Norway is most peaceful country: study

[muriel_volestrangler]

Source: Reuters/Sydney Morning Herald

Norway is the most peaceful country in the world and Iraq the least, according to a study launched.
...
The Global Peace Index, published a week before a Group of Eight (G8) summit in Germany, rates 121 countries from Algeria to Zimbabwe on factors including levels of violence, organised crime and military expenditure.

While most European countries including Britain rank in the top, more peaceful, half of the league table, the United States is nearer the bottom in 96th place, while Russia is fifth from last on 118th.
...
The index is backed by international figures including the Dalai Lama, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former US president Jimmy Carter and US economist Joseph Stiglitz, all winners of the Nobel peace prize. It is also supported by Queen Noor of Jordan.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Norway-is-most-peaceful-country-study/2007/05/30/1180205336789.html

---

Rankings of 121 countries: http://www.visionofhumanity.com/rankings/

Note that some of the worst countries to be in, like Somalia, DRC and Afghanistan, don't feature in the rankings.


Note also that the USA beats Iran - by one place.

[Jed Dilligan]

1. Harsh

Brazil beat us!

[billbuckhead]

3. America's very high murder rate played a part in this embarassment

Thanks gun lobby.

[Jed Dilligan]

4. I'm afraid it's us, not the guns

We're a country born of violence and we'd kill each other with rocks if that was all that was left.

[billbuckhead]

10. There must be something in the water to make Americans of Irish descent

more evil than Irish in Ireland. The easy access to guns in America makes Americans think that shooting someone is a great solution to most problems.

[Neoma]

16. If you look at it from a immigration standpoint, you'd probably understand why.

They had to be tough back then.

[HEyHEY]

18. What kind of thing is that to say?

You're gonna blame violence on an ethnic group?

[slackmaster]

28. I think he means Irish-Americans are vulnerable to the Evil Rays that guns emit

Kind of like how the Milgram experiment proved that there was something about Germans that made them more vulnerable to being used as pawns by white-coated authority figures.

Oh, wait a minute...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[smirkymonkey]

73. Yeah, and all Italian-Americans are in the Mafia.

I saw it on television.

[Justitia]

27. I have no idea where that came from, but Northern Ireland is no Utopia.

Here's hoping the peace holds!

- An American of Irish descent

[sg_]

46. NI has the lowest crime rate ..

in Europe and second lowest in the developed World according to the UNs ICVS report. Only Japan is safer according to it.

[HEyHEY]

57. Walk in to the wrong neighbourhood in Belfast and say that.

[sg_]

59. Well...

considering I have lived all my life in Northern Ireland I think I know well enough. If I said that in the 'wrong' area of Belfast nothing would happen. Something would only happen if I started saying nationalist things in a loyalist area and vice-versa...common sence really. You wouldnt walk into a predominantly African-American area in the US for example and start shouting stuff against them, would you?.

Most violent crime here tends to be commited by individuals in the various terrorist groups.

Getting a bit off track with my post, but you do realise it isnt like Grozney here.

[HEyHEY]

60. I know that... what I meant was

There's some rough places there. Just like anywhere.

[sg_]

61. Yup

nft

[silverojo]

33. As an Irish-American, I find that a very racist comment

Though I support gun ownership rights, I've never owned a gun, and I've certainly never tried to kill anybody with a gun or any other weapon.

Show me any evidence that Irish-Americans are a leading group of violent criminals in this country, and I'll show you a statistic that somebody simply pulled out of their ass.

[billbuckhead]

38. The problem isn't Irish or any other genes, it's America's easy access to guns

Ireland is one of the least violent places on earth and also ENJOYS one of the lowest gun ownership rates in the world.

BTW, Scotland is regarded as one the most violent areas of Europe and we still beat them in murder and gun crime.

Don't believe me, heres how moderate think tank Brookings Institute puts it:

"Compared with other developed nations, the United States is unique in its high rates of both gun ownership and murder. Although widespread gun ownership does not have much effect on the overall crime rate, gun use does make criminal violence more lethal and has a unique capacity to terrorize the public. Gun crime accounts for most of the costs of gun violence in the United States, which are on the order of $100 billion per year."
<http://www.brookings.edu/press/books/evaluatinggunpolicy.htm>

[krispos42]

85. Still beating that dead horse, huh?

You still haven't explained in any coherent fashion why, compared to 1967, the homicide rate in England and Wales has risen steadily until it is now DOUBLE, while our rate, over the same time period, is about 15% or so lower than 1967.

