Thread: Inappropriate sentencing

He is an aggressive arrogant idiot who think she can run around and say whatever he wants without repercussions.

I have never liked him, or the rest of his mob.

The only issue is whom now is to take the helm of the Police portfolio??

I for one would like to see someone with some actual law experience, and a bit of a hard liner actually, to take the lead. I don't think there's anyone in that mob who can or will do this.

They are all too new age and piss weak.

I am certainly not a fan of Stuart Nash (in fact I would happily kick him in the nuts if we ever met) but I cannot fault his sentiment on either of these two controversial matters. What a fucking sad state of affairs when a man cannot express his opinion ( minister of the crown or not). Stupid parliamentary rules show what’s nanny state we truly are.

In this matter we might share Nash's sentiment, however it is a slippery slope to begin down if ministers start to influence judiciary. Just look at Israel at the moment the Knesset wanting to change the law so that they can over-rule decisions made by the supreme court

The separations of power is fundamental to democracy. Parliament, the Executive (Cabinet), the Judiciary.

Like Mallard, Nash is a bobber boy.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

In this matter we might share Nash's sentiment, however it is a slippery slope to begin down if ministers start to influence judiciary. Just look at Israel at the moment the Knesset wanting to change the law so that they can over-rule decisions made by the supreme court

We can do that already in NZ, and have for a long time. Arguably it's safer to have that arrangement in Israel which has large coalitions than in NZ which has fewer parties and small coalitions. Heck, Parliament passes bills often that retrospectively make things legal.
Your example is poor. A Minister influencing the courts is totally different to Parliament exercising a power it legitimately has.

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

Originally Posted by Eat Meater

We can do that already in NZ, and have for a long time. Arguably it's safer to have that arrangement in Israel which has large coalitions than in NZ which has fewer parties and small coalitions. Heck, Parliament passes bills often that retrospectively make things legal.
Your example is poor. A Minister influencing the courts is totally different to Parliament exercising a power it legitimately has.

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

No. Our parliament can not over rule Court decisions. But the Crown can appeal court decisions and can lose.
All our Parliament can do is change legislation that affects the application of the law, albeit sometimes retrospectively.

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

In this matter we might share Nash's sentiment, however it is a slippery slope to begin down if ministers start to influence judiciary. Just look at Israel at the moment the Knesset wanting to change the law so that they can over-rule decisions made by the supreme court

Kinda wonder at times how we have managed to get the prison population down to 8000-odd from over 10K in 2017 without any apparent change in legislation?

Easy. Just don't send people to jail for things that should definitely be an imprisonment offence. And then be surprised when those people don't abide by their community "sentence" time after time.

Free Range Lunatic Asylum

and today.........he is now lowest ranking MP.....almost out the door....

Just watching the News, boasting about how many trillions of $$$$$$$s Gaming & virtual reality with be worth in the future. Great clip of shooting automatic weapons at imaginary enemies.
A certain Tennant guy was playing these games & bugger me the people he was playing these games with gave him a reference for a proper firearm.

judiciary nwhen sentencing are bound by the relevant act of law....law formulated and bought into an active role by.......yep you guessed it -that naughty word again!

Originally Posted by Maxx

Kinda wonder at times how we have managed to get the prison population down to 8000-odd from over 10K in 2017 without any apparent change in legislation?

Simple, you just dont lock them up when they deserve it. And then we wonder why they go on to re offend and make more victims out of innocent people.

Just shit

Originally Posted by Tahr

No. Our parliament can not over rule Court decisions. But the Crown can appeal court decisions and can lose.
All our Parliament can do is change legislation that affects the application of the law, albeit sometimes retrospectively.

We're arguing the same point. If the Crown loses an appeal they can change the law. That's the ultimate override. It's better than winning an appeal.
The courts only have the power to say whether the Crown acted within the powers granted to them by the law. If the law is changed the courts have to interpret the law. If the law is in breach of our unwritten constitution then the courts will say so, but Parliament is sovereign.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parl...ry_sovereignty

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

Originally Posted by flock

Great clip of shooting automatic weapons at imaginary enemies.

Have a look at Onward, it's a multiplayer team milsim. Heaps of fun, but also teaches you about the ins and outs of various weapons and squad tactics.

Then there is this stuff: