Singh family complaining about the police

[imdying]

I mean for all that matters, if you compare the effects of alcohol with any other drugs you will see the similarities
1) Causes an feel good factor aka High in the brain
2) Is addictive
3) Repeated use can cause serious bodily harm
4) Excess intake can cause death
Sounds very much like a sportsbike :/

Now this does not in anyway justify the death of the poor guy as he was just running a legally entitled business.Indeed!

[tgb_novice]

Sounds very much like a sportsbike :/


I agree but then thats why it is so strictly enforced (OH I hate those helmets :P) and with all the speeding tickets etc that we rake up :). I mean if we could control alcohol to that manner yah sure :) :beer:

[BIGBOSSMAN]

Prohibition: Coming to a town near you...

[tgb_novice]

Prohibition: Coming to a town near you...

Yah But..... They could carry guns :woohoo:

[Edbear]

Awe cunt-rare, liberalising it's sales etc has seen things worse.

The dropping the drinking age, having more liquor outlets with longer hours and the pushing of alcopops has seen a pretty big increase in alcohol fueled problems in a lot of young peopels lives - more so than in my day of mainly beer and a 21 years drinking age, shorter pub hours and no sales from dairies, supermarkets etc .

You know, it's a funny thing... The more liberalised the laws become, the more problems we have in society, do you really think there is a connection..?

On the other hand, we want freedom to do whatever we want, insisting we can control ourselves and don't need all these laws.

While some, or maybe most of us can exercise self-control and common-sense, it is apparent that far too many can't, hence we have our Police tearing their hair out at what they face every day in the streets.

The reality, as maybe opposed to what we think should be, is that if you make "bad stuff", (alcohol, smokes, drugs, etc.), freely, or more, available there are plenty of people who will use/abuse/take advantage of same. The reality, is that this is the way it is, and no amount of complaining about laws or law enforcement is going to make it go away.

If you think the Police are in some way handling things poorly, go out on patrol with them. If you think the laws are being unfairly introduced, or are draconian or inadequate, sit down with those who make them, sit in on the committees and listen to the discussions among the pollies who have to make the laws, follow their research, read the studies and papers they read.

Go into the emergency rooms at the hospitals on Friday and Saturday nights and watch what the Drs. and Nurses have to endure. See the situation for yourself, first-hand. See the blood, see the violence, see the drugged-up young people attacking anything and anyone.

Then you may comment...

[Patrick]

Fuck I didn't know coppers had a sense of humor...bahahaha......and yeah thinkin' about leaving Auckland, where's a good destination? [with no crime and great roads]


Stewart Island.

Spud and I make two??? Scummys a nudist, and you can't tell which way he is facing when he smiles... but he's a funny one too....


Oh, never knew that, I looked in all my books and can't find that 'dollar figure' - maybe you could tell me how much it is???:rolleyes:

BTW: Lost out today, no dollars collected.

None since September 07 either - damn... Quotas...... Revenue Collecting....


You know, it's a funny thing... The more liberalised the laws become, the more problems we have in society, do you really think there is a connection..?

On the other hand, we want freedom to do whatever we want, insisting we can control ourselves and don't need all these laws.

While some, or maybe most of us can exercise self-control and common-sense, it is apparent that far too many can't, hence we have our Police tearing their hair out at what they face every day in the streets.

The reality, as maybe opposed to what we think should be, is that if you make "bad stuff", (alcohol, smokes, drugs, etc.), freely, or more, available there are plenty of people who will use/abuse/take advantage of same. The reality, is that this is the way it is, and no amount of complaining about laws or law enforcement is going to make it go away.

If you think the Police are in some way handling things poorly, go out on patrol with them. If you think the laws are being unfairly introduced, or are draconian or inadequate, sit down with those who make them, sit in on the committees and listen to the discussions among the pollies who have to make the laws, follow their research, read the studies and papers they read.

Go into the emergency rooms at the hospitals on Friday and Saturday nights and watch what the Drs. and Nurses have to endure. See the situation for yourself, first-hand. See the blood, see the violence, see the drugged-up young people attacking anything and anyone.

Then you may comment...

Does 23 years of this shit mean I can comment? Good....

