Tougher Sentencing

[Jinx3d]

Yeah - tougher sentancing eh? Three strikes and a bullet.

Does that apply to speeding. Dohh - we are all dead.

[MadDuck]

Insteresting and thanks Jack for opening up and telling us about your past. Having met you I think you a damn fine bloke !

I cant say I have been anywhere near where Jack has but I was dragged up in a neighborhood where survival of the fittest was paramount. Family was non existent so how the hell do you educate kids in an environment like that - YOU CANT. Take a 13 year old that kills a pizza delivery boy for fun.

I was in truble with Mr Plod on numerous occassion - I wont go into details cos you all know me as such a nice gal There was a life changing moment in my life that stopped me going too far and it was out of the blue....it was just good luck. Now I too follow the papers and watch people from the old hood convicted or killed.

As for Jurys. They supposedly are picked from a random sample of NZ society. BUT if you female with and education you will not serve on a jury! The process is soooo selective.

My conclusion is yes harsher sentencing. And not such a cushy life in our jails. Damn they eat better than some of our old folk and have more company.

[Skyryder]

So some snotty nosed arsehole from a bad home thinks he/she has the right to abuse spit, and intimidate all those that happend just to be in their way. Most of the shits that I see get around in groups. The trouble in this county there's a whole bloody industry out there making excuses for them. Oh they don't understand or they come from a bad home or they don't know better. They bloody well know when to run that's for sure. I simply do not except excuses for criminal behavour.

Not long a ago I was invited to the Family Court as the victim of assault. The letter of invitation listed all those that were to be present. There were six yes six from the Justice Department. Councellors, probation people, Youth Aid etc. Christ what a bloody joke. It would be cheaaper to bang the arsehole in the slammer for a fortnight just to keep him off the streets. The little shit got 60 hours community and since he was not working, that would be done in a little over two weeks.

Like I said what a bloody joke.

Skyryder

[Ms Piggy]

Difficult and very costly to rehabilitate people who have never been habilitated in the first instance...



The Dept of Corrections do some very good work that often goes unseen and unrecognised by the majority of the taxpayers in targetting a reduction in reoffending rates, and have continued to introduce a number of intervention strategies ......

Thanks Her_B4 I wasn't sure to be honest b/c it's not an area I know anything about. Totally agree with ya about it being difficult to help those who don't or can't be helped.

[mangell6]

Well done Deano, you interpreted my smartarse statement correctly.

I dont understand the link between the premise that harsher sentences are not the solution and the reason you put forward.

I put forward a reason? All I know is that even though the law allows for considerable penalties, read harsh, the judges consider what has previously been imposed by other judicial personages, read not harsh.

The judiciary are limited in what they can sentence a person to for a set crime. The jury decides what they are (or arent) guilty of, and the judge then has to decide which end of the bracket the sentence is going to be. You can legislate in capacity for harsher sentences, this doesnt mean that it will happen, except if you raise the minimum sentence.

Totally agree with you. The law is interpreted in many and varied ways.

Minimum sentences seem to be a good idea, set consequences no matter what the circumstances. The three strikes and you are out rule also seems to have merit, as it gives a firm guideline as to what will happen when, and discourages testing the limits of getting away with crimes...

If I hit my thumb with a hammer, I know that I am going to feel pain.

Now to read what Jackrat wrote.

Mike

[Ms Piggy]

Education is a wonderfull idea apart from for the kids that are to busy worrying about what the next hiding is going to be for or why the old lady packed her bags a couple of years ago and hasn't been heard from since...Belive me it's not easy learning anything in a place like that.Fear kind'a gets in the way...The cycle starts in the home and our system of welfare and punitive justice only reinforces it, nothing else...If a person doesn't work it out for themselfs no amount of prison time will make them do it.I never met a single inmate that didn't know they were shit heads, including myself.

That's exactly it mate. It starts in the home, so if you come from a home of hatred & fear where a bashing is normal etc, etc how would ya know different?

