NationStates Jolt Archive

This matter popped up in the obesity thread, but I thought it deserved it's own.

It's funny how Americans usually imagine themselves to have vastly more civil rights than Europeans.
That's because in general, they do. My cousin that is still in Slovakia (we're the same age) has more restrictions on what he cannot do than I do.
What restrictions has he mentioned?

In America drug freedoms tend to be significantly less than in Europe. It varies from country to country, but there's nowhere in Europe where you can be locked up for the possession of anything other than a very large amount of marajuana. In Europe the legal drinking age varies between 16 (e.g. France, Germany) and 18 (e.g. Ireland, Britain).

In places such as Germany there is much more tolerance for explicity sexual material in the media. Media outlets don't have the American FCC heavily regulating them to ensure that they are sufficiently "moral".

In most of Europe you are not barred from voting after you serve your punishment in prison, and in some places you are even allowed to vote while in prison. It is my understanding that Americans don't have this freedom.


However, in America, extremes of free speech, such as Nazi propaganda, are better protected than in Europe. Also, Americans tend to have greater gun freedoms (although Finland has even more gun freedom), but this is not something that Europeans want.

I think it probably ends up balanced. Some things are more restricted in one country than they are in another country. So, I'd say it really depends on what freedoms you regard as more important. :rolleyes:

You can't compare a country to "Europe", because human right difer so much from country to country, even more as in the USA.

Europe

I really don't know, but I will gladly read any good discussion that comes out of this thread.

Western Europe.

Depends. Europe isn't one homogenous country like the US is. Rights vary place to place. In some places, such as Scandinavia (I would imagine), the people have more civil rights than in the United States. But in other places, like Belarus, the US has far more civil rights.

I agree with Wisjersey. Depends. Also, we have more gun freedom than the USA? That's news to me.

Depends. Europe isn't one homogenous country the US is
Aw, cummon, stop stereotyping! We aren't all gay!
Oh, I do appreciate how you complimented our intelligence though.

(sorry, I just *had* to do that! don't hurt meee!)

When we say "America" do we mean the US or all of America?

European countries and laws vary so much from country to country that any basic America vs. Europe comparison is basically meaningless anyway.

You can't compare a country to "Europe", because human right difer so much from country to country, even more as in the USA.
We're talking about civil rights not human rights here, but I see your point about generalising about the continent! But for this discussion we must.

I agree with Wisjersey. Depends. Also, we have more gun freedom than the USA? That's news to me.

It's hard to say about Finland. You need a permit for every weapon in Finland, but it's not that hard to get. Plus, you can get a sound suppressor more easily in Finland than the US.

I'd say for an average gun, it's easier in the US. But for suppressors, it's easier in Finland.

When we say "America" do we mean the US or all of America?
Sorry. I mean the USA.

Plus, you can get a sound suppressor more easily in Finland than the US.

I'd say for an average gun, it's easier in the US. But for suppressors, it's easier in Finland.
We do love our sound suppressors. That's because we are all assassins. Fat and liberal assassins.

I also might add to my original post, that gay rights in Europe are far ahead of them in the USA. Most countries allow civil unions, if not homosexual marriage.

Laws concerning firearms are, in our opinion, the best in the world. Laws are supported by Finnish welfare society, where all citizens are looked after also in difficult situations in life. According to the law, all honest and respected citizens are permitted to own a firearm when they have a legitimate use for it. Approved purposes of use are hunting, sport shooting, recreational shooting and reservist shooting, to name a few examples. Use of firearms for self-defence is basically prohibited and you are not allowed to carry a firearm with you, unless you are going to practise hunting, sport shooting or engage in other approved activities. All buyers of firearms must apply for a permit from the police office of their place of residence before they can purchase a firearm. Firearm permits can be revoked if the holder commits a crime severe enough.

Since shooting sports are well recognised by the government and police authorities, bringing firearms and ammunition to Finland is easy compared to many other countries in the world. As Finland is a member of the EU, citizens of European countries will only need to have a European firearm passport to bring firearms and ammunition to Finland. The only restriction affecting our sport is the prohibition against the use of hollow point ammunition without a special permit for them



Here in Virginia, I don't need a permit to buy a gun. There is an automated background check that takes a minute. You can't be a felon or domestic abuser and buy a gun. You can carry openly in Virginia, but you can't carry concealed without a permit. Self-defense with a firearm is an acknowledged right in Virginia (and 33 other states).

Oh, and I can buy (and am encouraged to buy) hollowpoint ammunition. If you use the same ammunition as the police in your pistol, you are not likely to be labeled as a "killer" or "sadist" who specially chose unusual ammunition. The police use the most lethal hollowpoints money can buy, so that's a good thing.