"No comment... "

But bloody good post!

[scracha]

Then you may comment...

Utter bollox....no offence like. Other countries (e.g. France) manage to have every second "dairy" selling alcohol without massive problems. Like much other crime, the real culprit isn't the availability or price of alcohol, it's the soft sentencing that goes hand in hand with the "My client was drunk M'Lud" defence. If dickheads who punch people when drunk faced the real prospect of a few days in a small hotel room with "bubba" instead of a $200 fine then I'm pretty sure there'd be more responsible drinking.

Prohibit one substance and another fix will take it's place.

[HenryDorsetCase]

S'funny: all that talk of "ban it" and whatever. I have a firmly held belief that there shouldn't be any illegal drugs, because banning stuff JUST DOES NOT WORK. It never has and it never will. You want to jack up heroin? fine with me. You want to get on the crank. go for your life. You like to get pissed and fall down, thats fine too.

Where society needs to draw the line is when the consequences of your actions reach out beyond your own denuded and delightful self, and detrimentally affect others: You drink and drive, say, or you steal shit to feed your smack habit, or you get cranked up and crack someone's head. That affects someone else, you pay. I also firmly believe in the death penalty, not really so much as a deterrent, because after all people are dumb fucks most of the time, but simply as an economic measure: cost of keeping some dirtbag in prison fed, clothed and watered with three squares a day and no prospect of rehabilitation vs cost of two 9mm rounds to the temple sort of thing. As a taxpayer, I object to scumbags having nicer accommodation than my first house (and yes I've visited a prison, and no, I'm not joking).

Personal responsibility is the key. Its all very well to whine and whinge but no one holds a gun to someones head and says "NOw go rob that liquor store": someone decided that would be a good thing to do, and a bunch of his mates went along for the ride: they're all guilty, they all pay.

It's just not that hard: Dont expect the government to do anything, do it yourself.

Oh, and I also think all our police should be armed, all the time, and they don't need those silly bushmaster (sounds like a porno from the '70's) they need shotguns. 7 shot pump action remington 12 gauges with folding stocks, or AA-10s.

So, yeah, you asked, thats what I think. How about that local sports team?

[devnull]

S'funny: all that talk of "ban it" and whatever. I have a firmly held belief that there shouldn't be any illegal drugs, because banning stuff JUST DOES NOT WORK. It never has and it never will. You want to jack up heroin? fine with me. You want to get on the crank. go for your life. You like to get pissed and fall down, thats fine too.

Where society needs to draw the line is when the consequences of your actions reach out beyond your own denuded and delightful self, and detrimentally affect others: You drink and drive, say, or you steal shit to feed your smack habit, or you get cranked up and crack someone's head. That affects someone else, you pay. I also firmly believe in the death penalty, not really so much as a deterrent, because after all people are dumb fucks most of the time, but simply as an economic measure: cost of keeping some dirtbag in prison fed, clothed and watered with three squares a day and no prospect of rehabilitation vs cost of two 9mm rounds to the temple sort of thing. As a taxpayer, I object to scumbags having nicer accommodation than my first house (and yes I've visited a prison, and no, I'm not joking).

Personal responsibility is the key. Its all very well to whine and whinge but no one holds a gun to someones head and says "NOw go rob that liquor store": someone decided that would be a good thing to do, and a bunch of his mates went along for the ride: they're all guilty, they all pay.

It's just not that hard: Dont expect the government to do anything, do it yourself.

Oh, and I also think all our police should be armed, all the time, and they don't need those silly bushmaster (sounds like a porno from the '70's) they need shotguns. 7 shot pump action remington 12 gauges with folding stocks, or AA-10s.

So, yeah, you asked, thats what I think. How about that local sports team?

Couldn't agree more.

The soft-cock attitude of our politicians is a disgrace.
Labour has never been hard on crime - probably has something to do with the pool they draw their voters from :mad:

Capital punishment needs to be back in the law books, and judges need to grow a pair and start dishing it out to these murderers. If they don't, it's only a matter of time before the community does...

Spot on regarding the Bushmasters. A high velocity .223 round is not what is needed - it goes one hell of a long way if you miss the intended target, and TBH, cops don't get enough range time as it is. A centrefire is just playing into the hands of the anti-gun lobby.