Oh, and did I mention the two bans in the UK? The assault weapon ban and the handgun ban? Two things that people such as yourself heavily advocate?

Let me summarize, although viewers should read the original exchange as it includes a graph and some pictures, as well as the full reference links:

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Die on your knees or get on your knees to the gun lobby and it's minions
Edited on Fri May-25-07 09:01 PM by billbuckhead
Why not do what free democratic advanced nations like those in the EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand have done to great success and have stricter gun laws and enforce them? The Brits had a twenty year low in gun homicide last year, only 46 nationwide!

krispos42 (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And near-record total homicides
but I guess that doesn't matter.

How about we do Mexican gun control? They ban anything over .17 caliber.

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Fri May-25-07 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Any links or just lies as usual? Here check out nationmaster for real comparison
The Mexicans come over the border and buy guns in gun friendly red states, the Mexican and Candian governments complain about it all the time.

With 3 time the murder rate of the UK, the USA is the one doing the right thing............in opposite world where the gun lobby and minions live. The only exceue they ever can come up with is that people of the same culture, language and genetics magically become evil in the USA. These gun worshippers will say anything to keep up their addiction to guns.
<http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-... >

krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sat May-26-07 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. Of course I have links for you
Even a nifty graph.

This is the UK's Home Office 2004/2005 Crime Report

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/hosb0206.pdf

Open it and look at pages 48 and 54. For comparison, here is a chart of the US homicide rate. Note the massive bump as PTSD-afflicted Vietnam veterans returned home to an uncaring nation, as civil unrest surged, as crack and cocaine markets flourished, as Reagan systematically closed down mental hopitals and turned health care into a for-profit enterprise.



Note that the British graph on page 48 is for total number offenses; it's not per capita. Per capita numbers are on page 54. It is important to note that the UK uses offences per million people, and the US graph is in offences per hundred thousand. So you have to either multiply the US numbers by 10 or divide the UK numbers by 10 to get a valid comparison.

Note that in 1989 the UK implemented it's ban on the sale and posession of assault weapons, and in 1998 it's ban on the sale and posession of handguns. So both the numbers of guns in the UK, and the 'death-spraying' assault weapons with huge magazines, pistol grips, and bayonet lugs also decreased.

Some DUers will note that the bans on assault weapons and handguns in the UK was not intended to fight crime or homicide, but to prevent a specific form of homicide, the mass shooting like at Dublane or Hungerford. Some DUers also advocate extremely strict gun-storage laws with the stated intent of preventing thefts so as to reduce a major source of illegal guns for criminals.

It follows, then, that even if the UK assault weapon and handgun ban was not specifically intended to lower crime and homicide rates, it should have been a nice side effect. As should the 4 million police-monitored public-area surveillence cameras that have cropped up in the past couple of decades.

To see the ratio of US to UK gun ownership rates, see this post of mine. It includes links to my sources.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sat May-26-07 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
34. Let's cut to the chase. HOW MANY MURDERS WERE IN BRITAIN?
Edited on Sat May-26-07 11:28 PM by billbuckhead
Tell us that. Admit it. Admit the truth, that it's far harder to kill people without guns.

krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. 820 in England and Wales
The population of England is about 50 million, and of Wales is 3 million. Total, 53 million people, or one-sixth of the US population. Homicide rate is 1.55 per one hundred thousand people per year. This is one-third of the current US homicide rate of 4.5 per 100k/year.

40 years ago, the US homicide rate was about 6.0 per 100k/year, looking at the chart. So ours is down about 30% or so compared to 1967.

40 years ago, the homicide rate in England and Wales was 0.73 per 100k/year, looking at page 54. So theirs is up 100% or so compared to 1967.

I have never said otherwise. I, in fact, noted the exact same thing I just re-stated above on December 18th of last year. We're getting better, they're getting worse. In 1967, our homicide rate was 8 times theirs. Now it is only 3 times theirs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

As to admitting it is far harder to kill people without guns, well, that's a topic deserving of some consideration. There is no doubt that it is easier in the mechanical aspect of it. Pulling a trigger is much easier than, say, beating somebody to death with a baseball bat or strangling them with your bare hands. Not that the latter is particularly hard, either, especially when, as typically happens, a man is killing a woman.