Well, for once Slovakia is not Europe.

I think I do have more freedoms in Austria (but the one thing where we kick the US ass is simple, our social security is a lot better) than I would have in the USA. Agreed, our chancellor is an idiot too, but at least he can't invade other countries.

But also, Germany may have more tolerance for explicity sexual material in the media (just turn on a German TV station after a certain hour and the only commercials you'll see are... porn, it's annoying). But on the other hand they censor movies like Saving Private Ryan or Pulp Fiction on TV. Saving Private Ryan was uncut rated suitable for viewers at age of 16 when it was in the theaters (same goes for the VHS tape of it). When it came on TV a few months ago they still rated it for age 16, but censored it extremly (and thus butchered it terribly). Personally I don't really give a shit for the sexual material, seen one blonde slut holding her tits into the camera, seen all of them, nothing new there. Who cares, it's neither interesting, nor exciting.

Same goes for computer games. Games like Doom or Half Life are censored or even on the index, meaning you can't buy them if you're under 18 (as if that would stop a 12 year old form getting it, many people have DSL now, so a download is rather easy). There are even German versions of games, and I'm not talking about dubbings. What I mean is what German censorship has done with, for example, the Command and Conquer series. If you play C&C in German, your infantry are... bots. They don't scream and bleed, they make noises like tincans when you run them over with tanks. The original Half Life in the German version had absolutely no blood and your opponents were robots. Return to Castle Wolfenstein has been censored as well in the German version (mainly because of the blood and the Nazi stuff in it). Etc, etc..... Btw, I'm only playing US original versions, they are a bit more expensive around here, but they can take their censorship and shove it where the sun doesn't shine.

If you live in Austria you have to live with German censorship as well, since well, games and movies we get come via Germany.

Gun freedom, well, I'll be honest. If I would want to get my hands on an AK-47 or a Steyr AUG in Austria, I could get one. It's not that hard, laws or not. You can even get RPG-7s (of course not legal), one of those was used just a few months ago when one pimp attacked the house of another one and blew up the wall with an RPG-7. If you want it and can pay, you can get any weapon. Personally I don't care much for the "gun freedom". Luckily this here is a country where you don't need to go shopping with an APC. Also, if you have a hunting permission (which isn't that hard to get around here) you can own more than one firearm legally. I used to have 4 on my own, 3 rifles and one handgun.

Drug freedoms, well, the whole discussion about marijuana is ridiculous anyway. It works in the Netherlands, point taken I guess. There's the old argument that marijuana is a beginner's drug, which is bullshit. I've smoked it, I'm not shooting heroine. I know other people who smoke it every now and then, none of them is on heroine. On the other hand Austria (which has ~8,000,000 inhabitants) has some 600,000 potential or latent alcoholics (a similar percentage goes for Germany too, for example). Each year dozens of people get killed around here on the streets because of drunk drivers, but never one because someone smoking marijuana drives his car into a group of people. I really wonder which drug is more dangerous, marijuana or alcohol?

Anyway...

If by America, the two american continents are meant, I can say from experience that the civil rights are about the same. (UK & Brazil). There are slight differences that depend on the traditional cultural values of the country, but both are democracies, both are signatories to the Human Rights charter and take this seriously.

There are political differences, in things like education funding or pornography, but these do not affect the basic rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assemby etc.

All seems to depend upon what you count as a civil liberty. Is it a liberty to carry a gun, or is it a liberty to not have to carry a gun?

2000th post

All seems to depend upon what you count as a civil liberty. Is it a liberty to carry a gun, or is it a liberty to not have to carry a gun?

Our Founding Fathers wrote that it was a civil liberty to walk armed for purposes of self-defense.

Our Founding Fathers wrote that it was a civil liberty to walk armed for purposes of self-defense.

But were they right? It is an opinion, not an established fact, that carrying a gun is a civil liberty. I am not saying that they were stupid or anything like that, I am simply making it clear that they, the founding fathers, were people with their beliefs and ideas, which at times were right and at others were not.

An example of this is the insistance by some that the USA is not a democracy because the Founding Fathers explicitly stated it was not. Unfortunately/fortunately, they were wrong. The USA is an indirectly elected democratic republic. It's citizens get to vote, and these votes are what, in the end of the day, decides who runs the country. The people decide. That is democracy.

The founding fathers however were right to seperate the state from the church, theoretically anyway.

We're talking about civil rights not human rights here, but I see your point about generalising about the continent! But for this discussion we must.
Verdammt, I messed up again. :p

Maybe if we use our major cannon:
Someone who thinks the USA (or a seperate state) has more civil rights then the Netherlands?

