Thread: Wtf

Thread is getting waaaay to sipholophical for this hillbilly hippie

Laws are written for the guidance of the wise man,the obeyance of the fool

until such time as wise men may sit round a table and reasonably discuss their problems ,nothing in life will ever be resolved.(Dr P K Davison medical supt.seaview hospital hokitika)

Originally Posted by ebf

Thread is getting waaaay to sipholophical for this hillbilly hippie

I know what you mean, but it is good to know we have phyco nurses keeping an eye on us all.
I know of two killers of hunters who have gone back to hunting and one other that severely injured another hunter who has also gone hunting again...I guess it is a bit like automobile killers getting back behind the wheel.
At least when Dumber says he is going hunting everyone else will stay at home giving him a clear field.

Originally Posted by kotuku

expoh-hmmmy es like yourself im a psych nurse(43yrs) and i agree with your POV.my only comment on this whole thing is why this bloke makes an unequivocal statement about not going near firearms ever again ,then oops i forgot to mention Im intending to reapply for my FAL????????HYPOCRISYand self entitlement. its a little like career crims whose lawyers tell the court about their letters of remorse etc etc .its blatantly obvious is a cover my own arse shorten my sentence tactic.I often hear em laughing about it on the shop floor.
anyone who like my colleague and I has worked in institutions(me Im in the forensic psychiatric field) sees the human psyche unadorned and often at it very worstand often there are no answers ,apart from DEATH(which if you actually think about it is the ultimate answer to all lifes problems)
Now sidney before you jump on me ,and seeing as you appear clued up ,google Dr Ceri Evans -hes very well written on the psyche of criminals,the function of psyche in realtion to crime ,and the functioning of the psyche in relation to the after effects of crime. Ceri is my boss.

Firstly I am no expert in the area of mental health, nor do I have an in depth understanding of what is required for the individual to achieve reconciliation. But I have some concerns with the ideas expressed because they tend to confuse individual desires and expectations, with the big picture issues and how they will affect society as a whole.

I appreciate the point made about an victims journey, a feeling that the outcome is equitable may help with the process of personal reconciliation... but my concern is that a victims perception of equity is often not consistent with the laws interpretation, nor with the community societal view and expectation.

If our goal is an equitable society we cannot compromise the dispassionate application of the law, by a court system that is independent of political pressure and the understandable emotional response of victims.

That being said, there is definitely a place for the offender to be confronted by the trauma caused, and that may provide assistance to all parties to deal with the ongoing issues of coming to terms with what has happened.

Originally Posted by Sidney

but my concern is that a victims perception of equity is often not consistent with the laws interpretation, nor with the community societal view and expectation.

However there is a growing wave of feeling that the laws interpretation is way out of step with every other parties expectation, ... including offenders. Sure they plea for as low a sentence as possible as that is even how our economy runs; maximize profits and minimise losses (well the bit of the economy excluding governments that seem to go for the opposite). You could say that they feel the sentences are too low by the fact that they are not already dissuaded from their career path.

That being said, there is definitely a place for the offender to be confronted by the trauma caused, and that may provide assistance to all parties to deal with the ongoing issues of coming to terms with what has happened.

That really only works if they truly are remorseful. Many have shown utter disdain for their victims family, who are in themselves victims.

first of all sidney lets face a coupla facts about your beloved law ok.
No1-the westminster system is an adverserial system ,and as has often been proven open to manipulation and abuse.
no2 -the arean of judicial process is an artificial one for gods sakes.with the absolute plethora of legislation ocvering every minute factor about the process ,what actually goes into proving a case is in all probablitiy a fraction of what in essence is the ungarnished truth ;what exactly went on at that very point in time of the act being committed ,what is relevant to the setting of the actions.
Part of our forensic rehab process is getting those placed in psych hosptial to do violence prevention groupwork and individually offence chain work.this is often very painful andat least uncomfortable.In the words of one of my residents recently-"why the fuuck has it taken me so long to realise what I put people through."his actions -Obviously i cannot say due to privacy but hes well and truly up there in shagnasty rankings.
yeah the victims suffer from the moment of the offence ,but the offender ,dependent on circumstances and moreso attitude ,may well go through like with "so what " or the mispent adulation of dysfunctional peer groups commonly referred to as "staunch"
the work done by the offender ipsofacto is often never communicated to the victims due to legal process imposed barriers,mostly to do with the protective factor ,or usually the victims whanau wishing to forget the trauma., let alone the malfunctioning DNA sample who caused it.

We aren't talking cross purposes here, and I don't pretend that the application of the law is rehabilitive very often. Nor do I pretend that any system is perfect, but in my considered opinion, this one ain't as bad as I was expecting it to be.. everything is artificial if humans create it.....