[davereid]

S'funny: all that talk of "ban it" and whatever... banning stuff JUST DOES NOT WORK...
....I also think all our police should be armed, all the time, and they don't need those silly bushmaster...

Of course alcohol is a catalyst for a lot of criminal activity.

But to suggest restricting alcohol availability or pricing is the solution is not really likely.

If it were, easy access to alcohol would reflect in higher crime rates.

Yet... crime rates (expressed as % of people victimised by crime per annum)

#1 Australia: 30.1%
#2 New Zealand: 29.4%
#3 United Kingdom: 26.4%
#4 Netherlands: 25.2%
#5 Sweden: 24.7%
#6 Italy: 24.6%
#7 Canada: 23.8%
#8 Saint Kitts and Nevis: 23.2%
#9 Malta: 23.1%
#10 Denmark: 23%
#11 Poland: 22.7%
#12 Belgium: 21.4%
#13 France: 21.4%
#14 Slovenia: 21.2%
#15 United States: 21.1%
#16 Finland: 19.1%
#17 Austria: 18.8%
#18 Switzerland: 18.2%
#19 Portugal: 15.5%
#20 Japan: 15.2%

Shit ! Amazing !

Aus/NZ/UK have some of the worlds tightest alcohol laws.
Yet we have the worst rates of crime.

You can buy alcohol from vending machines in Japan ! No age check, just stuff the loot in. Very cheap. Everywhere. 24hrs a day.

Surely it can't be something else... ?

[Edbear]

Utter bollox....no offence like. Other countries (e.g. France) manage to have every second "dairy" selling alcohol without massive problems. Like much other crime, the real culprit isn't the availability or price of alcohol, it's the soft sentencing that goes hand in hand with the "My client was drunk M'Lud" defence. If dickheads who punch people when drunk faced the real prospect of a few days in a small hotel room with "bubba" instead of a $200 fine then I'm pretty sure there'd be more responsible drinking.

Prohibit one substance and another fix will take it's place.

I agree with you here, too, I wasn't talking about prohibition, just the observation that when you make access easier, more will "access"!

[spudchucka]

Spot on regarding the Bushmasters. A high velocity .223 round is not what is needed - it goes one hell of a long way if you miss the intended target, and TBH, cops don't get enough range time as it is. A centrefire is just playing into the hands of the anti-gun lobby.

Most police shootings happen within about 5 metres from the target. Even cross eyed fumble fingers can hit a man from that distance with a little training. Dogs running around in circles is another story though, probably should have napalm for them critters.

[spudchucka]

Aus/NZ/UK have some of the worlds tightest alcohol laws. Yet we have the worst rates of crime.

The three countries mentioned are also well known for their binge drinking cultures.

"Its not the drinking, its how we're drinking"!!:whistle:

[davereid]

The three countries mentioned are also well known for their binge drinking cultures.

"Its not the drinking, its how we're drinking"!!:whistle:

Yes, entirely true... but our drinking culture is but a learner compared to the japanese.

The japs invented binge drinking. They love it. They are far better that it than us. They just manage to do it without bashing each other up.

So do the Austrians, and the Swiss, but they arent as violent as us either.

Here is how we drink overall...we are hardly on the chart for alcohol, but manage to be on the podium for crime.


#1 Luxembourg: 15.5 litres per capita
#2 France: 14.8 litres per capita
#3 Ireland: 13.5 litres per capita
#4 Hungary: 13.4 litres per capita
#5 Czech Republic: 12.1 litres per capita
#6 Spain: 11.7 litres per capita
#7 Denmark: 11.5 litres per capita
#8 Portugal: 11.4 litres per capita
#9 United Kingdom: 11.2 litres per capita
#10 Austria: 11.1 litres per capita
#11 Switzerland: 10.8 litres per capita
#12 Belgium: 10.7 litres per capita
#13 Germany: 10.2 litres per capita
#14 Australia: 9.8 litres per capita
#15 Netherlands: 9.7 litres per capita
#16 Korea, South: 9.3 litres per capita
#17 Finland: 9.3 litres per capita
#18 Greece: 9.2 litres per capita
#19 New Zealand: 8.9 litres per capita
#20 United States: 8.3 litres per capita
#21 Poland: 8.1 litres per capita
#22 Italy: 8 litres per capita
#23 Canada: 7.8 litres per capita
#24 Slovakia: 7.6 litres per capita
#25 Japan: 7.6 litres per capita
#26 Sweden: 7 litres per capita
#27 Iceland: 6.5 litres per capita
#28 Norway: 6 litres per capita
#29 Mexico: 4.6 litres per capita
#30 Turkey: 1.5 litres per capita