The fact that it is easier does not make it more likely to happen, though. I drive a car. On any given day I can kill somebody on the sidewalk much easier with my two-ton domestic sedan than I could jumping out of it with a club and engaging them in hand-to-hand combat. Yet, day in and day out I do neither.

Simply because it's easy does not make me eager to kill a person. The prohibition against killing that nearly all of us have ingained in us is not easily dismissed.

In my opinion guns can make rage killings easier. So-called 'crimes of passion', usually, but that can include mass shootings as well.

However, it is also my belief that it is offset by allowing normal, non-violent, non-criminal, non-predatory citizens defend themselves better against attack. It probably more than offsets the passion-crime numbers, actually. But, as evidenced by your passion, that is not what gets reported. Blood-drenched stories about husbands killing cheating wives make headlines for days, but a 2% drop in national homicides gets a 5-second commentary during the MSM news hour. Never mind that that 2% drop means 300 lives saved, it's the father that kills his family of 4 then himself that makes top-of-the-hour news for 4 days. Maybe even getting it's own nifty computer-generated graphics on CNN or MSNBC.

How's that?

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. The USA must be doing something right to have over 12,000 every year!!!!
Edited on Sun May-27-07 11:39 AM by billbuckhead
You could total up all the nations of Europe and it would be far less. There can only be 2 explantions, either Americans are uniquely evil or our unique gun laws are responsible for this ongoing national tragedy.

WE NOW HAVE A HIGHER MURDER RATE THAN INDIA!

<http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders >
<http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-... >

krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. You still haven't addressed the fundamental issues I raised
Until you do, we are not having a dialogue, we're having two unresponsive, overlapping monologues.

What is the UK doing that is so terrible that their homicide rate is going up while ours is going down?

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Why does the USA have multiples higher murder rate than similar nations?
The only real difference is easy access to guns or Americans are worse people.

As far as the Uk homicide rate rising, they're just copying American violence glamorized by the gun culture and Hollywood.

krispos42 (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. The only real difference?


Well, have fun in your bubble. Say hi to Bush for me.

Tell me, what will you do when you and people like you get their way... and nothing changes? Who will you blame then?

billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Sun May-27-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Crooked voting machines and a corrupt supreme court put Bush in, not gun nuts
Your side lost the fair election and could only win through corruption.

Keep laughing about Bush being power, it reveals your true colors and lack of humanity.

Um.... non sequitur?
Edited on Sun May-27-07 08:07 PM by krispos42
I was talking about some sort of near-total gun ban, not crooked voting machines or anything else like that.




You think I WANT Bush in power? You think I want this in MY country? I have a two-year-old, dammit.



Or some nutjob that worships THIS Jesus controlling MY country?


You think I want THIS as national executive policy???


Puh-leez. You think I have Old Glory in my sig because I'm some sort of flag-waving Bush-savant?

No.

I'm not letting the beautiful flag of MY country be the sole province of fascists.





Besides, I took the picture myself and think I did quite a good job of it.

END OF EXHANGE

[Megahurtz]

89. Irish is NOT a Race. n/t

[JoFerret]

66. Not true

.

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. And the military -industrial complex, even more so

There are 24 indicators:

• Number of external and internal conflicts fought: 2000-05
• Estimated number of deaths from organised conflict (external)
• Number of deaths from organised conflict (internal)
• Level of organised conflict (internal)
• Relations with neighbouring countries
• Level of distrust in other citizens
• Number of displaced people as a percentage of the population
• Political instability
• Level of disrespect for human rights (Political Terror Scale)
• Potential for terrorist acts
• Number of homicides per 100,000 people
• Level of violent crime
• Likelihood of violent demonstrations
• Number of jailed population per 100,000 people
• Number of internal security officers and police per 100,000
• Military expenditure as a percentage of GDP
• Number of armed services personnel per 100,000 people
• Volume of transfers (imports) of major conventional weapons per 100,000 people
• Volume of transfers (exports) of major conventional weapons per 100,000
• UN Deployments 2006-07 (percentage of total armed forces)
• Non UN Deployments 2006-07 (percentage of total armed forces)
• Aggregate number of heavy weapons per 100,000 people
• Ease of access to small arms and light weapons
• Military capability/sophistication

http://www.visionofhumanity.com/WPI_Methodology/index.php

[entanglement]

42. So they don't factor in violence against women, LGBT and ethnic / linguistic minorities?

n/t

[mark414]

48. um...

it factors in all violent crimes

[Endangered Specie]

13. Funny how the Canadians and Swiss have guns but

are #9 and #14 on the list.

