3 strikes policy

**mashman** · 20th January 2010, 13:44

Originally Posted by p.dath

I subscribe to the "do the crime do the time" mantra. I don't want to make it easier for criminals when it comes to sentencing.

I subscribe to that same mantra too, which is why i'm dismayed at the thought of previous crimes not being considered when sentencing. Hence the reason i thought a points system would only help a judge in the sentencing, points being awarded and kept on your record, the more points you have, the more likely you'll get a longer sentence... it's not a fully fleshed out idea, bit hard to do that given an hours notice. Was just floating the idea, which is looking more like a Zeppelin

**scumdog** · 20th January 2010, 14:01

Originally Posted by mashman

I subscribe to that same mantra too, which is why i'm dismayed at the thought of previous crimes not being considered when sentencing.

Go back a few posts and look at my comment on that. (post #53)

Or has one of us not understood?

**mashman** · 20th January 2010, 14:33

Originally Posted by scumdog

Go back a few posts and look at my comment on that. (post #53)

Or has one of us not understood?

it's probably my interpretation... I thought you were saying that not all crimes are allowed to have previous convictions brought into the current case being "tried". Apoligies if you meant something entirely different

but it gave me the inspiration for the points system. I'm trying to get around the "Few crimes can have previous convictions used in evidence against somebody" (but why the fuck should they if he's a criminal), by giving the criminal points for ALL of his crimes, and hence helping the judge out so that he doesn't just have to "base his sentencing on the number of previous offences the idiot on front of him has". Hopefully a points system will reflect the gravity of each crime commited by taking into account the other points that other judges have awarded, without having to judge those previous cases, because they've already been dealt with and rated... if ya see what i mean.

**sinfull** · 20th January 2010, 16:11

Originally Posted by Headbanger

The REPEAT violent offenders should be given lodgings with the Judge who sentenced them upon release, And defense lawyers should be locked up with their clients.

That will sort it, No one will waste time and money defending them, and the Judges won't ever let them out.

Fixed that for ya ! But violence is violence ! I won't admit to being a saint and i have been known to be a brawler ! But i aint a violent offender, i'd hate to think i would have to live with the judge who sentanced me, after doing something as stupid as cracking some cunt who attacked me, a bit too hard and got 5 yrs for involentary manslaughter !~

Originally Posted by BoristheBiter

We will just have to agaree to disagree on this one.
I would not take into account what "legal and criminal experts" have to say as they are just looking out for them selves.
i'm not to bothered about speeders but repeat drink drivers should go away for life and if you are dumb enough to be caught three time for dope selling then that s just to bad.
as for burton preventative detention is what he should have got in the first place (again crap sentance) then he wouldn't have been out to kill that guy in Wellington.

You forget Burton wanted back in to prison, he had it so sweet in there, must be a bit harder to climb to the top with just one leg though aye !

Originally Posted by mashman

it's probably my interpretation... I thought you were saying that not all crimes are allowed to have previous convictions brought into the current case being "tried". Apoligies if you meant something entirely different

but it gave me the inspiration for the points system. I'm trying to get around the "Few crimes can have previous convictions used in evidence against somebody" (but why the fuck should they if he's a criminal), by giving the criminal points for ALL of his crimes, and hence helping the judge out so that he doesn't just have to "base his sentencing on the number of previous offences the idiot on front of him has". Hopefully a points system will reflect the gravity of each crime commited by taking into account the other points that other judges have awarded, without having to judge those previous cases, because they've already been dealt with and rated... if ya see what i mean.

I friggin like that idea ya have with the points system, (prob cause of my squeaky clean slate) but it's a known fact offences grow in seriousness do they not ? Someone who gets a rush out of beating up a dog will prob move on to beating a defenceless old lady one day, do you not think ? (my opinion anyway)

A demerit system may just stem the tide of violent reoffending !

**SPman** · 20th January 2010, 16:53

Originally Posted by sinfull

I friggin like that idea ya have with the points system, (prob cause of my squeaky clean slate) but it's a known fact offences grow in seriousness do they not ? Someone who gets a rush out of beating up a dog will prob move on to beating a defenceless old lady one day, do you not think ? (my opinion anyway)

A demerit system may just stem the tide of violent reoffending !

Sort of like a biker who offends by being 10 k over, just gets worse and worse and ends up killing Mabel and her 3 kids by acts of outrageous hoonishness........?

**Headbanger** · 20th January 2010, 18:22

A Christchurch judge has taken a swing at the new "three strikes and the max'' criminal justice policy the Government is about to put in place.
Christchurch District Court Judge David Saunders had an offender with a long record in the dock on a burglary charge.
But he was concerned that the proposed law change could lead to an unavoidable 10-year jail term for what looked to be a minor offence.
The 29-year-old unemployed Northcote man was seeking bail and the judge granted it in spite of the police opposition.
They pointed out the man had 65 previous convictions including burglary, robbery, armed robbery, and wounding.
Today, the man was charged with entering Christchurch District Council's dog pound with intent to commit a crime.