[HenryDorsetCase]

Most police shootings happen within about 5 metres from the target. Even cross eyed fumble fingers can hit a man from that distance with a little training. Dogs running around in circles is another story though, probably should have napalm for them critters.


so a high velocity .223 round goes straight thru some P-ed up or pissed up crackhead, he goes "Ow that hurts a bit" but continues to advance.

A shotgun from 5m: he WILL Fall over. It won't be pretty, but he also won't get up again any time soon. and the lower velocity spread shot is less likely to go thru walls, buildings or bystanders with lethal effect than the .223 round mentioned above. Its not like its target shooting at 50m, if some fuckwith advances on an armed pleecemin and doesnt stop when asked then he takes the consequences, end of story, no handwriging. I'm not sayng I could do it, or I envy anyone put in the situation, or anything like that, and I am sure it would be well traumatic for the cop, but thats kind of what they signed up for. That and the cool cars and huuuuuge money and stuff.

;)

enough ranting. Ive missed the bike I was after on tardme (by $10....) so I am going to bed. :)

[devnull]

Most police shootings happen within about 5 metres from the target. Even cross eyed fumble fingers can hit a man from that distance with a little training. Dogs running around in circles is another story though, probably should have napalm for them critters.

hehe... I wasn't going to mention the dog incident :)

Seriously though, a 12 gauge will achieve a better outcome at close range, with less risk (for everyone).

Tactical 00 buckshot stays pretty tight, even with an unchoked barrel.

And if you need range, it's not difficult to slip a solid into the mag...

[scumdog]

so a high velocity .223 round goes straight thru some P-ed up or pissed up crackhead, he goes "Ow that hurts a bit" but continues to advance.

A shotgun from 5m: he WILL Fall over. It won't be pretty, but he also won't get up again any time soon. and the lower velocity spread shot is less likely to go thru walls, buildings or bystanders with lethal effect than the .223 round mentioned above. Its not like its target shooting at 50m, if some fuckwith advances on an armed pleecemin and doesnt stop when asked then he takes the consequences, end of story, no handwriging. I'm not sayng I could do it, or I envy anyone put in the situation, or anything like that, and I am sure it would be well traumatic for the cop, but thats kind of what they signed up for. That and the cool cars and huuuuuge money and stuff.

;)

enough ranting. Ive missed the bike I was after on tardme (by $10....) so I am going to bed. :)

Shotguns with buckshot have 9 pellets the same weight as a 223 - ok, maybe not as fast but IF you don't get all nine pellets on the target you'l have 4 or 5 or 6 pellets whistling off into the far yonder.

Any shot over 20 metres will have one or more pellets not fitting onto the target most of the time.

A 223 as used by Police is VERY unlikely to penetrate the torso of a human being, in fact I'd pretty much say it wouldn't - and if it did it would be a shitload lighter and slower than when it went in, certainly be a fluke if it had enough energy to hurt anybody.
And the huuuuuge money? shoot, can't even afford to pay somebody to fix my Suzuki!!

[scumdog]

hehe... I wasn't going to mention the dog incident :)

Seriously though, a 12 gauge will achieve a better outcome at close range, with less risk (for everyone).

Tactical 00 buckshot stays pretty tight, even with an unchoked barrel.

And if you need range, it's not difficult to slip a solid into the mag...

But with a bushmaster you have 20 shots to play with, better range, compact size and a bullet that won't overpenetrate.

Ya seen what a solid slig does to ANYTHING? - an 'oops sorry' won't quite cover it if you hit something you were not meant to.

