Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Te Qaeda and the God Squad

960 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 39 Newer→ Last

  • Tom Beard,

    Since when has "soccer mum" been a part of our vernacular?

    Oh, for at least as long as "MILF" has :-)

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • Jeremy Andrew,

    Since when has "soccer mum" been a part of our vernacular?

    I know a lot of soccer mums, and they only ever use the term ironically.
    And none of them, to my knowledge, finds anything at all compelling about Jude - except maybe feeling compelled to chuck her chemist shop junk mail in the recycling.

    Hamiltron - City of the F… • Since Nov 2006 • 833 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    Today was the first time I ever heard "soccer mum" and I don't like it. It doesn't evoke anything for me.

    Readers of "Next" magazine, possibly?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2917 posts Report Reply

  • Jeremy Andrew,

    Oh, for at least as long as "MILF" has :-)

    Round our way the preferred term is yummy mummy. But a chunk of that demographic have seceded to become desperate housewives.

    Hamiltron - City of the F… • Since Nov 2006 • 833 posts Report Reply

  • kowhai montgomery,

    MILF I accept has gone global but soccer m**u**m? Shows how little I know....

    wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 485 posts Report Reply

  • daleaway,

    That's patronising. "Next" magazine does not usually use stereotyped imported cliches about their readers.

    "Soccer mums/moms" i's a lazy borrowing by slothful journalists who think it's cool to ape Americanisms.

    Since Jul 2007 • 178 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Fitzgerald,

    I've got $10 on Mintos quote coming true - no terrorism charges.

    Mr Minto said the police have put an "exit strategy" in place and the terrorism charges will not see the light of day.

    Since May 2007 • 631 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    The very concept of soccer mom (or nascar dad, or whatever) is patronising, so I don't feel too bad about that. But amen to the "lazy borrowing".

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 2917 posts Report Reply

  • Rebecca Williams,

    i feel *compelled* to feed jude dobson a good square meal ...

    all of this is very concerning, but i'm not sure yet why ... should i be worried about loss of civil liberties? or loss of my front windows when someone biffs a homemade incendiary device into my front yard?

    Auckland • Since Mar 2007 • 96 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Fitzgerald,

    Rebecca
    Why would anyone throw a bomb at your house? Nick your letter box sure but not bombs.

    We can do a lot to protect our community and the small stuff is better heres the link from page 2 a bit of Gun Control would help a lot.


    http://www.peace.net.nz/cgc_fact_sheet.html

    Guns in New Zealand
    In New Zealand, 210,000 licensed shooters own an estimated 700,000 to 1 million guns. We have 11 times as many guns per capita as the English and the Welsh, 20% more than the Australians but less than half as many as the residents of the United States. An additional 14,000 guns are imported to New Zealand in a typical year. Each day an average of seven firearm offences involving danger to life are reported to the police, while one in five homicides are committed with a firearm. In a typical year 96 New Zealanders are shot to death: nearly two a week. Of these, 75% are suicides, 12% accidents, 11% homicides, while in 2% of cases the cause is undetermined. In an average year, 13 children and youths aged 19 or younger die by gunshot and another 89 people are admitted to hospital with non-fatal wounds. Our gun death toll is 10% higher than the toll from cervical cancer. For every ten New Zealanders who die from HIV/AIDS, fifteen die by gunshot. Of all victims of gun homicide in this country during 1992-94, most (52.5%) were shot by a licensed gun owner. Almost all victims (95%) were killed by a familiar person. Half were shot by their partner, an estranged partner or a member of their own family. Of the perpetrators, less than 1 in 5 had a previous history of violent crime, while even fewer had any history of mental illness. Every civilian in possession of a firearm must possess a current firearm licence, renewable every ten years. Sporting long guns (shotguns and rifles, or 96% of firearms) are not registered, while military-style semi-automatic rifles (MSSAs), handguns (pistols & revolvers), and restricted weapons (mainly fully automatic firearms) are individually registered and more carefully monitored. As a result of these tighter controls, crime with registered firearms is rare.

    Since May 2007 • 631 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Beard,

    The very concept of soccer mom (or nascar dad, or whatever) is patronising

    Of course, just like any catch-all marketing segmentation, lifestyle generalisation or class-based insult (hippies, yuppies, Chardonnay socialists, chavs, bogans, douchebags, "mainstream New Zealand"). Sometimes it would be lazy borrowing, but other times it does strike a chord.

    It wouldn't work in the UK, of course, because "soccer" is the dominant (and working class) sport. But the evocation - of middle-class suburbia, dropping off the little tykes in the SUV to play their nice safe sport (that the parents would never watch on TV) before taking in a spot of shopping at the megamall - means that it does have some resonance here. It's an American term, but when it's used here it's being applied to a lifestyle that is almost as much an American borrowing. I don't think I've actually used it myself (except in reference to American culture), but I know what people mean when they say it.

    Round our way the preferred term is yummy mummy. But a chunk of that demographic have seceded to become desperate housewives.

