842
843

newsChris Brown banned from Australia (au.news.yahoo.com)

2littleducksGod is not great - Religion poisons everything が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 337
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]winelego 107ポイント108ポイント  (3子コメント)

Chris Brown will now appear via Hologram with Johnny Depps dogs

[–]winelego 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I am seriously this great potential to actually happen. In Korera V-pop or Virtual concerts are regularly used for performances

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_concert

It's also ironic that Chris Brown has done a song about hologram:

[–]pulpist -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

lmfao

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    [–]TheRobLangford 92ポイント93ポイント  (1子コメント)

    Actually his initial visa application has been rejected and he has 30 days to appeal.

    [–]IWatchFatPplSleep 22ポイント23ポイント  (0子コメント)

    American singer Chris Brown will reportedly be banned from touring Australia due t...

    Click more

    American singer Chris Brown will reportedly be banned from touring Australia due to his violent past.

    [–]iamddk 45ポイント46ポイント  (14子コメント)

    Then why did they let him in 2011? His charges are from 2009.

    [–]asdfawega4a4aerv 42ポイント43ポイント  (7子コメント)

    I'm not aware of any particulars about this case (for instance, his visa application may not have been filled out correctly and the government are just showing off), but the two major changes since 2011 that are probably relevant:

    1. New government / prime minister, so probably using this as a way to "act tough"
    2. Stopping domestic abuse is a massive issue in Australia now, so any leeway given before for CB is unlikely to occur again.

    I'd say it is more #2 than #1 though.

    [–]Satafly 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

    I really look forward to an impartial look into why it's such a problem now, because I simply can't shake the feeling that the numbers are rising because we're more aware of the problem.

    [–]drinkaveebs 14ポイント15ポイント  (4子コメント)

    As far as I'm aware domestic violence is actually on the decline, the issue has just become a media/political/special interest groups darling in recent times.

    [–]Satafly 6ポイント7ポイント  (3子コメント)

    On the decline over the course of decades, absolutely.

    Although we've had more cases this year than in the last 5, which is very odd.

    [–]gopher88 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Stats or just media interest?

    [–]Bring-Back-The-Biff 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

    Yes, cases have increased because law enforcement are now facing political backlash if they continue to ignore domestic violence.

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]pulverise_your_nile 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Maybe it's always been such a problem? Surely more reporting is a good thing.

      [–]Wolfosaurus 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

      This is just for publicity.

      [–]FluffyWof 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

      Yeah agreed. What about all the other celebrities who are allowed in? A lot of them have lots of criminal charges.

      [–]Wolfosaurus 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      And the glorification of our own criminals, like Ned Kelly and Mark "Chopper" Read.

      [–]Ayrr 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

      wasn't he recently in trouble in regards to breaking his probation?

      [–]modestokun 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Because collective shout wasn't as influential back then

      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

        [–]zoxozo 87ポイント88ポイント  (11子コメント)

        I'm really not sure why people are upset about this. The man has a fairly recent felony conviction for assault. Any other person trying to enter the country with a similar criminal record would likely be denied entry as well. I'm happy that the government is applying the same standards to celebrities as everyone else.

        IMHO it's a good thing for the government to keep people convicted of violent crimes from entering the country.

        [–]fddfgs 24ポイント25ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I'm guessing it's because he's been out here 3 times since the assault and it reeks of a political stunt rather than an actual statement about domestic violence.

        I mean I don't care either way but it's more than a bit hypocritical.

        コメントをもっと表示する (10 返事)

          [–]Mohaan 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I don't like people who commit domestic violence.

          I don't like Chris Brown's music.

          I'm still not fond of this decision.

          That is, I'm not upset he's not coming to Australia. I just think it's political grandstanding. If they're going to be serious about domestic violence has no place in Australia then fucking do it. Ban the movie Everest (Josh Brolin). Ban Chris Brown's perfume. Ban Sean Penn movies. Ban Beats by Dre, whatever the fuck Emma Roberts stars in. Pretty much 1/2 the fucking football codes.

          But this, this is an act to be seen doing something.

          [–]twoverend 48ポイント49ポイント  (4子コメント)

          Some of the comments in this thread are news.com worthy.

          [–]leathercollar 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

          Have you send the comments in the /r/Music post on this topic?

          [–]twoverend 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Wow. Tony Abbott should've just punched a black chick before the ballot. Look at all the support you get.

