RBTs meet most of those requirements- except by your definition, the “minimal intrusion” one. Also, maybe the opportunity to turn around one. But I bet that even in the US anyone trying that will get their plates run. There’s no reason they couldn’t be modified to fit within US laws.
Anyway, I’m not interested in discussing it any further. We’re going to have to agree to disagree on both these topics, I think.
Please keep the other thread in the other thread.
And when you go over there with this, please understand you have just admitted that RBTs, on at least 2 grounds, are illegal searches as already ruled by the Supreme Court (applicable everywhere in the US), and as such are not worth discussing as a potential policy for us, regardless of how it works in other countries.
Thank you for understanding.
ETA:
Right, then you would be left with precisely the laws we already have.
ETA2 :
You would lose. They are there to do DUI, right? Unless you break a law in front of them (they will be looking close to the funnel perhaps) then no worries. You might turn 1/2 mile or more before you get there.
I’ll thank you not to put words in my mouth. I’m done with the other thread, as I’ve said.
For that matter, I’m done with this one, too. You wonder why I’m no longer comfortable contributing? Because it really does appear you’re looking to play “Gotcha!” or tell us off for not believing in the same things in the same way you do.
No hard feelings, you understand. Thanks for the interesting and thought-provoking discussion!
OK, are you talking to yourself? What was that sideline about “didn’t answer” when I probably explained exactly that near the top of the thread, and again repeatedly if not the lamest attempt at Gotcha! ever in the history of humans? You can’t even say “Sorry, yeah, I missed it I guess”. instead you backpedal in a snorty huff for the umpteenth time.
I predict you will be back, just like bengangmo who said I redeemed myself in a thread I am not even aware of its existence. :rolleyes:
And then you will tell us how great your reading comprehension is while you demonstrate the opposite. All very entertaining, sure, but not really a “Great Debate” from you. Maybe “barely adequate debate”.
Enjoy your summer!
Because the government wouldn’t limit information about its own abusive* limitation of information.
*this message sponsored by the Department of Redundancy Department
What a lot of crap has been spouted on this. Australia has censorship just like America. We don’t have an explicit freedom of speech but we don’t seem to suffer from it. We Australians don’t see our government as big bad oppressors but rather as a group to help us poor lowly citizens. I don’t mind that I can’t watch kiddie pron or incite hatred towards to ethnic groups, it makes us a safer and much more civilised country.
We do have freedom of information laws that allow any citizen to ask for information from the government, the only stuff that is sometimes not released is commercial in confidence or state secrets.
In short, we are Australians are pretty happy with our censorship laws and if you don’t like it don’t come here.
Why then is it illegal to publish the list of sites to be blocked by the Great Firewall of Australia?
And I assure you, the US does NOT have anything like the kind of censorship that has been described for Australia, to the best of my knowledge we have NONE of it, and when people suggest it, other people go berserk enough that it never happens.
Really, if there is something specific you didn’t understand about what I wrote, I am glad to clarify. But please don’t classify it as “a load of crap” when you clearly haven’t understood it all.
We are? I have lived in both the UK and Australia (and the US) and I have always felt far more free in the UK (and the US) than in Australia. But then, I’m a video gamer, so perhaps my opinion is biased. Oh, and the conversations I have had with Australians scared me a bit. When I made passing reference of the BNP, most Australians I talked to were aghast. You allow a racist political party? They don’t censor them? They were on national television?!?!
Yeah, it’s called freedom of speech, Australia.
I for one am glad for the ‘obscene amount of security cameras’ (as if that is in anyway a pointer that the UK is a police state…). I got mugged once in the street by a group of chavs. The whole thing was caught on CCTV. They were arrested.
Yeah, I really feel like I’m being kept in check by all those police with guns…I mean…batons…
Are you really being serious here? That’s hilarious.
If you believe that the United States has censorship laws anything like those being described by the Australians here, you are thankfully mistaken.
Not those of you with government approved opinions anyway.