And all this 'buckshot out and slugs in' will only end up in tears, believe me, it happens even when hunting when there's no real pressure on.

[scumdog]

Spot on regarding the Bushmasters. A high velocity .223 round is not what is needed - it goes one hell of a long way if you miss the intended target, and TBH, cops don't get enough range time as it is. A centrefire is just playing into the hands of the anti-gun lobby.

See my above post regarding shotguns and the spread of buckshot - the old rule of thumb is: "One inch of spread for every yard of travel".

IF a baddie is hit centre mass (or even the legs, head) with a Police 223 round there won't be any worthwhile bullet or fragments that will carry on right through.

In fact very little will get through.

[devnull]

TBH scummie... 00 doesn't spread very much. i.e. about 8" at 30 yards. (I should mention, that 00 is only 5 or 6 big chunks of lead)

Grab a shotgun, a piece of paper, and try it out (shotguns are still the preferred weapon for most soldiers when fighting in close quarters). I think you'll be surprised

A solid is pretty unforgiving, but it does give you more range. Popping one into a mag then pumping the next round in is just practice, just the same as clearing stoppages or changing mags on a rifle

A solid will easily pass through a car door, and give whoever's inside a very bad day.

Given that cops tend to hesitate before shooting (at least the ones I've seen on ranges do), having to place a shot carefully at close range is asking a lot. Ideal placement for a .223 round is in the upper chest - at close range, with an offender rushing you, the chances of that happening is pretty small.

Plus, the intimidation factor of the 12 gauge barrel means that you may not even have to pull the trigger :)

To offer some balance, here's an interesting article on the effectiveness of the .223
http://www.steyr-aug.com/223forcqb.htm

but I still think that unless the Police give staff a whole shitload more range time (e.g. 24 hours per month instead of per year), it's a recipe for disaster.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Ya seen what a solid slig does to ANYTHING? - an 'oops sorry' won't quite cover it if you hit something you were not meant to.


it's like cooking innit? "Never explain, never apologise"

[Swoop]

Even cross eyed fumble fingers can hit a man from that distance with a little training.
I'd be more concernd with PC "Fumble" who fires 10 rounds to get that 1 round on-target.

[SixPackBack]

TBH scummie... 00 doesn't spread very much. i.e. about 8" at 30 yards. (I should mention, that 00 is only 5 or 6 big chunks of lead)

Grab a shotgun, a piece of paper, and try it out (shotguns are still the preferred weapon for most soldiers when fighting in close quarters). I think you'll be surprised

A solid is pretty unforgiving, but it does give you more range. Popping one into a mag then pumping the next round in is just practice, just the same as clearing stoppages or changing mags on a rifle

A solid will easily pass through a car door, and give whoever's inside a very bad day.

Given that cops tend to hesitate before shooting (at least the ones I've seen on ranges do), having to place a shot carefully at close range is asking a lot. Ideal placement for a .223 round is in the upper chest - at close range, with an offender rushing you, the chances of that happening is pretty small.

Plus, the intimidation factor of the 12 gauge barrel means that you may not even have to pull the trigger :)

To offer some balance, here's an interesting article on the effectiveness of the .223
http://www.steyr-aug.com/223forcqb.htm

but I still think that unless the Police give staff a whole shitload more range time (e.g. 24 hours per month instead of per year), it's a recipe for disaster.

24 hours a year training??? and we give the average copper a Glock?
No thanks.

[scumdog]

24 hours a year training??? and we give average copper a Glock?
No thanks.

'0' training and we give people a drivers license???

No wonder cars kill more NZers than guns!!:whistle:

[devnull]

'0' training and we give people a drivers license???

No wonder cars kill more NZers than guns!!:whistle:

:jerry:

Good point... but still, more range time should be made available...
TBH, not doing so is unfair on the staff, who are all too well aware that they'll be crucified if they screw up

[FJRider]

See my above post regarding shotguns and the spread of buckshot - the old rule of thumb is: "One inch of spread for every yard of travel".

IF a baddie is hit centre mass (or even the legs, head) with a Police 223 round there won't be any worthwhile bullet or fragments that will carry on right through.



