donkusai comments

Australia tried mandatory gun confiscation and got what, twenty or thirty percent ?

Gun control in Australia has been a success. Just ask Australians.

Gun control has been a great success in Australia going from a gun massacre every 1.5 years before the controls were brought in, to none in the last 20 years. This does not mean that there isn't any gun crime, but the level of safety (both real and perceived) is very high here. Now, on saying that, Australia doesn't have (and never really has ever had) a gun culture the way the U.S. has. I think some of the arguments that have been put forward about acceptable risk are valid arguments, and it's up to the nation as a whole to make that decision. In Australia, we didn't really change much with our gun control laws as far as culture is concern - completely different story for the U.S.

As for this incident. It would be nice to see just as much passion in the argument about how we treat people with mental illness. From what I've read, this guy was an Iraq vet who got pretty messed up by his time over there. I'd love to find out what was (or wasn't) done for him on his return. In this case, I'd even suggest that this might be more important than the gun discussion.

"Even before Trump’s tweet, many House Republicans, including top leaders, had opposed the measure and worried about its ramifications."

...and this is what worries me the most about this. Most of the republican house leaders were against this. President-elect Trump is against this. I'm all for "drain the swamp", but it seems most of those neck-deep in murky water don't want to see one drop of swamp water drained. It's been a weird end to 2016, and here at the start of 2017, I'm cheering the republican house leaders and Donald Trump on their integrity. My belief in parallel universes and alternate timelines has risen in recent months...

There is a lot to be worried about in regards to the next 4 years, but one positive for Trump. He's called the attempt to weaken ethics rules in the congress for what they were, and helped to kill the changes. Trump is so good at misdirection that when I look one way, he's doing a great job at draining the swamp, and when I look the other... I swear I can see it getting deeper... I guess we'll just have to get used to this. Trump may very well end up as both the worst and best president ever - at exactly the same time. Confused? Join the club...

Basing what is real or "fake" news on the sophistication of the way its advertising is set up is just stupid. This just reinforces the "big corporate" news over smaller independent sources that - yes - may be fake, but these days may also include more accurate sources than the big players. The problem with mainstream media (and I don't use this term in the right-wing slander sense of anything that doesn't have a huge bias to the right - so I include organisations such as FOX in this) is that they've found it easier and cheaper to substitute real news for opinion. Why pay an actual journalist to investigate and research an issue fully and then present it clearly to the public when you can put an idiot in a bow-tie on the screen and get him to sprout nonsense on the topic based on their own personal opinion. This is the source of the problem here. "Fake" news is ungrounded opinion, and we've been getting that from mainstream news sources for quite a while now.

Unfortunately, there's been so much of it lately that it's hard to see the forest for the trees. news sources need to STOP mixing opinion pieces with proper investigative journalism. Until they do, good journalism is thrown in with all the other opinionated rubbish and no one can tell what's true and what isn't. When that happens, you pick the news that you like the most and that becomes your truth. It's all pretty messed up.

The whole point of terrorism is to try and disrupt people's daily lives. Yes, there are risks, but there are risks in everything. With the rare exception, most terrorist attacks affect very few people - far less than traffic accidents, suicide and other things we live with everyday. The best way to defeat them (outside of the law enforcement side of things) is to show them that we are free to live our lives unaffected by their actions. This New Year's Eve, think back on your own year, and celebrate your freedom by enjoying tonight and hoping the best for others for the New Year. :)

I used to live not far from Ise Grand Shrine in Mie. I remember my first time there on New Year's Eve/Day... never seen traffic jams kilometers long like that at 3am. It's a great place to see in the New Years, and a short trip to Toba to welcome in the first sunrise.

2016 has been a weird year. It may turn out being one of those turning point years, or it might just end up a historical footnote. Either way, I hope everyone enjoys these last few hours of 2016, and I hope 2017 is a good one for all.

veejay: "Trump will prove it on a more dangerous scale."

Trump has never said that he's killed anyone. Sure, he claimed that he "could" shoot someone and no one would care, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would think he ACTUALLY plans to do that. If Trump is a danger, he is a danger to stability - and he won't be the first president to be that (probably most presidents are - think of Bush and Iraq, or Obama and healthcare). Duterte is something different and something far more dangerous. He has actually legalised the execution of members of the populace based on rumour or suspicion... think about that for a second. True, I'm no fan of Trump, but let's not muddy the water here - this has nothing to do with Trump. I'd like to think sane people, whether from the left or the right, would see the insanity in the boasts of Duterte. When the rule of law breaks down, dictators and murderers rise to the top.

"Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has threatened corrupt government officials with the prospect of being thrown out of a helicopter mid-air, warning he has done it himself... The fiery-tempered former prosecutor said he once hurled a Chinese man suspected of rape and murder out of a helicopter."

You hurl "suspected" criminals out of helicopters to their death? Whatever happened to actually having a trial to see if they were guilty first, or if they're just falsely accused? ...or is it a case that if they're proven later to NOT be guilty, you can just rewind time and suck their splattered remains off the ground and back into the helicopter? That would be such a wonderful tool to have, otherwise you'd be a president who murders innocent people... and that wouldn't be good... Hitler... Stalin... Pol Pot not good...

Firstly, I just want to say that political murder is never justified. My thoughts go out to the ambassador's family.

Secondly, when war and the killing of civilians (hospitals and rescue workers have been deliberately bombed in Aleppo) becomes your foreign policy, there is always a price to pay. You can't play nasty and then get upset when they play nasty back. You reap what you sow. We seem to be suffering a bout of nasty politics lately around the world. While this may make short term gains and may make people in the home countries swell with national pride, given time it never ends well...

Australia should have been a republic in 1999, but some vested interests pushed people to vote no based on the presidential model. Personally, I voted yes, but if they put forward a directly elected president model, I'll vote no and encourage everyone I know to do the same. The Irish system works fine and is the closest to what we already have. You put in a directly elected president and you just get another politician who has taken enough $$$ from lobbyists to fund a campaign... no thank you.

...and I think that pretty much sums up the complexity of the issue and why the 1999 referendum wasn't handled well.

China know they don't have a leg to stand on with this one (the drone was taken just off the coast of the Philippines, nowhere near China like some posters here seem to think. This is China's way to save face and return the drone. The U.S. government should accept but not endorse China's feeble excuse, and throw in a stern warning not to do it again. Deescalate the whole thing. With the photo proof over the past few days of the weaponising of the man-made reef islands in the SCS and Trumps signalling that he isn't going to play China's games with the call to the Taiwanese leader, I have little doubt that the Chinese military felt they had to respond in some way to save face. If this is all they do - take a research drone and give it back a day or 2 later, then I personally can live with that. They could have done something way more stupid.

Sounds like our half-orangutan soon-to-be-overlord.

A little harsh perhaps, but we certainly live in interesting times. Some may even say that this sort of thing is unpresidented...

Stuart hayward: Does anyone really believe the U.S. Navy has to build a $150,000 drone to simply collect salinity data & water temperatures?

Other reports state that it's a commercially available drone that retails at that price. China could easily buy one of their own. Apparently, it was testing water temperature and salinity, which can affect the sonar used by submarines. It's been reported as civilian research paid for by the U.S. Navy (if I remember correctly). The U.S. ship had already collected one drone, and (being an unarmed ship) could only watch on as the Chinese took the other drone and sailed away.

The drone is useless to the Chinese both technologically speaking, and near-useless for data. It's clearly meant to be a huge middle finger to the U.S. The Chinese military likes to do this sort of thing if they think they aren't getting the respect they feel they deserve. Of course, what they feel and what they deserve don't always align.

Tsuchifumazu: A last ditch effort to take a final swipe at the right.

That actually made me laugh. No one is accusing the left or right of hacking. The hacking and subsequent posting on Wikileaks is apparently from foreign sources. This time around, they hacked the Democrats emails. Next time, it may be the Republicans. The question you have to ask yourself is would you be happy if was hacked during an election. If you're answer is "yes", then this investigation is a waste of time. If "no", then it needs to be done. I'm sure the incoming Trump administration is equally as keen to keep the election process free of foreign interference.

So... get a state-run agency to dodgy up a few complaints, have them step in to ban the phones, then the market is clear to be flooded by all the cheap Chinese iPhone rip-offs. Keep the profits in-house so to speak. Wasn't there a boss in China some time back threatening to sack any worker who bought an iPhone?

A big thumbs up to Obama for being so positive in the handover of power, and a big thumbs up to Bush 8 years earlier for clearly doing the same. Regardless of which side you support, the respect for the votes of the people shown by BOTH sides needs to be acknowledged. Weirdly... I actually think that when Trump leaves office, he'll be as equally gracious and helpful as both Obama and Bush were. For Clinton supporters, this is a small but important renewal of faith in democracy...

The election has been run. The people have had their say. That should be respected. Trump was actually quite gracious to Clinton in his speech. Sure, protest if and when he does something outrageous (you know it's gonna happen), but not now.

As an aside, I was just listening to R.E.M's "end of the world as we know it" (wonder why) and I swear I just heard a line about the reporters being trumped. First the Simpsons, and now this...

The focus here should be is Clinton dependable and trustworthy? It is plain to see that she is not.

