Incidentally, this is from a different thread:

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?p=391473#post391473

Now, Rk, tell me how you feel living in a country that has such flagrant disregard for personal freedom?

The truth is, what RK calls freedom really isn't that appealing to me. I'm not bothered by it when it comes at the price he expects people to pay.

I'd far rather have the welfare state as a safety net and live in what he describes as a police state than the other way round. I'm pretty sure he has said (or implied at least) that we have the amount of freedom we deserve. Fine. Americans have the safety net they deserve.

This is not an anti-American post - I am well aware that the environment you are brought up in colours your thinking, and mine is that I am happy to pay more money in order to have the state help me when I need it. Like Dana I'm not crazy bout the cameras either, but they don't bother me enough to protest them. They are not there to monitor me - I abide by the law. If some lowlife scum gets taken to court (and our court system has been copied all over the world) it's worth it.

Yumyum, police state. I gobble it down like pickles.

Yeahah...that's some damn fine, tasty police state right there.

We have cameras in some areas of our city. I think it's good that they're used to catch the thugs that pick fights with innocent passers by. To my knowledge, there have never been any complaints about the cameras and if so, they've been so minimal as to not even make the news, and believe me, we have some pretty slow news days around here.

I fight this kind of shit.
This is why the UK frightens me so much... I hate to see that we are headed that way. It is disgusting. :greenface
Crime I understand, but WTF does this mean?
Green hair, naughty language? This is the kind of shit that disgusts me... one does not have the right to be insulated from those they "don't like" if they are not breaking the law.

I think they mean a bit more the green hair and naughty language rkz. Something more along the lines of property damage and insulting, derogatory behaviour.

Anti-social behaviour is a catch all term for a variety of behaviours which disrupt and upset the lives of others. It could, for instance, include a gang of youths hanging around the kiddy play park, drinking vodka and smashing the swings. It could refer to someone who consistently intimidates and harrasses their neighbours. There are lots of things which are considered "anti-social". It is a legal term (if someone is found to be acting in such a manner as to terrorise or disturb an estate of people for instance, they may be served with an Anti-Social Behaviour Order)

Okay. That's fine. It's also the last time I will discuss this with you.

Both of you are describing anti-social behavior as crime, but in your original description separated the two. I guess that was a mistake.

Get off your high horse, RK. In the US its usually called a restraining order. Its very easy to get one -at least temporarily- against someone you don't like. I know of instances where abusers actually manage to get restraining orders against those they have abused in order to shut them up.

Open your eyes. The good old USA is going downhill and fast, at that.

What are you talking about?
It takes a bit more than just not liking someone to get a restraining order.
I agree with you about the US and where the UK is now, destroying personal freedoms as fast as they can, is where we are heading.

rkz...I have to say, you seem to have a very romanticized view of what you think your country should be like compared to the reality now or in the past.

I really think you need to accept that just because you think it should be a certain way, everyone else isn't stupid or any other derogatory word for thinking you're being irrational in your approach.

If one person disagrees with me, is it possible I could be wrong? Yes.

If more people disagree with me than agree, is it likely I could be wrong? Yes.

Sanity is not statistical.

Not in my state it doesn't. All you have to do is go down to the courthouse and fill out a simple form. You can tell every lie in the book about the person you target. Doesn't matter. The R.O. is immediently issued, usually for 30 days until the case goes before a judge. The person served then has to go to court, bring any witnesses s/he may have along with any evidence - blah, blah, blah. Its a great way to harass someone with very little cost or time involved on the part of the person obtaining the R.O. against someone else.

And you don't agree with me about the UK, because as far as I'm aware, there's plenty of personal freedom in the UK. Maybe even more so than here.

In no way am I romanticizing anything.
I am often wrong and admit it when given sufficient evidence/logical argument. I am VERY happy when this happens and thank them.
The number of people that believe something means nothing, in fact is often is an indicator as to how stupid it is.

Thanks for the info sam... I guess I was under the impression that the court/proof stage happened much sooner. Wow, that sucks. I have been misinformed and mistaken.