OT: And now for something completely different...

[David Brown]

On 28/04/15 18:31, Don Y wrote:

<snip due to lack of time>

I believe Norway is at or near the top in the use of smartphones. And
despite how long and thin the country is, and how spread out our
population, there is good mobile coverage with solid internet rates
virtually everywhere.

From what I understand, most smartphones have limited data plans. [I
don't own a phone (with service) as I tend not to use phones at all]
Perhaps useful for querying bank balances -- but not for the types of
services they want to *pitch* (download music, video, etc.). I find it
distressing to see how tethered to their phones most folks appear to be.
(is this "alert", "text message", "email" or -- gasp -- voice call
really *that* important? Or, is it just some bored person looking for
someone to talk to and settling on *your* number?)

Most data plans have limits (at least, limited in what you get for the
monthly fee - you can usually pay more for more data). But if you are
not watching videos, you could would have a hard time using up the
limits on even the cheapest of plans. This is especially true if you
are using apps rather than webpages - they are fair more economical in
the data traffic. Even if you are addicted to face book and funny cat
photos, you won't use much traffic - it's the videos that take the
megabytes.

The laws (and the regulations the police have to follow, as well as the
resources they have) are definitely laxer, making it easier to buy or
sell small quantities of lighter drugs. And people here have plenty of
money to spend on such things. (The high price of alcohol may also be
an influence, making it cheaper to get "high" than drunk.)

Do, less "drug related" crime? E.g., addicts stealing to feed their
habits?
And, less over-the-top police responses? E.g., SWAT teams raiding homes
of suspected dealers, labs, etc.?

I have never heard of a drug lab in Norway. People occasionally mix up
some GBH in the kitchen, and pot plants are grown in varying scale. But
the rest is imported. And it is very rare for the equivalent of a SWAT
team to make raids - guns are much less common here (except for things
like hunting rifles, which are not favourites amongst criminals).

One of the odd things about drug addicts is that they usually steal from
each other. The theory is that if you steal from another addict, it's
unlikely that they'll report the crime. It's not quite an economic
perpetual motion machine - there is a certain injection of money from
occasional other thefts, from selling drugs to people with jobs or
incomes, and from social services.

E.g., I've been told Russia has a considerable problem with alcoholism
(though never heard comment on their drug use, etc.)

That's a cultural thing - alcohol, especially vodka, has always been a
staple part of Russian social life.

Dunno as it's never been a real part of my life -- other than a brief
indulgence in college. Most of the drinking that I see is folks
engaged in it (largely) "alone" -- even if in the presence of others.

Most drinking here is done socially. Even the alcoholics are social
about it - they get drunk together at parties.

That's fine in good times, but in
bad times it's easy for people to step over into alcoholism. Russia
also has a lot more problems with other drugs than they used to.

I guess they don't have the catchy slogans -- "Just Say No" -- with
which to address the problem! <rolls eyes

 

[Don Y]

On 4/28/2015 2:59 PM, David Brown wrote:

On 28/04/15 18:31, Don Y wrote:

The laws (and the regulations the police have to follow, as well as the
resources they have) are definitely laxer, making it easier to buy or
sell small quantities of lighter drugs. And people here have plenty of
money to spend on such things. (The high price of alcohol may also be
an influence, making it cheaper to get "high" than drunk.)

Do, less "drug related" crime? E.g., addicts stealing to feed their
habits?
And, less over-the-top police responses? E.g., SWAT teams raiding homes
of suspected dealers, labs, etc.?

I have never heard of a drug lab in Norway. People occasionally mix up some
GBH in the kitchen, and pot plants are grown in varying scale. But the rest is
imported. And it is very rare for the equivalent of a SWAT team to make raids
- guns are much less common here (except for things like hunting rifles, which
are not favourites amongst criminals).

Police departments, here, are incentivized to engage in "bold moves".
E.g., they are allowed to confiscate the personal property of "drug
dealers" and use the proceeds from the (eventual) sale of those items
to fund their "law enforcement efforts". They also have (in the past)
access to military equipment from the federal gummit to facilitate
their activities. Hard to imagine acquiring an armored vehicle and
NOT wanting to USE IT!

And, then there are bounty hunters -- a *private* sort of parapolice
force that has much greater freedom in how they pursue their "skips".
(In the US, anything involving *money* is magically "special" :> )
They can enter private property unannounced and without a warrant,
are not required to read the "skip" his rights under /Miranda/, etc.
A power that is all too easily abused.

One of the odd things about drug addicts is that they usually steal from each
other. The theory is that if you steal from another addict, it's unlikely that
they'll report the crime. It's not quite an economic perpetual motion machine
- there is a certain injection of money from occasional other thefts, from
selling drugs to people with jobs or incomes, and from social services.

I think much of that may be because those are the people that they are
surrounded by, naturally. Sort of like claiming blacks steal from
other blacks for <whatever> when, in reality, its more likely because
they are *surrounded* by "other blacks".

A house down the street was the site of a home invasion -- presumably something
drug-related (at least, that's the catch-all that the police use for such
events) -- despite the fact that an elderly (80+) year old couple resided
therein (and had been the *sole* owners of the recently built home)

Here (desert southwest) we hear of drug-related crime quite often as
"smugglers" try to protect their "drug corridors" (US lands) -- from rival
smugglers as well as human traffickers.

E.g., I've been told Russia has a considerable problem with alcoholism
(though never heard comment on their drug use, etc.)

That's a cultural thing - alcohol, especially vodka, has always been a
staple part of Russian social life.

Dunno as it's never been a real part of my life -- other than a brief
indulgence in college. Most of the drinking that I see is folks
engaged in it (largely) "alone" -- even if in the presence of others.