Thai Police use Dum Dums... ONE shot, ONE person STOPS !!!:whistle:
Hit the WRONG Person... BUGGER...SHOOT AGAIN !!! :whocares:
By comparison... Kiwi cops are (un ???)fairly restrained. :rolleyes:

[SixPackBack]

'0' training and we give people a drivers license???

No wonder cars kill more NZers than guns!!:whistle:

So it would be okay to give poorly trained police hand-guns because we have poorly trained drivers?
Nice try at passing the ball out scumdog.:mellow:

[FJRider]

So it would be okay to give poorly trained police hand-guns because we have poorly trained drivers?
Nice try at passing the ball out scumdog.:mellow:


Go face to face with ANY Police "person" and TELL them they are poorly trained...I DARE YA :wari::wari::wari:

[SixPackBack]

Go face to face with ANY Police "person" and TELL them they are poorly trained...I DARE YA :wari::wari::wari:

WTF.....strange comment dude? I can only assume your a cop or scumdogs boyfreind...lighten up;)

[Patrick]

...if some fuckwith advances on an armed pleecemin and doesnt stop when asked then he takes the consequences, end of story, no handwriging.

Like the Christchurch hammer weilding dropkick... the hands are still being wrung over that one...




Which is why the Bushmaster is good at long range - THAT suits me fine...

[QUOTE=Swoop;1612354]I'd be more concernd with PC "Fumble" who fires 10 rounds to get that 1 round on-target.

PC "Fumble" getting 1 shot on target out of 10 wouldn't be allowed anywhere near the gun cabinet... You can relax.

[spudchucka]

I'd be more concernd with PC "Fumble" who fires 10 rounds to get that 1 round on-target.

If they were that bad they would never get the required certification to use police firearms. And I'm in no doubt that the dog guy from Wgtn had his certification cancelled.

[spudchucka]

:jerry:

Good point... but still, more range time should be made available...
TBH, not doing so is unfair on the staff, who are all too well aware that they'll be crucified if they screw up

You'd get no argument from most cops on this issue.

[SixPackBack]

You'd get no argument from most cops on this issue.

Nor the public I would imagine. If it could be shown that officers received regular intensive training backed up with some sort of stringent 'police gun licence' it would be a hell of a lot easier to bring arms in.
This needs to be coupled with a realistic attitude to a copper making the inevitable mistake. Are we ready for that?

[98tls]

Nor the public I would imagine. If it could be shown that officers received regular intensive training backed up with some sort of stringent 'police gun licence' it would be a hell of a lot easier to bring arms in.
This needs to be coupled with a realistic attitude to a copper making the inevitable mistake. Are we ready for that? Methinks the real world is but KB may well be a different story.

[scumdog]

So it would be okay to give poorly trained police hand-guns because we have poorly trained drivers?
Nice try at passing the ball out scumdog.:mellow:


Never said that at all, just showed how Kiwis are quite happy with thousands half-assed drivers with no training to share the roads with but a few hundred cops with less than optimum training equiped with firearms they may never fire in their whole career is a big no-no..

But since you mentioned it guess it makes sense......

[spudchucka]

Nor the public I would imagine. If it could be shown that officers received regular intensive training backed up with some sort of stringent 'police gun licence' it would be a hell of a lot easier to bring arms in.
This needs to be coupled with a realistic attitude to a copper making the inevitable mistake. Are we ready for that?

The vast majority of cops will never find themselves in the position of having to draw a weapon on an offender. From personal experience I can say that it is a very humbling experience to find yourself only moments away from having to squeeze the trigger.

Having gone as far as you can without actually having fired the weapon I felt afterwards that the training I'd had was sufficient. However I have always found weapons handling comes completely naturally to me. Not everyone has naturally ability though and the training needs to allow for the lowest common denominator

There is no police gun licence, in fact you can be qualified to use firearms as a police officer and not hold a current NZ firearms licence. However you do need to pass the training requirements, if you don't you can't draw a weapon from the armoury.

[SixPackBack]

The Singh family have laid an official complaint with the PCA. Will be interesting to see both the outcome and public reaction.
Not gunna bring papa Singh back regardless of the outcome!

