NZ Police public image

[spudchucka]

But you clearly have no idea on this one matey...

Just going back through the crap in this thread and if you are upset about this one then go have a look at sections 39, 40, 41 & 48 of the Crimes Act 1961, which relate to use of force. Heres the link for ya.

http://www.legislation.co.nz/browse_...t=pal_statutes

Then you might understand why the following comment by yourself was taken by me as you showing your complete ignorance on that particular topic. Not to mention a general lack of knowledge or understanding of any of the wider issues involved.

The only law I am aware of that says you can assault someone is if they are attempting suicide, then you can use any force required to stop the person

Because on this occasion I am aware of what the law states and it just goes to show that some people that think they are allways are right, aint

As per above.

Cure, that I can think of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R1AaronKDX
ditto, those fuckers should have there eye lids cut off and there eyes filled with sand, and their pecka stitched to their forehead, thats just for starters....fuck they piss me off...and wots worse is the fuckers get away with it...


A wee surgical removal of what ever the wankers have between the legs, place in prison with the general inmates and clearly letting the general population know what the person is in prison for

More reasoned debate from R1AaronKDX and Honda.

[Blakamin]

Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

thats bloody stupid... (might have to watch my road-rage now coz I reckon if some dick tries to run me off the road, I believe its reasonable to PunchTheirFuckinHeadIn!) self defense!!!

[spudchucka]

thats bloody stupid... (might have to watch my road-rage now coz I reckon if some dick tries to run me off the road, I believe its reasonable to PunchTheirFuckinHeadIn!) self defense!!!

Well the subjective test of course is to consoder what any other "reasonable" person would consider as "reasonable" force, in the circumstances. For instance, the members of a jury who might be pondering your guilt or innocence having been charged with pounding some idiots face into a gooey, bloody pulp because he cut you off.

Its better to just swear and curse and take up the black art of voodoo, get your revenge incognito. :sly:

[inlinefour]

If you have genuine concerns try writing to the minister of police or your local MP instead of trolling on a web site for bikers. You were just seizing upon an opportunity to do some stirring and then you wonder why you find yourself on the receiving end.

As far as I'm aware no one has suggested that police do not need to maintain a good raport with the public. I however have no interest in mainting a good raport with a shit stirring troller on a internet forum.

Just a reminder Honda, here's how you started this thread off..

Thats how I ended that particular post. Perhaps you need to read the rest also to get the wider picture? I'm not trolling, just interested in what others think also. Its only considered shit stirring when someone reacts to it like you have

[inlinefour]

Well the subjective test of course is to consoder what any other "reasonable" person would consider as "reasonable" force, in the circumstances. For instance, the members of a jury who might be pondering your guilt or innocence having been charged with pounding some idiots face into a gooey, bloody pulp because he cut you off.

Its better to just swear and curse and take up the black art of voodoo, get your revenge incognito. :sly:

I like to think that fate will sort them out eventually through no actual action required by the person who has been cut off. Might not be for several years, but my confidence in a force from higher above is occasionally reinforced when some wanker getting what they deserve

[MSTRS:Me]

HAWKES BAY TODAY TOP STORY: Body stayed on beach while cop manned speed camera
21.01.2005

Chris Gardner
Rescue services left waiting with a drowned man were told police could not attend the Ocean Beach scene - but the man who pulled the body from the waves passed an officer with a speedgun up the road soon after.

Roger Parr, who pulled the body of 79-year-old Havelock North man Jeremiah Henley from the surf at Ranaika with a friend on Saturday, spotted an officer on speed camera duty just minutes from Ocean Beach after being told police were not available after a 40-minute wait.
Ocean Beach Kiwi Surf Patrol was on the scene before Mr Parr, of Napier, and his friend had pulled Mr Henley out.
The Lowe Corporation Rescue Helicopter also responded - taking the body away when they learned police were not coming.
"We waited 40 minutes for the police to come and do their part. Nobody was available to come to the scene of an unexplained death, or to get an account of what had taken place," Mr Parr said.
He thought police must have been busy dealing with essential matters elsewhere, but then saw a police officer with a speedgun about 3km from the scene of the drowning - at the Ocean Beach Road intersection with Waimarama Road.
"I was distressed to see this policeman sitting there in his car and pointing his little speedgun down the road," Mr Parr, patient care co-ordinator at Cranford Hospice, said.
"How can it be that the death of a person is downgraded to such a point of insignificance that it does not warrant any response from the police because they are too busy trying to hand out fines up the road?"
He did not hear from police until Monday, when an officer asked him to go to the Hastings police station and give his statement.
"It would seem that, increasingly, the only way to access any service from the police is to drive at 111km per hour on the open road."
Hastings area commander Inspector Dean Clifford said given the circumstances and staff available he was "happy with how the police staff dealt with this very unfortunate event".
The officer Mr Parr saw was a Road Policing Group member dealing with a crash on Ocean Beach Road, which was experiencing heavy traffic.
"Deployment of resources are made based on the information at hand and, unfortunately, at times those decisions may not meet the expectations of the people involved."
Mr Clifford did not supply details of the crash. A Hastings firestation spokesperson told Hawke's Bay Today that the fire service did not attend any crash in Ocean Beach Road that afternoon.
Mr Henley, a widower, was to be farewelled today at St Luke's Anglican Church in Havelock North.

I lifted this verbatim from our evening newspaper. I think it amply demonstrates that the cops actually to go out of their way to shoot themselves in the foot. Another great leap DOWN the scale of respect.