[HEyHEY]

19. We don't have handguns I think that's the big difference

[Endangered Specie]

35. Um, you DO have handguns...

http://www.marstar.ca/gf-norinco/index-hg.shtm

[slackmaster]

50. Norinco used to make excellent 1911s

The prices are still very attractive. I wonder if the slides and frames are as well made as they were 20 years ago.

BTW shame on Endangered Specie for polluting the sub-thread with verifiable facts.

[Endangered Specie]

51. I don't suppose me bringing up the cost of the Canadian gun registry

being about 3 orders of magnitude more expensive (thats 1000 times) would bring me more shame?

[HEyHEY]

55. I'm not trying to hide anything here... chill

[HEyHEY]

54. Yeah, but the restrictions are so tight, we may as well not

[billbuckhead]

21. The Swiss are changing their gun laws to EU style gun laws

I guess they're more life affirming. The Canadians are extremely anti-handgun.

[Endangered Specie]

36. Maybe, but this study isn't based on the future...

its based on the recent past (presumably) and in said past the Swiss have had a ton of guns and ownership, nearly at the rates we have.

[billbuckhead]

37. A rate they found unexceptable but Americans think there isn't blood in streets

according to the gun pimps. Meanwhile school shootings, office rampages and men killing "their" women and then commiting suicide are now part of our national character. Thanks gun lobby!

[smirkymonkey]

74. Thank God! Switzerland has been a veritable shooting gallery

these past few years. It's about time they did something about it.

[slackmaster]

29. In some respects Norwegian gun laws are more lenient than ours

...To be considered for issuance of a permit the applicant must have "valid reason". Valid reasons include (but are not limited to): Hunting, Vermin Control, Target Shooting, Collecting, Self-Defence. A self-defence permit allows the person to carry a pistol concealed, but these are rarely granted.

No type of firearm is banned in Norway, however the type of firearm you can own is dictated by the use to which it will be put:

Hunting or Vermin Control: any shotgun and any rifle except military style semi-auto rifles.
Target Shooting: any shotgun, rifle or pistol appropriate to the type of shooting. For example you wouldn't be granted a permit for a pistol if you were a member of a Skeet Club.
Collecting: any type of firearm (including full-auto). In recent years collectors have been asked to define their "Area of Interest". A collector who has as an area of interest of "German Military Weapons 1890 - 1945" would be allowed to collect full-auto Schmeissers, Maxims, etc. A collector who has as an area of interest of "Winchester Rifles" would be limited to rifles from Winchester.
Members of the armed forces (this also includes reservists and part-timers) are entitled to a permit for any gun, except full-auto....

http://www.dvc.org.uk/dunblane/andrew.html

...Oh, and by the way silencers are available over the counter - no registration or anything. The use of a silencer is seen as an act of good neighbourliness....

As a gun collector living in California, Norway sounds pretty reasonable to me. My main area of interest is "Military firearms of the 20th Century". :D

Everything I own now would be legal there, plus I'd love to be able to add automatic military relic weapons to my collection, and acquire and use sound suppressors.

[Endangered Specie]

63. Wow!

the only thing that would be bad is somedays youd only have 2 hours daylight to shoot!

[slackmaster]

69. OTOH in the summer you have 22 hours

:D

[Endangered Specie]

72. after shooting milsurps for 22 hours, I think my shoulder would fall off!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

25. You call that harsh? I call it a no-brainer. -nt

[Jed Dilligan]

26. Considering that gangs and gun crime are rampant,

particularly in Sao Paolo, I'd say it is a pretty harsh assessment of this country. I don't think it's inaccurate, but it's harsh.

[peacebuzzard]

!!

[peacebuzzard]

53. Street violence in Rio has escalated these past few weeks/months.

how current are these averages?

I am sure the figures have some mobility factors.

All in all, an interesting, revealing and alarming post.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

80. Indeed, very alarming. If violence in Rio and São Paulo keeps rising,

we may end up less peaceful than the USA. That'd be a disaster.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. Norway is wonderful

love the people, food, fjords, mountains in Norway.

One day I hope to see Iraq in peace.