All seems to depend upon what you count as a civil liberty. Is it a liberty to carry a gun, or is it a liberty to not have to carry a gun?
It's a liberty to have the choice to carry a gun.

It's a liberty to have the choice to carry a gun.

It is also a liberty to not have a fear of the other carrying a gun.

A liberty is simply an absence of restraint. Now what is not being restrained can vary. In one case it is the bearing of arms, in the other it is peace of mind. You have to choose. Both are liberties, but mutually exclusive ones from my culture's point of view.

(Remember cultures are different.)

One other thing: as far as I know, every country in Western Europe has the age of consent set at sixteen or under (as low as twelve in at least one case). In America, or at least a lot of the states, it is eighteen.

This matter popped up in the obesity thread, but I thought it deserved it's own.


What restrictions has he mentioned?

In America drug freedoms tend to be significantly less than in Europe. It varies from country to country, but there's nowhere in Europe where you can be locked up for the possession of anything other than a very large amount of marajuana. In Europe the legal drinking age varies between 16 (e.g. France, Germany) and 18 (e.g. Ireland, Britain).

In places such as Germany there is much more tolerance for explicity sexual material in the media. Media outlets don't have the American FCC heavily regulating them to ensure that they are sufficiently "moral".

In most of Europe you are not barred from voting after you serve your punishment in prison, and in some places you are even allowed to vote while in prison. It is my understanding that Americans don't have this freedom.


However, in America, extremes of free speech, such as Nazi propaganda, are better protected than in Europe. Also, Americans tend to have greater gun freedoms (although Finland has even more gun freedom), but this is not something that Europeans want.


As long as we are talking about Freedoms.. America by far has greater religious freedoms to practice and express to belifs especially in comparison to France and Germany.... as well the right to attain citizenship is far easier in America then specific countries such as Austria and Germany. Business also have more freedoms to set hours and prices then do European countires who have strict price controls and wage labor laws set to protect workers. We as well have (as stated) greater freedoms of speech for individuals and the media, in comparison to countries like England who have technically no such rights under the law... and as long as we are talking about Europe as a whole America by far has far more civil liberties in the way of movement from state to state where even in Europe documentation is needed. I think if you added up all the civil liberties on each side youd find America peeking ahead..

One other thing: as far as I know, every country in Western Europe has the age of consent set at sixteen or under (as low as twelve in at least one case). In America, or at least a lot of the states, it is eighteen.

in all of the states actually.. its a federal law

and one of the more appropriate ones

Civil Rights, in regards to Drug Laws here in the U.S. is a FARCE!

We have fallen flat on our FACE and we can't seem to get up!

I have often wondered why the LAW has not been Constitutionally CHALLENGED?!?!

We U.S. citizens have a RIGHT to face a "witness" to the crime. We have also taken from that a Right to face an "accuser", and so I am left to wonder whose "Right" has been infringed on to commit ANY crime and who is it that is "accusing" them?

There is NO Constitutional Right, that I have seen, that allows them to "Legislate" Morals. Quite the contrary... Our Forefathers went out of their way to make sure that any Right of the State not derived in the Constitution is not a Right of the State but defaults to the People. The Constitution is, first and foremost, a document made to SECURE an INDIVIDUALS Rights, NOT the GOVERNMENTS!

Regards,
Gaar

Civil Rights, in regards to Drug Laws here in the U.S. is a FARCE!

We have fallen flat on our FACE and we can't seem to get up!

I have often wondered why the LAW has not been Constitutionally CHALLENGED?!?!

We U.S. citizens have a RIGHT to face a "witness" to the crime. We have also taken from that a Right to face an "accuser", and so I am left to wonder whose "Right" has been infringed on to commit ANY crime and who is it that is "accusing" them?

There is NO Constitutional Right, that I have seen, that allows them to "Legislate" Morals. Quite the contrary... Our Forefathers went out of their way to make sure that any Right of the State not derived in the Constitution is not a Right of the State but defaults to the People. The Constitution is, first and foremost, a document made to SECURE an INDIVIDUALS Rights, NOT the GOVERNMENTS!

Regards,
Gaar

you mean not the FEDERAL governments... rights not secured to the FEDERAL government are reserved to the STATE governments... and the right to "Legislate" Morals is highly argulable in any environment.. States have more ability in this instant then the Federal government itself

and are drug laws/rights a farce ? just in what wester culture can you walk into a store and legally buy cocaine .. or heroine.. or extacy ??? the only drug given lienecy is Marijuana, whose effects are not in question but rahter simply the manner in which you address it. There are also good reason why our alchol laws are the way they are... America culture is set at extremes.. we work hard.. we party hard.. and parting hard means drinking till you hit the ground to the point of abuse in many cases in youth. Thats why we can't drink till we are 18 while most europeans are drinking when they are 12.