I agree with this. On my list for people who should be president, I'd put her 2nd last. Unfortunately, the guy I'd put last is also running for president... :(

For sheer nastiness and thuggery on the pitch, Kevin Muscat takes some beating.

Arg... even as a Aussie, I don't like this guy. He was the thug's thug. We don't need that in the game.

I don't think "vicious" is quite the word. Halilhodzic did say "more street-smart", which I think is more accurate. The Japanese team has great technical skill, but it doesn't take much for stronger teams to push them off the ball or to dominate them physically. If the Japanese team can learn to mix it physically, to push the edges of the rules a little more, I think they'll do so much better. I can't help but to remember how the Japanese rugby team beat South Africa. If the football team could show that level of fight, they'd dominate Asia and give the big teams pause for thought.

One of the problems with free trade deals, and reporting of trade in general, is the way things are calculated. One millionaire business owner can profit $100,000, and 18 families can lose $5,000 income a year, and that's seen as a net gain for the country of $10,000, despite there being 1 winner and 18 losers. Magnify this across a nation's populace, and a lot of people get burnt and disfranchised. They're told that it's good for the country, but all they see is job loses and 20 years of stagnant wages.

Add the lack of transparency, the ability for private companies to sue governments for anything they enact that may affect company profits, and the way it seems some of the biggest businesses pay little to no tax while the rest of us have to carry that burden... no wonder popularism is becoming so popular. No wonder people will support an "outside", even if you know they'll be an absolute disaster, over the status quo, because the status quo is seeming just as much a disaster, just one that's taking its time to play out.

Or a Samsung phone.

...a gas bottle delivery driver using a Note 7? ...or perhaps an elderly man who was tired of life and wanted to go out with a... umm, well, wanted to make a departing statement. It certainly seems the 72 year old was probably behind it, with the house fire and all, though the 2nd blast is more than a bit odd...

I thought Australia's performance was a big step up from some of their previous games. They made a match of it. The thing about the All Blacks, though, is they play as well in the last 20 minutes as they do in the first. They are consider one of the world's best sporting teams for a reason.

Agreed, outrider... and the cost of not monitoring them can be just as staggering...

If you want free access to guns in your society, then you have to accept this sort of thing happening regularly. It's your choice. We accept the risk of accident and death as a result of car accidents for the benefit that cars bring to our mobility. If you're happy to accept these sorts of things as the down-side for the benefits that having guns freely available in society brings, then that's fair enough. Guns for hunting and stuff like that can be handled in a more controlled and safe manner. So far, the only argument I've heard for the existing free access to guns is "the 2nd amendment" and "freedom", which usually translates to "we need to protect ourselves from the government and from other people with guns". Really. Well, if you think all the deaths are worth it, then you have to live with that decision. Good luck with that.

"It's just a big opinion poll." ...one that would actually reflect the opinion of the nation. This is an issue that people feel strongly about on both sides. I for one would like to see this vote go ahead and the result acted on, whichever way it falls. We're looking at a redefinition of a core social institution.

Biggest earthquake I've experienced in Japan was a 7.4 in 2004 (though epicenter was a little off the coast). It came 5 hours after a 7. Helmets are stored in an easy access place. When safe, you exit the building. Clearly these folks have done that. Hopefully, next time they have to do it for real, they'll do it with great success. Personally, I hate earthquakes. It's the out-of-the-blue danger that adds to nastiness.

The Canadian passed Arai, but Arai held on and then passed Dunfee up the inside. The two ran into each other as Arai passed and Dunfee nearly fell, he stumbled a lot and his timing was all out from that point on. It wasn't too far from the end. The Canadians put in a protest, Arai was disqualified, then the Japanese protested the disqualification, and Arai was given back the bronze.

Personally, it looked at first like Arai barged through Dunfee, but I'm not sure if Dunfee may not have seen Arai at the last moment and may have contributed to it. Personally, I think the judges had to make a tough decision.

Great effort by the Japanese. I don't follow much of the track and field, so this result was a bit of a surprise to me. Watching the race, they fully deserved the result. Well done.

Just another social media over-reaction. A movie studio stuffed up a poster. The people of Hong Kong may well fear for their independence from mainland pressures, but is a poster stuff-up from a low-grade Hollywood sci-fi movie really what you want to spend your day whinging about?

smith, I agree - slightly odd way of describing things. Often in sports like gymnastics, that little bit of flair, or bit of personality that comes out, can be the difference between two technically excellent competitors. Maybe that's what he was getting at with the "robotic" comment, that it was mechanical and lacked feeling, and that was the difference between a medal and not. Well done Japan for stepping things up and doing well.