Oh well....looks like we will just have to agree to disagree........see you at the hanging, im bringing beer and cashews!!!!!!:thumbsup:
Printable View
Oh well....looks like we will just have to agree to disagree........see you at the hanging, im bringing beer and cashews!!!!!!:thumbsup:
I've yet to see you show us some data that substantiates your claim, all I've done it propose another and more plausible means by which our prisons are full. There are is simply more people repeatedly committing crimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
There are those that should be sentenced more heavily. Not the majority, but some. You seem to be assuming that we are talking about all. If the overall level of crime reduced then the prisons would not be so full and the few that do need putting away for longer could more easily be accommodated. If there is an overwhelming general public perception is that some are too light, then yes that does mean that the sentences are too light. There are quite a few cases each year where the sentence really is a wet bus ticket compared to the effects of their crimes.Quote:
All of these threads are the same... isn't it dreadful, lock em up forever, the justice system is soft, put em on an island to eat themselves. That is simple emotional response and these issues are bigger than that.
Helloooo Mr Sydney, .... have you actually taken in what I've been writing? This is it!Quote:
The implication is that by being tougher, we would deter more offenders... that is not reality. When I point out that increasing the prison population is not desirable, the short term view is that just as long as they are all locked up whats the problem? The problem is that with a larger prison pop, we also have a larger rotation of freshly trained and resentful re-offenders cycling through our community, we have more frustrated and deprived kids growing up without fathers and we have a long term cumulative increasing problem. That all spells increasing levels of crime which perpetuates the issue.
But I've been approaching it from a totally different angle. Lower crime through better economic decisions and responsible social, yes we are all responsible. As I've said, "Why have they turned to crime?" The vast majority of the time it is through economic hardship. Many turn to drugs to 'dull the pain' of this hardship which just means they have to increase their level of crime to pay for that too.
There was a lot of discussion about 30 years ago about reducing sentences, and the statutes were actually changed to accommodate this and it did happen. The thought was that the prisons had just become a 'school for criminals' and that it was better to rehabilitate and release. Like they didn't talk to each other out of prison for training and setting up their black market connections.
It is a valid part of an overall change. Perpetrators of crimes should be sentenced in proportion to the effects of their crimes. That quite frankly is what the justice system was set up to do. As I've mentioned on many occasions we possess the means to reduce a lot of crime through better governmental economic decisions and better communities. Changing overall sentencing in the current climate will have little effect of crime levels, it is just moving the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff from one side of the beach to the other. We need to look up and wider and stop people coming off that cliff, at the moment the ambulance crew are overworked.Quote:
The "Sensible" Sentencing Trust don't offer anything apart from tougher sentencing, that is one dimensional thinking and we need better than that.... in fact don't call yourself sensible until your have the capacity to consider the issue from a larger perspective.
These are big issues, they deserve better thought and consideration, and the traditional emotive response doesn't actually work....
I haven't read any of this thread as "one side or another". Just wanted to put it out there that I've enjoyed reading it, for the most part people have played nice. I think it's really great to discuss these things as they are obviously impacting all of us!
I don't think the way things are are particularly correct - I'm pretty young and this is all new to me, it's all I've ever known - and I certainly don't have the answers. Just good to think about how changes could impact the future.
As for Dummer - I reckon this is something he has to nut out in his own head, the court has decided his fate and that's done and dusted no matter what I guess. As for him picking up a firearm in future, I have no doubts that he already has and will continue to do so. And most likely lawfully too, as where there is one Dummer there are others - who still have their FALs!
Anyway like I said, good chat ;)
sidney -another wee facet youve overlooked old chap and im bloody suprised you didnt produce it.In psychiatric institutions we face a n inescapable hurdle known as institutionalisation; sets in subtly but never completely erasable.
what is it .
put simply its where the individual reaches a stage where he or she realises whilst theyre in detention all their so called life decisions are in fact made for them ,likewise all facilities -recreation ,food ,housing ,medical attention ,legal resources are on tap and free of charge. they need not worry about bills .mortgages, where to get bedding -all provided.likewise you have highly professional house staff ,they only downside being of course ,theyve got the authority to enforce routine and give orders. however after a few years you become used to that ,and if youre smart become "the grey man- completely innocuous(all care no responsibility) ,just doin time ,kickin back and woe is me surviving boredom.Mental illness is a little different as often psychosis (usually drug induced )means mood disorders ,hallucinations etcetc and self control has flown out the window and often completely incurable
release into the community means what exactly -what was previously free requires paying for -,and if in prison you were topdog or whatever-out in society it matters SFA-youre just another entity. fuck this is tough -all these choices and no monies to socialise with the bros etc etc.BTW -the above is sourced from conversations ive had over the years with those whove done a lag!!
