Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

Cold arm of the law

May 3rd 2011 03:49
: Vyoos news
cat teases german shepherds
Roads less travelled

VYOOS EDITORIAL
You'd think Alaskans would be a little more tolerant of the spirit of adventure.


An 18-year-old got himself into trouble at the weekend when playing with friends on ice at the edge of the Chena River, in the state's main city of Fairbanks.

When a large piece of ice detached itself from the riverbank where the boys were, 18-year-old Michael Poland, in a fit of youthful enthusiasm, jumped onto it and rode off down the river.

The floe, with the teen aboard, floated through the middle of town. At some point the exuberance must have waned - the river was far too cold to contemplate a swim for the shore, and soon he would be into the suburbs, and then out into the wild.

Someone called the fire brigade, which rescued the boy. As soon as they got young Michael to shore, they handcuffed him, took him to the station, locked him up, read him the riot act, and discussed whether to charge him with disorderly conduct or creating a hazardous condition for fire fighters.

In the end they charged the boy with both.

When he comes before a judge to face these charges, I hope the judge remembers that we are talking about an 18-year-old boy whose crime involves giving in to a spirit of adventure and a sense of freedom and who acted his age, which happens to be an age when derring-do comes naturally.


It is part of both the psychological and physiological make-up of 18-year-old boys to be adventurous of spirit. It is the same spirit which helps humans survive in Alaska and other inhospitable environments.

The judge should be wise. I suggest the case be dismissed and the fire fighters instructed to thank the boy for reminding them what fun is.








29
Vote
   


Lolly pops and violent video games

November 3rd 2010 08:14
: Vyoos news
video game violence

VYOOS EDITORIAL
They are trying to make the sale of video games containing graphic violence illegal in California to people under 18.

Plenty of people are pushing the process, saying kids of all ages play video games these days and who in their right mind could be comfortable with a legal system which condones eight-year-olds having unfettered access to games which contain violence?

Who could dispute that?

Well, one group which is isn't convinced, and which is putting up some interesting counter-arguments, is the judges who comprise the United States Supreme Court.

They don't like the "vagueness" of the proposed California law, which sounds like something which can be discussed and addressed. But secondly, and much more crucially, they fear the law conflicts with the First Amendment's protection of free speech.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg put it this way, "If you are supposing a category of violent materials dangerous to children, then how do you cut it off at video games?''

Justice Antonin Scalia said, "You're asking us to create ... a whole new prohibition which the American people never, never ratified when they ratified the First Amendment.''

What the judges are concerned about is an apparent free speech double-standard, in that the California law appears to limit violent video games while ignoring the violence minors experience in other media such as online, in movies, in music and in books.

Justice Scalia repeated a crucial point: many children's books use violence to demonstrate that being bad doesn't pay. "Some of Grimm's Fairy Tales are quite grim, to tell you the truth,'' Scalia remarked.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed to a study said that watching a Bugs Bunny cartoon had the same effect on minors that playing a violent video game did.

"So can the legislature now, because it has that study, say we can outlaw Bugs Bunny?'' she asked.

Think also comic books. Think kapow! Think comeuppance factor.

As often is the case with these debates, there can be legal, political or social mandates on both sides, and common sense can get squeezed out the back door.

There aren't enough headlines in common sense.

So let's let common sense have a say here. Is it common sense to leave violent video games around for kids to find? Of course it isn't.

Is it common sense to think kids will access violent video games despite the best efforts of parents, teachers, politicians and police to prevent them doing so. Of course it is. The more you hide something, the more attrractive it becomes.

Is it common sense to do everything you can, including legal imperatives, to ensure that any underage kid can not access violent video games? No, it isn't.

Apart from the legal arguments above (and in the US anything that might compromise the First Amendment is a very serious legal argument indeed), and apart from political self-agendas from the Our Kids Are Pure and Sacred lobby, one has to ask what a law banning access by minors to violent video games would achieve.

It certainly won't prevent access by minors to violent video games. The games will still be out there, legally accessible by parents, older siblings, and anyone with an internet connection who knows where to find free copies on the net. Which is, like, you know, every teenager.

Then there's the life lesson argument. If this law is passed, and we somehow effectively prevent every individual viewing video violence until the day they turn 18, we are going to have some shocked and shaken 18-year-olds walking around. Is this the way to prepare kids for the rigours of the real world?

Kids are tougher than many people give them credit for, and they need to be. Surely it is common sense to let them learn some of life's harsher, uglier lessons in their time and in their space.

If an eight-year-old is old enough to find a violent video game, he or she is old enough to start learning perspectives associated with it. The first lesson, that the world isn't full of lolly pops and mum can't, in fact, kiss everything better, can be a hard one, but it's better learned sooner rather than later.





57
Vote
   


Three men and a prick

October 27th 2010 07:30
: vyoos news
stories of the nearly normal

STORIES OF THE NEARLY NORMAL
Three Earth men from the Australian state of Queensland have appeared before a hearing of the Intergalactic Tribunal for the Humane Extermination of Sub-moronic Examples of Sentient Organisms.

The hearing sought to determine whether the men should be exterminated immediately, with costs.

The tribunal first heard from the Prosecutor, a seven-headed Stryzzlegryzz from the planet of Sooyoo, who presented the facts of the case.

"One of these men," the prosecutor told the judge, a Learned Cloud from Milky Way Central, "tattooed a penis on to the back of a second of these men, while the third man watched," the Prosecutor said.