[98tls]

If Helen fast tracks the paperwork and throws a decent amount of $ at them that should ensure the vote of another large portion of our population.:bash:

[HenryDorsetCase]

If Helen fast tracks the paperwork and throws a decent amount of $ at them that should ensure the vote of another large portion of our population.:bash:


so cynical.



so right.

[HenryDorsetCase]

the LAPD seem to like firearms training and shotguns: I think their gangs and slums are somewhat more hardcore than ours.

check this (http://www.lapdonline.org/search_results/content_basic_view/6384) out

[Genestho]

The Singh family have laid an official complaint with the PCA. Will be interesting to see both the outcome and public reaction.
Not gunna bring papa Singh back regardless of the outcome!

I can understand your comment as a bystander - It wont bring him back.
But from an insiders point of view, if there was a way that his death could've been prevented then its only natural that they want answers.

If this was your loved one in this situation, what you do? Thats probably not a fair question to ask because you wouldn't know the answer until you were going through it.
Grief affects people individually, callous acts provoke anger, this is their focus. If there was a cockup and they can prevent the cockup from happening again, good on them.
The situation will happen again, but maybe the alleged cockup wont.
Sometimes there needs to be accountability from more than just the offender, which has been lacking in alot of cases.

Watch what happens when the Dept of Corrections gets sued by the survivor of the RSA killings, finally for the first time there will be accountability and from that will openup a flood of cases. And so there should be.

[SixPackBack]

I can understand your comment as a bystander - It wont bring him back.
But from an insiders point of view, if there was a way that his death could've been prevented then its only natural that they want answers.

If this was your loved one in this situation, what you do?
Grief affects people individually, callous acts provoke anger, this is their focus. And if they can prevent the cockup from happening again, good on them.
The situation will happen again, but maybe the cockup wont.
Sometimes there needs to be accountability from more than just the offender, which has been lacking in alot of cases.

Watch what happens when the Dept of Corrections gets sued by the survivor of the RSA killings, finally for the first time there will be accountability and from that will openup a flood of cases. And so there should be.

Good post. What would I do?...nothing! having personally been through the wringer with more than my fair share of tragedy including a family death from 'P' and a close family friend brutally stabbed to death I can work through anger-grief-blame appropriation without a flicker.

The copper may not receive a glowing performance appraisal next time around-the criminal will receive a long jail sentence. No amount of hand wringing will change that.

[FJRider]

The vast majority of cops will never find themselves in the position of having to draw a weapon on an offender. From personal experience I can say that it is a very humbling experience to find yourself only moments away from having to squeeze the trigger.

Having gone as far as you can without actually having fired the weapon I felt afterwards that the training I'd had was sufficient. However I have always found weapons handling comes completely naturally to me. Not everyone has naturally ability though and the training needs to allow for the lowest common denominator

There is no police gun licence, in fact you can be qualified to use firearms as a police officer and not hold a current NZ firearms licence. However you do need to pass the training requirements, if you don't you can't draw a weapon from the armoury.

I spent 8 years in the Army (regular force),PART of that on active service. Had people shooting at ME... it was about that time I wished I had spent MORE time on the range. ALSO at that time, feelings about all sorts of things, change.
ALL armed forces including police, train for things, they hope they will get a chance to do... AND SURVIVE. When (if) they ACTUALLY do it for real ...attitudes to all things, will never be the same.
To those in the "trades" that ARE 'wishing'... I hope you don't need to find out... for yourself.
And no matter HOW much training or practice, you can still make mistakes. I guess thats what makes us human

[Genestho]

Sorry I edited my post as you were replying to mine...I forgot to add the part about the trauma of watching someone go through hell, knowing there couldve been a way to save him.

Very practical answer. Cheers Mate.

I guess it goes back to - you either become apart of the solution or continue to assist in growing the problem and do nothing.
Again everybody deals with this differently.
I wont assume that you dont have your reasons for not wanting answers and culpability beyond what your satisified with in your situation. Maybe you dont need any.
I dont see anything wrong or tragic in what theyre doing, afterall as the old saying goes "evil prevails when good men do nothing"

[FJRider]

Never said that at all, just showed how Kiwis are quite happy with thousands half-assed drivers with no training to share the roads with but a few hundred cops with less than optimum training equiped with firearms they may never fire in their whole career is a big no-no..