I mean I don't know anything about this sorta life but I totally agree that a person has to want to sort their shit out. I was talking to a guy recently who is now a drug & alcohol counsellor and a former criminal and he said he just had a kinda relisation that his life was gonna go nowhere if he staye din that scene. So in th end no-one except that person can change themselves, ya know from the inside out.

For me becoimg a social worker is b/c I'd like to be part of the help at the top of the cliff rather then the ambulance at the bottom but I'm not sure realistically how that can happen.

[mangell6]

Back then there was no name for bleeding heart lib's but my mates and I knew them well anyway.We just called them suckers is all.

The cycle starts in the home and our system of welfare and punitive justice only reinforces it, nothing else.

I think that this statement sums up the real problem.

It is regretable to see the Government encouraging the continuation of the cycle by the break up of the family by the latest round of budget giveaways.


I know exactly what Jackrat is saying as I was the white kid on the black block ergo I could do no wrong in the eyes of the blue boys. I got out, left the town/city I hate to think what I would have been like or ended up if I had stayed.

A number of individuals consider prison "home" as there is a commoraderie (sp) there that is missing in their so called "normal" family life.

Apologies to the 'liberals' if you are offended by anything that I have said, but there are a group of people who believe that someone else is always to blame. And if those people only looked in the mirror they would see that person.

well almost.

CSL - Remember that a person has to want to change, you can never make them change. And as my life has shown me sometimes there are individuals that you cannot help and in the end you have to walk away. Thus letting them fall off the cliff. Sorry.

And I won't mention the perils or benefits of association. Damn I did!!
Mike

[Ms Piggy]

CSL - Remember that a person has to want to change, you can never make them change. And as my life has shown me sometimes there are individuals that you cannot help and in the end you have to walk away. Thus letting them fall off the cliff. Sorry.

And I won't mention the perils or benefits of association. Damn I did!!
Mike

Yup I agree with ya Mike, sad but true & that for me will be my BIGGEST challenge, I don't like that bleeding heart liberal shit but some of it I agree with.

I think people should definitely be held accountable for their own actions but sometimes I'm pretty sure that if the same child were bought up in a different family they wouldn't turn into a crim, don't get me wrong though, I'm not saying that at all justifies the crime.

[moko]

I think that we should be more liberal and consider the perpertrator and the poor life that they have had that contributed to the way that they make personal decisions.

Yes,we should do that.........then shoot the bastards.

[scumdog]

Couple of comments after reading the other messages - time and time again I hear the comment dirrected at Police/Court staff "YOU have stuffed up my life" or "It's all YOUR fault I've got to go to court/will lose my licence/am going to jail" etc. - nothing about taking personal responsibility for action though. A suggestion that a look in the mirror would show who was to blame for their problem normally brings the intelligent response of "Eh?"

Most of the poor Bozos think where they are in life right now is at the top of the heap, they don't know they COULD do better, they think that those with a steady job/nicer car etc are "lucky" but don't seem to realise they could get there too.

Some are too tied up with their drug scene to notice they are getting nowhere and that the rest of the world is better off than them.

Some DO change and they get my respect - and I've told them that.

Tougher sentencing - everybody knows (they do don't they?) that maximum fine for drink-driving first time is $4,500, - when was the last time you saw a first or second time drink driver get fined over $1,000? - just an indication that the POSSIBLE penalties could be tougher but are not being used.

[MikeL]

Needless to say i would support harsher sentences.

The home is the start or the end of bloody near all budding criminals. Social services can throw any amount of $$$ and support at fledgling crims but if the support aint there at home the efforts are so often fruitless.

So, Spud, from your perspective is harsher sentencing the ONLY practical solution? It's the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff...
Any practical suggestions for the fence at the top? Or given the dismal vicious circle of poor parenting, abuse, low self-esteem and crime that you must meet all the time (and no doubt try to avoid becoming too cynical about), is there any hope?
Jackrat, I admire and respect you for what you have done. But you and Spud
would have to admit that you are exceptional. The fact that you were able to break the cycle isn't necessarily proof that we as a whole don't need to address social issues because all that's needed is to take personal responsibility for our actions.
It reminds me a bit of the debate Zed and I had about free will. We have a system in which the powerful make rules and set up structures and establish values based on greed and exploitation, and they call it democracy or freedom; and when the weak protest that these structures and values are inherently unfair, because they lock large numbers of people into cycles of poverty, ignorance and crime, they are reminded that they have free will and can choose good or bad and must take responsibility for their own actions...