doesnt take einstein to realise which option mr crim is going to gravitate toward.
now before you jump in -dont forget there are thousands out society already who face the same challenges daily -BUT-tough it out in a law abiding way and often with dignity barely intact but choosing to grind it out rather than offend against fellow man.
In saying this Iaint forgotten that theres fucking rich crims and fucking poor ones ,but at the end of the day same applies.
How to reduce crime _better self fucking discipline for starters!!!!- the last 20yrs have seen governmentally sponsored social engineering (clark was an exponent), producing a generation of "Iwant it now "type "Who you lookin at" types and last but not least if one arthur taylor is any measure a subsect of institutional bush lawyers who'd give a QC a run for his money.
anyhow Ive laid out my POV so i thinks illleave it there as obviously some are overwhelmed by the plethora of info.,although if anyone has questions ,happy to reply .
@Sidney lets hear your views on how we will make NZ into a crime free utopia
still waiting bro......
With you there @kotuku
Personal accountability. I someone does bad under the influence of drugs/alcohol then maybe a little leniency. Second time, 'Not on your Nellie!' If you have been there before and found that taking drugs/alcohol have a severe negative effect then second time around you were aware of that when you decided to use the drugs/alcohol. "Fool me once fool me. Fool me twice fool you."
There are many instances where too much leniency is given, where a decision was made in sound mind and not through desperation, and it has been out with the wet bus ticket. Sure the first time a wet bus ticket may be appropriate. Again, this is not the entire solution, but it should be to protect the general public and those that have to clean up the mess. The main solution is to change so there is less crime committed and changing the penalties will do diddly squat as far as that is concerned. However justice should be seen to be done, and I firmly believe victim/society impact must be a significant factor in that. At the moment we are not in a position to do it.
I'll give a response to a "sensible" question... ya want to rephrase?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouser
If you agree (im still not sure) that the present system is not working, and in your view rehabilitation is the way forward and not primitive emotive responce...what would YOU change to get NZ out of its current malaise, if you had the power to change the law?
How many times with the wet bus ticket? What does "many instances where too much leniency is given" actually mean. Do you know the facts of the cases? Have you read the cases? Have you read comparable cases and enough of them to have a statistical appreciation of whether this one is a "wet bus ticket" or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetman
Given that the only ones that you hear about are the "wet bus tickets" do you think your perception is close to the reality? You keep using the wet bus tickets as the basis for your argument, which is of course statistically non-relavent... but it sells newspapers...
The whole tougher sentencing mentality, is an easy sell if you can create fear.... its a simplistic response and the perception that it creates may not be the reality....
http://http://www.rethinking.org.nz/...tion_in_NZ.pdfQuote:
The motion at last year’s Synod noted the “alarming increase in the New Zealand prison population”. We started by looking at the reasons for this alarming increase – 86% between 1995 and 20101 - and we concluded that underlying it was a flawed understanding of justice in New Zealand - an understanding that focuses almost exclusively on retribution/revenge and not on restoration/rehabilitation.
The New Zealand public, in general, perceives that we live in a less safe place than in the past and that the answer to this is to “be tough on crime”. Over the last 20 years the main political parties have bought into this perception and the resulting bidding war on the issues of crime and punishment has increased prison sentences dramatically. This has caused the alarming increase in the prison population.1
1 NZ Department of Corrections website and ‘Beyond the Holding Tank’, a Salvation Army Report, 2006
INCARCERATION IN NEW ZEALAND TODAY
“The number of murders in New Zealand dropped by nearly a quarter last year, while overall reported crime fell 6.7%.” (Headline in Waikato Times 1 April 2011)
“Prison numbers are expected to grow to over 10,300 by 2017.” (Department of Corrections and Ministry of Justice 2010)
“Whenever you send someone to prison you’re actually not holding them accountable if you’re removing them from those to whom they should be accountable.” (Kim Workman, TV One Interview, Oh My God, 14 March 2011)
There appears to be a basic disconnect in the above quotes. Crime is going down yet the prison muster is expected to increase. No wonder there is confusion about our criminal justice system.