Of course I see value in the sort of work you are doing. The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

The lock em up and throw away the key approach is simple, satisfying at a rudimentary level and actually doesn't solve the problem... we have a ways to go to get to the american level of failure in that regard, but we are in second place....

Originally Posted by Sidney

The issues I have and was referring to are around an emotive response to sentencing, driven by victim perceptions. That is a can of worms with potentially very negative outcomes...

If this requirement is not addressed then there are very major negative outcomes. At the moment it is skewed far too far towards the favour of the perpetrator with little regard to the victims. As you said earlier that all things must be weighed up, that means all things including the victims expectations.

Gagetman

Again, we apparently have the lowest rate of serious offending for 15 years and the fullest prisons. I would suggest that public perception is most likely inaccurate.

Deterence is a very subjective area and is not well understood by anybody, let alone the average poorly trained & environmentally challenged, under 25 yr old offender, with low empathy, and non complete frontal lobe development..... it doesn't occur to them that they might get caught, let alone how serious the sentence might be.

Confrontation of the damage caused is part of accountability, but you are correct, further damage to the victims is not appropriate and strict criteria for both parties has to be evident before any benefit can result...

@Sidney whats your opinion on the NZ based Sensible Sentencing Trust........if we have the lowest rate of serious offending and full prisons, why do you think victims families and concerned citizens went to the trouble to set up this organisation?

There are many, many more ordinary citizens out there who think along the same lines....we all know we will never live in some crime free utopia, WE (the majority) just want them off our streets and 'punished' for their offence not given the "arr poor boy, its not his fault his parents/one parent, either didnt give him the love and upbringing he deserved, shite"....so put him 'right' inside, when hes doing his minimum 10 year stretch....not 10 months to be released and re offend.....

It wont work for the the vast majority of crims, but at least it keeps the bastards out of lives for longer.....their going to end up back inside sooner or later anyway (stereotyping again).....

I would happily support a Chinese style system for certain offenders😆

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

If they took the word "sensible" out of their name, I would listen more. If the only solution that organisation has is for longer sentences, then frankly they are just feeding off other peoples misery (the victims) and perpetuating the idea that that might actually work.

There is a place for preventative detention for those that cannot function outside. I would just like to see less of those people being created by "sensible" people.

There is a logistical problem with prisons, if you accommodate larges numbers of the same sort of people, in a confined environment - you will not produce a different type of person when you let them go.... that would be the definition of stupidity wouldn't it? - to expect something different?

We cannot continue to grow our prison population and not have cumulative and snowballing effect.... kids without fathers, families locked into single parenting.... a whole increasing generation of resentment...

This ain't about being soft on offenders, its about our future as a society.....

This whole discussion winds me up far more than it should do but it is probably because I see the solution as being simple. If we rid society of all inmates in our prisons that have been convicted for crimes such as murder, rape and causing harm etc by transporting them to Auckland Island and set up an exclusion zone patrolled by our navy,then we could leave them to their own devices without their being a burden on society. Yes they would likely die quick from exposure or slowly from starvation but frankly I couldn't care less. The money saved from prison closures and from not catering for these scum could be directed toward feeding the many hungry children in our schools.

Originally Posted by Rushy

This whole discussion winds me up far more than it should do but it is probably because I see the solution as being simple. If we rid society of all inmates in our prisons that have been convicted for crimes such as murder, rape and causing harm etc by transporting them to Auckland Island and set up an exclusion zone patrolled by our navy,then we could leave them to their own devices without their being a burden on society. Yes they would likely die quick from exposure or slowly from starvation but frankly I couldn't care less. The money saved from prison closures and from not catering for these scum could be directed toward feeding the many hungry children in our schools.

I have, for some time believed that our prison inmates should be housed in prisons on a Pacific Island...would be a great income earner for the Islands...their rules would differ from ours as far as growing their own food.
No good building prisons on remote islands near Antarctica as under our present rules only heating is provided for inmates and not their jailers.

Originally Posted by Rushy

This whole discussion winds me up far more than it should do but it is probably because I see the solution as being simple. If we rid society of all inmates in our prisons that have been convicted for crimes such as murder, rape and causing harm etc by transporting them to Auckland Island and set up an exclusion zone patrolled by our navy,then we could leave them to their own devices without their being a burden on society. Yes they would likely die quick from exposure or slowly from starvation but frankly I couldn't care less. The money saved from prison closures and from not catering for these scum could be directed toward feeding the many hungry children in our schools.

A society with the the capacity to do that, or behave like the Chinese do as suggested, would eventually turn on itself with the same vengeance and viciousness. That would then justify rule by a police state.

The book Lord of the Flies comes to mind.