          [–]131531 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Holy shit they're glorious

          [–]TheRealCJ 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Reddit has this weird love-hate thing with Australia. Somebody mentioned that NZ "banned" Chris Brown too, and oops, nobody cares.

          [–]freakalicious 132ポイント133ポイント  (90子コメント)

          Fantastic news

          [–]tronetq 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

          While I agree, what about people like Wayne Carey who's been involved in domestic violence multiple times but he's still all over TV and radio? We can't ban him from his own country but has he been forgiven just because he was a great footy player?

          [–]cudddleuptome 16ポイント17ポイント  (2子コメント)

          Mr Brown is a bad man.

          [–]microferret 14ポイント15ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I read that in Babu's voice. Bloody Seinfeld.

          [–]nagrom7Aussie comedians have hit the jackpot 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

          If you know what's good for you, don't scroll further down. There be monsters.

          [–]mungrolia 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

          What ever will we do

          [–]SandyRegolith 6ポイント7ポイント  (10子コメント)

          Why does 7 News think he's a rapper?

          [–]PompeiiGraffitiFunswick East 29ポイント30ポイント  (4子コメント)

          All black people are rappers, didn't you know?

          [–]NoThoughtForUserName 9ポイント10ポイント  (4子コメント)

          The fact that he raps may have something to do with it, just a hunch though.

          [–]ShozOvr 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

          Black+singing = rapping?

          [–]NoThoughtForUserName 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

          Jesus the fact that he's black has nothing to do with it.

          From his fourth album on he started actually doing more rapping, before then he was primarily a singer but he now does a combination of both, I don't know if you're aware but there are actual technical differences between rapping and singing.

          [–]ShozOvr 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          There is no issue referring to him as also a rapper. But to only refer to him as a rapper is silly. It's possible that they are trying to make him look worse to the uninformed general public as rappers are (not always unjustly) confused for thugs/gangsters. Would you not say he is technically moreso a singer/artist in the general sense?

          [–]TassieTiger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Yes

          [–]werthersarmchair grump 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

          http://premier.ticketek.com.au/shows/show.aspx?sh=CHRISBRO15

          Free tickets!

          [–]wisty 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

          "Brown was driving a vehicle with Robyn F. as the front passenger on an unknown street in Los Angeles. Robyn F. picked up Brown’s cellular phone and observed a three-page text message from a woman who Brown had a previous sexual relationship with.

          A verbal argument ensued and Brown pulled the vehicle over on an unknown street, reached over Robyn F. with his right hand, opened the car door and attempted to force her out. Brown was unable to force Robyn F. out of the vehicle because she was wearing a seat belt.

          Woo woo not OK! Australia is banning a victim of domestic violence for acting in self defense! /s

          From the rest of the transcript, Brown comes across as a complete psycho.

          It's not censorship if he's clearly not being banned for his music, but for his record. And he's recently been thrown out of two rehab centres for violent behaviour, beaten up a fan who tried to photobomb him. He hasn't reformed.

          [–]microferret 23ポイント24ポイント  (12子コメント)

          Good, his music sucks.

          [–]xheist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

          First they came for the spouse abusers

          [–]cs123 18ポイント19ポイント  (58子コメント)

          Slippery slope. Not a fan of the guy and what he did but I wonder what standard will we apply to others coming here.

          [–]smileedude 109ポイント110ポイント  (29子コメント)

          I would say most convicted violent ex-criminals would struggle with an Australian visa application. He wasn't granted an exception rather then banned.

          [–]TheRealCJ 37ポイント38ポイント  (8子コメント)

          The "slippery slope" would be allowing him in without any kind of scrutiny because he's a celebrity.

          [–]Oblivinatior 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

          Where do you draw the line between a criminal and an ex-criminal? The Rhianna assault was a while ago, but he was jailed in 2014 for an assault in 2013.

          コメントをもっと表示する (19 返事)

            [–]redditthrowaway1995Not the suppository of all wisdom 19ポイント20ポイント  (2子コメント)

            A slippery slope to what exactly? If it's a slippery slope to keeping violent foreigners out of the country, I'm all for it.

            [–]cs123 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

            OK, so what about actors? If they were making a movie in Australia and had cast Mark Wahlberg or Danny Trejo you would say no too?

            What about rappers that perhaps had criminal convictions in their younger days? Maybe firearm offences..Ban them too?

            What about Eminem, Sean Connery, Bill Murray, Nicolas Cage, Sean Penn?

