Bloody Effin Revenue Collectors

**Deano** · 20th June 2004, 12:53

Originally Posted by SPman

I think you'll find, if you look at the overall picture, courts are imposing stiffer sentences. Its just seems to be the media and Joe Stupid, who know little or nothing of the circumstances, etc, who mouth off the continual cry of, "they get away with it! Bring in tougher sentences!"
Its always easy to slag off about perceived injustices that have nothing to do with you! - espec, if you've heard 1 or 2 salacious "facts"

Anyway, when has a sentence ever been a deterrent?

So do you think dropping $92,000 worth of fines to $7,800 and some community service is reasonable ?

As far as deterrants go ,if I was on my last set of demerits, I would certainly be more careful about speeding. And loss of licence for DIC definitely puts me off drinking to excess then driving. If sentences weren't a deterrant, then why have laws at all? Do you think moral conscience alone would prevent crime ? Not likely.

And who the feck are you calling Joe Stupid, asswipe ? (see how easy it is to make stupid personal attacks for voicing an opinion). Don't you recall the referendum some years ago when a huge number of like minded kiwi's voted for tougher sentencing.

You're talking out a hole in your ass.

**SPman** · 20th June 2004, 13:28

Originally Posted by Deano

So do you think dropping $92,000 worth of fines to $7,800 and some community service is reasonable ?

No, but probably realistic!

As far as deterrants go ,if I was on my last set of demerits, I would certainly be more careful about speeding. And loss of licence for DIC definitely puts me off drinking to excess then driving. If sentences weren't a deterrant, then why have laws at all? Do you think moral conscience alone would prevent crime ? Not likely.

To those who, shall we say, dont give a fuck, deterrents dont work. ie, most crims. In cases of murder,90% dont even think of deterrents when they do it, or, if they do, somehow think they can circumvent them. (bit like traffic tickets really

) To regular, generally law abiding citizens, yes, deterrents do work, as in the above cases, but, really, only if you have a moral conscience of some kind to start with.

And who the feck are you calling Joe Stupid, asswipe ? (see how easy it is to make stupid personal attacks for voicing an opinion).

Whoops, thought about implications afterwards

Don't you recall the referendum some years ago when a huge number of like minded kiwi's voted for tougher sentencing.

Yep. While I agreed with some of the sentiments, as it applied (seemingly) to some of the more high profile cases, the general thrust seemed to me to be more of a shit stirring exercise by the media, to rile up the public by feeding them half truths and innuendos. (as per normal).

You're talking out a hole in your ass.

yeah, probably. whatever.

**Deano** · 20th June 2004, 13:32

Originally Posted by SPman

No, but probably realistic!

To those who, shall we say, dont give a fuck, deterrents dont work. ie, most crims. In cases of murder,90% dont even think of deterrents when they do it, or, if they do, somehow think they can circumvent them. (bit like traffic tickets really

) To regular, generally law abiding citizens, yes, deterrents do work, as in the above cases, but, really, only if you have a moral conscience of some kind to start with.

Whoops, thought about implications afterwards

Yep. While I agreed with some of the sentiments, as it applied (seemingly) to some of the more high profile cases, the general thrust seemed to me to be more of a shit stirring exercise by the media, to rile up the public by feeding them half truths and innuendos. (as per normal).

yeah, probably. whatever.

Did you have a hard night ? I know I did. No worries.

**igor** · 20th June 2004, 14:09

Originally Posted by Deano

Nathan Bentley from Upper Hutt was recently convicted in court for unpaid fines (boy racer driving offences I understand) totalling $92,000. While he may not be the stereotypical 'scumbag crim', he obviously had no regard for the road laws and continued to offend. What did he get in court - 400 hours of community service and the fine reduced to $7,800 which he has to repay at $30 per week. Perhaps he did not have any assets worth confisgating.

What sort of message does that send to the rest like him ?

Methinks the message is why bother paying your fines, just wait until a court summons and the judge will slap your hand with a wet bus ticket.

