[movefromus]

I am married to a freedom loving right winger (small government, constitution loving, no PC rubbish, no gun control, no squished rights, all that stuff). I was wondering if anyone else is this way or knows someone who's this way inclined who has moved to NZ. I'm wondering how he's going to do there seeing that the politics are so different. Do you think he'll find it too difficult? We just about had heart attacks when we saw the recent law there that said you're not allowed to spank your own children (not because we do lots of spanking but just because of the intrusiveness of the government, etc.). Any opinions?
Thanks,
Carly

[swissmissdesigner]

Why are you shocked?
Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?
They believe that with violence they will teach and discipline a child!
How wrong is that!!
Also a husband can hit his wife; they don’t get in trouble with the law...
You may also read the UNESCO 2006 report about NZ children safety issue.

[dharder]

I am married to a freedom loving right winger (small government, constitution loving, no PC rubbish, no gun control, no squished rights, all that stuff). ... Any opinions?

I'm not a conservative American (nor do I play one on tv), but I have similar questions, just the other way round ! :)

I worry if NZ is too 'conservative', if their employment law, for example, is going to be very different from the UK one, I checked to see what they have in the way of anti-discrimination legislation, etc.

I don't know what you mean by 'PC rubbish' or 'squished rights,' so can't comment on that, but after looking at a number of issues, I get the impression that New Zealand is somewhere between the UK and the US where government involvement/regulation is concerned (except, maybe, in those building regulations, wow, how much red tape is that!).

More regulated than the US, but not as regulated as the UK. How do people who live there experience this?

Daniela

[stu70]

One of the reasons why I never took a really high paying job in the USA was for all the reasons you mention in your note; guns everywhere(more sadly the belief that more guns will only make it safer for people to protect themselves),right wing politics which believes in mixing politics with religion, the "bible belts", on and on and on. I would be totally turned off if NZ were to remotely follow American style politics. We have fought enough wars to separate church from the state and I have no desire to be contributing to the economy of a nation that is hell bent on running the country from a "holy" book. Cheers

[movefromus]

swissmiss - I was surprised because 1) I grew up there and this was not something that was an issue (normal spankings, not bruise leaving beatings), 2) because from what I read most NZers were not on board with the change in law yet the politicians didn't care. I think it's pretty scary when the government who's representing the people doesn't listen to the people.

Anyway, my point is really, how do conservative Americans find it living in a different political environment (the views I gave were just to give an idea of what kind of conservative I was referring to)?
Thanks,
Carly

[toesonthenose]

Aloha move,
If you think there is nothing scarier than a government not listening to its people, than the USA is the scariest place in the world. I would think an American conservative may not like the national health care system, the high progressive tax rates, no military taking up 40% of the budget, a labor party in control, strict gun laws (compared to the US), no FOX news, among others. On the positive, all my conservative friends have a great time complaining about these things, so it may provide some entertainment. Of course as a liberal in NZ, you don't get to see the democrats cave in to our boy king George on a daily basis!
To be honest I really don't have an answer for you, Shaun

[Ana&Steve]

Hi Carly, I think if you look at that spanking law a bit closer, it is really more of an anti-abuse law. It doesn't disallow disciplinary "smacks" if that is your child-rearing system. (I don't have kids and can't know the right answer on healthy child- rearing, my guess is a bit of all of all methods)
As to the right-wingers, I get the impression that not as many are even interested in moving to NZ. My parents-in-law are so right wing, they would still support his administration if Bush started eating babies on TV. (Okay, maybe not that, as they love babies and often wonder whether we will produce grandchildren:uhoh ) They love NZ and have been to the SI several times, and feel it's very spiritual. (They are also hardcore Christians) I could never imagine them living in NZ, they would be frustrated by the lack of frenzy and industry to make a buck, and the general individual independence, as well as the lack of drive to conform everyone to the same religion. Much of our drive to move to NZ is to get away from Republicans AND Democrats, and stay happily in the middle where you can treat every situation as it comes, with common sense, not a ready-made party driven answer.
Hope you get what you need, and that you find happiness!
Ana

[Ana&Steve]

Why are you shocked?
Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?
They believe that with violence they will teach and discipline a child!
How wrong is that!!
Also a husband can hit his wife; they don’t get in trouble with the law...
You may also read the UNESCO 2006 report about NZ children safety issue.

Where are you talking about?

Ana

[movefromus]

I can't wait to get a real conservative in place as president - haven't had one in quite a while....I'd prefer a constitutionalist myself "king George" isn't doing the best of jobs and the Government as a whole isn't sticking to the constitution in a great way.

If 80% of the people in America had the same opinion on a law I'm pretty sure a lot of the politicians would go the same way....some out of conviction, some because they want to be voted in again.

No other conservatives moving to NZ?

[Junnifer USA]

I agree with "Toesonthenose" statement above. The few conservatives we run into are very frustrated. Generally, and as government policy, NZ has not given much support to the Iraq war (I believe 500 troops are stationed there. SOmeone will correct me if I am wrong.) And, very clearly the public does not support it. Nor do they support gun control, low,low minimum wages as in the US, lack of workers rights, etc...
So if your purpose is to find a conservative haven, then NZ is not the place for you. You will be frustrated at every turn. ALl the discussion about spanking is focused on one recent law that did not have much public support. The larger issues of health care, social services, military, and infrastructure reflect a libral leaning (by American standards).

By the way, Clinton is a hugely popular guest in NZ on 2 or so occassions. I doubt a retired George Bush would be so well received.

We love it here. And happy to be out of the bible belt where we can speak freely and openly, without negative impact on our jobs, businesses or kids at school!

THere may be more sheep than people in NZ, but at least the people don't act like sheep here!

[jess]

Hi movefromus. Americans I have met here are fairly liberal. That doesn't mean there aren't conservatives, just that they are probably harder to run into, which means if you hook up with fellow expats, your partner might feel a bit like the odd man out. Also kiwis in general (in my experience) are appalled by the US invasion of Iraq (it's referred to on the news as an invasion here - not the American 'war in Iraq' wording). Depending on your opinion about that issue, you might have some run ins with kiwis. Other than that I guess it depends on how your partner will deal with the policies here. I'm sure you're aware that gun control, climate change concerns, healthcare, welfare, taxation and other issues are dealt with very differently from the US and probably not in a way a conservative would feel comfortable with. It depends on how much that will bother him.

Personally as someone who had the opposite problem - feeling like a liberal fish out of water in the states on issues like healthcare and gun control - it's such a relief to feel pretty much in the mainstream here and not be considered out in left field any more. So I wonder if your partner would feel like he's stuck out in right field here - after a while it can be demoralizing to be on the margin. I guess it depends on how political he is and whether he will mind perhaps being in the minority on many issues.

