20 / 20 this Sunday

[Blakamin]

Send him home permantly to face the shame, I am tired of them being allowed to think that money will buy off the crime.... $40,000 for a young girl killed at a petrol station down the line and now $10,000 for this young man....

yeah, we should cut the bullshit.... I'll give you $5000 to stand on the road so I can maim you...save all the tax-payer court shit.... just run someone over and write them a cheque on the spot wouldnt even need cops at the scene! (unless the killer was broke or a kiwi, then they'd get jail)

lives aint $$$$ and when the "justice" system realises this, we'll all be alot safer!

[Ghost Lemur]

Broken Bike, NO TV??? What the HELL do you do man, thats pretty much all there is to life, isn't there?

Wh0re the forums. Watch add free movies and episodes. Read. Make love to the better half. Spend quality time with punks, while their still young enough to think I'm cool.

Wish I had a bike though... :crybaby

Hopefully the forks are being straightened. There away at the moment, haven't heard a yay or nay on them yet.

[Lou Girardin]

Personally I think that most foreign drivers, (in particular those from Asian countries) should not be permitted to drive here on there home licence. They should have to surrender it to the LTSA who will issue them with a New Zealand photo learners class licence. They should then have to graduate through the system so that their driving ability can be assessed. Having a NZ photo licence will also clear up issues of identity that arise with the Chinese licences. When they leave the country or when they attain a full NZ licence the LTSA would then release their licence from their home country back to them.
.

This sounds fine in theory, but withdrawing from the convention on international drivers licences will mean that, in turn, we will no longer be allowed to drive on our licences when overseas.
I don't think that this will prove popular.
And lets not even start on the racist implications.
Maybe, if the LTSA had people with some practical experience, they wouldn't introduce cretinous policies like the one allowing taxi applicants to use interpreters. Or even trying to make vehicle inspections, WOF etc. optional before a driving test.
It's a lot easier spending our money on brain dead adverts or contracting the Police to carry out set hours of traffic enforcement, regardless of results.

[Lou Girardin]

Judges have pretty much all been defence lawyers in the past. It should come as no surprise that most of them are soft ons.

Yeah! Damn right. Lets use Saddams judicial recruiter or Pol Pots or Mugabes. They didn't take any shit, no soft concepts of legal jurisprudence with those guys.
And we are learning, Phil Goff wants to introduce a bill to enable confiscation of assets from people not even convicted of a crime. Why bother with the expense of a trial? We know they're guilty, they're ugly and their eyes are too close together.
After all, we allow punishment at the whim of a cop at the roadside so why not this?
And then we can ban bikes, because we know that they're all lawbreakers, even cops admit to being prepared to kill with their lethal speed machines.
Bring back the birch too.

[justsomeguy]

Send him home - no way. I'm sure he made an honest mistake. It was not his fault. The guy in the bike drove into him. And "fourebidan" is such a HUGE word how could he remember that???

He was only making a turn. It was the biker’s responsibility to see him. And he didn't make the biker die. The biker did it on purpose. Stupid biker. Simply putting this poor student in so much trouble.

And come on $10,000 dollars for only killing some stupid kiwi? It's still too expensive. Now the $40,000 fine for killing that little girl at the petrol station was daylight robbery. I'm sure that half that amount would be sufficient.

I think the laws here are too strict.

They should have a maximum fine of $5,000 for murder and 2 hours spent in a public toilet.

For stealing (only goods or money worth over 1 billion) a maximum fine of a $100 and no fast food for a day.

For rape and sexual assault - no penalty as it's probably the women’s fault anyway for provoking it. I'm surprised they even bothered to send a taxi for that stupid girl who got lost in Piha. I appreciate the intelligent of that excellent 111 operator who gave an excellent excuse to that guy who was being chased by some violent people. We can't find your road in our map system. I mean come on. People are always in trouble. Why should poor underpaid police have to keep up with everything. It's such hard work meeting the daily quota of tickets anyway.

For paedophiles - it's not the crims fault - you see they did not have a lot of friends to play with when they were kids so they are making up for it now. But now since they are adults they play with the kids in an adult manner.

You may disagree with me but you are all wrong.

My way is correct and all the judges agree with me.

I have gotten them to reduce the fines from $40,000 to $10,000.

Hahaha that’s a 75% decrease.

Soon I will be able to reach my $5,000 target with no jail terms.

to all you innocent people.

to the way the kiwi legal system treats criminals

[Jamezo]

highly amusing!

though I feel I have to take the role of devils advocate, and present an alternative view of our legal/justice system.

A basic distinction that has to be made is the difference between 'real-life' crime and statistical crime. When someone on KB exclaims that all their shit has been stolen, that is real-life, personal crime. It feels good on a personal level to extract 'revenge', and make the 'criminal' suffer and pay as much as humanly possible. It's natural, and entirely understood.

However, on a larger scale, excessively punishing 'criminals' (there is after all not always a black and white area between the 'criminals' and the 'rest of us'), does not have the effect of reducing the actual levels of crime. In every study I can recall, harsher sentencing of crime does not appreciably reduce crime*, in fact it encourages it strongly in many ways, for example increasing the divide between the 'criminals' and 'the rest of us' as discussed earlier. This has the effect of discouraging their integration into 'regular' society, in short, statistically turning people into lifetime criminals.

As I see it, the modern legal/justice system has the task of balancing the tangible benefits of the public believing that justice and fairness prevails, versus the statistical reality that letting our primal need for 'justice' influence our legal/justice system has the consequence of actually increasing crime, to the detriment of society as a whole.

whew! that's enough thinking for one day (I already had a @#%!@&*$ 3 hour maths exam!)

*the one way in which it does, is that it physically keeps the offenders off the streets, but this is not an economic course of action.