You now seem to have no grasp on the word some, and are completely ignoring the main point of my argument. Bloody one eyed Cantabrian ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
There are a lot of sensational statistics in that linked document where they are making something out of what should be, and statistically is, correct and expected. The old '50% of people in this country are below average' scenario. Again they are comparing figures of a relatively prosperous time with a tough economic time and not making any allowance for this. Statistically this has always been a link between the two yet no weighting has been applied, that is how the British provided labour for the West Island.Quote:
And you accuse me of random statistics? :DQuote:
Nearly half (48%) underestimated the average sentence imposed
for rape, and nearly half (
47%) underestimated the average time a rapist serves in prison
The variation of 2-3% on a sample size of close to half might have more statistical integrity than the number of "wet bus tickets" that you know about in comparison to the total number of cases processed by the justice system......:)
A sample size of close to half? That means almost 1/2 of one opinion (I wont mention the old 'If you have half a mind to become a politician you are over qualified')! There are more on here that mentioned the 'wet bus ticket' than a half.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
I do understand your point though. I could go and find a few but I wont; I need to rattle my daggs and get out for what I do in the community.
i could have phrased that more clearly... :)
I'm over this thread it is getting Dummer and Dummer signing off this thread:wtfsmilie:
So many Bush Lawyers out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dundee
sidney -military detention centres old chap.bloody sight tougher than any civilian prison(as is the military law system).ya know whats funny -bugger all soldiers ever go back for secondsold boy,in fact a lot of one time transgressors were pretty unanimous"never a fucking gain"!seems a short sharp jolt can =lesson learned.
in fact im a great fan of ye old military orderly room-double marched in-details read criime read ,guilty -punishment awarded ,not guilty -double the punishment cause youre eyes are too close together ,and your average baggie couldnt lie straight in bed.doubled out of orderly room-straight into your sentence.10mins maxand you sure as hell didnt forget every little detail.reckon she'd go down a treat in the district court.charge em in batches and open a TAB book on sentences-all you ex RF buggers would make great bookies
yeah borstals ran on similar lines, but had lousy re-offending rates
Worked pretty well for a couple of my cousins who lost their fathers at a young age and ran off the rails in their teens. But like the rest of us, some will respond well to one thing, others to something else. And then there are others that will just never respond to anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
With the youth work I do, and have done for 25 years now, we get a lot of single parent kids coming along that are quickly heading in the wrong direction. They push boundaries, get disruptive, destructive, obnoxious, ... but we never give up on them. Often it will take 6-7 years but with persistence, insistence, and leadership they do respond. The difficulty is that fewer and fewer are willing to put in the effort nowadays, but having seen the difference it makes to the lives of those we deal with the only way out for me will be feet first in a pine box.
@Sidney still waiting mate, you seem to be good at saying no to all suggestions/opinions, so what would you do?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouser
Pretty sure the most obvious one that I have already suggested is a reduction in imprisonment rates...
For every 100K pa prisoner, that could fund a case manager who could handle 20-50 cases pa, for home based detention/programs involving direct accountability and restitution programs for suitable cases, which at least would provide a possibility of less lifestyle based training that results from incarceration..... not just home D without obligation....
Reduction in alcohol availability for under 20's... a large percentage of crime is alcohol fueled...
Support based case managers for every family with dependants for those we imprison. Co-ordination with organisations like Pillars to achieve this... Leaving those families with the state and the authorities as enemies simply breeds another generation of criminals.
I am not sure that you have offered any options at all.... tougher sentencing isn't an option.... its an admission of failure.. it only addresses prevention of crime for that offender. That approach multiplies the problem in the long term.
There is plenty of information about options available and plenty of work that has been done to make positive steps to addressing the issue... the ministry of justice has some previously focused Drivers Of Crime approaches that seem to have stalled... Rethinking Crime and Punishment - Rethinking Crime and Punishment has plenty of information..
Kotutu is obviously working in programs designed to address these issues. So is Gadget by the sounds of it.
