Two Questions

[Murray]

OK I am all for the police in them protecting people and always been strong in my support for them but like many attitudes are changing and as such.

I have 2 questions that have come to my mind

How do police go onto some ones property and kill someones dog and its an internal investigation matter and there is no criminal offence??

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11373514

2nd question

Were we better off with a police department and traffic control department and are Rastus and scumdog police or traffic control??

[bluninja]

OK I am all for the police in them protecting people and always been strng in there support for them but like many attitudes are changing and as such.

I have 2 questions that have come to my mind

How do police go onto some ones property and kill someones dog and its an internal investigation matter and there is no criminal offence??

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11373514

2nd question

Were we better off with a police department and traffic control department and are Rastus and scumdog police or traffic control??

This was supposedly independent...ie the IPCA. Seems there's 2 failures here, the first of the police to investigate criminal actions of it's own officers, the second is to not act immediately over the IPCA findings that say what the police did was unlawful. Like many complaint schemes to do with enforcement departments it is kicked to the long grass for as long as possible before the findings come out. Then, when those findings are against the enforcement agency, the just say sorry all complaints upheld, no action to be taken. Just have a look at the IPCA media releases on their website for 2014, about 1/3rd find the police acted unlawfully, plus others that say they made the situation worse, or acted unwisely.

Seems to me the IPCA should act as swiftly as the police in collecting evidence and then act on it.

[Maha]

You have acceded your One Question per week allowance by one Murray.

[caseye]

Media beat up. We have been told one side of this story.
Who we believe should be based on what we see, hear and understand from those telling us the story in a completely unbiased way.

[Murray]

You have acceded your One Question per week allowance by one Murray.

Your right! last one was 7th December at 19.53pm and shouldn't it be "exceeded"?

[FJRider]

OK I am all for the police in them protecting people and always been strong in my support for them but like many attitudes are changing and as such.

I have 2 questions that have come to my mind

How do police go onto some ones property and kill someones dog and its an internal investigation matter and there is no criminal offence??

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11373514

2nd question

Were we better off with a police department and traffic control department and are Rastus and scumdog police or traffic control??

1: The Dog owner has the option of taking legal action against the Police. All he needs is a Lawyer who will take the case. As the case has not been taken to court yet ... the judge has (and is entitled to) his own opinions .... But ... not necessarily ALL the facts. If YOU want to try the case based SOLELY on an online Newspaper report you read ... feel free ... as you have.

2: By comparison ... there are many trades in the Army. Soldiers FIRST ... Corps of trade SECOND. As I recall ... MOT had limited authority ... and had no powers of arrest. And (most) earned their nickname of "Snakes" ..

Better off .. ??? ... you decide. Not much PUBLIC argument about it at the time ...


Question for YOU ... do you want more Police boots on the ground ... or less .. ???

[Murray]

Question for YOU ... do you want more Police boots on the ground ... or less .. ???

Pretty damn easy question which probably 90%+ (take the crims out) of NZ would give the same answer. YES but not in traffic control.

[Murray]

Media beat up. We have been told one side of this story.
Who we believe should be based on what we see, hear and understand from those telling us the story in a completely unbiased way.

I suggest you read the article and take into account what JUDGE Anna Johns had to say. If this is quoted correctly do we believe her or is it a biased view??

[FJRider]

Pretty damn easy question which probably 90%+ (take the crims out) of NZ would give the same answer. YES but not in traffic control.

The national police force of New Zealand is responsible for enforcing criminal law, enhancing public safety, maintaining order and keeping the peace throughout New Zealand.

Why should YOUR disregard for YOUR own safety on the roads of New Zealand be more important than ANY others safety on those SAME roads ... ???

[Murray]

Why should YOUR disregard for YOUR own safety on the roads of New Zealand be more important than ANY others safety on those SAME roads ... ???

Where did I say,or infer, THAT???

[FJRider]

Where did I say,or infer, THAT???

Fewer Police patrols will give less chance of dangerous/drunk drivers/riders on the public roads of New Zealand being caught ... more chance then ... of YOU MEETING one of those.

The downside is ... YOU can't pick where (and when) that (meeting) might be. Be it out our your bike alone .... or in your car with your family.



Be careful what you wish for ...

[Murray]

Fewer Police patrols will give less chance of dangerous/drunk drivers/riders on the public roads of New Zealand being caught ... more chance then ... of YOU MEETING one of those.

The downside is ... YOU can't pick where (and when) that (meeting) might be. Be it out our your bike alone .... or in your car with your family.



Be careful what you wish for ...

You havent even read the question posed!! It was "would we be better off with a separate police department and traffic control department" nothing to do with reducing numbers. Im absolutely all for increasing actual police work and police numbers but absolutely not if all they do is sit on the side of the road looking for people doing 101+ on the roads.

[Maha]

''Were we better off with a police department and traffic control department''

An age old question, been at least 25 years since the merge happened innit?
Things certainly changed for all concerned, even some coppers were not overly impressed with the merge, mainly the TO's from memory.
Good ole' Policing waned a bit, but the early speed wobbles have been addressed and sorted to a certain extent.
Don't see Points Duty Cops so much nowadays and most (if not all) cars have a weapon on board, the nature of things I guess.

It seems the smaller areas/regions still like Policing the way it used to be..

ie: From a small NZ town local 4 page rag.
Word used by the stationed cop describing the wankers who stole copper guttering and spouting. ''Thieving Smudges/Ugly scribble faced mutt/Dodgy two legged Parasites/Ugly cockroaches.