            [–]ren1237 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            They consider recent convictions rather than all convictions - the intention is that they have to have proof of reform ie. not getting convicted again.

            [–]Raxkor 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Not slippery at all. The only reason he wasn't rejected out of hand like every other violent offender trying to come into Australia is because of his fame.

            The slippery slope begins when we let him in.

            [–]Nicend 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

            It's the current requirements for anyone entering the country. See here

            [–]arminius75 4ポイント5ポイント  (12子コメント)

            Slippery slope is a logical fallacie.

            [–]yagankiely 11ポイント12ポイント  (11子コメント)

            It's only a logical fallacy if you are using it to argue why someone else's argument is wrong. If your argument is that the situation is or will result in a 'slippery slope' then it isn't a fallacy. That doesn't yet mean it's a valid argument, and not does it mean it's well argued but it isn't a fallacy.

            Calling someone's argument wrong because they used a fallacy is also a logical fallacy, by the way.

            [–]Davorian 2ポイント3ポイント  (7子コメント)

            Calling someone's argument wrong because they used a fallacy is also a logical fallacy

            Well I suppose it's technically true that someone's conclusion isn't necessarily wrong because it doesn't follow from their premises in some way, but it seems like the onus is still on them to rectify that. Unless I'm missing something?

            [–]yagankiely 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

            Just because you used one (if you did; it reads as if you were implying that they were wrong because of the use of a fallacy - to me- but you didn't actually state that) then it doesn't mean you are wrong either. :p

            Of course the onus is on them. As I said, just because he didn't make a slippery slope argument (as the existence of a slippery slope was his argument and not an element of it), doesn't mean his argument is well argued. It was more of a statement of a conclusion than an argument. I'm just pointing out that his use of a slippery slope wasn't a fallacy. Not that his argument was sound.

            Edit: sorry about typos, on mobile. :/

            [–]Davorian 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

            Yeah, I understand that. I'm not OP. I was referring specifically to your last part about claiming logical fallacy is itself a fallacy. It's a bit tangential I know, but I was momentarily confused. It just seems like it's a really "technical" kind of fallacy, in the sense that I can't imagine a practical situation where it really matters. If someone uses a fallacy, it doesn't necessarily mean their conclusions are incorrect, but they have to rework their argument anyway.

            [–]yagankiely 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            The use of a fallacy has no effect on whether the argument is correct. Calling someone else incorrect because they use a fallacy is a fallacy but that doesn't mean that that argument is incorrect. All fallacies are 'technical' because their existence does not confirm or deny the validity of an argument and are more or less procedural errors.

            [–]Zagorath 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

            as the existence of a slippery slope was his argument and not an element of it

            As I said in my reply to your previous comment, this is not true. Yes, all the guy explicitly said was "this is a slippery slope", so a naive reading of the comment might come to the conclusion that the existence of a slippery slope was all he was arguing.

            But clearly, there was an implied argument of "and therefore this should not happen". That's where the fallacy comes in.

            [–]yagankiely 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Your stance is based on inference. I disagree with your inference and it isn't exactly a solid argument to rely on your inference when no actual evidence exists to support that inference (especially with plain text).

            Compare to the fallacy fallacy I mentioned. I inferred that he was making one, but I also mentioned that that might not be the case because he never explicitly stated something that would make that the case.

            I'm not able to effectively guess what someone really meant in plain text, and neither are you. Basing off the plain text of what was actually written, it wasn't a slippery slope fallacy, and the other was also not a fallacy fallacy. Unless the respective OPs can clarify its all just guesswork.

            コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

              [–]Zagorath 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Not exactly.

              Slippery slope is a fallacy of you use it to support your own argument (which this guy did, implicitly), and you haven't explicitly established that every step on this slope is inevitable (as this guy had not). So their usage was, a case of the slippery slope fallacy.

              The fallacy fallacy is a little misleading. Simply pointing out that someone made a fallacious argument is not a fallacy. The fallacy is saying "you used a fallacy, therefore your stance in this argument is wrong". If you simply use it to say "you used a fallacy, therefore any deduction you made from that argument can be dismissed as not useful", then it's fine.

              It's a very thin line, but it's important to recognise the difference.

              [–]yagankiely 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              (which this guy did, implicitly),

              I don't believe he did. His (poor) argument was that this would result in a slippery slope. He didn't prove that, or attempt to, but that doesn't matter.

              and you haven't explicitly established that every step on this slope is inevitable (as this guy had not).

