Judges doing alright?

[jasonu]

It finally looks like atleast some Judges in NZ are makeing OK decisions.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10810104

[Akzle]

actually, you find most of the decisions they've made at nzlii.org

and if you care, you can send a strongly worded letter to her royal-bitchness "justice" sian elias who basically put an end to jury trials.
dont argue. the crown is the law, and the judges are employed by the crown. don't say "conflict of interest" too loudly.
and just who the fuck is "the crown" anyway?

i say they replace 1/3rd of prisons with gallows. some people should not be allowed to breed. those that put their kids in tumble dryers are right at the top of this list.

[Haggis2]

Here here Don't forget though its all our fault these people behave like this

[awa355]

Unfortunately, the original sentance was far too short in my opinion. Then again, if that had've been ten years, the court of appeal would probably have cut that back.

We seem to be hearing more and more stories of women using violence against their kids, other women. Where did the maternal instinct go?

[Akzle]

Where did the maternal instinct go?

the "family court" took it when they gave women a false sense of importance, and completely skewed the perception of "family", did their damndest to break down the family unit and paint anything with a penis as evil and incompetent.
they also claimed jurisdiction over all your kids, telling you just how you are allowed, and not allowed to raise em. because after all, you're too stupid to make those kinds of decisions for yourself.

[Oscar]

some people should not be allowed to breed.

How about you lead by example.
Win/win.

[paturoa]

It finally looks like atleast some Judges in NZ are makeing OK decisions.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10810104

Nah, the pos wasn't sentenced to the same that she did to her children.

I'd support a new law where the offenders would get the same that they did to their victims (rape excluded obviously), and yes this is a serious post. This would apply to "victim" crimes including theft.

[Akzle]

How about you lead by example.
Win/win.

ahh. you again.
i see your accommodation hasn't improved (you're still in a state of denial)

and what exactly do you infer by your comment? (i have two kids already, just F your I.)

[Akzle]

I'd support a new law where the offenders would get the same that they did to their victims (rape excluded obviously), and yes this is a serious post. This would apply to "victim" crimes including theft.

do unto others eh?
but where does that end?
if someone kills you, then they get killed... but then they've been killed, so the killer has to be killed...

IMO people need to be put in situations where being an arsehole is not an option, where their welfare depends on positively interacting with others to move everyone forward.
most people in society are too selfish as is.
...start with the man in the mirror.

[Scuba_Steve]

Nah, the pos wasn't sentenced to the same that she did to her children.

I'd support a new law where the offenders would get the same that they did to their victims (rape excluded obviously), and yes this is a serious post. This would apply to "victim" crimes including theft.

You would probably support my plans for punishments then, but why exclude rape? Bubba lovs his bitches! "now squeal like a pig boy"

[BoristheBiter]

ahh. you again.
i see your accommodation hasn't improved (you're still in a state of denial)

and what exactly do you infer by your comment? (i have two kids already, just F your I.)

From what I read into his comment it means he doesn't agree with you so you shouldn't be allowed to have children.

[Oscar]

ahh. you again.
i see your accommodation hasn't improved (you're still in a state of denial)

and what exactly do you infer by your comment? (i have two kids already, just F your I.)

I didn't infer anything.
It was your idea, and judging by your demeanor, attitude and apparent level of education, you fit comfortably into your own grouping of "some people".
So go ahead and lead by example.

[Akzle]

From what I read into his comment it means he doesn't agree with you so you shouldn't be allowed to have children.

i sensed that too., just a wonder it was a facetious comment rather than useful contribution...

I didn't infer anything.
It was your idea, and judging by your demeanor, attitude and apparent level of education, you fit comfortably into your own grouping of "some people".
So go ahead and lead by example.

in·fer   [in-fur] verb, in·ferred, in·fer·ring.
verb (used with object)
1.
to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence
2.
(of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
3.
to guess; speculate; surmise.
4.
to hint; imply; suggest.

por vous: http://www.trademe.co.nz/books/nonfi...es-thesauruses

-demeanour i'll take. i have an ego. i don't have a problem admitting that it oft' gets the better of me (and apparently, you)
-attitude and "apparent" education, simply because you don't agree with me i must be an uneducated ____ something?
i think you missed the bus on this one... I ALREADY HAVE KIDS. and i'll bet they're better than yours, too. =P
you also clearly misinterpreted my meaning of "some people"

[BoristheBiter]

i sensed that too., just a wonder it was a facetious comment rather than useful contribution...

I took it as how do we decide who should be allowed to have children.
As you can see no one can decide on anything on this one site alone so I can't see the decision forthcoming any time soon.

I am more in favor of not paying for anyone and everyone can fend for themselves.

[Oscar]

(n·fer   [in-fur] verb, in·ferred, in·fer·ring.
verb (used with object)
1.
to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence
2.
(of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
3.
to guess; speculate; surmise.
4.
to hint; imply; suggest.

por vous: http://www.trademe.co.nz/books/nonfi...es-thesauruses

-demeanour i'll take. i have an ego. i don't have a problem admitting that it oft' gets the better of me (and apparently, you)
-attitude and "apparent" education, simply because you don't agree with me i must be an uneducated ____ something?
i think you missed the bus on this one... I ALREADY HAVE KIDS. and i'll bet they're better than yours, too. =P
you also clearly misinterpreted my meaning of "some people"

Missed the bus?
Stop it, you're embarrassing yourself.
The reason I said I wasn't inferring anything, is because I wasn't - I was saying it: Lead by example.
That's not an inference, it's a statement.

My assumption that you are uneducated has nothing to do with whether I agree with your statement or not, but everything to do with your statement.
The fact that I referred to your "apparent" education was because, if you are actually educated, you hide it well.
The fact that you already have children means that society, not I, have missed the bus.
Lastly, the fact that you used a phrase like "some people" probably makes you some people.