When are the courts actually going to use sentencing as a real deterrant ?

thats the Court system for ya.

see we get Judges who used to be Lawyers, who appear to beleive any co co ma nee story the said toerag gives them.

hers a couple of options.

1
What we need is rednecks giving out the sentences.

good old fashioned ass wiping rednecks. yehaa

2.
death squads is another good idea.

Copper: Excuse ma Maam ya double parked could ya get out of the car please. (the cop has manners he said please)

Maam: Why do i have to get out of the car.

Copper: well if i shoot ya in he car we gunna have to valet it and that costs money and i may get bulelt holes in the seat the that really ruins the resale.

Maam. Ok, i'll get out then.

BANG.

of course we could still take this option and be very selective the first night, take out 300 - 400 of the worst offenders and the rest may pull there heads in.

**marty** · 20th June 2004, 17:25

Originally Posted by igor

due to a law change in 1998 u can now arrest if u suspect u are being fibbed to. u no longer have to prove they were fibbing as b4.

pardon? 'good cause to suspect' has been around since well before 1998. under which legislation was this modified?

**igor** · 20th June 2004, 18:17

Originally Posted by marty

pardon? 'good cause to suspect' has been around since well before 1998. under which legislation was this modified?

the fush and chup act 2004

**marty** · 20th June 2004, 19:48

yeah good one igor. i bet i've used that one more than you have

**scumdog** · 20th June 2004, 19:55

Does it supercede the Fush'n'Cup Act 1971? - if so I better start using it

**marty** · 20th June 2004, 19:59

it supercedes every act, dog. you know that

**spudchucka** · 20th June 2004, 20:05

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Today criminals, tomorrow.............?

Paranoid ex traffic cops???

**bikerboy** · 3rd July 2004, 16:09

" We used to have a quota but now we are allowed to write as many tickets as we want!" from spudchuka.
If true, that's like handing a fully loaded machine gun to a two year old.

That same approach hasn't worked with burglaries, maybe solving them should now have a quota, atleast some would be solved that way.

Banana republic here come, yippee!

**spudchucka** · 3rd July 2004, 16:38

Originally Posted by bikerboy

" We used to have a quota but now we are allowed to write as many tickets as we want!" from spudchuka.
If true, that's like handing a fully loaded machine gun to a two year old.

That same approach hasn't worked with burglaries, maybe solving them should now have a quota, atleast some would be solved that way.

Banana republic here come, yippee!

Get over it. Either get hard, suck in your guts and pay your fine or shut up and take it to Court.

The sig line is a joke you clown but I'll change it to one you might prefer, ok.

**igor** · 3rd July 2004, 17:46

Originally Posted by bikerboy

" We used to have a quota but now we are allowed to write as many tickets as we want!" from spudchuka.
If true, that's like handing a fully loaded machine gun to a two year old.

That same approach hasn't worked with burglaries, maybe solving them should now have a quota, atleast some would be solved that way.

Banana republic here come, yippee!

its the same assholes who commit most burglaries and these arseholes make your and my life a misery.

most if not all burglaries are low intelligent scum who think cause u don't secure your house like fort knox they have the right to pinch your stuff.

instead of giving the same penalty for 10 offences as the give for 1, times the sentence by 10.

police only report the offences. the courts dish out the sentences.

whats a judge, someone who used to do the best for these scum to get them off. look at the halfwit they just appointed in PN. he thinks all offenders are hard done by and should be treated lightly. I say wake up and do what the public want. lock the bastards up for longer periods if not for ever.

take it from someone on the frontline who ant looking through rose tinted glasses, shithead goes to jail burglaries stop. shithead gets released burglaries start again.

the man who sits up high in the courtroom and can dish out sentences needs to and get hard and give out some decent sentences for burglary.

**Big Dog** · 3rd July 2004, 17:56

Originally Posted by igor

the man who sits up high in the courtroom and can dish out sentences needs to and get hard and give out some decent sentences for burglary.

I have met a man who lives on the street, he burgles houses for food and stuff to sell for alcohol drugs. Turns him self in at the beggining of winter knowing full well he will get a warm bed and three squares and be out by next surf season.