But since you mentioned it guess it makes sense......

I wonder if driver behaviour would change if we armed the Highway Patrols.... mmmmmmm

[98tls]

I can understand your comment as a bystander - It wont bring him back.
But from an insiders point of view, if there was a way that his death could've been prevented then its only natural that they want answers.

If this was your loved one in this situation, what you do? Thats probably not a fair question to ask because you wouldn't know the answer until you were going through it.
Grief affects people individually, callous acts provoke anger, this is their focus. If there was a cockup and they can prevent the cockup from happening again, good on them.
The situation will happen again, but maybe the alleged cockup wont.
Sometimes there needs to be accountability from more than just the offender, which has been lacking in alot of cases.

Watch what happens when the Dept of Corrections gets sued by the survivor of the RSA killings, finally for the first time there will be accountability and from that will openup a flood of cases. And so there should be. In this particular case if the facts are as has been stated then then i wonder if they take a hard look at there own actions after the event,i can understand there grief but will never understand there actions,if by some chance the guy could have survived by getting to a hospital in quick time then if theres blame to be laid i suggest they take a look in the mirror.

[Genestho]

Maybe they are scraping at hope, I dont know, shock affects you like you wouldnt believe (or maybe you would - I dont know). Even now I go back and think what I couldve done differently in my situation. You just watch the whole thing unfold in front of you like a bad movie, no control. Anyway as sixpackback says it will be an interesting outcome either way.:yes:

[98tls]

Maybe they are scraping at hope, I dont know, shock affects you like you wouldnt believe (or maybe you would - I dont know). Even now I go back and think what I couldve done differently in my situation. You just watch the whole thing unfold in front of you like a bad movie, no control. Anyway as sixpackback says it will be an interesting outcome either way.:yes: Fair call,at the same time in this particular case it reeks (to me anyway) of blame anyone but myself,apart from that they had no problem despite there grief in trying to set up a donate $ line the very next day,which incidently they were not able to do.

[Genestho]

Crikey, is that right? Didnt know that!

Man, I may be about to do a public u-turn in everything I just said!!!

Makes you wonder why they would want to do that eh? I find that strange behaviour indeed.

[BIHB@0610]

Crikey, is that right? Didnt know that!

Man, I may be about to do a public u-turn in everything I just said!!!

Makes you wonder why they would want to do that eh? I find that strange behaviour indeed.

Maybe they're just freaking out about the widow left behind, with perhaps no life insurance, three young girls, no career, and no way to make ends meet. It would totally suck! I'm on my own with three kids and a bloody decent salary, believe me, it's hard on your own :blink:

[Ixion]

In their society "they" will be a quite extended family, as well as co-religionists. Not all of them will be prostrated with grief.

[Genestho]

Maybe they're just freaking out about the widow left behind, with perhaps no life insurance, three young girls, no career, and no way to make ends meet. It would totally suck! I'm on my own with three kids and a bloody decent salary, believe me, it's hard on your own :blink:


Is that a rumour or a substantial fact though? Ive tried to find info out about that and I cant find anything except a removed archived file from Radio NZ...

The widow thing - I guess so, I can relate. But so soon to do something like that seems so calculated, that whole extended family thing, maybe the ones directly involved didnt have anything to with do a donation fund and the rest have gathered around....

[tgb_novice]

Is that a rumour or a substantial fact though? Ive tried to find info out about that and I cant find anything except a removed archived file from Radio NZ...

The widow thing - I guess so, I can relate. But so soon to do something like that seems so calculated, that whole extended family thing, maybe the ones directly involved didnt have anything to with do a donation fund and the rest have gathered around....

The Auckland Indian Community has requested that if anyone want to make a donation they can do so and they have setup something for the same. And coming from the same culture, things are a bit different in our community, There normally is a lot of extended family and the Sikh / Indian / Regional community normally come together during times of unexpected hardship to support. And in most cases the majority of the community support money wise. Thats my 2c.

And when I mean community 90% of the people in these would not know the family personally.

[Genestho]

Ahhhh ok. That makes more sense. In times of crisis, kiwis and their communities can be extremely humbling.