[barryp]

I find plenty of old-school conservatism in NZ - noninterventionist, fiscal balance, distrust of intrusive government, etc. There is a rather large opposition to the current Government based primarily on those things, and the recent imbalance of tax growth (hefty) vs. economic growth (small). The election is a long way away, but the conservatives would win handily were it held today.

The so-called anti-smacking legislation does not outlaw corporal punishment; police won't be knocking down your door if you spank your kid in the supermarket line, as opponents falsely claimed. If you pick up a blunt instrument and do the same, though, you are subject to prosecution. Some parents were using a loophole in existing law to exculpate themselves on parental discretion grounds when beating their kids with tools, electrical wire, and rods. The recent legislation closed that loophole.

That legislation was in the end supported by National at least in part as a repudiation by National of fringe so-called Christian Conservatives, who co-opted the Republican Party in the USA long ago. I think old-school US conservatives would have found this reassuring.

I'm a libertarian loon and find NZ more sympathetic than the US to my value system. Personal privacy is respected a great deal more over here; neither government nor private enterprise is allowed to collect and distribute personal data here the way they do routinely in the States. Prostitution is legal and formerly oppressive personal conduct laws have almost all been canned. (Homosexual acts were illegal in NZ until 1986, for example, and now a gay man is statistically safer on the streets in Wellington than in San Francisco, where 9000 bashings are REPORTED each year.) The double-standards remain with drug laws, however.

There is a fair amount of PC nonsense in the area of Maori/Pakeha relations, but there's a lot of plain old racism and stupidity driving that IMO. (This past week a TV official offered a true-crime programme as an example of content reflective of Maori culture. The USA equivalent would have been to claim that C.O.P.S. was reflective of mainstream Black culture because producers chose to cover petty crimes committed by black people. I found this hilarious - incredibly insensitive and really stupid at the same time.)

In summary, I think an economic conservative can find a place here, though many related US cultural assumptions won't fly (hatred as opposed to skepticism of government, emphasis on gun possession, links with particular types of Christianity).

[kelpy]

I am married to a freedom loving right winger (small government, constitution loving, no PC rubbish, no gun control, no squished rights, all that stuff). I was wondering if anyone else is this way or knows someone who's this way inclined who has moved to NZ. I'm wondering how he's going to do there seeing that the politics are so different. Do you think he'll find it too difficult? We just about had heart attacks when we saw the recent law there that said you're not allowed to spank your own children (not because we do lots of spanking but just because of the intrusiveness of the government, etc.). Any opinions?
Thanks,
Carly

Hi Carly,

I think it all depends how right winged he is. Some of the examples you list, I am also behind (constitution, no squished rights), and I consider myself pretty liberal.

If he's a Bushie, for example, then I doubt he'd find NZ or anyplace for that matter very welcoming.

But if he's more of a "Goldwater conservative", then I think he'd have no problems.

Cheers!

[Howie]

Having lived in both the US and NZ I thought I'd weigh in.

I find that Kiwi's don't talk politics as much as Americans. I don't think they care so much about people's political views as how people behave in everyday situations. I think Kiwi's will probably treat most Americans similarly (have their preconceptions at first until they get to know the person). I don't think they are fond of opinionated people regardless of their politics.

But a conservative living in NZ will indeed face frustrations. I find the politics in NZ very similar to Canada. Yes there is "big government", but I think most people enjoy the benefits rather than see it as intrusive.

Hope that makes some sense.

[wanderingoregonian]

I agree with what a lot of people here are saying. I meet plenty of people here who are of a live and let live philosophy and don't want tons of government meddling. I don't find many who support Bush or religon in politics.

Its the social issues I find the most refreshing coming from America. You see many more same-sex couples walking hand in hand here, something that I only occasionally saw in Boston even after the same-sex marriage law changed a couple years ago there . It is completely accepted to be domestic partners, where as back home many clearly were way more comfortable once I married my partner of 8 years. When I tell kiwis about the striking differences in how I was treated once we got married, they were quite surprised. I'm with Jess on the health care and gun control. I am well aware that health care isn't perfect here, it is a complex expensive thing managed by people and therefore will always be imperfect, but man it is so nice to finally have the health insurance monkey off my back! Probably my biggest pet peave from America; I personally feel that access to basic health care (and not having it linked to full time work, which doesn't give single parents much flexibility) is a huge 'family values' issue and I keep thinking that eventually it will have to become a voting issue back home.

The taxes are high here. There is more regulation. Social issues seem more progressive then in the states. I'm sure you'll sort it out. I guess it also matters why you are thinking of immigrating. Politics (and universal health care) were high on our list of why we were moving, so we'd be disappointed if our research was off - but if you are moving for other reasons, it might not matter too much

[Caniwi]

I would think that for the most part.....the Americans you run into outside of America, are those who do not agree with the current politics of the US and choose not to be a part of that society. Those who tend to agree with the way Bush "runs" the country, really don't fall too far from the apple tree (nor the country) and tend not to embrace the fact that other nations, governments, religions and societies have their own ideals and laws, that are not neccessarily condusive with a right-wing (especially a US right-wing) mind-set. If one finds themselves outside that relm, they should know that what is right-wing is not gospel. Debate is healthy, but no wishes to have others views forced upon them. Either one embraces ANY place for what it's worth, or choose not to go there. If ones political views are of the utmost importance to one, (as opposed to cost of living, employment, scenery) it would be wise to find a like-minded society.

[swissmissdesigner]

Ana&Steven: I am taking about NZ.

[toesonthenose]

Great discussion! I must admit this has reminded me of some my own biases. Honestly I never thought conservatives considered leaving America except for temporary employment reasons. One of my favorite memories of New Zealand was driving by an NZ Air Force Base near Blenheim in March 2003 when the US occupation of Iraq began, and seeing sheep walking in and out through wide open gates. I live near a Marine Corps Base in Hawaii where armed soldiers chase surfers away from the waves at the edge of the base, explosions and gunfire are nearly constantly heard. Quite a difference in baseline paranoia.

Movefromus, why are you thinking of leaving the USA? I have always wondered why conservatives tolerated Bush's nonconservative expansion of Federal powers, wiretapping, suspension of Habeus Corpus, out of control spending, interference in private health matters (Terry Schivo), or his Iraq strategy, to name but a few. I can't imagine true conservatives happy about yesterdays bill spending another $120 Billion for the next 4 months in Iraq, just for more death and mayhem.
P.S. Left wingers love freedom as much as right wingers.
Peace, Shaun

[willsken]

Why are you shocked?
Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?
They believe that with violence they will teach and discipline a child!
How wrong is that!!
Also a husband can hit his wife; they don’t get in trouble with the law...
You may also read the UNESCO 2006 report about NZ children safety issue.