[James Deuce]

*the one way in which it does, is that it physically keeps the offenders off the streets, but this is not an economic course of action.

Only because Corrections have neither the leeway nor the imagination to make money out of prisoners. Probably contravenes a UN treaty or two.

There is a Maximum Security prison in Nevada that has a car restoration shop that is used by people like Jay Leno - because they do such an unreal job. People are charged commercial rates, prisoners have to be exemplary prison citizens to work in the shop, and those that get out are usually poached by car restoration or panel beating businesses. This business pays for 50% of the Prison's operating cost.

[spudchucka]

Yeah! Damn right. Lets use Saddams judicial recruiter or Pol Pots or Mugabes. They didn't take any shit, no soft concepts of legal jurisprudence with those guys.
And we are learning, Phil Goff wants to introduce a bill to enable confiscation of assets from people not even convicted of a crime. Why bother with the expense of a trial? We know they're guilty, they're ugly and their eyes are too close together.
After all, we allow punishment at the whim of a cop at the roadside so why not this?
And then we can ban bikes, because we know that they're all lawbreakers, even cops admit to being prepared to kill with their lethal speed machines.
Bring back the birch too.

Go join the Green party, they seem to be a bunch like minded people to yourself.

Can you ever say something positive? Is that something you are physically capable of? Here was a thread of reasonable discussuion and you come along blowing off at the mouth as usual, trying to turn it into another anti police prodaganda thread. You are unbelievable!

[Jamezo]

Only because Corrections have neither the leeway nor the imagination to make money out of prisoners. Probably contravenes a UN treaty or two.

There is a Maximum Security prison in Nevada that has a car restoration shop that is used by people like Jay Leno - because they do such an unreal job. People are charged commercial rates, prisoners have to be exemplary prison citizens to work in the shop, and those that get out are usually poached by car restoration or panel beating businesses. This business pays for 50% of the Prison's operating cost.

amazing! but what could our prisoners do, operate a tinnie house?

[Blakamin]

amazing! but what could our prisoners do

Kick back, take drugs, watch sky and work out.... ohhh... thats what they are doing already....
Might commit a crime... cheaper than rent

[justsomeguy]

amazing! but what could our prisoners do

Build furniture. repair appliances. Repair vehicles. Create building materials - bricks, etc. Lots of stuff - I'm sure someone with the right acumen can come up with an infinite amount of things a criminal can do.

[justsomeguy]

highly amusing!

though I feel I have to take the role of devils advocate, and present an alternative view of our legal/justice system.

A basic distinction that has to be made is the difference between 'real-life' crime and statistical crime. When someone on KB exclaims that all their shit has been stolen, that is real-life, personal crime. It feels good on a personal level to extract 'revenge', and make the 'criminal' suffer and pay as much as humanly possible. It's natural, and entirely understood.

However, on a larger scale, excessively punishing 'criminals' (there is after all not always a black and white area between the 'criminals' and the 'rest of us'), does not have the effect of reducing the actual levels of crime. In every study I can recall, harsher sentencing of crime does not appreciably reduce crime*, in fact it encourages it strongly in many ways, for example increasing the divide between the 'criminals' and 'the rest of us' as discussed earlier. This has the effect of discouraging their integration into 'regular' society, in short, statistically turning people into lifetime criminals.

As I see it, the modern legal/justice system has the task of balancing the tangible benefits of the public believing that justice and fairness prevails, versus the statistical reality that letting our primal need for 'justice' influence our legal/justice system has the consequence of actually increasing crime, to the detriment of society as a whole.

whew! that's enough thinking for one day (I already had a @#%!@&*$ 3 hour maths exam!)

*the one way in which it does, is that it physically keeps the offenders off the streets, but this is not an economic course of action.

OK thats what you think. I think that if we make the justice system really harsh - death penalty, impossibly hard prisons - then people will be less inclined to commit crimes - because the risks are too high......

Or is the criminal psyche different - they don't think they will get caught and do it anyway --

Can the cops here or someone who knows what they are talking about answer this????

[scumdog]

This sounds fine in theory, but withdrawing from the convention on international drivers licences will mean that, in turn, we will no longer be allowed to drive on our licences when overseas.
I don't think that this will prove popular.
And lets not even start on the racist implications.
Maybe, if the LTSA had people with some practical experience, they wouldn't introduce cretinous policies like the one allowing taxi applicants to use interpreters. Or even trying to make vehicle inspections, WOF etc. optional before a driving test.
It's a lot easier spending our money on brain dead adverts or contracting the Police to carry out set hours of traffic enforcement, regardless of results.

Quite right Lou, now let us hear how YOU would fix all this if you had the power
And who cares if we can't drive on a N.Z. licence overseas??

[vifferman]

Only because Corrections have neither the leeway nor the imagination to make money out of prisoners. Probably contravenes a UN treaty or two.

Prisons here used to utilise prisoner's labour to make furniture for Gubmint departments, and probably made other stuff too. It was a good idea - gave the prsioners summat to do, they were paid some small allowance to buy smokes etc., and for some of them, it was the opportunity to learn some skills.
I'm not sure what killed it, but it was probably along the lines of "it's slave labour", "undignified" etc. Or maybe the companies that were in competition making office furntiture objected? Who knows.
It's a shame though.
I think if I was in prison I'd rather learn something or do something productive with my time than watch TV or whatever.

[Motu]

Mt Eden Prison is next to an old quarry - that's where all those stone inner city curbs came from,lovingly crafted by inmates.Prisoners can't work because of this OSH bullshit - that's why the old work for the dole schemes stopped....''he hurt himself because he wasn't trained in the use of a shovel'' Just so much PC crap tripping up the smooth running of society.