But were they right? It is an opinion, not an established fact, that carrying a gun is a civil liberty. I am not saying that they were stupid or anything like that, I am simply making it clear that they, the founding fathers, were people with their beliefs and ideas, which at times were right and at others were not.

An example of this is the insistance by some that the USA is not a democracy because the Founding Fathers explicitly stated it was not. Unfortunately/fortunately, they were wrong. The USA is an indirectly elected democratic republic. It's citizens get to vote, and these votes are what, in the end of the day, decides who runs the country. The people decide. That is democracy.

The founding fathers however were right to seperate the state from the church, theoretically anyway.

like you said.. its just an opinion... and in this case your opinion.... fortunatly for us.. the Founding fathers also spoke with great vagueness... so that this document (the constitution) could be flexible to the demands of our culture of our time. Seperation of church and state is a highly debatable issue.

like you said.. its just an opinion... and in this case your opinion.... fortunatly for us.. the Founding fathers also spoke with great vagueness... so that this document (the constitution) could be flexible to the demands of our culture of our time. Seperation of church and state is a highly debatable issue.

I did not actually give my opinion. I just pointed out that carrying a gun could be seen as a liberty. it could be seen as a loss of liberty. I actually have no fixed opinion on this. To me it is dependent upon the norms and standards of the society. For a citizen of the USA carrying a gun will nearly always be seen as a liberty. To a UK citizen it is much more likely to be seen as a threat to liberty.

Civil libereties are relative and based on opinion, and as such they can not really be compared country to country.

It is also a liberty to not have a fear of the other carrying a gun.
The fact that someone has a gun doesn't cause fear or infringe on another's rights. It's what the gun owner does with it that counts.

Civil rights? It's about balanced I'd say. But economic rights are a whole 'nother issue

As long as we are talking about Freedoms.. America by far has greater religious freedoms to practice and express to belifs especially in comparison to France and Germany....

as well the right to attain citizenship is far easier in America then specific countries such as Austria and Germany.

Business also have more freedoms to set hours and prices then do European countires who have strict price controls and wage labor laws set to protect workers.

We as well have (as stated) greater freedoms of speech for individuals and the media, in comparison to countries like England who have technically no such rights under the law...

and as long as we are talking about Europe as a whole America by far has far more civil liberties in the way of movement from state to state where even in Europe documentation is needed. I think if you added up all the civil liberties on each side youd find America peeking ahead..
I don't think that Europe as a whole has any more religious freedom than America. France is an exception because its government is anti-religious. And with the current climate in the US non-Christian/Jewish religions appear to be growing ever less acceptable.

Yes, immigration is looser in America.

Not relevant. That's economic freedom, not civil rights.

Not at all, England has along tradition of recognising free speech as a universal right, since long before the USA was even founded.

This isn't even a fair comparison. The USA is all one country, of course you need no passport to move from state to state. Europe is made up of many different countries.

in all of the states actually.. its a federal law

and one of the more appropriate ones
And in many US states the drinking age is as high as 21, and in New York they are looking at raising it to 25.

you mean not the FEDERAL governments... rights not secured to the FEDERAL government are reserved to the STATE governments... and the right to "Legislate" Morals is highly argulable in any environment.. States have more ability in this instant then the Federal government itself

and are drug laws/rights a farce ? just in what wester culture can you walk into a store and legally buy cocaine .. or heroine.. or extacy ??? the only drug given lienecy is Marijuana, whose effects are not in question but rahter simply the manner in which you address it. There are also good reason why our alchol laws are the way they are... America culture is set at extremes.. we work hard.. we party hard.. and parting hard means drinking till you hit the ground to the point of abuse in many cases in youth. Thats why we can't drink till we are 18 while most europeans are drinking when they are 12.

There is a difference between Legislating how something may be used in order to better ensure the Public security and outlawing something outright.

You may feel free to restrict somethings use as you see fit, in order to secure Public places, but you have NO RIGHT to outlaw something outright that infringes on no one elses Rights.

Regards,
Gaar

bump

and as long as we are talking about Europe as a whole America by far has far more civil liberties in the way of movement from state to state where even in Europe documentation is needed. I think if you added up all the civil liberties on each side youd find America peeking ahead..

EU citizens can travel and work anywhere within the EU without visas etc. You only need the pasport for airoplains and ID for customs.