Fuck me, and some would have us believe that Judges are acting in the will of the people.

65 times convicted, whats the bet he's been "caught" 100's of times, and got away with shit 1000's of times. This fuck should just be taken out the back and shot. Obvuisly this dumb fuck cock-smoking judge has no clue as to what a minor offender is.

If some filthy piece of scum enters my property, fucks with my shit, That,s a major, I'd want blood.

Lock him up with the judge and have people line up to piss on them around the clock..

**wbks** · 20th January 2010, 20:15

Originally Posted by Headbanger

Fuck me, and some would have us believe that Judges are acting in the will of the people.

65 times convicted, whats the bet he's been "caught" 100's of times, and got away with shit 1000's of times. This fuck should just be taken out the back and shot. Obvuisly this dumb fuck cock-smoking judge has no clue as to what a minor offender is.

If some filthy piece of scum enters my property, fucks with my shit, That,s a major, I'd want blood.

Lock him up with the judge and have people line up to piss on them around the clock..

For some reason judges seem to deal out more sympathy than punishment. Maybe it's because with such a large paycheck, them (and their families) are usually pretty safe from the criminals the sentence, in their upper class housing and neighborhoods, never feeling the effects of repeat offenders. That is the only reason I can see for the plebs to be baying for blood so often while the judges are more concerned with giving them another chance or freeing up a room in the Hilton. I read in the paper today about a dude who shot his 8 year old daughter in the foot and burned her with a ciggarette and the judge gave him 4 months... That wouldn't be enough in one of those third world lock ups where prisoners fight each other for scraps of food to survive and try not to get killed, and surely not in one of NZ's prisons

**Genestho** · 20th January 2010, 20:57

Haven't kept up with the news since the hol's started, some of you may, or may not know there was a push back in July? for a revisit of the original bill, but I believe this had already passed through select commitee.

I'm not sure where it got to.

It's not going to fix everything, it's not designed to, but it is designed to keep the recidivist VIOLENT offenders away from the community and maybe prevent a murder or two.

Some people just cannot be rehabilitated.

There's been quite a few bills passed this year by Simon Powers regarding Law and Order...so they are chipping away at it. Not like that other bunch, had to laugh at Goff's comments today, I know it's the usual opposition smack talk, but please - what a joke!

They didn't bother coming up with much themselves in 9 years!
The onus is on the Judges and Politicians to make it work!

**Hitcher** · 20th January 2010, 20:59

Originally Posted by wbks

For some reason judges seem to deal out more sympathy than punishment. Maybe it's because with such a large paycheck, them (and their families) are usually pretty safe from the criminals the sentence, in their upper class housing and neighborhoods, never feeling the effects of repeat offenders. That is the only reason I can see for the plebs to be baying for blood so often while the judges are more concerned with giving them another chance or freeing up a room in the Hilton. I read in the paper today about a dude who shot his 8 year old daughter in the foot and burned her with a ciggarette and the judge gave him 4 months... That wouldn't be enough in one of those third world lock ups where prisoners fight each other for scraps of food to survive and try not to get killed, and surely not in one of NZ's prisons

Nonsense. Judges make sentencing decisions based on a range of issues, not just based on what the charges are. If there are extenuating circumstances, I would like judges to be able to take those into consideration. Otherwise what's the point of having them?

**wbks** · 20th January 2010, 21:03

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Nonsense. Judges make sentencing decisions based on a range of issues, not just based on what the charges are. If there are extenuating circumstances, I would like judges to be able to take those into consideration. Otherwise what's the point of having them?

Nonsense? How? Judges constantly give out bullshit sentances to people who show no sign of rehabilitation, and go out to commit violent crime within months, and in my experience, within days. They DO make decisions based on a range of issues, but those issues aren't public safety or justice

**Headbanger** · 20th January 2010, 21:42

Originally Posted by wbks

For some reason judges seem to deal out more sympathy than punishment.

My theory is they see so much of the offenders that they get immune to the real word effects of the offenders actions ( a bit like a nurse, Some seem to view a patients extreme pain as nothing, not even there) and all they see is the person in front of them, and for some fucked up reaon instead of laying waste with some worthwhile punishment seek to give them (yet another) break.

A person has to work really hard at being a shitbag before they will lock him up.

**oldrider** · 20th January 2010, 22:37

Originally Posted by wbks

For some reason judges seem to deal out more sympathy than punishment.

Simple answer:

Without crime and criminal's, society wouldn't need judges and criminal lawyers, why would they kick their own rice bowl?

**RocKai** · 20th January 2010, 23:39

Ok, how hard is it for a two-times killer with a long criminal history to find job? A career criminal deserve a career prison terms. I wish we could hang them all. 3 times killer is bad enough, no one could have accidentally murdered 3 times in their life and to have 20 years prison term.

Hell, in Viet Nam I've seen kids who are 16 had to have life imprisonment when they first murder. The lightest I've seen is over-18 husband killer to have 12 years without parole and that's because the asshole is a demented prick who always harass and maritally-rape her in 10 years. Shoot the bastard.