[coffeenap]

5. USA coming in at 96. Go us????? nt

[NashVegas]

6. Aren't They Also the Most Depressed?

(right after Finland)

[RaRa]

8. I think Iceland is up there too

Any country that experiences short days and long nights would have higher levels of depression I would think.

[slackmaster]

30. Yes, but Finnish and Norwegian men have the highest sperm counts

And the countries are very beautiful in the spring.

[PittPoliSci]

62. i'd probably be depressed too...

if it was dark for months on end.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

81. No, that's a Republican myth, first stated by Eisenhower

He kept dissing the Scandinavian countries by saying that their socialist leanings had led to the highest suicide rates in the world.

Well, Sweden and Denmark have high suicide rates, although not the highest in the world, but Norway has one of the lowest in the world, despite having the same social benefits.

[Orrin_73]

9. They have one of the most vile RW in europe

Its beautiful place for european not for non european people.

[silverojo]

34. Yes, Norway is very racist

I know some Asians living there, and they literally fear for their lives. There are lots of hate groups thriving there, but that's kept pretty quiet....

[Blue_Tires]

87. i'm disheartened to read about that

[entanglement]

43. Scandinavians lack the concept of racial equality - "European only" housing is legal in Norway

for example. Or was, until quite recently. I don't know if they've changed their laws.

[shrike]

77. I noticed that.

While visiting. Very uniform population. All-white.

Lovely country in many ways. Really enjoyed myself there. But there's no paradise on earth, I'm afraid.

[Jackpine Radical]

11. Well, for the past 1200 years the Scandinavians have been exporting

their thugs, rebels and malcontents to other places such as Normandy, England, Ireland, Russia, and lately (last 400 years or so) the US. It started with the Vikings and continued through emigration down through the centuries. My ancestors were in one of the last waves to come over. Now there's nobody left at home except gentle and peaceful folk.

[billbuckhead]

39. It could be argued Britain and Spain did the same thing

Where were all those warriors developed during the fight against the Moors and the Scotch supposed to go? Become farmers, shoemakers or most likely, violent criminals? No they exported them to the new world.

[Hardrada]

40. Hardrada

It seemed like a plan.

[Coventina]

47. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[Vilis Veritas]

12. Norway, Iceland and Japan are at the center...

of the whaling issue. The ICW is about to be made moot because of those countries combined efforts.

Say goodbye to the Humpback whale now...it is only a matter of time once the ICW is gone.

Peace.

[Endangered Specie]

14. Plus Japan has a very high suicide rate...

I wonder how they got to #5 with it

[Vilis Veritas]

15. Suicide is victimless and not counted...

in their statistical analysis.

By their measures the COUNTRY is PEACEFUL. The people, well...that is a whole basket in itself.

I would also like to see how the scale was weighted. There are a lot of unknowns...

Peace.

[slackmaster]

31. Tell the widows and orphans of Japan that suicide is victimless

It's usually not.

[Vilis Veritas]

41. Suicide is not completely without victims.

Will that do?

I think you knew what I meant, however if you did not, I will try and explain my reasons for making the statement.

There is typically little DIRECT VIOLENCE that IMPACTS OTHERS. Unless the suicide in question results in others dying, the pain or hurt that is usually felt by the VICTIM/s of suicide is not due to pain or hurt from direct violence on their person, but from loss resulting in depression.

I will grant that, per definition of the term victim, they could qualify, however, in the context of the discussion at hand, their resultant victim-ness is due to loss and not a direct result of VIOLENCE against their person, which would necessitate their inclusion in the study and therefore directly impact the peace quotient of the nation. Just my opinion. I can have that, right?

Peace.

[HEyHEY]

58. from a legal standpoint, it is victimless

[Coventina]

44. You beat me to it. "Peaceful" is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

:mad:

[shrike]

78. They're very sensitive about it, too, the Norwegians

When I was over there, I found they got quite defensive. Sort of a taboo topic with tourists.

[HEyHEY]

17. Great! Let's get em!

[HEyHEY]

20. I must say regarding the USA

I was just in Milwaukee and Chicago. One thing that got me is how whenever we were in a Neighbourhood or it was getting dark safety became a big deal. People discussed the neighbourhood they were in and what the safest way to go was. I was wondering if there was a real threat or if it's just a response to the crazy ambulance chasing type news you guys get there.
I live in Vancouver, which has the notorious downtown eastside. It's insane there, but I will still walk around and feel resonably safe, and that's the worst neighbourhood in the country. So, there is something going on down there.