Most drinking here is done socially. Even the alcoholics are social about it -
they get drunk together at parties.

IME, folks would like the "excuse" to drink with "another". But are
more than happy to be the sole drinker in the room:
"There's soda in the cooler, over there..."
"Don't you have any *beer*?"
(i.e., MUST you have a beer even when the host{ess} hasn't supplied it?
I've known folks to temporarily leave such gatherings for the express
purpose of *buying* a 6-pack. Suggests they have more than a "hankering"
for a beer!)

 

[Don Y]

On 4/28/2015 5:14 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:

On 2015-04-27, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

I always thought that /one/ person, /one/ vote was key to democracy, and
thus it is critical for a democratic country to make sure that everyone
who is entitled to vote, can vote exactly once. I also thought that the
same eligibility rules should apply to everyone. It doesn't really
matter whether you allow convicted criminals to vote or not in a
presidential election - but the rules should be the same for all states.

It probably better if you do allow them, else the government could
stack the vote by prosecuting those who dissagree.

It's easier to rationalize that they are no longer "worthy" of
this "privilege" (which, presumably, is the most important "right"
one has in a democracy).

And, easier to come up with "back door" mechanisms that effectively
prohibit/discourage those likely to hold beliefs that you'd prefer
to suppress (because they conflict with *yours*).

E.g., in the US, religion, gender, economic status, race, "intelligence",
criminality, residency, slavery, age and even membership in the armed
forces (!) have been "legal grounds" for denying the ability to vote to
an individual, historically. Now, you have to be more subtle in how
you "discriminate" -- fabricating other "rational sounding" excuses to
keep those who are likely to undermine your power base from voting
(i.e., relying on the stupidity of the electorate to see beyond the ruse).

 

[krw]

On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:23:28 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:

On 4/28/2015 2:59 PM, David Brown wrote:
On 28/04/15 18:31, Don Y wrote:

The laws (and the regulations the police have to follow, as well as the
resources they have) are definitely laxer, making it easier to buy or
sell small quantities of lighter drugs. And people here have plenty of
money to spend on such things. (The high price of alcohol may also be
an influence, making it cheaper to get "high" than drunk.)

Do, less "drug related" crime? E.g., addicts stealing to feed their
habits?
And, less over-the-top police responses? E.g., SWAT teams raiding homes
of suspected dealers, labs, etc.?

I have never heard of a drug lab in Norway. People occasionally mix up some
GBH in the kitchen, and pot plants are grown in varying scale. But the rest is
imported. And it is very rare for the equivalent of a SWAT team to make raids
- guns are much less common here (except for things like hunting rifles, which
are not favourites amongst criminals).

Police departments, here, are incentivized to engage in "bold moves".
E.g., they are allowed to confiscate the personal property of "drug
dealers" and use the proceeds from the (eventual) sale of those items
to fund their "law enforcement efforts". They also have (in the past)
access to military equipment from the federal gummit to facilitate
their activities. Hard to imagine acquiring an armored vehicle and
NOT wanting to USE IT!

Confiscation certainly has proven to be a problem. A good reason why
government cannot be trusted. It's hard to imagine why a civil police
force would need armored vehicles at all. National guard, sure. They
even have F16s (and nuclear weapons, on rare occaisions). ;-)

And, then there are bounty hunters -- a *private* sort of parapolice
force that has much greater freedom in how they pursue their "skips".
(In the US, anything involving *money* is magically "special" :> )
They can enter private property unannounced and without a warrant,
are not required to read the "skip" his rights under /Miranda/, etc.
A power that is all too easily abused.

Of course they're not required to read their "skips" their rights.
First, bounty hunters are not officers of the court. They're not
arresting the perps. They're not even questioning them. ...and the
the "skips" already have a warrant out for them from a court of law.

One of the odd things about drug addicts is that they usually steal from each
other. The theory is that if you steal from another addict, it's unlikely that
they'll report the crime. It's not quite an economic perpetual motion machine
- there is a certain injection of money from occasional other thefts, from
selling drugs to people with jobs or incomes, and from social services.

I think much of that may be because those are the people that they are
surrounded by, naturally. Sort of like claiming blacks steal from
other blacks for <whatever> when, in reality, its more likely because
they are *surrounded* by "other blacks".

So that makes it just peachy?

A house down the street was the site of a home invasion -- presumably something
drug-related (at least, that's the catch-all that the police use for such
events) -- despite the fact that an elderly (80+) year old couple resided
therein (and had been the *sole* owners of the recently built home)

Shit happens. It's not only the cops who get it wrong. It's just one
more of the reasons to be armed.

Here (desert southwest) we hear of drug-related crime quite often as
"smugglers" try to protect their "drug corridors" (US lands) -- from rival
smugglers as well as human traffickers.

Or they're just more illegals doing their thing. Thak you Barak.

E.g., I've been told Russia has a considerable problem with alcoholism
(though never heard comment on their drug use, etc.)

That's a cultural thing - alcohol, especially vodka, has always been a
staple part of Russian social life.

Dunno as it's never been a real part of my life -- other than a brief
indulgence in college. Most of the drinking that I see is folks
engaged in it (largely) "alone" -- even if in the presence of others.

Most drinking here is done socially. Even the alcoholics are social about it -
they get drunk together at parties.

IME, folks would like the "excuse" to drink with "another". But are
more than happy to be the sole drinker in the room:
"There's soda in the cooler, over there..."
"Don't you have any *beer*?"
(i.e., MUST you have a beer even when the host{ess} hasn't supplied it?
I've known folks to temporarily leave such gatherings for the express
purpose of *buying* a 6-pack. Suggests they have more than a "hankering"
for a beer!)

You assume a lot.