Surely, Spud, there are times when confronted with some vicious mindless thug who you know will just go on offending, a person utterly devoid of any redeeming features, a complete waste of space for whom a bullet in the head would be the best solution, you begin to wonder whether there was ever any real choice possible in his life, or whether it wasn't somehow all mapped out for him before he had a chance to develop a conscience, or an idea of free will...?

[jrandom]

you begin to wonder whether there was ever any real choice possible in his life, or whether it wasn't somehow all mapped out for him before he had a chance to develop a conscience, or an idea of free will...?

Hmmmph.

The fact that a minority *do* break the cycle indicates that the mapping is not necessarily deterministic or predictable. Sometimes people hop right out of the bell curve.

I think most of the guys that Jack and Spud talk about couldn't be described as completely anarchic and sociopathic. They're (sometimes) nice to their kids and girlfriends, they (when they get around to it) do favours for mates, etc.

So they *do* have consciences, of a sort. And free will does exist, enough for some people to occasionally break the mold.

I don't think it's valid to conceptually smooth over large chunks of humanity in an argument and use the resulting (apparent) uniformity to claim an absence of free will. It only takes one counter-example to disprove...

Are we getting back to the 'consciousness as automaton' argument here?

[mangell6]

Tougher sentencing - everybody knows (they do don't they?) that maximum fine for drink-driving first time is $4,500, - when was the last time you saw a first or second time drink driver get fined over $1,000? - just an indication that the POSSIBLE penalties could be tougher but are not being used.

And who is the single individual that makes the decision on how much the penalty will be?

We have a system in which the powerful make rules and set up structures and establish values based on greed and exploitation, and they call it democracy or freedom; and when the weak protest that these structures and values are inherently unfair, because they lock large numbers of people into cycles of poverty, ignorance and crime, they are reminded that they have free will and can choose good or bad and must take responsibility for their own actions...

Any system that encourages people to depend on their own efforts and provides associated support has my support (vote). I do not agree with any system that encourages people to depend on others (the state) and also provides the associated support. An additional 300,000 people (Budget night figure) in NZ are to be dependant on the state! Where is the personal responsibility or accountability for ones own actions - gone with the wind I reckon.


Socialism rules!


Back onto the topic

Does anyone know what the impact was to offences when DIC was changed to have a minimum penalty of loose of licence?? I know that with the people

I remember reading how murders/mans laughter increased in NZ when the death penalty was removed.

In NZ the 'cause' and 'effect' principle does not seem to be promoted (can't find the right word), ah, explained or demonstrated to children, let alone adults.

Are prisons too soft? If they meet the basic humanitarium needs and are also better than being on the outside, what does that say about our society and the so called minimum standard of living.

Better go and do some work as it is wet and windy outside and I can't be bothered going for a ride so I will check the bike over, if I feel like it, but its warm inside, so I don't know if I can really be bothered going outside . . . .

[scumdog]

Further to my last comments, I just remembered that back in the '70s three of my mates got picked up for drunk driving, first time for all three - they got prison for it, how often does a first time drunk-driver get THAT nowadays?

Judges (as some would say, they reflect society) are too soft too often and to the wrong people,never mind, Justice Dept. has put in for permision to build a new 300 bed prison near Milton, now they have pretty much got approval they suddenly say "ah, ahem, it's actually going to be a 600 bed prison" WTF!!!! - still now there is likely to be a cell available (when they get it built) the judges might be a bit quicker to send low-lifes to jail.

I don't believe that jail is for rehabilitation - it's just there to take them out of society for a bit, rehabilitation is up to the individual, after all he would have had enough clues earlier that if he didn't mend his ways he would be in prison

[rettun]

I think before they go making sentences harsher they should get their shit together and rank sentences in accordance to the severity of the crime.

and work from there