If this is the reality, we would be making efforts to keep offenders out of prison - they will grow out of offending if we don't keep putting them back into the training institutions.Quote:
“By 30 years of age a huge percentage of offenders will stop offending. 40% of prisoners serve terms of less than 6 months; 85% will be out in under 2 years; 5-7% should never come out, will never change – the public thinks this figure is more like 40%.” - Kim Workman
There is plenty of information out there...
I agree totally with the vast majority of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney
My only issues are minor:
Prison is not the only training ground. There is more training, particularly hands on practical, available outside of prison.
There is still room for increases sentences for SOME recidivists. Like the guy that was constantly getting caught drunk driving, killed people on a couple of occasions and was still doing the same thing. I believe he had been on numerous retraining schemes. For everyone's safety the likes of this case should be put away for a very long time.
And of course I'd add the one I've been proposing all along, sort out the economy so that there is no need for so many to turn to crime for survival. "Idle hands, ...". If you look at the places with lower crime rates it tends to be those with lower unemployment rates and often greater state input, such as the Scandinavian countries.
Thanks for that reply Sidney, as you say the information is out there if you try, i obviously dont.....as you have already probably gathered im from the oldskool 'hang em high' philosophy......yeah, you know....the good old days.....
I know its only high 'media attention' cases, but when my friends and i talk about retribution from certain incidents, we are mainly all of the same opinion, we are not 'middle class whites' blaming it all on the welfare classes!!!
Ive been on the bottom rung of the class ladder to many times to think of myself otherwise, 2 years on the dole (welfare) under the bitch thatcher (plenty of coal where she is now) taught me that!
Its just that we get totally pissed off to see regular offenders given an easy ride, im not talking about the one off people who make an mistake (Dummer) you know who im talking about, the ones who have taken crime up as a lifestyle!
We (society) are paying for them whether they are inside or not, at least when they are inside they cannot harm us anymore!!!
good luck in your endeavours and career, i can tell from your posts your are very passionate about this subject, thanks for sharing!!!!
I believe there are not there aren't enough consequences for the youths, the current system with Family Group Conferences work for 80% of the youth offenders but the recidivist offenders just laugh at the whole process and continue to offend, then get taken by CYFs but then run away and continue to offend. A lot of these kids don't come from broken homes either, it's not always the parents doing.
I'd like to see some kind of reparation law bought in where any person who causes damages must pay for them at a minimum. Eg, I know a guy that burnt out a $50k vehicle and only got 100hrs of community service! I think they should be paying the full amount whether it's insured or not. Another that I see all the time is people causing thousands of dollars in damage ripping copper piping and cylinders out of houses for a couple of hundred in scrap, do you think they're made responsible for all the damage they've done? Nope, it comes back on the owner or insurance company if they have one. I could go on and on and on with examples of damage done yet they're not held accountable for it.
A lot of the criminal youth and adults you cannot reason with, no amount of our new age punishments will turn them.
I think another good start would be making our prisons a lot less comfortable and make them more like a military prison to discourage people from going back.
A culture change is what is needed, we will never be like the Scandinavian countries. Most of the people I deal with don't want to work and have a sense of entitlement from the government and absolutely no care or respect for anybody else, they also have a below average IQ. How to change this? I don't know. It pisses me off going into their houses and they have big TVs and Sky TV, which most of them do, especially because I can't afford it.
I'm no expert in the matter but I don't believe that giving out longer sentences will do anything, but maybe changing the content of the sentence will. An end to the Police budget freeze would be a bloody good start to.
I agree Savage1, you guys are way under resourced at the sharp end. I'm all for making it easier for those that do fall back into line, but also come down heavy on those that don't. One thing that police HQ feared with the three strikes was some muppet thinking "I've got nothing to lose, if I get caught I might as well be dead." and going out in a hail of fire.
sidney -have you got any bloody idea whatsoever about the realities of case management -youre ratios are fucking laughable .i have communtiy based colleagues who case manage up to 20 persons at any time and frankly theyre run off their bloody feet! jesus wept- to renew a recent quip["allsmoke no hangi!. case management properly executed requires unlimited resources and minute attention to detail ,cause beleive me ,one small oversight and the whole lot willgo down the dunny .been there done that more than once ,and humble pie aint my fuckin meal of choice
number 2 sidney -if a bloody individual does not want to change ,nothing ,i repeat nothing will make em change ,despite all the optimists in this firiggin world holding hands and gently farting on em.
you can quote all the statistics hypotheses etc etc you like but im coming from butt ugly naked unadorned humanity at its lowest point and my own paddling in it for four decades.
gadget I bleive in -i know him ,Ive seen him in action ,and when it comes to good old fashioned plain garden commonsense he has it in spades,unlike a lot who profess to be expert in this subject(that incidentally is not a crack at you OK>
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
Oh Kotuku.....mate.......if i could get all of that printed on a t-shirt i would mate.....priceless!!!!!!!!