[scumdog]

HAWKES BAY TODAY TOP STORY: Body stayed on beach while cop manned speed camera
21.01.2005

Chris Gardner
Rescue services left waiting with a drowned man were told police could not attend the Ocean Beach scene - but the man who pulled the body from the waves passed an officer with a speedgun up the road soon after.



Church in Havelock North.

I lifted this verbatim from our evening newspaper. I think it amply demonstrates that the cops actually to go out of their way to shoot themselves in the foot. Another great leap DOWN the scale of respect.

O.K., HAD an officer attended would the outcome have been any different?

Regardless, I hope it gets chased up to see who is telling the porkies- and from how high up.

[spudchucka]

Thats how I ended that particular post. Perhaps you need to read the rest also to get the wider picture? I'm not trolling, just interested in what others think also. Its only considered shit stirring when someone reacts to it like you have

I've read them all and my opinion hasn't changed. You haven't said anything that others haven't said before you. People who stir or have an axe to grind keep pulling the same old shit up over and over again. Its a bit like a relay race where you pass the baton on to the next stirrer.

[MSTRS:Me]

O.K., HAD an officer attended would the outcome have been any different?

Regardless, I hope it gets chased up to see who is telling the porkies- and from how high up.

You may as well say the same of a murder.
The assumption is the man drowned accidently, therefore I would not expect the police to be obliged to attend. But if the death was not observed/could have been the result of other than accident, then the Police have to attend??
Someone is definitely telling big ones in this instance, and my money is not on the newspaper, Mr Parr or the Fire Service. The slant of the article bears up what most people I know are saying. Can't get a cop when you need one, but can't avoid them on our roads. The message is not even subtle anymore.

[inlinefour]

I've read them all and my opinion hasn't changed. You haven't said anything that others haven't said before you. People who stir or have an axe to grind keep pulling the same old shit up over and over again. Its a bit like a relay race where you pass the baton on to the next stirrer.

Some people will never believe anything but themself and allways rubbish things that they will not or can not agree with. Then there are those who just point the finger back at those who mention the issues and find some reason to bad mouth them...

[inlinefour]

Mr SpudI'mgonnathrowaChuckeratyou and co. I'm not recieving some pretty good rep points where as its pretty clear that the few neg ones are coming from your way. I think that its a clear indication that others might actually agree with at least some of what I say?

[spudchucka]

[COLOR=Blue]HAWKES BAY TODAY TOP STORY: Body stayed on beach while cop manned speed camera
21.01.2005

Issues with this story;

1: Speed cameras are usually operated by non-sworn, semi retired members of police. If it was a speed camera the guy saw down the road the jocker operating it would not have been able to do anything other than be another rubber necker.

2: If the cop down the road was operating a radar or a laser and was a sworn member that was not engaged in any other urgent duty then that is apalling.

3: The fact that the news article reports the cop seen as being operating a "speed gun" and then in the next sentence says it was a "officer on speed camera duty" suggests that the reporter has not done their homework very well.

4: "The Lowe Corporation Rescue Helicopter also responded - taking the body away when they learned police were not coming". I find this a little hard to believe that the chopper would remove the body prior to police attendance. Goes very much against all sudden death protocols.

5: "How can it be that the death of a person is downgraded to such a point of insignificance that it does not warrant any response from the police because they are too busy trying to hand out fines up the road?" I couldn't agree more and if this was actually the case then people need their butts kicked.

6: If the cop seen was in fact attending to a traffic crash and there were issues regarding safety then he was right to stay to attend to that. Its not going to make any difference to the dead guy on the beach.

7: "Mr Clifford did not supply details of the crash. A Hastings firestation spokesperson told Hawke's Bay Today that the fire service did not attend any crash in Ocean Beach Road that afternoon". It is easy enough to find out if he's lying about the crash. If he lied he's in deep poo.

I lifted this verbatim from our evening newspaper. I think it amply demonstrates that the cops actually to go out of their way to shoot themselves in the foot. Another great leap DOWN the scale of respect.

No disrespect intended but to me it looks like another poorly investigated and poorly reported incident that simply contributes to feelings of ill will. If a subsequent investigation shows that there were no units available and the cop 3kms down the road was in fact dealing with a traffic crash will the paper be making a retraction and publishing the actual facts. I doubt it! Why not? Because it doesn't make good copy and would not get past the editors desk. But sending the reporters out to find more half truth dirt will sell papers.

[spudchucka]

Mr SpudI'mgonnathrowaChuckeratyou and co. I'm not recieving some pretty good rep points where as its pretty clear that the few neg ones are coming from your way. I think that its a clear indication that others might actually agree with at least some of what I say?

You only got bad rep from me when you dished it out to me first. I've given you two, the same that you have given me. Like I said to you, if you want to play that silly bloody game then we'll see who ends up on the red list first. I don't give a rats arse about rep points, in fact I think its one thing that lets the site down but if you want to play silly buggers with me then I'll line up and play silly buggers back.

[spudchucka]

Some people will never believe anything but themself and allways rubbish things that they will not or can not agree with. Then there are those who just point the finger back at those who mention the issues and find some reason to bad mouth them...

You're making less sense as this drags on!

[Lou Girardin]

It seems clear from the report that the cop was operating laser.
Attending a non-existant accident, that's a new one. If you're going to lie, try and make sure you're not easily caught out.