Thread: Deferred justice ???

If you've got a licence, I'd bet you wouldn't get away with sort of crap https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/3605...rker-sentenced

It would appear that this was a very stupid, immature mistake on your part. It's well known that the brains of young men don't develop until they are their mid 20s, and I anticipate about that that applies to you,’’ the judge said.
Aha! That will be why the opposition parties want to lower the voting age even more

the only thing good about it - he will not get a firearms license - but what about those in the car with him -none appear to have tried to stop him

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

the only thing good about it - he will not get a firearms license - but what about those in the car with him -none appear to have tried to stop him

unfortunately maybe that is not the ccase..The last paragraph from the judge reads...

"But he considered that the two convictions would have consequences for Sinclair if he wished to travel in future and would hinder him from holding a firearms licence." so he was not given any conviction. He was ordered to coeme up for sentence if summoned within 12 months, so if he does anything that puts him in front of the courts, he will be sentenced, but if he behaves himself there will be no conviction and he could apply for a FAL later....

Well there is an immature young male brain, then there is this sort of behavior. One is jumping off high stuff, accepting dares to ride bikes or skateboards down sketchy stuff etc, then there's actually shooting random people.

surprised that the rest of the road workers didnt deal to him to be honest

Originally Posted by no1_49er

If you've got a licence, I'd bet you wouldn't get away with sort of crap https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/3605...rker-sentenced

The difference being that this kid has not held himself out to be fit and proper, and through his actions has shown that he isn’t anyway. A licensed gun owner has and is bound to act accordingly, so for me a more severe whack for a gun owner in these circumstances would be appropriate.

teen kid he is 19 -- grandad was on his way to Gallipoli at that age - what the hell is happening to these young buggers thick as planks

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

teen kid he is 19 -- grandad was on his way to Gallipoli at that age.......

The flip side of that is that it shows how tragic sending 19 year olds into war really was.

Originally Posted by Andygr

The flip side of that is that it shows how tragic sending 19 year olds into war really was.

19 years old, completely different playing field 110 years ago, comparison hard to make.

Originally Posted by Andygr

The flip side of that is that it shows how tragic sending 19 year olds into war really was.

Indeed. Back then kids were disciplined from a young age, were taught practical stuff and were expected to contribute to society and family by that age ....Nowadays, discipline is farcical, education farcical and tit appears that half of them are not expected to contribute anything anywhere...

Originally Posted by Tahr

The difference being that this kid has not held himself out to be fit and proper, and through his actions has shown that he isn’t anyway. A licensed gun owner has and is bound to act accordingly, so for me a more severe whack for a gun owner in these circumstances would be appropriate.

So you would be happy with someone without a car license who injured someone in a vehicle accident being treated more leniently than a licensed driver who did the same?

Originally Posted by Sauer

So you would be happy with someone without a car license who injured someone in a vehicle accident being treated more leniently than a licensed driver who did the same?

A valid comparison.

Originally Posted by Sauer

So you would be happy with someone without a car license who injured someone in a vehicle accident being treated more leniently than a licensed driver who did the same?

Gaining and holding a drivers license does not include a test of character - the character or personal suitability of the applicant (their fit and proper status) is not vigorously assessed or scrutinised, and the bad behaviour of a driver is not projected onto all drivers.

Quite different with firearm license holders.

Originally Posted by Sauer

So you would be happy with someone without a car license who injured someone in a vehicle accident being treated more leniently than a licensed driver who did the same?

Suspect the emphasis was on the representation as being 'fit and proper' threshold .... is that a thing for drivers licensing?