Oh, come on! NZ parents are no different to any others! If you look into this issue a little more closely you'll see the NZ statistics on child abuse are skewed. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=agTAEOjv6G5w) I also know that a lot of child abuse goes on in the US and the UK. Wife beating as well for that matter!

Just as an example. I was down the park watching one of my boys play football and someone was coming round with a petition against the anti smacking bill. There was outcry against him from a lot of the parents, telling him that it was barbaric to hit kids! So much for "them" thinking smacking is OK.

If you want to make sweeping statements, could you please back them up with some facts in support. If I was a Kiwi I’d feel very insulted by your post.

[swissmissdesigner]

willsken: http://www.mg.co.za/articledirect.aspx?area=%2fbreaking_news%2fbreakin g_news

I hope that helps..

By the way, my last visit to NZ was last month I was invited for a dinner in Hamilton.
The major subject was the anti smoking law. We where 8 people, 7 kiwis and my self at the table. They where telling me that there is nothing wrong with smacking a child. The where telling stories about how their Dad hit them with a leather belt when they where young. The worst part was that they thought their parents did the right thing, so now they are doing the same to their children. I felt so terrible to listening to it, I stood up from the table and went home.
No, I don't want make a "sweeping statements"...

[movefromus]

toesonthenose - I was raised in New Zealand by NZ parents though I was born in Aussie. I married an American and have been living in the US for the last 8 years. We have young children and have decided to live in NZ for a while...close to my family for a bit. We enjoy the New Zealand outdoors and feel like a bit of an adventure. We're not sure how long we'll stay yet...play it by ear I guess :).
Carly

[movefromus]

barryp

The so-called anti-smacking legislation does not outlaw corporal punishment; police won't be knocking down your door if you spank your kid in the supermarket line, as opponents falsely claimed. If you pick up a blunt instrument and do the same, though, you are subject to prosecution. Some parents were using a loophole in existing law to exculpate themselves on parental discretion grounds when beating their kids with tools, electrical wire, and rods. The recent legislation closed that loophole.


Here's what the bill says:
"59 Parental Control

"(1)Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and for the purpose of-
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or distructive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

"(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

"(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1)

"(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offense is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution."

So - according to subsection (2) we are not allowed to use force (which would include spanking) when we are correcting our children.

Subsection (4) is what the National MPs wanted in (originally this was not in the bill). My problem with this is that some people (Sue Bradford for example) think that no spanking is inconsequential and unfortunately not all people (including the police) use good judgement at all times. What if the police are unsure and refer it to social services? They are notorious for taking children at the drop of a hat and are notorious for making it extremely difficult for parents to get their kids back.

One more note on your post - there was no loop hole in the law. If a case was brought to court and this excuse was exercised the judge and jury were the ones to decide if reasonable force was used or not - most people in NZ would not think that beatings with electrical wire, etc. are reasonable force when disciplining children. There are already laws and punishments for abuse (which haven't changed through this) the only thing now is that they've added the punishment of spanking to the list of abuses.
Carly

[Lupin]

willsken: http://www.mg.co.za/articledirect.aspx?area=%2fbreaking_news%2fbreakin g_news

I hope that helps..

By the way, my last visit to NZ was last month I was invited for a dinner in Hamilton.
The major subject was the anti smoking law. We where 8 people, 7 kiwis and my self at the table. They where telling me that there is nothing wrong with smacking a child. The where telling stories about how their Dad hit them with a leather belt when they where young. The worst part was that they thought their parents did the right thing, so now they are doing the same to their children. I felt so terrible to listening to it, I stood up from the table and went home.
No, I don't want make a "sweeping statements"...

The link doesn't take me anywhere useful, but perhaps that's my connection or something!

You were unfortunate to be at a table with eight idiots, good on you for walking out on them. That doesn't make NZ parents barbarians. This is the home of Playcentre, one of the most child-centred gov. funded environments.

[swissmissdesigner]

Lupin: I never said theat NZ parents are barbarians!
What I said that "lot of parents smacking ."......

www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=308554

[willsken]

Well, that article is interesting but it doesn’t state in any way that a lot of NZ parents smack and abuse their kids. I know less people here in NZ than I did in the UK that use smacking as a form of punishment. It is sad to hear you had to sit down with all those people who agree with smacking children but that sounds to me something that could have happened in the UK or the US as well.

I don't smack and I think it is a much better way to parent children but no one will ever get me to put smacking and abuse in the same category.

[Lupin]

No and I didn't mean it to sound quite as it does. I think I was just trying to say that just because you were unfortunate to spend an evening with those eight people, doesn't make their views representative of the majority parenting attitude.

I still think you were brave to walk out on them as that sort of situation can be so very uncomfortable.

[Sam B]

Is there anywhere in the world more conservative than the US? Surely anywhere is going to seem less so. NZ is a long way in the opposite direction isn't it? It's one of the reasons we moved here.

[Jenny & Mark]

Is there anywhere in the world more conservative than the US? Surely anywhere is going to seem less so. NZ is a long way in the opposite direction isn't it? It's one of the reasons we moved here.

Completely agree. Even the democrats fall right of centre in my opinion. I can never understand the appeal of a two-party republic system.

Mark.

[dharder]

Even the democrats fall right of centre in my opinion.

I read this commentary in the Guardian once that suggested there should be some exchange programme between the UK and the US: all UK Tories go to the States to be the Democrats there, and we get all the US Democrats to be our Tories. That way, everyone would be happier. :)

Daniela

[Jenny & Mark]

That way, everyone would be happier. :)

Daniela

:D. nice.

Mark.

[aberdian]

Why are you shocked?
Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?
They believe that with violence they will teach and discipline a child!
How wrong is that!!
Also a husband can hit his wife; they don’t get in trouble with the law...
You may also read the UNESCO 2006 report about NZ children safety issue.

Kind of an incendiary sweeping statement here swissmiss, swimming in emotive words and invective?? A lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children? Hmmm. What are you trying to say here? Don't emigrate, they're a bunch of child abusers? I appreciate your point, just not the way it's been put across and I fail to see why you're putting it across.

Trying very hard to be objective here, but the above quote seems to be a very loaded statement......

