, but there are many who dont think that way.
How could ordinary people be given something other than
work/family/pension to aspire to?  A lot of people are just 'doing' it
to make ends meet, there is no ... ? ... 'spark' in their lives.

>> So you are preparing a 'community army' or a 'citizenship army'?
>> Not a real fighting army?
>
>Yes.

hmmm.  make it both.

>> Will they be called up full time if needed later on?
>> If not, why not?
>
>No: because there will be plenty of volunteers.

....  from the 12 month citizenship lesson?

>----snip----
>
>> > I don't understand this objection: the NS ``disadvantage'' applies to
>> > *everyone*; in other words, it's not a disadvantage. I repeat:
>> > Allowing exceptions means introducing/perpetuating privilege.
>> 
>> no, it does not.  I dont see it that way.
>> it does not apply to anyone who has done NS and gets the job I was
>> forced to leave. that disadvantages *me* as when my NS is done, the
>> person who took my job has 12 months experience that I dont have when
>> we compete for contracts or jobs. they may also have the pay level I
>> would have had, if I had been left alone to persue my career.
>
>There you go again with assumptions that are not justified by what I said.

nyagh!!   LIFE is an exception!  People have 'exceptions' every day!

>You don't get forced to leave a job. You choose when you enrol: say, any
>time after your 16th birthday.

oh, this is new.  Makes a bit of difference :-)

So, you leave school, join the forces for 12 months as a nasho, become
a citizen and be entitled to all its benefits, and then live your
life?

So, what if you dont want to become a citizen? What if you are already
*in* Australia - do you get chucked out?


------------------
* Some people are only alive because it is illegal to kill.
	Assist the Police -- Beat yourself up!