A LEttrr to KB

[MikeL]

Since NZ is pretty much an authoritarian state (under Labour at least)

Definition of "authoritarian state": one that passes laws that I don't approve of...

[Pixie]

Finally, what people have said about the application of the law is ,sadly,true.
The charges were ,probably,the only ones applicable.But while we have this P.C. academic bullshit government(not to say the others differ much)we will not see the response we feel is justified by these events.
They ignored the public's wishes on sentencing.
It seems the first question they would ask any serious perpetrator,if the were directly involved in the punishment of such,is "How has society failed you,precious lamb?"

[spudchucka]

Ahh once again our super efficient Boys in Blue do a wonderful job.(of cocking up the charges)

Why the fuck do I bother?

[sels1]

Why the fuck do I bother?

Dont be discouraged Spud, most of us appreciate having yr professional viewpoint

[Gen]

Why the fuck do I bother?

For those of us that do appreciate most of the boys and girlies in da blue

I wouldn't want to do what you do.....scary stuff.

[MikeL]

Why the fuck do I bother?

Because if you keep plugging away with rational, logical, unemotional and balanced arguments you eventually expose ill-founded, ignorant, hot-headed and prejudiced opinion for what it is...

You won't change those people's opinions, but you have a chance of making others see the question more clearly...

[spudchucka]

Thanks for the positive messages, I appreciate it.

[Gremlin]

Why the fuck do I bother?

It may seem useless, but think. Even if you save one life or help one person, that person will always thank you for being there when they needed it.

Is that not worth it??

[spudchucka]

It may seem useless, but think. Even if you save one life or help one person, that person will always thank you for being there when they needed it.

Is that not worth it??

I'm not questioning why I do my job, my feelings are quite certain in that regard. I have been questioning why I bother attempting to shed light on topics relating to policing and the law in general, (for the benefit of Kiwi Biker members), when it seems to fall totally on deaf ears or blind monitors, whatever the internet equivalent is.

[jazbug5]

... it seems to fall totally on deaf ears or blind monitors, whatever the internet equivalent is.

Actually, though not everyone replies, I'm certain a great many people really appreciate what you have to tell us. Also, not everyone has the (one eyed) view that cop=adversary. I've met more good 'uns than bad in my time, and now work with ex cops- all very, very decent folk. Keep up the good work, and I hope you get another bike soon.

[MikeL]

Spud, you must have realized as soon as you made it known on this forum that you are a cop that you would be targetted by people with their own personal agendas who may or may not make a distinction between you as an individual policeman and the policies and procedures of law enforcement in general (and traffic law enforcement in particular).
Your everyday experience would also have made you aware that certain members of society will always be unwilling to make any attempt to see things from any perspective other than their own narrow self-interest.
To some extent you must have been willing to set yourself up as a target, knowing what would ensue. I think you have generally reacted with admirable restraint. Occasionally a hint of arrogance or impatience has crept in, but if you have resorted to tit for tat with certain members, it's probably only what they deserve...

Your difficulty, as I see it, is not so much dealing with the WINJAs of this world, whose horizons are limited by their immaturity to the extent that they think personal abuse and vilification will impress anyone, but rather the problem of entering into open and honest dialogue with those of us who may disagree with some aspects of current policy, considering that no matter what disclaimer you might make, you will be perceived as representing or symbolizing a police point of view. To what extent do you feel free to express your own opinion, and to what extent does loyalty require you to defend the official line?
And an equally important question: to what extent does your daily contact with the seamier and more sordid part of humanity give you a jaundiced and cynical view of everyone's actions and motives?
These are rhetorical questions, because I don't think it's possible to give an impartial answer...
One of the good things about forums like this is the insight it gives us into other people's ways of thinking. I've read all your posts with interest. As you know, we have some differences of opinion. I've tried to put forward my view of certain things reasonably calmly, and you have responded on the same level. Some of my views have been modified by what you've written, although we will probably have to agree to disagree on other things. For me, the dialogue has been valuable. It would be a pity if you were deterred from contributing further by the mindless rants of a few ignorant adolescents.

[Waylander]

All that and if you didn't bother, then who would we ask if something was legal or not?

[James Deuce]

Just to add my 10 cents: Bush Lawyerism has almost ceased on KB. If people want to discuss a point of law they are invariably digging up the legislation to discuss a point of interpretation. That contribution by Police KB members is one of those subtle cultural watersheds that elevates KB from self aggrandising waffle into legitimate informed discussion.

In respect to my attitude to Policing the roads, my Dad taught me to treat Traffic Police as the enemy, thereby dehumanising people doing a job.

You've fixed that, even though you aren't traffic yourself, and sometimes don't have good things to say about HP.

[Ixion]

Spud, you must have realized as soon as you made it known on this forum that you are a cop that you would be targetted by people with their own personal agendas who may or may not make a distinction between you as an individual policeman and the policies and procedures of law enforcement in general (and traffic law enforcement in particular).
Your everyday experience would also have made you aware that certain members of society will always be unwilling to make any attempt to see things from any perspective other than their own narrow self-interest.
To some extent you must have been willing to set yourself up as a target, knowing what would ensue. I think you have generally reacted with admirable restraint. Occasionally a hint of arrogance or impatience has crept in, but if you have resorted to tit for tat with certain members, it's probably only what they deserve...

Your difficulty, as I see it, is not so much dealing with the WINJAs of this world, whose horizons are limited by their immaturity to the extent that they think personal abuse and vilification will impress anyone, but rather the problem of entering into open and honest dialogue with those of us who may disagree with some aspects of current policy, considering that no matter what disclaimer you might make, you will be perceived as representing or symbolizing a police point of view. To what extent do you feel free to express your own opinion, and to what extent does loyalty require you to defend the official line?
And an equally important question: to what extent does your daily contact with the seamier and more sordid part of humanity give you a jaundiced and cynical view of everyone's actions and motives?
These are rhetorical questions, because I don't think it's possible to give an impartial answer...
One of the good things about forums like this is the insight it gives us into other people's ways of thinking. I've read all your posts with interest. As you know, we have some differences of opinion. I've tried to put forward my view of certain things reasonably calmly, and you have responded on the same level. Some of my views have been modified by what you've written, although we will probably have to agree to disagree on other things. For me, the dialogue has been valuable. It would be a pity if you were deterred from contributing further by the mindless rants of a few ignorant adolescents.

What he said. Esprit de corps makes it hard for members of groups like the police to separate criticism (including self criticism) of the organisational values, as articulated by the Commissioner, Minster etc, from criticism of the corps itself . From the point of view of a police officer it's one thing for them to bitch about policy amongst themselves in the locker room, it's another to agree with the public bitching about it

And the police are the public face of the whole justice system, the only part that most of us see on a daily basis. So they cop the flak when anyone has a gripe (justified or not) with any part of it. Including a gripe about the law itself, although the police usually have little input into what the law is (and individual officers less still)

I personally appreciate the input of the police members, even though at times I may not agree .

[gman]

never trust anyone you can blindfold with a shoelace.