[Ana&Steve]

Why are you shocked?
Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?
They believe that with violence they will teach and discipline a child!
How wrong is that!!
Also a husband can hit his wife; they don’t get in trouble with the law...
You may also read the UNESCO 2006 report about NZ children safety issue.I just can't get these statements out of my head. I looked up domestic violence laws in NZ, and it is NOT ok to assault your partner, or or abuse them sexually or mentally. In addition I have not gotten this violent impression at all in my visits and research. The child smacking is a very sensitive subject, I know, but I will never equate a swat on the butt with a beating, and again the impression I've had of NZ parents so far was really leaning more to the push-over side than to pummeling kids with fishing poles.
I just wanted to put a different opinion next to the above; I know people behave badly sometimes, but I just don't see them being worse in NZ. Truth be told, I have found more civility than I have ever experienced in my life.
Ana

[Sam B]

So far I haven't had any of those cringy moments where you see a parent really losing it with their kid in public, like I often did in the UK. You know the scene, harassed mum dragging kid by arm, swiping at their bottom and calling them a little f***** in the supermarket. In my job I have come across less parents that think corporal punishment is ok, but I have met some. I have heard several news items since I've been here about child deaths though, perhaps more than in the UK when you consider the difference in population size. What do others think?

[willsken]

Sam it seems to me that it may be a bit of a cultural problem. If you read the article linked in the post I did on page 2 it has some of the facts in there. On the whole parenting seems a lot more relaxed here from my experience so far. Of course there are those who abuse sexually and physically, as there are in all countries. You can't get away from it. I just don't think it's any more a problem for Kiwis that anyone else.

I just wanted to add that I think that due to the population size of the UK it doesn't always make national news. I remember a woman killing her child in my home town. A lot in our local paper about it but it didn't go national.

[robberger]

I am married to a freedom loving right winger (small government, constitution loving, no PC rubbish, no gun control, no squished rights, all that stuff). I was wondering if anyone else is this way or knows someone who's this way inclined who has moved to NZ. I'm wondering how he's going to do there seeing that the politics are so different. Do you think he'll find it too difficult? We just about had heart attacks when we saw the recent law there that said you're not allowed to spank your own children (not because we do lots of spanking but just because of the intrusiveness of the government, etc.). Any opinions?
Thanks,
Carly

1) I am for small government--but I've never seen one.
2) I love the U.S. constitution--but the U.S. doesn't follow it anymore.
3) I hate PC rubbish--but it's everywhere.
4) Gun control--tougher question. I gave up my guns to come here, and it wasn't hard. I haven't heard of many people getting shot up by crazies here in NZ. When the U.S. had a small government, followed the Constitution, and wasn't PC (i.e. sometime around 1776), people were a bit more responsible and moral...if a gun was used there was probably a good reason (the major one being to prevent big government from taking over again). Since the primary purpose for the Constitutional right to bear arms has been circumvented by the will of today's people, one questions the value of the right.
5) Squished rights--the U.S. is leading the charge these days, albeit in other areas than other countries. Keep in mind also that the U.S. is the primary funder of the U.N., and various U.N. treaties provide the rationale for the things conservatives find offensive.
6) Other stuff--with 'conservatives' like George Bush, who needs liberals? Just different sides of the same coin.

I think my point is that you can't run and hide (not even in the U.S.), and while the U.S. is still more conservative than most places, the entire world appears to be running in the wrong direction--forgetting that the principles which got us here and the people who died for them are the very reason we can even have the civilization we have. So be it.

Will he find it too difficult? I guess that depends on what he believes in. If he really thinks political/social systems are the solutions to today's problems, then he'll probably despair :)

Just my thoughts
--Rob

[Sam B]

Willsken, I'm puzzled. I read that article and it seems to be saying that child abuse and deaths in particular ARE more prevalent in NZ than in many other countries? Regardless of whether the majority of the perpetrators are Maori or Pakeha, it's still happening in NZ? Although I agree that it is probably more reported nationally here than in the UK. The article puzzled me, because it does seem to support (to a degree) what swissmiss was saying.

[willsken]

I understand what you are saying Sam but to me there is a difference. Yes, child abuse is a big problem here but how the statistics are made up is something that needs to be taken into consideration by people reading the comments made by posters. The stats for NZ are skewed by a problem with child abuse by Maori. Before this is taken the wrong way, it doesn't make it any less important that the abuse is of Maori children and it obviously needs urgent attention. My point is that people should be aware how the statistics are made up and why NZ rates so poorly.

My reply was directed to the comment:

Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?

This to me implies big % of parents. Sweeping statement and not true.

[movefromus]

1) I am for small government--but I've never seen one.
I know, pretty sad.
2) I love the U.S. constitution--but the U.S. doesn't follow it anymore.
I still hold out some hope with the Supreme Court but unfortunately you're right.
3) I hate PC rubbish--but it's everywhere.
I know and it's a major problem - causes governments to make many ridiculous laws that take away any hope of everybody being treated equally under the law and that affect other rights (such as free speech).
4) Gun control--tougher question. I gave up my guns to come here, and it wasn't hard. I haven't heard of many people getting shot up by crazies here in NZ. When the U.S. had a small government, followed the Constitution, and wasn't PC (i.e. sometime around 1776), people were a bit more responsible and moral...if a gun was used there was probably a good reason (the major one being to prevent big government from taking over again). Since the primary purpose for the Constitutional right to bear arms has been circumvented by the will of today's people, one questions the value of the right.
The right is just as important today as it was in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The more that people are oppressed by a government, more it is important that they have the capability to defend themselves from it if need be. The more the government deteriorates the right to gun ownership, the more power they ultimately have because the people have no recourse if politics fails.
5) Squished rights--the U.S. is leading the charge these days, albeit in other areas than other countries. Keep in mind also that the U.S. is the primary funder of the U.N., and various U.N. treaties provide the rationale for the things conservatives find offensive.
I know, I can't stand the UN.
6) Other stuff--with 'conservatives' like George Bush, who needs liberals? Just different sides of the same coin.
As I said earlier, I can't wait for a real conservative (conservatives if I include some of the pathetic senators).

I think my point is that you can't run and hide (not even in the U.S.), and while the U.S. is still more conservative than most places, the entire world appears to be running in the wrong direction--forgetting that the principles which got us here and the people who died for them are the very reason we can even have the civilization we have. So be it.
I completely agree.

Carly

[Lupin]

I understand what you are saying Sam but to me there is a difference. Yes, child abuse is a big problem here but how the statistics are made up is something that needs to be taken into consideration by people reading the comments made by posters. The stats for NZ are skewed by a problem with child abuse by Maori. Before this is taken the wrong way, it doesn't make it any less important that the abuse is of Maori children and it obviously needs urgent attention. My point is that people should be aware how the statistics are made up and why NZ rates so poorly.

My reply was directed to the comment:

Did you know that a lot of NZ parents regularly smack and abuse their children?

This to me implies big % of parents. Sweeping statement and not true.

Stastically speaking a lot of NZ parents do smack and abuse their children:

New Zealand has the third-worst record for child deaths from maltreatment among the 27 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, according to a 2003 United Nations report. A disproportionate number of cases involve families of indigenous Maori people.

But the issue is not ethinicity, it's poverty. There is nothing within Maori culture that promotes corporal punishment and in fact it's generally understood to be a 'custom' aquired from the Christian Missionaries.

Child abuse won't go away unless people are lifted out of poverty, according to the UN and government reports.

Seventeen percent of Maori were living in ``severe hardship'' in 2004, up from 7 percent in 2001, according to New Zealand Living Standards, a government report published last month. Just 4 percent of Caucasian New Zealanders fell into the same category.

I think people get tangled up with seperating out Maori as an ethinic group when it's totally irrelevant. It's a sheer numbers in poverty thing and the stats for NZ are shameful for all NZers :(

[Lupin]

I know, pretty sad.

The right is just as important today as it was in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. The more that people are oppressed by a government, more it is important that they have the capability to defend themselves from it if need be. The more the government deteriorates the right to gun ownership, the more power they ultimately have because the people have no recourse if politics fails.


I'm sorry but the right to bear arms typifies, for me, everything that is so very wrong about American culture (NOTE: "everything that", not that everything is, important difference as there's much that is good and great too). I'm not going to say anything else about it, nor am I going to defend my view any further (and I'm now very grateful ENZ removed bad rep because I'm quite sure I'd be bombarded). It's just my earnest belief that nobody is any safer when a gun is involved and I feel much safer living in a society without a massive gun culture. It is, imo, an indefenceable position, quite outdated and obsolete.

The people have every power if the government fails, just as in every other civilised country that manages quite well without resorting to mass gun ownership and all it's resulting problems; they can vote them out. :roll

Anyway, I feel fairly sure Conservative Americans would be welcomed here in New Zealand :)

[Sam B]

Lupin - you are a voice of reason! Agree with everything you said.

[toesonthenose]

I have always found the 2nd amendment argument of having a gun to defend yourself from governmental tyranny as a joke. The government controls the military, and police, you and your guns stand no chance against them. No gun toting defender of freedom will last 5 minutes against trained military forces under government control. Just look, people with guns cannot hold back the police or SWAT teams, let alone the Army, Marines, or an Air Force. (Shooting down planes with guns is difficult!) Dr. Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Susan B. Anthony, and others have shown us that great change can come without guns. Of course, the irony is King and Ghandi were killed by gunman.
Interesting how a topic about conservatives turns to guns and smacking children!
Peace out, Shaun

[Jo Jo]

Lupin - I completely agree.

[willsken]

I think people get tangled up with seperating out Maori as an ethinic group when it's totally irrelevant. It's a sheer numbers in poverty thing and the stats for NZ are shameful for all NZers :(

I understand what you’re saying and I agree with you that poverty is responsible for the stats. I don't agree however that it isn't a cultural issue because until we find a way to engage Maori, especially Maori boys into education then the poverty issue isn’t going to go away. Vicious circle then isn’t it? This is an issue of great concern in schools and I know it is a priority in our school.

[movefromus]

I have always found the 2nd amendment argument of having a gun to defend yourself from governmental tyranny as a joke. The government controls the military, and police, you and your guns stand no chance against them. No gun toting defender of freedom will last 5 minutes against trained military forces under government control. Just look, people with guns cannot hold back the police or SWAT teams, let alone the Army, Marines, or an Air Force. (Shooting down planes with guns is difficult!) Dr. Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Susan B. Anthony, and others have shown us that great change can come without guns. Of course, the irony is King and Ghandi were killed by gunman.


A lot of Americans said the same types of things before the revolution and did not fight against the British.

[toesonthenose]

Sssshhhhhh!!!!!
There are a bunch of British people on this website! That was only 230 years ago, they might not be over it. Tony Blair did apologize for burning down the US Capitol building in the War of 1812, but I think the Boston Tea Party is still to fresh a wound to bring up.
As far as fighting against the US Marine Corps, I leave that to you movefromus, I am not that brave.

[Lupin]

I understand what you’re saying and I agree with you that poverty is responsible for the stats. I don't agree however that it isn't a cultural issue because until we find a way to engage Maori, especially Maori boys into education then the poverty issue isn’t going to go away. Vicious circle then isn’t it? This is an issue of great concern in schools and I know it is a priority in our school.

But isn't that the same for disaffected working class boys in the UK or USA or Australia, etc? I kind of agree with you too though, in that in addressing the issue of poverty and it's consequences in NZ, we need to do it in a culturally sensitive way because doing so we stand the best chance of success, given that large numbers of those any successful attempt would target would be Maori.

I think you're spot on that getting kids from lower socio-economic groups to re-engage with education is absolutely the key to getting families and communities out of the poverty trap for the benefit of the whole of society :)

[willsken]

I don't think so really. That's a class issue and not a cultural one. Have a read of this link and see what you think. There is loads of stuff around about this but this was the only one I can find for now as I have to go to a meeting. http://newint.org/issue248/kura.htm

[constablechuck]

I guess I'm a bit of a mix between right and left wing, having held an elected position in the U.S. at the state level, I can say that one of my biggest frustrations was the seemingly apathetic attitude people had towards government, as long as they were still getting a paycheck, able to watch football and american idol then the obvious loss of constitutional freedoms occurring were not a concern, the fact that those with big money are steam rolling democracy by buying their candidates into office with huge campaign contributions seems to be an accepted practice.

I do disagree with the NZ approach to self defense and gun ownership, it seems like the only people carrying guns here are the criminals and I think having a well armed citizenry that can form a militia in the event of a tyranical government is important to protecting democracy, however I appreciate the NZ approach to most other things and I'm overall much happier living in NZ.

The NZ government seems more concerned with looking after it's citizens then spying on them, the social policies here that put more of a tax on the wealthy are fair since it is the wealthy that are getting more of a benefit from the infrastructure of government, lets face it, every economy needs unskilled laborers, these people are an important part of the labor force but don't get paid much, the social programs NZ has in place to help these lower income people make ends meet are needed and far superior to what the U.S. provides, the trickle down economics and punish the poor policies of the U.S. government are atrocious, I'm sorry to say that the U.S. government that I learned about in school and that my Dad fought for in WWII no longer exists.

I don't think anyone will find a country on earth where they agree 100% with the politics, if your lucky you might be able to move somewhere that you at least agree with most of the politics.

[Sam B]

I don't know many people who would consider keeping a gun so that they could form a militia if the government became tyranical. This seems so alien to me. I'd probably hide under the bed and pretend to be dead rather than be in the militia! Is this really a likely chain of events in NZ? Much more likely would be that some of the guns would fall into the wrong hands, like psychologically disturbed teens, or criminals etc. I'm completely perplexed by this gun argument. I've never heard anyone argue for widespread gun ownership before.