              Just because his argument has other separate failings of logic doesn't that doesn't make it a slipper slope fallacy. A slippery slope fallacy can still be a fallacy when all steps are established; it depends on how it is used. He has not established that any of the steps are inevitable. It's a poor 'argument' it fails at many steps but not specifically due to a slippery slope fallacy.

              The fallacy fallacy is a little misleading. Simply pointing out that someone made a fallacious argument is not a fallacy. The fallacy is saying "you used a fallacy, therefore your stance in this argument is wrong". If you simply use it to say "you used a fallacy, therefore any deduction you made from that argument can be dismissed as not useful", then it's fine.

              Which I explained subsequently. I also didn't actually accuse that person of using the fallacy. I only pointed out its existence.

              [–]Kerrigor2 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Calling someone's argument wrong because they used a fallacy is also a logical fallacy, by the way.

              Finally... Someone else gets it...

              [–]yagankiely 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I'd be interested to see statistics of whether non-celebrities are consistently (or at less not-infrequently) also denied visa based on comparable criminal histories.

              There's also another angle, not that I necessarily agree or disagree with it, that a celebrity who might be seen to have more of an effective influence on malleable minds regarding, in this instance, the acceptability of domestic violence than an average comparative offender that would have no means of influencing people to any new full degree should be treated differently.

              To me, this would remind me of the argument that games, rap etc are making people violent, which is ludicrous, but some people might still be influenced with an antisocial attitude. Dunno.

              [–]Reddit_Cannot_Meme 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              woe is us, however shall we manage without hero worshiping violent criminals like good little Americans?

              [–]maxblack88 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I'm OK with this.

              [–]differentimage 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Well done Australia. Those crazy immigration rules of yours kept out someone really not worth having.

              [–]phantompoo 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

              So does this mean...Marky Mark is no longer welcome? Courtney Love?

              Will this also stand with allegations of assault? Would Hope Solo (goalkeeper of the US Women's Team) be denied entry based on her assaulting her relatives - charges were later dropped?

              It will be interesting to see what policy emerges out of this.

              Edit: word

              [–]Ayrr 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It is very very very difficult for a non-australian citizen/resident to enter Australia with a violent criminal record. I think if the offences were committed more than 10 years ago you don't have to declare them; and I think the only other way you might get an exemption is on compassionate grounds.

              I imagine if you were charged but not convicted there would be no issue.

              [–]M_ceylan -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

              This is bullshit grandstanding, pandering to the SJW do-gooder crowd. Let's ban performances of Wagner's music because of his unabashed anti-semitism; ban sales of anything to do with the Sex Pistols because Vicious murdered Nancy Spungen; ban the music of Ike Turner and James Brown from the airwaves for the same reason Chris Brown is being banned.

              [–]AdminsEatCocks 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Don't forget the Beatles! John Lennon abused his first wife, he even admitted it.

              [–]flimflam2020 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Misleading title and yahoo clickbate. His visa was denied he wasn't banned.

              [–]differentialcalculus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              If they are going to take a stance on domestic abuse then they should ban other famous people like Slash who was charged with domestic violence in 1999. People are gonna say.. but that was 16 years ago!!! Well, Chris Brown's assault charge was fucking 6 years ago. I'm all for banning people with domestic abuse charges against them but at least have some conisistency. More inconsistant that fucking Ray Razor Chamerlain.

              [–]Oblivinatior 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

              I'm conflicted about this. On the one hand, the entertainers visa has a character requirement, which has the very ambiguous criterion that you will not past the test if:

              -your past and present criminal or general conduct shows that you are not of good character

              on top of:

              -you have a substantial criminal record, meaning you have been sentenced to 12 months or more in prison, or multiple sentences that add up to more than 12 months in prison. A suspended sentence is considered a prison sentence.

              Which a quick wiki search suggests he also might fail.

              The issue is, was his application denied by the immigration department because he clearly failed the character test, or was it denied because of community pressure because he's high profile. If it's the former, then great, the system works. If it's the latter, that's a bad precedent.

              [–]rulenumber303 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

              They give low-profile people grief about their convictions too, make them explain themselves and mostly exclude them... the difference is the low-profile person has more of a chance of spinning a line about how it was a very difficult time in their life, they've been to anger management, they've totes changed etc than a celeb whose every detail of Still Being An Asshole is out there.

              [–]VIIX -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Good.

              コメントをもっと表示する (30 返事)