The EU also has the human rights act. Only the UK is taking any notice at the moment but the recent high court ruling on religious wear in schools shows that even in unlegislated areas, the UK at least, is pulling ahead.

We shouldn't bicker who has more or less or whatever else. The point is that everyone has them. Germany does not beat people in the streets. Britain does not require internal passports. France does not allow slavery. The US does not have a thought police. But you know what? Sveral countries, like North Korea and Myanmar, do.

We shouldn't bicker who has more or less or whatever else. The point is that everyone has them. Germany does not beat people in the streets. Britain does not require internal passports. France does not allow slavery. The US does not have a thought police. But you know what? Sveral countries, like North Korea and Myanmar, do.
We are not bickering, or at least we shouldn't be.

the US has had a massive restriction on its civil rights since the PATRIOT act and its gun freedoms are a sharp decline

We are not bickering, or at least we shouldn't be.
Well, since you put it that way, I'd have to put in my opinion. I'd have to say the US. It allows for great freedom of expression and association, has plenty of economic freedom, and it gurantees that all rights not mentioned in the constitution are reserved for the states and/or individuals. I'm sure a few European countries allow for that, but most of the governments are centralized republics, anyhow.

SwimmingPool you say we have to include the whole continent when discussing this but you repeatedly separate Europe into Countries to make your case.

In America drug freedoms tend to be significantly less than in Europe. It varies from country to country, but there's nowhere in Europe where you can be locked up for the possession of anything other than a very large amount of marajuana. In Europe the legal drinking age varies between 16 (e.g. France, Germany) and 18 (e.g. Ireland, Britain).

In places such as Germany there is much more tolerance for explicity sexual material in the media. Media outlets don't have the American FCC heavily regulating them to ensure that they are sufficiently "moral".

In most of Europe you are not barred from voting after you serve your punishment in prison, and in some places you are even allowed to vote while in prison. It is my understanding that Americans don't have this freedom.


However, in America, extremes of free speech, such as Nazi propaganda, are better protected than in Europe. Also, Americans tend to have greater gun freedoms (although Finland has even more gun freedom), but this is not something that Europeans want.

I also might add to my original post, that gay rights in Europe are far ahead of them in the USA. Most countries allow civil unions, if not homosexual marriage.

don't think that Europe as a whole has any more religious freedom than America. France is an exception because its government is anti-religious. And with the current climate in the US non-Christian/Jewish religions appear to be growing ever less acceptable.

Not at all, England has along tradition of recognising free speech as a universal right, since long before the USA was even founded.

This isn't even a fair comparison. The USA is all one country, of course you need no passport to move from state to state. Europe is made up of many different countries.

You have repeatedly separated Europe from the countries to pick what civil rights they have. I believe you should either take a look at the EU charter and then base this argument on that. Then it would be a fair comparison. Or even country by country breakdown, otherwise this is not a legitimate argument.

And in many US states the drinking age is as high as 21, and in New York they are looking at raising it to 25.


The drinking age in all states is 21. When did they start talking about that?

the US has had a massive restriction on its civil rights since the PATRIOT act and its gun freedoms are a sharp decline


What massive restrictions? Which gun freedoms are in a sharp decline?

the US has had a massive restriction on its civil rights since the PATRIOT act and its gun freedoms are a sharp decline

Really... Please name off these restrictions. I have yet to actually see one.

As for gun freedoms, at least in Connecticut the number of gun licenses went UP after 9/11. High capacity clips are no longer banned, and that joke of an "assault weapons" ban has lapsed.

Please substantiate your point of view.

There's various different restrictions and the like in both areas, and the level is hard to compare. For example, whilst in most places in Europe have gay marriages, and very few places have similar things in the US. At the same time, places in Europe have restrictions on free speech (banning the swastika and associated symbols.) And at varying levels, some places in Europe have looser or tighter anti-terrorism laws than in the US. At the same time, the US has looser gun laws than most places in Europe. It really does depend on how you weigh stuff and the like.

Europe has lower drinking ages, but higher driving ages, there's all sorts of things that really are tough to compare.

And in many US states the drinking age is as high as 21, and in New York they are looking at raising it to 25.

All states have a 21 year old limit, with exceptions for soldiers on base, religion, or minors with parents.

Unless by "they" you mean MADD, I have no clue what you're talking about... and I work in NYC. The limit only went up to 21 in 1984!

So yeah, it all depends upon how you weigh it. Civil rights are a very subjective topic, and some people include some things under this category that others do not. You can make a legitimate arguement that either side has more civil rights, all because it is subjective.