[stu70]

I've never heard anyone argue for widespread gun ownership before.
But then again you probably never lived in the USA. After the millionth school shooting there I heard some people saying how lives could have been saved if every student had a gun with them to protect against the killer :confused:
It absolutely amazes me that in this day and age some people would insist on carrying a gun as if that was the only way to keep them safe. Look at the crime rate in the USA and Canada and you will see the argument is as hollow as the barrel of their guns. The only people who benefit from the gun culture are the gun manufacturers and dealers.

[Lupin]

Willsken, I think we're kind of on the same wavelength though :) The cultural aspect of the child abuse stats isn't a result of Maori culture per se though, but as a result of the strain placed on Maori culture by worsening poverty in recent generations.

This article explains what I'm trying to say far better than I can:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10388619

The outcome of deepening poverty on Maoris has been catastrophic to their sense of identity etc and so poverty remains at the root of the problem.

The article also discusses why the Pacific Island communities experience worse poverty than Maori but much lower child abuse rates.

[wanderingoregonian]

But then again you probably never lived in the USA.


don't even get me started on the gun issue! I just got an email from my family back home. My mom and brother nearly got hit yesterday by a stray bullet from the neighbors shooting. :( The same thing happened to my dad a year ago. When the police came by, they couldn't figure out who was shooting because all the neighbors have guns and at least two different households admitted to firing their weapons around the time of the incident. This is not a bad area - I had my wedding only feet from where they stood - and there is no way my mom having a gun on her hip could have done anything about a stray bullet. Just a few people having a couple beers and shooting a few rounds over the weekend - a common enough thing in rural America. Growing up I had plenty of opportunities to shoot a few rounds if I had wanted to - and I saw plenty of adults take proper precautions, but any of us teenagers could have gotten our hands on those guns if we really wanted. I saw plenty of households where the alcohol was locked/hidden away in the same place as the guns... I always knew where my dad's guns were, but I can't image ever getting to them in time to protect myself from an intruder - but it is easy enough to imagine my mates getting their hands on them if they poked around enough.

I won't say that I was any more afraid of getting shot than getting hurt in a car accident growing up - but it was something in the back of your mind, just a thought of 'hmm maybe she has a gun in her purse, don't upset her too much" or maybe I shouldn't ask the neighbor camp quiet down because they are drunk and might have a gun. They had a way of cropping up in the stranges places, so you just sort of assumed that anyone could have them at anytime - having my own wouldn't have made me feel any safer...

[Lupin]

The only people who benefit from the gun culture are the gun manufacturers and dealers.

Well said :clap

And the gun clubs, the hunt clubs, the man who just loves to shoot etc, etc....

[swissmissdesigner]

We live in Calabasas/California since 10 years. We feel very safe here and nobody is shooting in the area where we live.

[constablechuck]

"I won't say that I was any more afraid of getting shot than getting hurt in a car accident growing up - but it was something in the back of your mind, just a thought of 'hmm maybe she has a gun in her purse, don't upset her too much" or maybe I shouldn't ask the neighbor camp quiet down because they are drunk and might have a gun. They had a way of cropping up in the stranges places, so you just sort of assumed that anyone could have them at anytime - having my own wouldn't have made me feel any safer..."[/QUOTE]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Criminals like the idea of easily victimizing unarmed people, but if they think their potential victim or someone nearby has a gun then they may be afraid of getting shot, since crimes that don't happen don't get reported it's unknown how many crimes have been deterred because of law abiding citizens carrying a gun for self defense.

A kid or some drunk idiot could also get ahold of car keys or a knife and hurt a lot of people, it's up to people to be responsible for themselves and their children.

As for having an armed citizenry to form a militia in case of invasion by a foreign power or if the government became corrupt and tyranical, it's well known that the founding fathers had that in mind when they wrote the U.S. constitution, the right to bear arms was seen as essential to preserving democracy, that idea was probably feasible at the time, however now the U.S. government is so huge and powerful that it seems that democracy has been permanently replaced by bureaucracy.

U.S. Constitution: Second Amendment

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. "

[constablechuck]

Where I lived in PA was very close to a hunting area, I do have to admit that I was worried about a stray bullet hitting my home and I did run off some hunters that were far to close to a residential area, common sense is the key.

My thoughts are that if the current gun control policies in NZ are working then great, if not then hopefully people will consider a change.

[willowshouse]

Criminals like the idea of easily victimizing unarmed people, but if they think their potential victim or someone nearby has a gun then they may be afraid of getting shot, since crimes that don't happen don't get reported it's unknown how many crimes have been deterred because of law abiding citizens carrying a gun for self defense.

"

So this is why USA has such a small violent crime problem - all the criminals are scared of being shot themselves!



A kid or some drunk idiot could also get ahold of car keys or a knife and hurt a lot of people, it's up to people to be responsible for themselves and their children.

"

Comparing a gun to a set of car keys or even a knife is just a tad ridiculous IMO. Yes, of course everyday items can be used to inflict harm on others but we are talking about a piece of engineering specifically designed to kill which is an entirely different matter. Let's not even start talking about the difference in society once everybody carries a gun.



As for having an armed citizenry to form a militia in case of invasion by a foreign power or if the government became corrupt and tyranical, it's well known that the founding fathers had that in mind when they wrote the U.S. constitution, the right to bear arms was seen as essential to preserving democracy, that idea was probably feasible at the time, however now the U.S. government is so huge and powerful that it seems that democracy has been permanently replaced by bureaucracy.

U.S. Constitution: Second Amendment

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"

I have to say, whilst that may be important to you - it has no bearing on how I want to live my life. I would suggest that this is exclusively an American reason for wanting everyone to have a gun and it's place stays in America.

I will probably regret making this post .. but my irritation got the better of me.

[Lupin]

Criminals like the idea of easily victimizing unarmed people, but if they think their potential victim or someone nearby has a gun then they may be afraid of getting shot

Trouble is that all too often the victims of gun crime aren't actually criminals......

Also, something tells me the USA doesn't have the low crime rate your logical argument would suggest? But I am prepared to be corrected :p



since crimes that don't happen don't get reported it's unknown how many crimes have been deterred because of law abiding citizens carrying a gun for self defense.



Priceless.

[willsken]

Willsken, I think we're kind of on the same wavelength though :) The cultural aspect of the child abuse stats isn't a result of Maori culture per se though, but as a result of the strain placed on Maori culture by worsening poverty in recent generations.

