As you say if ppl want to skip nothing will stop them, so what concrete and credible idea can you suggest? death penalty to those who dodge ns? or round up all the males when they are 13 or 14 years old and send them to some Pre-NS detention camp till they finish their NS?Originally posted by tohyi:the government can put up all the barriers they want, but if somebody is going to skip their NS liability no exit permit bullshit is going to stop them. the minister should come up with more concrete and credible ideas. taxpayers got to have their moneys worth for his $million salary.
educate recruits on the real need for the national service policy. i dont recall anybody telling me why i had to sserve my national service. it was never discusssed in schools or even on the first day of enlistment. it was like some sort of a blind routine every guy had to follow. no double standards for white horses. it only creates contemp among parents and recruits. yes there were white horses issues back even 5-8 years ago. reduce the national service further to 1.5 years so that guys could get into the competetive job market lot more faster instead of having the current time wasting 2 years. thats more credible than silly exit permits for 13 year olds.Originally posted by strikefreedom:As you say if ppl want to skip nothing will stop them, so what concrete and credible idea can you suggest? death penalty to those who dodge ns? or round up all the males when they are 13 or 14 years old and send them to some Pre-NS detention camp till they finish their NS?
We can only hope stiffer penalty will deter those who plan to dodge NS, but we cannot stop them unless we implement something extreme and if that happen i'm sure there will be even more ppl calling the goverment despotic undemocractic and whatever come to their mind.
You can educate but that doesn't mean ppl will listen. Just like we are taught commiting a crime is bad but how come ppl still commit? Anyone that have a slight history knowledge will understand why there a need to be able to defend the country on our own, don't tell me you don't understand that when you know what happen during Jap occupation in Singapore. Also some or most ppl heard of the word NS they will associate it as wah tough man or i am going to suffer. So even if they know or understand, some may still try to find a way to dodge it.Originally posted by tohyi:educate recruits on the real need for the national service policy. i dont recall anybody telling me why i had to sserve my national service. it was never discusssed in schools or even on the first day of enlistment. it was like some sort of a blind routine every guy had to follow. no double standards for white horses. it only creates contemp among parents and recruits. yes there were white horses issues back even 5-8 years ago. reduce the national service further to 1.5 years so that guys could get into the competetive job market lot more faster instead of having the current time wasting 2 years. thats more credible than silly exit permits for 13 year olds.
People like Melvin Tan left at such a young age because their parents encouraged or made the decision for them. We cannot have parents encouraging their children to give up Singapore citizenship to dodge NS and then return home to earn big bucks later. These parents should be made to know the consequences of such a decision may mean they will never see their children again unless they emigrated too.Originally posted by free thinker:This looks like a "Soviet" way to control people which is a tremendous shame.
The age 13 is too young for a boy to choose whether he wants to make Singapore is home (he just completed PSLE for goodness sake!). This new law is like FORCING people to do NS.
It is now NOT easy for male Singaporeans to give up their citizenship. Under the Singapore Constitution, any male who wants to renounce his citizenship must first discharge his NS liabilities under the Enlistment Act. That means that if you happen to be a Singapore-Born male, you need to serve NS before you can renounce your citizenship; if not, you will be stuck.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:People like Melvin Tan left at such a young age because their parents encouraged or made the decision for them. We cannot have parents encouraging their children to give up Singapore citizenship to dodge NS and then return home to earn big bucks later. These parents should be made to know the consequences of such a decision may mean they will never see their children again unless they emigrated too.
Why should we make it easy for Singaporeans to give up citizenship? And if they should do so, we must ensure they do not benefit more from Singapore than loyal citizens who remain.
[quote][quote]One of them is writer Ng Yi-Sheng, 25. He feels the changes are an overreaction.
'Increasing the punishment for draft-dodgers would make NS seem even more of a forced obligation,' he said.
However, Mr Kevin Loh, 29, who owns a cleaning company, disagrees. He favours the changes.
'National service is a key institution, and while those who are willing to serve have nothing to fear, it will be good to have a stronger deterrent for those who might want to escape their duty,' he said.
dear oxford mushroomOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:That's exactly why the laws had to be revised..
i'd suggest for 1 year.. 2 years i can get 2 degrees on part time basis already.Originally posted by tohyi:educate recruits on the real need for the national service policy. i dont recall anybody telling me why i had to sserve my national service. it was never discusssed in schools or even on the first day of enlistment. it was like some sort of a blind routine every guy had to follow. no double standards for white horses. it only creates contemp among parents and recruits. yes there were white horses issues back even 5-8 years ago. reduce the national service further to 1.5 years so that guys could get into the competetive job market lot more faster instead of having the current time wasting 2 years. thats more credible than silly exit permits for 13 year olds.
As you pointed out, it is now not easy for males Singaporeans to renounce citizenship. If the lowering of the age requirement for exit permits has this effect, then this revision in the law is necessary indeed. As for Singaporeans who acquired citizenship by descent but do not intend to be Singaporeans, I think it is only right that they be deprived of citizenship.Originally posted by free thinker:dear oxford mushroom
Which law(s) are you refering to? The requirements for a Singapore-Born male to renounce his citizenship or what? Please elaborate.
Cheers.
Dear oxford mushroomOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:As you pointed out, it is now not easy for males Singaporeans to renounce citizenship. If the lowering of the age requirement for exit permits has this effect, then this revision in the law is necessary indeed. As for Singaporeans who acquired citizenship by descent but do not intend to be Singaporeans, I think it is only right that they be deprived of citizenship.
I think you are talking about children of foreigners who became Singaporeans and although the law does not require them to serve NS, their children have to. That is the price the parents have agreed to pay to be Singaporeans. If they are not prepared to have their children serve NS like everyone else, perhaps they should consider emigrating to Australia instead.
I am afraid you are wrong. Those people who had to put aside their aspirations for two years to defend their country deserve a say as to who gets to govern it. The age at which they can renounce their citizenship may not necessarily have to change.Originally posted by TooFree:National Service is MANDATORY in Singapore. The revision of the voting right to the age of 18 is nonsensical. If it is mandatory, why vote?![]()
Cousult your friendly English dictionary for the word MANDATORY.Originally posted by iveco:I am afraid you are wrong. Those people who had to put aside their aspirations for two years to defend their country deserve a say as to who gets to govern it. The age at which they can renounce their citizenship may not necessarily have to change.
If I am newly-drafted, it is only natural that I want to have a say in the way I want my country governed. Because the whole thing was done without consent. I just happened to be born a citizen so I am subjected to the draft like it or not.
Yes I would agree if he happens to be a Singapore-Born male. What happens if he is born OVERSEAS and clearly does not want to make Singapore his home? Then that would be extremly unfair isn't it?Originally posted by TooFree:The new exit permit rule do serve its purpose by pre-empting potential NS dodger at the earliest stage possible.
National Service is MANDATORY in Singapore. The revision of the voting right to the age of 18 is nonsensical. If it is mandatory, why vote?![]()
I guess we need the percentage for this minority group to form a better valued judgement.Originally posted by free thinker:Yes I would agree if he happens to be a Singapore-Born male. What happens if he is born OVERSEAS and clearly does not want to make Singapore his home? Then that would be extremly unfair isn't it?
*FYI, any person born OVERSEAS but acquired Singapore Citizenship due to DESCENT shall cease to be a citizen if he/she does not take an OATH by the age of 21.*
Dear TooFreeOriginally posted by TooFree:I guess we need the percentage for this minority group to form a better valued judgement.
1. What is the percentage for those acquiring citizenship by descent?
2. How many are actually force to serve to retain their citizenship?
3. How many actually serve willingly to retain their citizenship?
And one more thing, what losses would a person falls in this category chunked up should he decides to renounce his allegiance to Singapore?![]()