    I'm sure that most soccer mums would style themselves as "yummy mummies", though (at the risk of lowering this thread even further into bathos and patronisation) "yummy mummies" are so not MILFs. Desperate housewives, on the other hand...

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • Jeremy Andrew,

    In a typical year 96 New Zealanders are shot to death: nearly two a week. Of these, 75% are suicides, 12% accidents, 11% homicides, while in 2% of cases the cause is undetermined

    So none of those 75% who topped themselves would have died if they didn't have a gun available? Likewise, none of the 1 in 5 homicides committed with firearms would have happened without a gun?
    Guns are a convenient method for killing, after all, its what they're made for. But it is disingenuous to imply that by controlling or eliminating firearms those deaths wouldn't happen.

    Hamiltron - City of the F… • Since Nov 2006 • 833 posts Report Reply

  • daleaway,

    It's a playwright's working rule that if a gun appears in Act I, it will have caused mayhem by Act III. Easy availability of guns leads to more gun crime. New Zealand has needed a rethink on this issue for a long time.

    A forensics guy of my acquaintance told me they love cases involving Molotov Cocktails, because they are so easy to trace back to the perpetrator. I won't tell you what he told me about why this is so, but it was quite heartening.

    Since Jul 2007 • 178 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Paul Wood,

    Razors pain you;
    Rivers are damp;
    Acids stain you;
    And drugs cause cramp.
    Guns aren't lawful;
    Nooses give;
    Gas smells awful;
    You might as well live.

    -- Dorothy Parker

    Christchurch • Since Jan 2007 • 175 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Fitzgerald,

    No it's not

    Since May 2007 • 631 posts Report Reply

  • stephen clover,

    A forensics guy of my acquaintance told me they love cases involving Molotov Cocktails, because they are so easy to trace back to the perpetrator. I won't tell you what he told me about why this is so, but it was quite heartening.

    Is it the DNA in the drool? ;>

    wgtn • Since Sep 2007 • 269 posts Report Reply

  • stephen clover,

    No it's not

    That's not an argument, that's just the automatic gain-saying of any statement the other person makes.

    wgtn • Since Sep 2007 • 269 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    So none of those 75% who topped themselves would have died if they didn't have a gun available? Likewise, none of the 1 in 5 homicides committed with firearms would have happened without a gun?
    Guns are a convenient method for killing, after all, its what they're made for. But it is disingenuous to imply that by controlling or eliminating firearms those deaths wouldn't happen.

    Ugh

    Sorry Jeremy but the data is really really clear. If you don't have guns you don't have anywhere near the same number of successful suicides.

    You are right guns just make it easier to succesfully kill (yourself or another). However removing guns DOES cause a reduction in the number of deaths.

    Yes the same number of people may try to kill (themselves or others) but they fail and as a result have the chance to change their mind.

    less guns = less deaths

    That may not seem logical to you but all the studies show precisely that.

    cheers
    Bart

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3221 posts Report Reply

  • Michael Fitzgerald,

    Guns are a convenient method for killing, after all, its what they're made for. But it is disingenuous to imply that by controlling or eliminating firearms those deaths wouldn't happen.

    Jeremy, you seem to be contradicting yourself.

    Since May 2007 • 631 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Paul Wood,

    Fewer swimmingpools, fewer drownings - this is a pointless argument.

    Christchurch • Since Jan 2007 • 175 posts Report Reply

  • stephen clover,

    Guns are a convenient method for killing, after all, its what they're made for.

    I would say that they are rather more designed for explosively propelling small, hard projectiles at incredibly high speed and accuracy.

    wgtn • Since Sep 2007 • 269 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    I'm sure that most soccer mums would style themselves as "yummy mummies"...

    Eww... I know a severely sleep deprived new Mum who will seriously fuck up anyone who says 'yummy mummy' in hear hearing. As she so eloquently puts it, it's rather easy to look fabulous when you can offload the screaming poo-maker on a nanny while you sleep, eat, go to the gym, get your stretch marks surgically removed and generally be a sanctimonious bitch in the only kind of magazine you can focus on .

    Don't screw around with a very tired and stressed out mother, kids. And if you ask them a question, be prepared for a extremely frank answer.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11783 posts Report Reply

  • Jeremy Andrew,

    No contradiction. Guns are made for killing, either people or animals. But if people want to kill, either themselves or others, they don't need a gun.
    Bart, I agree, guns make a successful killing more likely, but the (self-)killers will still more than likely make the attempt. Yes, less will be successful, but the way those stats were presented implies that without guns, all those lives would be saved. Which is not accurate.

    Hamiltron - City of the F… • Since Nov 2006 • 833 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Paul Wood,

    On the relativity of terrorism, this rather ammused me.

    Christchurch • Since Jan 2007 • 175 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Paul Wood,

    Without wanting to sound like Charlton Heston, shooting is also a legitimate sport. I have my name on a couple of trophies for marksmanship without ever having killed anything.

    Christchurch • Since Jan 2007 • 175 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 39 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.