This article explains what I'm trying to say far better than I can:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10388619

The outcome of deepening poverty on Maoris has been catastrophic to their sense of identity etc and so poverty remains at the root of the problem.

The article also discusses why the Pacific Island communities experience worse poverty than Maori but much lower child abuse rates.

Round the houses but yes we are on the same wavelength. Good article by the way. :yes :)

[Ana&Steve]

I am very uncomfortable with the gun laws in the States. I especially don't like that what I take as a matter of course is appalling to people from other countries; I feel like I got so used to it that I gave up on standing against it. It's just that, IMO, the majority of people who have guns in the US are exactly the type you don't want to be armed: criminals, vigilantes anarchists, militants, and nervous families that think they have it for protection but owning it just increases their anxiety. I will admit, I have thought about getting a gun after various traumatizing situations, but like most people who think extreme thoughts at the height of adrenaline, after the situation is past, and the fear and shock wear off, I go back to being the generally gun-fearing type I always was. I guess a lot of people don't get over that initial fear, and make the decision to get a gun. Just what you want in your neighborhood, a bunch of jumpy people who are sick of getting robbed and jump at the slightest sound but now they're armed.:roll That is not to say that I have never shot guns, (I'm actually a good shot) but even that makes me feel a bit stereotypical when I think about it. :o
Ana

[aberdian]

<mutter> must not get involved in gun control argument with Americans, must not get involved in gun control argument with Americans</mutter>
Over my years online I've learned that this is one topic which will never produce a winner but will produce lots of very angry people (on both sides). Never mix it with religion either.......

[Sam B]

I'm just gobsmacked. I've never really known any Americans and I haven't been there, but I never realised that there were loads of people who think everyone should have a gun. And that thing about the militia - it just sounds unbelievably paranoid. I feel like I've landed in a parallel universe! Ana and Steve - GET OVER HERE NOW! Save yourselves!!

[willsken]

I will admit, I have thought about getting a gun after various traumatizing situations, but like most people who think extreme thoughts at the height of adrenaline, after the situation is past, and the fear and shock wear off, I go back to being the generally gun-fearing type I always was. I guess a lot of people don't get over that initial fear, and make the decision to get a gun.
Ana

I can understand how those thoughts go through your mind. I'm so glad you didn't though. There are far too many people who do just that and end up having their own guns turned on them. I remember people thinking we were odd when we lived in South Africa. We seemed to be the only people in the street who didn't own one. That was 30 years ago mind you, so I don't know what it's like over there to day.

[Trigirl]

I have to say, whilst that may be important to you - it has no bearing on how I want to live my life. I would suggest that this is exclusively an American reason for wanting everyone to have a gun and it's place stays in America.

I will probably regret making this post .. but my irritation got the better of me.

perhaps said in irritation but very well said indeed anyway.

[movefromus]

I've lived here for 8 years (came over from New Zealand). Personally, I'm terrified of personally using a gun because I have absolutely no experience with them. That said however, I do not fear living here any more than I feared living in NZ (and I live in the southern US). If someone breaks into my house with a gun or with a knife I have pretty much no way to adequately defend myself...I'm a small woman with 3 very young children. My husband has fairly recently bought 2 guns and I have to say that I wish he could bring them to New Zealand. I would feel 100% safer in either country with a loaded gun in my house.

When it comes to protection from the government you have to understand that some people are more willing to die fighting for freedom to than live under an oppressive government. Patrick Henry's speech "give my liberty or give me death" is something that a lot of people truly truly believe in. Currently there is no need for a revolution but just say one day in the future there was. Just say you couldn't just vote out the government anymore because there was some true oppression going on. What happens then? Do you lie over and play dead? You can't say that this would never happen - look at the history of human kind. It's FULL of tyranny. There most likely would never be a need for this type of action against the government in our lifetime but we need to preserve the right for our future citizens in case they have to fight. What would the British Colonies have fought the British with if they'd had no guns? Candlesticks? I realize that it seems like an impossible task to defeat a government such as the US but there is at least a chance if you have a well armed citizenry, no chance whatsoever if you don't.

The current gun laws are ridiculous. The only thing they do is infringe upon the rights of the citizens. The only people who abide by them are the law abiding citizens. Do you really think that criminals are going to care whether they have a concealed carry permit or not? No. Do you think they'll care if they have a licence? No. Do you think they'll care if their particular type of gun is out lawed? No. Do you also think that if the government took every gun from the law abiding citizens that criminals couldn't get guns? Of course they would. The government can't stop drug smuggling (even though they waste a lot of resources on it) or people smuggling so how are they going to stop gun smuggling? The border with Mexico is practically unguarded.

I'll be back with more later :) . I can't resist this topic.
Carly

[dharder]

Do you really think that criminals are going to care whether they have a concealed carry permit or not? No. Do you think they'll care if they have a licence? No. Do you think they'll care if their particular type of gun is out lawed? No. Do you also think that if the government took every gun from the law abiding citizens that criminals couldn't get guns?

But but but... as someone else has pointed out, the numbers of deaths and crimes and guns seem not to support this theory AT ALL. If anything, quite the opposite.

One of my favourite bits of trivia of recent years is the one where the mayor of a Florida town cancelled the trip to London of the local high school after 7/7 because he thought it was too dangerous for the teenagers to go. All very well, if it wasn't for the fact that they murder rate in that town is 28 times as high as that of London, and that included the victims of the 7/7 attacks!

Countries with very strict gun control are not less safe, are not run by criminals, have fewer criminals and statistically less crime.

How can that be reconciled with the idea that more guns = more security when clearly, the numbers in the US and in other countries point to the opposite?

Daniela

[james the mechanic]

I read recently that in the US a gun owner is more likely to shoot a member of his own family than an intruder.
I grew up in the US and understand that the US constitution grants all americans the right to bear arms. I also have experience of the former but I never even heard of the latter. (not my family but a friends) But I lived a sheltered life in a small town.
However you are to leave the constitution in the states why not the guns?
Where abouts are you guys settling in NZ that leads you to believe that you need guns?
Or is it just to shoot other family members?
If so just leave them off your EOI.
james

[movefromus]

The number of guns legally owned in a country does not by itself determine rates of homicide. Switzerland is living proof of ths. It has a very strong gun culture and yet a lower murder rate than NZ. Semiautomatics are not banned and neither are automatic weapons. The government there encourages its citizens to have guns and be competent with them.
Yes having a gun makes it easier to kill a person but it's the person not the gun who makes the choice. We have some real issues in the US when it comes to inner city crime and gang problems. These account for a very high number of gun related deaths in our country. Washington DC has had extremely strict gun control laws and it also has a murder rate at least 5 times that of most states in the country (15 times the rate of some states).
Utah has very relaxed gun control laws and yet the murder rate there is almost as low as New Zealand's. This is not my opinion, I got the information from Disastercenter.com's crime statistics for the US.
I would dare say that culture/social issues make a huge issue in this matter not the fact that there are a lot of guns.