[Louie the XIV]

32. I don't know what neighborhood you were in

but the vast majority of areas in the U.S. have very low violent crime rates similar to Europe.

Most of the violent crime in this country occurs in concentrated areas.

[mark414]

49. you were just in milwaukee?

and i didn't know about it you jerk?

and as far as my city goes...most anywhere is an okay place to be. most of the fear comes from, i'll be honest, white east-siders (our not so notorious neighborhood) and suburbanites. and a lot of the crazy news plays a role in that.

i've lived in places in this city that those folks would be scared even driving through...but there's still places in this city where i wouldn't walk around at night. during the day, absolutely, no problem. but something's going on in this city. people ain't acting right and it worries me, especially with the summer crime season about to start. a 4 year old just got caught up in a failed drive-by and killed by an errant bullet...some teenagers just beat up and robbed an older mentally disabled guy of the money he made mowing peoples lawns. and it doesn't stop. the big thing for the last few years seems to be roving groups of adolescents beating people up at random (i almost got caught up in the middle of one of those...long story), or these unorganized crime crews who get together and go on big sprees and then part ways (all the benefits of a gang without that pesky membership requirement).

i'm in a much nicer and quieter part of the city right now but you can still sit outside on a still night and hear all the sirens and gunshots going all night long.

[TheLastMohican]

22. The list is complete bull

Can you seriously believe it? Canada fights in Afganistan with tanks and helicopters, Denmark fights in Iraq and Afganistan despite the fact Iraqis don't want them there, and Afganis didn't ask Finland to soldier in Afganistan.

How can they be rated as "peaceful" nations if they fighting wars of agression and occupation on a foreign soil?

So basically, the peacemaker is the guy with a bigger gun, huh?

On the other side, Ukraine, number 80? ;( Who is Ukraine fighting? I have a friend from Ukrainian armed forces and he says their army is desintegrating rapidly.
They got rid of nuclear weapons on their own will (the only country in the world to do so). They transfered all their attacking capabilities like strategic bombers and navy submarines to Russia.

SO the guys who compile this list should check their data.

[KansDem]

23. Looks like the indicators refer to *domestic* conditions...

...not necessarily to skirmishes halfway around the world.

For example, check out the murder rate with handguns and I'd bet you'd find that the top countries have very few murders signifying relative "peacefulness" among the citizens. Now compare that with the figure for US...probably one reason why we're no. 96.

[otherlander]

24. Israel is more violent than Lebanon?

Didn't expect that.

[ima_sinnic]

45. the USA is built on a mountain of violence, pain, and suffering

Land stolen from natives who had been here for eons, who were brutally and savagely massacred, raped, plundered, exiled, and marginalized--even their present-day descendants are treated like second-class citizens as their treaties are still violated and they are denied adequate education, job opportunities, and realistic social services.

Industry built on the backs of slaves who were rounded up like cattle in Africa and brutally transported to unimagined horrors, sanctity of family ties broken, culture ransacked and trashed, and this also continues to the present day, with all too lingering remnants of segregation and its aftermath resulting in undereducated, underemployed, and marginalized descendants who are underserved by social programs and opportunities.

Agriculture dependent on "illegals" who are both necessary for our cheap food supply but reviled as a "threat" to our "way of life" and therefore rounded up, persecuted, often killed.

And we continue to export our "democracy" to every corner of the globe as if we were somehow superior to the rest of the world on our mountain of battered, broken bones.

So USA is low on the "peace scale"? gee, what a surprise -- NOT. When greed is the foundation of everything, violence is not far behind.

[Odin2005]

75. Not to be snarky, but...

Many other countries have inflicted enormous suffering on the world, the US isn't some unique paragon of evil. My distant Scandinavian ancestors were blood-thirsty warriors that enslaved people and sacked cities and monasteries. Italian-American posters here have Roman ancestors that exterminated whole metropolises and sowed the surround fields with salt, sending millions of people into slavery or destitution.

[Endangered Specie]

52. Oh, I also forgot, New Zealanders have GUNS too...

and they are #2...