As a high media case, look at the teenager who attacked the lady at the ATM machine. The woman who came to her rescue is in hospital with serious head injuries. As an aside she has been gifted a large some of money by some very caring people either through generosity or feeling of guilt. This should not be seen by the judicial systems as compensation for what she is going through.
Now to the scumbag offender (and his mate the getaway driver)
Is this his strike one?
Will he be given a group hug and placed back in society?
Will he do a short stint with a warm bed and 3 meals a day?
Who deems him fit to go back into society if he has not reformed during his short stint?
What is there to prevent him from getting more aggressive in future attacks?
I believe that he should be detained until such a time his victim is fully recovered, and living their normal life, then carry out the sentence from that date.
If the victim never fully recovers then he/she is never released. If the prisons are overloaded, stop wasting money on 1080 etc and build more prisons.
As kotuku says, if they are bad, they are bad. There is no deterrent. If the risk of a death penalty does not stop murders or drugs dealing in other countries then nothing will
When I say "until such a time his victim is fully recovered" I mean from physical injury or severe emotional distress (Kotuku can be on the assessment panel).
Not like the Queenstown taxi driver who says he cannot work at night any more because a off duty copper racially abused him. The copper paid him out $400 as ordered by the court FFS
Fuk....ive been called 'scottish' & 'irish' and i didnt get a sausage!!!!!.....not even a pint!!!!!!!!.....now wheres that lawyers number?
But that wouldn't be an insult, that would be talking you up. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Scouser
To true GMQuote:
Originally Posted by gadgetman
Ouch!
Oh fuk......just scored another own goal........:XD:
YupQuote:
Originally Posted by Scouser
It's OK Scouser, I don't think anyone has noticed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouser
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
Oh please if you are going to get excited you should learn to read first...... you might notice I said per annum... not at once......
2 its not perscriptive, its descriptive... so try not to get your fanny pack knotted...
3 if the average length of sentence is around 6 months (which as I understand it is about correct), for a 20 case load pa, then would have 10 on the go at once.
4 you cannot definitively talk about case load numbers until the amount of workload for each case is defined, and we haven't done that yet have we?
Finally in reference to your obvious change/suitability issues.... are you serious?... that goes without saying... not everyone is suitable nor will be...
Of course the system has to be designed, but we don't work this way in justice yet.... there may some benefits to thinking about the concept though... that is if we can think conceptually rather than focussing on the details which aren't worked out yet...
Can you print that on your t-shirt..... :D
As a community case manager I have to agree with you. Some of our case managers have up to 40 clients to look after. The system is so under resourced.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
As the old saying goes...you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
What doesn't change is that scum, whether it is scum that kills women while they are working or scum that cracks the skull and causes a brain bleed to a good woman helping out another elderly woman being robbed or scum that kidnaps the newly born child of a woman in a maternity hospital and that scum just like the scum on a shower floor needs to be cleaned up and in my opinion preferably permanently removed.
Personally I'd like to see the introduction of conscription.
I must emphasise that it's not a panacea for society's ills, but it does instill a sense of discipline, responsibility, self respect, teamwork, pride and a respect for authority. Learn how to push themselves beyond what they thought was possible, learn skills that they didn't have.
For those who are ineligible (physical, objectors etc), a model similar to Germany's Zivildienst where non-soldiers would serve the community working in retirement homes, hospitals etc. I am aware that Germany no longer has a conscript army.
Of course I don't expect everyone to agree with me, it would be expensive to implement initially but I think that in the long term society would benefit from a skilled, productive, professional and caring young generation.
no im not printing anything on a Tshirt -merely pointing out to your good self that some of your hypotheses are well wide of the mark.its obviously slid home -the tone of your replies and the rising sarcasm suggests to me the emergence of the cunliffe style defence.
lets just lay it to rest eh -its run its course .