[aberdian]

The number of guns legally owned in a country does not by itself determine rates of homicide. Switzerland is living proof of ths. It has a very strong gun culture and yet a lower murder rate than NZ. Semiautomatics are not banned and neither are automatic weapons. The government there encourages its citizens to have guns and be competent with them.


Lets see.

Homicides/1m population involving firearms and gun ownership percentage (includes rifles and shotguns)

England and Wales 0.8 / 4.7
Scotland 1.1 / 4.7
NZ 4.7 / 22.3
Canada 8.4 / 24.2
Switzerland 4.0 / 27.2
USA 44.6 / 48.0

These are 1992 figures from a University of Lausanne study, Gun Ownership, Suicide and Homicide:An International Persective, just do a google search. As a scientist, I'd say there was a pretty damn strong correlation between the 2 numbers.

Homicide to gun owner ratio is pretty much 1:4 - 1:5 for most countries apart from the US and NI where it's nearly 1:1. Read into that what you will.

I said I wouldn't get involved but I have - apologies and I'll shut up now.

[Jo Jo]

LOL, I just spent about 20 minutes digging out and typing up virtually the same info as aberdian just posted.

With regard to Switzerland, opponents of gun control often cite it as an example of how high gun ownership doesn’t necessarily relate to death from guns. This is based on the erroneous argument that since virtually all adult males are members of the army and have military weapons, there is nearly universal access to deadly weapons. This is not quite true; there is strict screening of army officers and ammunition is stored in sealed boxes and inspected regularly. The rate of households with firearms is actually comparable to that of Canada.

Whatever way you look at it, the US has a huge problem with gun-related deaths, and it is obvious that this is related to the high rates of ownership and to the reasons for owning those guns. Leave the guns in the US and be glad you are moving to a country where people don’t feel the need to carry a gun for their personal safety.

[stu70]

LOL, I just spent about 20 minutes digging out and typing up virtually the same info as aberdian just posted.

With regard to Switzerland, opponents of gun control often cite it as an example of how high gun ownership doesn’t necessarily relate to death from guns. This is based on the erroneous argument that since virtually all adult males are members of the army and have military weapons, there is nearly universal access to deadly weapons. This is not quite true; there is strict screening of army officers and ammunition is stored in sealed boxes and inspected regularly. The rate of households with firearms is actually comparable to that of Canada.

Whatever way you look at it, the US has a huge problem with gun-related deaths, and it is obvious that this is related to the high rates of ownership and to the reasons for owning those guns. Leave the guns in the US and be glad you are moving to a country where people don’t feel the need to carry a gun for their personal safety.

I have great respect for American values of entrepreneurship, innovation and best in the world education system (well okay, almost as good as Canadian). I feel sad a great nation is being wasted by leaders who are misguided, misinformed and narrow minded. Political influence of National Rifle Association and the "bible waiving" crowd has polarized the nation so badly that anyone who seeks the triumph of common sense over "medieval puritanical views" and wants a departure from hateful propaganda of these groups is labeled a "liberal". More deadly than the guns in the USA is the attitude of the people who carry these weapons.

[Ana&Steve]

Countries with very strict gun control are not less safe, are not run by criminals, have fewer criminals and statistically less crime.How can that be reconciled with the idea that more guns = more security when clearly, the numbers in the US and in other countries point to the opposite?
Daniela
Whatever way you look at it, the US has a huge problem with gun-related deaths, and it is obvious that this is related to the high rates of ownership and to the reasons for owning those guns. Jo Jo
I would dare say that culture/social issues make a huge issue in this matter not the fact that there are a lot of guns. Carly I think the problem is the way we have been brought up. I know different regions have different beliefs in the US, but this is what it's like "where I come from". Americans have the right to bear arms. That's all a lot of people hear. So they get a gun because they can, it's their right.
The thin etiquette that was once included with guns has largely been discarded. When we were little, all the kids played with guns, and there were certain rules that everyone knew, such as never point a gun at anyone. (I'm not saying that kids playing with guns is right, we weren't raised thinking is was wrong) Recently I went to my cousin's wedding out in the "backwoods" of Palm Springs, and I know this is unPC, but the best word I can use to paint a picture is "white trash". The kids not only pointed guns at each other, but they cussed and threatened in their play worse than a rated R movie. I grew up in the same social class as these kids (I got better:D ) but now they as the children of my generation aren't taught at least some manners, not just with guns, but period. I guess it gets in the way of practicing all your Rights.:roll
I know in some regions kids grow up with more gun sense, like hunting families, but that kinda creeps me out, too. Not hunting for food, I'm a meat eater, but the way hunters talk. They dream about hunting bigger and better game, and I guess it is a game to them. "Yea, all we got around here is quail and deer, but I really want to shoot me a bear or a lion." There are farms that raise exotics just so some hunter can go shoot them. It's our American right. The worst is when little 5 year olds talk about their hunting goals. Makes my hair stand on end.
So my whole rambling point is, Americans are largely driven by not being denied anything, but many don't take the time to earn their responsibilities. Also, if we aren't exposed to outside opinions, we never get a chance to question whether we truly believe, as opposed to believing because it's all we've been told.
Ana and Steve - GET OVER HERE NOW! Save yourselves!! Sam BOh geez were trying! Still trying to sell the house!!!:exit
Ana

[John Z]

Very interesting thread!

It goes all the way from smacking, via poverty to firing guns, and it all relates. Why?
From my point of view it is poverty of mind when you do not have the ability or feel the will to educate yourself in human behaviour.

Is it out of free will when you smack a child or do you think you have to behave like that because of what other people say or think?

Is it out of free will when you buy a gun or do you think it is what you're supposed to do because it fits your image in society?

Is it out of free will when the word of the law has it's own "interpretation" in "everybody's" head, while the word of the law was (the) only a way of catching the spirit of the law?

I'm not discussing where poverty of mind comes from because there are too many variables involved, many of them person related, many of them government politics related and last but not least, many of them corporate politics related. (And it could get too much off-topic)

I'm not sure about the way you all may relate or react to this and it may already be enough or too much, so I'll keep it "short and simple":

Make up your own mind. Draw the line and stick to it: Don't smack. Ever.

John.

[Andy-Dee]

The safest place to be when I hold a gun is the target - and thats with 6 years of training by the best efforts of Britains military finest. :no

And yes I was issued with a permit for a sub machine gun whilst in the RAF - how scary is that??

Only suitable for the Medical Core really!!!!! :exit