The guy who runs this page is a New Zealander:


http://www.gunpics.net/

[LeftHander]

56. I want a Fjord Excursion....nt

[Forkboy]

67. That's bad

:rofl:

[Blue_Tires]

64. ttt nt

[ozone_man]

65. But they kill whales?

And Japan. Humanism is a bit hollow without a respect for nature.

"The Norwegian governments 2006 quota has increased 30 percent from the previous year to 1,052 minke whales."
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/save-our-seas-2/save-the-whales/norwegian-whaling

[Thor_MN]

68. They must not have surveyed the whales for their opinion.

was my first thought on reading they headline.

As someone posted upthread, the indicators appeared to all be related to domestic violence. I suppose that whales would be considered as living outside the country...

Whaling is subject where I am disappointed in my Scandinavian heritage. I can only take a bit of comfort in knowing that virtually all of my ancestors were farmers. I haven't found any fishers yet.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

71. in reply to that link

Admittingly my article is from 2004 and by the norwegian gov but still has a few nuggets of worth

I'll post 4 paragraphs from it(as thats the forum rules limit) then make a few comments of my own, two of them will be about the IWC or the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling which the IWC is based on, the other two will be more in general about norway.

Also i might be a bit biased in this being a norwegian myself (tho i've only tasted whale meat once, was quite tasty) so feel free to read the article and debate against my views


first the IWC paragraphs starting with the 1982 moratorium that Norway formally reserved its position on:
|
The moratorium included a clause stating that “by 1990 at the latest the Commission will undertake a comprehensive assessment of the effects of this decision on whale stocks and consider modification of this provision and the establishment of other catch limits.” This meant that new, more reliable stock assessments for the stocks from which catches might be taken, and a revised procedure for their management, were to be available by this deadline. The Scientific Committee met both these requirements, but at its Annual Meetings since 1990 the Commission has nevertheless been unwilling to re-evaluate the moratorium and catch quotas. Instead, it has specified new conditions that must be fulfilled before catch quotas can be discussed.
|
The article further states that the above behavior could be seen as a delaying tactic something i fully agree with, so i agree with the choice my country took on resuming the whaling since the IWC acted in bad faith about its own agreement

second part is more about article 5 in the convention i mentioned
|
The express objective of this convention is to ensure “increases in the numbers of whales which may be captured without endangering these natural resources”. Moreover, the Convention lays down that the harvesting level shall “be based on scientific findings”, shall provide for “the conservation, development and optimum utilisation of the whale resources .... and shall take into consideration the interests of the consumers of whale products”. In other words, the objective of the Convention is not to protect whales for their own sake, but to regulate catches of whales for the benefit of mankind both now and in the future. The position of member countries of the IWC which oppose whaling on principle is in fact in conflict with the Commission's own objectives.
|
Looking at article 5, Norway is actually more in accordance with the commission's objectives then most of its members are, an fact i look upon as somewhat humorous(i did look up the convention itself so it is accurate i belive)

thirdly is one reason why norway is still whaling even if there is not much money to get from doing so
|
Norway has succeeded in maintaining a decentralised pattern of settlement, with many small communities scattered along the coast. This is the result of a deliberate policy that has broad support. Fishing, sealing and whaling are among the principal means of livelihood of the coastal population, especially in the northernmost parts of the country. If these coastal communities are to have any future, they are dependent on acceptance of their time-honoured right to utilise the living, renewable resources of the sea. At the same time, these resources must be protected against overfishing and pollution.
|
Not to much to say here aside from that i'm against any closing down of our communities, we have enough of our rural communities and such already low on people since many are moving to the larger cities, and i see it as a sad thing that we are loosing many traditions and such to that trend

lastly and this is more about our whaling methods
|
The methods used by Norwegian whalers today for killing minke whales are probably the most strictly monitored and best registered methods used in any big-game hunting in the world. The methods used in Norwegian whaling also compare favourably to those used for livestock in slaughterhouses.
|
Nothing to really say here except that i hope those who enjoy meat plan to protest against those killing livestock since they are treated worse then the whales :P

In closing i will point out that i do disagree with most of the japanese whaling since they do not seem to make sure things are done as properly as possible and responsibly. If the article is read you might see that Norway actually is very restrictive and trying to make the hunting as painless as possible while also making sure that we don't overhunt the specific type of whale we tend to hunt.