You frighten me worse than the likes of China and North Korea. At least in those countries, one gets the impression that the citizenry objects to the measures their government is taking to control their access to information and their ability to advocate for political causes.
Precisely how are you protected by arresting people carrying around a forbidden fictional text? Why do you beleive that silencing unpopular opinions makes you more civilized?
How does this tie in to free speech exactly?
I decided a long time ago that I would never set foot on that continent. However hostile my own society may be towards me, looking at how bad things could be makes me appreciate the United States all the more.
Actually this isn’t how it plays out in reality. In reality the Australian and more recently the Queensland governments (and for all I know probably other state governments) have made the system so expensive as to effectively restrict access for many people and on many topics.
This is more about social restrictions on speech than legal restrictions, but…
I am an Australian, and most of my knowledge about the US comes from different forms of media. I have always assumed that people in the US must be really relaxed about saying what they want - after all free speech seems to be something they are really proud of.
I was completely shocked several years ago when the Dixie Chicks criticised then president Bush and received death threats. :eek:
I cannot imagine that happening in Australia - you can slag off whatever politician you like. People might think you’re a tool for doing so, but no-one would suggest you shouldn’t say things like that.
I’m not saying it negates any differences in legislation - it’s just fascinating that it seems like there are things you can’t say in America (because of social pressure) that are completely fine in Australia.
This is a laughable comparison. You don’t know anything about contemporary AU politics and culture if you think that the government and people of Au have a human rights philosophy similar in any meaningful way to those two countries.
Additionally it is ridiculous to imply Australians are unable or unwilling to effect political change.
Actually, that implication here is right out condescending.
Right, you get fined $50 if you don’t vote. That’s one reason why I think I’ll never become an Australian citizen, despite possibly living in the country for a lengthy time. I want to be free to not do certain things. And I don’t want people who don’t know the difference between the parties or what they stand for to be ticking anything in the ballot box.
I know-that bolded part never happens anywhere else-esp. not in the US.
Probably because it would provoke knowledge of and interest in the sites, and lead to people using one of the trivially easy ways to get around the block to view the sites.
Look the USA has very similair censorship laws to Australia. The difference is mainly around some of the hate stuff that is about it.
You censor just as much as we do. There is nothing I can think of that you can buy in the states that you can’t buy in Australia, guns and soem video games being the exception. [not all guns just the stupid ones].
Compulsary voting is a good thing IMO, I rather like our system a lot more then yours. What is this I want the freedom to not vote, so you want the freedom to not have your vote heard?
Oh and the crack about government approved, we vote them in and we can vote them out. I am not government approved, I support Sea Shepherd etc and that is not a government approved position, so stick that up ya jumper.
We do not silence people with different opinions, lets look at the racist angle for a moment. You can be a racist and we even had a racist pollie get into parliament on a racist agenda but you cannot go out on the streets and say we should go out and commit crimes against said people. This is the essence of our hate laws, it does make us more civilised. You judge how civilised a country is by how it treats it’s children and most disadvantaged people.
Typical condescending crap from a country that has more problems than Australia. I have always stuck up the USA but now i can see how I might just stop it if this is typical of the population.
I think that you had a very narrow interpretation here, what most Australians would have been shocked about is that any one would listen this right wing dckhead. Self censorship is real here and most networks would not give him the time of day as most consumers would not watch him, although the ABC [state TV] probably would have given him time just liek they did for pauline hanson. He would not have been censored by the gubberment only by the free press who are controlled by a free capitalistic system.
Huh? Do you really think that the Dixie Chicks case is the norm? People shit all over politicians here all the time. As far as saying, “you shouldn’t do that!” well, that’s freedom of speech too. You have a right to say what you want, but be prepared to have people express THEIR opinions about it as well.
I must be living in a different world. Not once have I heard anyone in Australia comment on this proposed censorship, nor obviously be concerned about it.
I would have no problem with censorship on kiddy porn or such