"What's a penis?" the Judge said.

"A reproductive appendage, m'Cloud," the Prosecutor explained. "However, the recipient of the appendage did not know he was getting a penis tattoo. He thought he was getting a yin and yang symbol."

The Learned Cloud emitted a small snort of thunder. "Did he have his eyes closed throughout the procedure?" he asked.

"M'Cloud," said the Prosecutor, "this information is not known, but if I may clarify, it would be irrelevant to this case because the tattoo was being drawn on the back, and Earth men do not have eyes in the backs of their heads."

The Learned Cloud sat up straight and looked closed at the three Earth men.

"Good Galaxy!" he exclaimed. "How backward. Or forward. Or something. Proceed Mr Prosecutor."

"Thank you, m'Cloud. It appears the tattoo artist and the penis recipient, although friendly, had had an argument. The tattoo artist had patched up the friendship, but this was in fact a ruse. Still angry with his so-called friend, he wanted to inflict humiliation.

"He therefore, with apparent sincerity and friendship, offered to fulfil the stated wish of the first man to have a yin and yang symbol tattooed on his back.

"Instead, he created a penis."

"Well, without eyes in the back of his head, how did he discover the deception?" the Judge asked.

"When the man returned to his place of abode, which he shared with a woman, he showed the tattoo to her. She reported told him, 'I don't think it's the tattoo you were after'.''

The Judge shook his head, and then asked, "And the third man?"

"The third man, m'Cloud, stood and watched as the tattoo was drawn, and assured the recipient at intervals that the yin and yang were coming along splendidly. He is reported to have said," and here the Prosecutor checked his notes, " 'Mate, it's looking really good.' This is believed to local vernacular aimed at convincing the recipient of the integrity of the work."

Judge Cloud considered the evidence for a time, and then said in deep, slow tones, "I find the case for criminal moronity proven in all three cases; the recipient of the penis for being dumb enough to have trusted his so-called friends; the other two for being sufficiently moronic to conceive of and support this act; and all three for their failure to have eyes all around their heads.

"Mr Prosecutor, if we return these men to Earth, can we expect them to face any penalty there for their actions?"

"M'Cloud, our information is that the Earth prosecutorial forces, known as police, are considering a charge of assault and a further charge for breaching the Public Safety Act."

"And the maximum penalty?" the Judge asked.

"A fine of indeterminable extent, Sir."

"What! Not extermination?"

"No, m'Cloud."

The Judge sighed.

"Send them back," he said at last. "Earth people obviously have yet to appreciate the seriousness of advanced stupidity. These three might serve to show them."
couriermail.com.au




165
Vote
   


VYOOS EDITORIAL
Sometimes, the best decisions in law are innovative moments of colour splashed on grey areas of inefficacy.

[ Click here to read more ]
57
Vote
   


Today's news: bowser bonk

February 9th 2010 07:13
The trial continues of an Australian man who was having sexual intercourse with a woman in a vehicle at a petrol station and who refused to stop having sexual intercourse despite police arriving and requesting him to do so.

The court was told that police indicated from outside the locked vehicle that they wanted the couple to cease having sex. Exactly how the police indicated their requirements was not made clear in media reports of the court case


[ Click here to read more ]
56
Vote
   


Today's news: beer goggles

January 11th 2010 21:41
beer goggles
Too much beer does not affect your ability to get a woman's age wrong, according to a British study.

The study at the University of Leicester had researchers showing a group of people — half of whom were sober and half of whom had consumed varying amounts of alcohol — images of females meant to be 13, 17 or 20


[ Click here to read more ]
45
Vote
   


Light penalty for vile trickery

April 25th 2009 04:03
snake oil

Caveat emptor — buyer beware — even if you are terminally ill with cancer.

[ Click here to read more ]
40
Vote
   


Singapore's fine reputation enhanced

October 14th 2008 14:38
They say of Singapore that it is a fine place. They have a fine for everything.

It became famous for fining people for incorrect disposal of chewing gum, but that fine became extinct in 1992 when Singapore placed a blanket ban on the importation of gum. Chewing gum smugglers (gum runners?) can be gaoled for 12 months and fined US$5,500


[ Click here to read more ]
39
Vote
   


Pay up doc, we didn't want twins

July 24th 2008 07:18
An Australian couple will have to pay the costs of raising both their twin daughters after a court today ruled against their claim that their obstetrician should pay the costs of raising one of them.

The lesbian couple, whose names have been suppressed, sued Canberra obstetrician Sydney Robert Armellin for almost $400,000 for implanting two embryos instead of the requested one. The ACT Supreme Court today ruled in favour of Dr Armellin, and ordered the couple pay his legal costs, even after the doctor admitted from the outset that a mistake had been made


[ Click here to read more ]
66
Vote
   


Bumble's guide to US law

July 19th 2008 08:15
Mr Bumble
Dickens' Mr Bumble, the first to claim that the law can be an ass

Is it naïve to suggest that America is the land where litigation is the domain of the inventive? If you dream it, they will sue it.

[ Click here to read more ]
51
Vote
   


Chris Champion's Blogs

10894 Vote(s)
754 Comment(s)
121 Post(s)
4300 Vote(s)
33 Comment(s)
39 Post(s)
5384 Vote(s)
193 Comment(s)
72 Post(s)
3728 Vote(s)
204 Comment(s)
44 Post(s)
15730 Vote(s)
1464 Comment(s)
232 Post(s)
Moderated by Chris Champion
Copyright © 2012 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]