I guess this is just a ranty way to say that i disagree with your view that Norway is without a respect for nature(I think you will also find that in general we tend to hunt below the quota we are given)

edit: forgot to add in the link: :silly: http://www.emb-norway.ca/facts/general/whaling/whaling.htm

[ozone_man]

76. Norway has quite a lot of coastline with all of it's fiords,

so in that sense it's similar to an island nation like Japan or New Zealand. And it's easy for landlocked states/countries to criticize whaling in this day and age, but we have our own issues. For example making room for wolves, grizzly bears, polar bears, and now even the birds and bees. But whales have that intelligence and gentleness that makes it really difficult to accept hunting them. That's the only reason I brought it up. It's wonderful that you have so little human violence, but we lead you when it comes to being kind to whales. ;)

Norway has succeeded in maintaining a decentralised pattern of settlement, with many small communities scattered along the coast. This is the result of a deliberate policy that has broad support. Fishing, sealing and whaling are among the principal means of livelihood of the coastal population, especially in the northernmost parts of the country. If these coastal communities are to have any future, they are dependent on acceptance of their time-honoured right to utilise the living, renewable resources of the sea. At the same time, these resources must be protected against overfishing and pollution.
|
Not to much to say here aside from that i'm against any closing down of our communities, we have enough of our rural communities and such already low on people since many are moving to the larger cities, and i see it as a sad thing that we are loosing many traditions and such to that trend

I agree to a large extent when it comes to maintaining the culture and economic survival of local fishing/hunting communities. In particular, I support the right of aboriginal/indigenous cultures to hunt and fish, in the hunter/gatherer sense. But there comes a point when it's time (like with Canadian seal hunters) to change the way of living to be consistent with sustainable economics and lifestyle. I think indigenous cultures, e.g., Inuit or Lap Landers should be allowed to maintain these hunting rights. Outside of aboriginal cultures, I think it' time to move forward to sustainable economics. Not that there really exists a nation on Earth that practices such at this point, but that is what we should strive towards. Sustainable economics, energy, and population.

So, we can't all live like we used to a few hundred years ago. Nobody really wants to live on a Government subsidy, if whaling (or seal hunting) were ended, but that may provide the opportunity to retrain into other professions.

Anyway, I commend Norwegians for being such a peaceful nation. It gives us something to work towards in the U.S.

[Coventina]

86. You said it with more kindness than I would have.

Kudos to you!

[kerry-is-my-prez]

70. I'm going there this month - I'll be sure to show this to my hosts & to my RW family.

My family is all Republican and we're visitng our former exchange student who is Norwegian. Thanks for posting this....

[LeftishBrit]

79. Interesting - I've only visited Norway for brief periods, but I was really impressed by what I saw

I found the people really nice and helpful, and the attitudes to education and the public services much more positive than in many other places - I called it "The Land that Thatcherism Forgot". No doubt there are more problems there, as everywhere, than appear to the casual visitor, but it seemed like a great place.

About the USA: I assume that if 'military expenditure' features in the rankings, that would automatically put it in a low position, regardless of other considerations.

[bamacrat]

82. Wow 96

Im sure Bush is somewhere saying look daddy I made an A finally. This is sad, Iran is right behind us, and big shocker Iraq is the least peaceful country.

[Oeditpus Rex]

83. Party Political Broadcast on behalf of the Norwegian Party

Ik tvika nasai.
(Good evening.)

Stivianka sobjiord ki niyanska ik takka Norge weginda zokiy yniet...
(You may think it strange that we should be asking you to vote Norwegian at the next election...)

ik vietta nogiunda sti jibiora...
(but consider the advantages.)

In Norge we hatta svinska offikiose buinni a gogik in Europa.
(In Norway, we have one of the highest per-capita income rates in Europe.)

Sti glikka in Norge tijik dinstianna gikloosi stijioska kary.
(We have an industrial re-investment rate of 14 percent.)

E in Norge we hatta siddinkarvo dikinik chaila osto tykka hennakska.
(And girls with massive knockers.)

Gikkiaski ungurden kola bijiusti stonosse.
(Honestly, they'll do anything for you.)

Hijiasgo biunderten ki yikilpa stivvora niski ofidae.
(They'll go through the card.)

E stavaskija, E stonioska.
(You name it, they know it.)

Stingik oloshoyert okka in Trondheim khi oyplitz...
(There's one in Trondheim who can put her...)





:D

[reyd reid reed]

84. nevermind

[muriel_volestrangler]

88. And now, a massage from the Swedish Prime Minister