[caseye]

Murray, I've been "rushed" by nasty belligerent dogs and some of their owners,( most often it is very hard to tell which is which, both snarl before biting, both usually have big red eyes that don't see and both don't give a monkeys who actually gets hurt, as long as they get what they want) certainly outside of their own patch where they are in fact fair game for anyone with sufficient wits and weapons to dispatch them fairly and squarely if they feel the need to do so.
With the full consent of the law. Something I have actually had to do, to protect the little kid who was about to become breakfast.
A female judge who's only contact with today's less desireables is probably being chauffeured through Otara, is not qualified to comment or asses the "rushing" of a big snarling about to attack dog, not on it's own patch.
We most certainly have NOT had both sides of this story relayed to us in anything like a fair or unbiased manner and this is true of most of the situations that we read about in the papers or see /hear about on radio or TV.
Reporting news, was once a skill, allowing readers,listeners to make up their own minds based on what was put before them by the reporters, who's JOB relied on them doing it with professional and ethical correctness in order not to influence unduly their own assessment.

[FJRider]

You havent even read the question posed!! It was "would we be better off with a separate police department and traffic control department" nothing to do with reducing numbers. Im absolutely all for increasing actual police work and police numbers but absolutely not if all they do is sit on the side of the road looking for people doing 101+ on the roads.

"Better Off" is a personal opinion ... and can be based on your own (perceived) INCREASED/DECREASED safety on the roads. Highway Patrol are still Police ... and can be called on where/if a priority exists.

[Murray]

Murray, I've been "rushed" by nasty belligerent dogs and some of their owners, outside of their own patch where they are in fact fair game for anyone with sufficient wits and weapons to dispatch them fairly and squarely if they so

fel the need to do so, with the full consent of the law. Something I have actually had to do, to protect the little kid who was about to become breakfast.
A female judge who's only contact with today's less desireables is probably being chauffeured through Otara, is not qualified to comment or asses the "rushing" of a big snarling about to attack dog, not on it's own patch.That my friend is my considered opinion and you do know I am qualified to comment.
So, my original observation stands.
We most certainly have NOT had both sides of this story relayed to us in anything like a fair or unbiased manner and this is true of most of the situations that we read about in the papers or see /hear about on radio or TV.
Reporting news, was once a skill, allowing readers,listeners to make up their own minds based on what was put before them by the reporters, who's JOB relied on them doing it with professional and ethical correctness in order not to influence unduly their own assessment.

so why did the police apologise??

[caseye]

You'd rather they didn't.
They are not allowed to win these days, it's either us ordinary citizens baying for their blood when they make a balls up or its the crims suing their arse off when there isn't a leg to stand on , but hey who cares, bash em anyway.
You,me, we need to get our priorities sorted.
Do we want police people who are allowed to think and act in the best interests of most of the citizens or do we actually want them to sit on their hands while people die in case they don't get it right the first time?
Have you seen the reports of "youths marauding" in Britomart station last night?
I'd say, go in there beat the living daylights outa them, take em home to their parents and arrest them for criminal negligence and allowing law abiding citizens to get hurt.
But Oh NO, instead we get, the station was cordoned off, thousands could not catch a train home.
For what?
In case we hurt one of them too much and got a law suit filed.
Get used to it, this is the way of the future as long as we don't back our boys and girls who do it for the love of their fellow man/woman.

[Swoop]

Murray, I've been "rushed" by nasty belligerent dogs...
A mate just pulls out the pepper spray and nukes the fuck out of the mongrel. Apparently you "need to save a bit, in case the owner requires a bit too"!! :rofl:

[mada]

To me it makes more sense to have them as one large underfunded under-resourced dept. rather than two separate underfunded under-resourced depts. with cross over of duties on the roads.

All that would happen is a massive double up but no extra funding (which would mean less resources for other areas - eg. crime). You'd need to double up on all the safety equipment with logos/branding ie. vehicles, stab proof vests, radio equipment/comms, etc. Then there is the issue of arrest powers - would they have them, and if so then they need appropriate training, safety equipment. Police are and have always been the most competent agency for making arrests in NZ, many agencies have such powers but will use Police - eg. Customs at the Airport - because staff don't have the appropriate training/resources etc.

Nowadays with the way crime/people are and the tendency for more and more people to say fuck it and drive off or assault cops, let alone officers of other law enforcement agencies - a standalone traffic cop agency would be useless. The risk to traffic cops would end up being too high, as they would have no intel/access to NIA for criminal history checks, people would be more likely to attack or disobey if they knew Traffic cops were powerless and or not cops, even if they did have access to NIA then you would have a whole new kettle of fish in terms of another organisation now requiring security checks to weed out those working as clean skins. You'd end up with lots of calls to the cops to attend traffic stops and drive offs - and with the Police having less officers - in particular less dedicated to the roads, it'd be a total nightmare. From what I've heard the road cops are also a very useful and valuable tool when it comes to collecting on the ground intel which leads to real crime prevention ie drug busts, robberies, burgs etc.

Traffic policing is one area where Police can actually have some effect and PREVENT crime, rather than try and pick up the pieces afterwards. Let 'em keep it I say.

[FJRider]

.... Traffic policing is one area where Police can actually have some effect and PREVENT crime, rather than try and pick up the pieces afterwards. Let 'em keep it I say.

Probably the first of all Police to "find" stolen vehicles on the road ... and with powers to arrest/detain if necessary. MOT had to CALL the Police ...