NZ Police public image

[Ixion]

You'll get my vote
Be aware though that failure to perform will result in a "Mussolini"
(hung upside down with brain removed)

Vote ? Vote? What's with the vote bit ?. I follow the Vetenarian principle of politics. One man, one vote. I'm the man and I've got the one vote. The rest of you just do as you're told.

[Wolf]

Vote ? Vote? What's with the vote bit ?. I follow the Vetenarian principle of politics. One man, one vote. I'm the man and I've got the one vote. The rest of you just do as you're told.

All Hail Lord Havelock Vetinari! And much kudos to his esteemed chronicler, Terry Prachett...

[Ixion]

All Hail Lord Havelock Vetinari! And much kudos to his esteemed chronicler, Terry Prachett...

Actually, I'd vote for Sam Vimes as Police Commisioner ! I reckon that man had the right idea about policing. Unfortunately, we seem to have ended up with Sergeant Colon.

[Wolf]

Actually, I'd vote for Sam Vimes as Police Commisioner ! I reckon that man had the right idea about policing. Unfortunately, we seem to have ended up with Sergeant Colon.

Could have wound up with Nobby...

[mikey]

I WANA BE A COPPER

[drummer]

good point spud.

or what about if there is disagreement about ownership, like in domestic separation situations, and one party believes they have the property rights (or just doesn't want the ex to have it), so when the other one takes it away, they can be shot?

drummer?

Interesting point because this is exactly what happened to me... not shot but I had a situation where police in Queensland took sides over a despute and firearms were carried by the police.

I have never justified shooting to kill with my posts infact you will if you look see a comment of mine that killing is not right... ever.

[Lou Girardin]

Ah yes, but what are you going to do improve things? So far all the slanging on this site has made things worse so in this age of dispensing with resposibility I blame you and Ixion

BTW Note the claim made in the MEDIA re Doones words was retracted by them hence the 'go' at H. Cluck by Doone.

There's not a lot I can do apart from publicly pointed out the failings, as do many others. I do my best
I didn't think this site had such far reaching influence, I'll have to forgo writing to the papers, or maybe just to the ODT.
But, back to the original point, don't you think that Doone is scum.

[drummer]

So when a shoplifter is caught stealing a chocolate bar the shop keeper is justified in blowing his brains out to prevent the offender from getting away with his property?

As above. Put it in perspective and the situation you prescribe is quite absurd.

The Crimes Act covers defence of property in sections 52 - 56. Use of force to the level of discharging a firearm at another person is reallly only justified under section 48, which covers self defence and defence of another person, which makes the Court decision even more interesting.

I'm afraid that you are wrong. The Court is the only appropriate forum to judge whether the actions were justified. The farmer broke a law, he was charged, (correctly) and the Court made a decision based on the evidence presented. That is how the justice system works and in my opinion this case has actually increased my faith in the system.

As above. The farmer committed an offence by firing his weapon and injuring another person. It is the police function to put that person before the Court, which they did. It is not the police function to decide whether his actions were justifiable, that is the job of the Courts. It is my opinion as a person, (not as a cop) that the decision of the Court was the correct one in the circumstances.

Even their right to life? You're a hard man. Most hardliners want the death penalty for murders, rapes and such but wouldn't see a person put to death by either the state or by vigilanty justice for staeling a quad bike.

Oh by the way, the farmer has responsibilities as a firearms licence holder too.

I agree with many of your points here and fundamentally I agree with the right to defend property but not to the point of vigilanty justice taking hold.

Thats simply your subjective opinion. Others have equally valid but differing opinions. The law is generally quite clear on these issues and the police in this matter acted appropriately according to the relevant laws.

Appreciate it, thanks.

Spud... thanks for your long reply earlier, however you are arguing on a different plane... I am not debating what the law is now... I am simply saying that the current law is an ass...

Secondly... you say I am a hard man... yes... I am... against lowlife scum. Let me ask you a simple question.. (assuming you made the law) Do YOU believe that a criminal caught in the act of stealing should be protected or not? If you do then how far would YOU allow the victim to go in preventing the crime from happening?

[drummer]

Spud... thanks for your long reply earlier, however you are arguing on a different plane... I am not debating what the law is now... I am simply saying that the current law is an ass...

Secondly... you say I am a hard man... yes... I am... against lowlife scum. Let me ask you a simple question.. (assuming you made the law) Do YOU believe that a criminal caught in the act of stealing should be protected or not? If you do then how far would YOU allow the victim to go in preventing the crime from happening?

[drummer]

maybe drummer has a $ value on personal property being stolen at which you can shoot someone in the back.

I hesitated to answer this simply because of the absurdity... and now, come to think of it... I won't

[drummer]

By this definition every crime becomes a crime against the person!

Your point?

[scumdog]

There's not a lot I can do apart from publicly pointed out the failings, as do many others. I do my best
I didn't think this site had such far reaching influence, I'll have to forgo writing to the papers, or maybe just to the ODT.
But, back to the original point, don't you think that Doone is scum.

Don't mention him and Incis to me in the same breath - but then he's at the same level as all the politicians, - maybe that's where he's aimed

And easy with the loose use of my name in connection with Doone

[idb]

Don't mention him and Incis to me in the same breath - but then he's at the same level as all the politicians, - maybe that's where he's aimed

And easy with the loose use of my name in connection with Doone

How is the INCIS project going anyway....it must be just about finished?

[scumdog]

How is the INCIS project going anyway....it must be just about finished?

Yeah, that's the word I'd use: "finished" - like the dodo is finished.

[spudchucka]

I hesitated to answer this simply because of the absurdity... and now, come to think of it... I won't

Whats absurd about it? Its a fair question when you are saying that the use of potentially lethal force is justified to prevent property from being stolen. Do you propose that this same level of force used in this case would be appropriate in circumstances such as a shoplifter stealing a packet of chewing gum? The value of the gum is much less than the value of a quad bike, however it is still somebody's property that is being stolen. At what threshold would the use of lethal force be appropriate? $1.00? $5.00? $10.00? $100.00? $1000.00? $5000.00? Its a legitimate question and I think you should answer it.