< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: We are living in a sick society


SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Thursday, September 01, 2005

We are living in a sick society

This is just disgusting - few other words can describe it. Labour has run our countries Police into the ground and they are now at the point where the officers are getting this level of respect from the community. I would happily forgo a tax cut to see that money put into crime and serious hard time.

Update - I challenge any lefties reading this to justify Labours Law and Order policy being nothing more than a bullet point in the Tax policy. Some interesting reading from the Police Association website. Go to it and read some of their issues. The parties that appear to be supporting a hard line on crime are ACT, National, NZ First and United Future.

The Maori Party is more interested in Te Tiriti issues, and all the lefties are hopeful that restorative justice will 'fix' crime. Frankly, early intervention is bullshit. The only thing that people understand in consequences. Currently criminals understand that there are very few consequences of committing crime. That needs to change. I would like to see some new consequences created so that people are less inclined to commit crimes. Some examples include - longer and harder time, and loss of licence (even if it wasn't a driving office). Stuff em, they can use public transport until they learn to be part of society. It would also be nice to introduce a criminal tax that is levied on either income or welfare payments to crims that go ringfenced for Law and Order initiatives.

Why am I so hard on restorative justice? Around 13 months ago my office, along with a few others nearby was broken into. We were lucky in that we had an alarm (which strangely didn't go off, since added another sensor and it will go off next time) but limited him to stealing a hammer which was used to break into other offices. When caught, I was invited to go to a restorative justice meeting, but after talking with a few people whoe opinions I trust, I decided not too because it can be used as evidence in obtaining a reduced sentence apparently. The Police officer that I had been dealing with also said that it was a joke and didn't achieve anything.

Until I see the Police actively supporting restorative justice, it is nothing more than hot air spouting from the rabid left.

ยท Linked Article

Posted by Bernard Woolley | 9/01/2005 12:14:00 pm


Blogger Keith said...

Even if caught, young offenders will probably get name suppression and not do jail time.
There was a hell of a lot to be said for the days when the local plod would have taken 'em around the corner and administered a thrashing.
I'm so bloody sick of the do-gooder bleeding hearts who use the most amazing mental contortions to excuse the filth who carry out acts such as this.
My God--have we come so far down the track of moral idiocy that a speeding driver is a higher priority than murderous little sick thugs such as these?

9/01/2005 12:30:00 pm  
Blogger Chron Gen said...

I wondered whether Gummint might have thrown the chequebook at law and order this election, they throw money at everything else, why not at the Cops?

Is is really because the have an irrational ideology which believes crime and anti social behaviour is the fault of Roger Douglas & Ruth Richardson, and not because these scumbags consciously choose to commit a crime ?

9/01/2005 12:34:00 pm  
Blogger Bernard Woolley said...

Its something that National and ACT really need to drive home in the next week or so - Law and Order. It is perhaps one of the most fundamental services that government should be providing. If it can't afford it, then they can stop paying heritage, culture and recreation, Wananga and all the other niceities until they get the basics working well. The politicians need to learn to prioritise needs. Get the fundamentals organised first, then the nice-to-haves. Just like families and business are supposed to do it.

9/01/2005 12:47:00 pm  
Blogger Keith said...

"...it is nothing more than hot air spouting from the rabid left."

Absolutely--I have a relative making a *very* nice living from it though. Lots of travel and conferences, personal 0800 number provided at the taxpayer's expense and a fat salary.
Does it work? Who cares, just so long as it provides a "career path" for otherwise useless sociology graduates.

9/01/2005 01:29:00 pm  
Blogger Lucia Maria said...

The other thing is to come down hard on the dpb. Apparently, most criminals come from single parents - the rate of which is still growing.

9/01/2005 02:00:00 pm  
Blogger Keith said...

Lucyna, how to do that though? There are lots of single mums who really do need the helping hand of the dpb. Maybe a cut-off date once the children are old enough to be cared for in a creche, but a lot of single mothers simply go ahead and have another child before that stage anyway. Not an easy problem to fix.

9/01/2005 02:44:00 pm  
Blogger Lucia Maria said...

Keith, where I would start would be in the definition. Change it from a dpb to an unemployment benefit. Take away the extra money per child so that there is no incentive to create extra children for extra money.

I would put research money into investigating and writing about the dangers to children of single parenting as as life-style choice, and the benefits to children of two parents as role models of what a normal relationship is like. All this pc crap about all sort of families is just that - crap.

Lowering taxes drastically would also reduce the pressure on existing families - apparently arguing about money is the biggest cause of stress in couple's lives today. I wouldn't be surprised if money was also the biggest cause of breakups.

9/01/2005 02:54:00 pm  
Blogger Chaucey said...

I'm sad about that story. The poor cat, and that poor family. Who'd be a police officer, eh?

I hate crimes committed against animals....

The sentencing should be very harsh. Not a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket... I want these people locked up and away from harming other pets.

9/01/2005 03:36:00 pm  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Creepy little effers. Displaying senseless intentional brutality towards animals like that is the biggest warning sign of a future killer.

9/01/2005 03:42:00 pm  
Blogger Bernard Woolley said...

Chaucey - I know what you mean. I felt so sad when I read that story. Law and Order must be turned in to an election issue!

9/01/2005 03:51:00 pm  
Blogger ZenTiger said...

This is more than the killing of an animal (as if that isn't enough), it was a strong threat of further violence levelled at s specific police officer, and involving his family.

As such, I would support sufficient resources into catching the culprits and bringing them to justice - not just on animal cruelty, but whatever charges can be laid for what they have done, and what they have implied, to this family.

9/01/2005 04:36:00 pm  
Blogger Keith said...

Absolutely. Terrorising a man's family ought to attract some serious resources and a serious penalty.

9/01/2005 04:39:00 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's true, the fuckers that torture animals will go on to kill or hurt people, so getting them early and locking them up is a good plan. Re your challenge Bernard, lefties generally don't vote Labour so aren't inclined to defend its policies. I too would prefer to see the cops spending more time solving crimes than hassling me about my driving (an activity I can only assure them will have utterly no effect), but I don't see what changing the government would have to do with it. I haven't gone searching statistics or anything, but on a purely subjective basis, I don't recall the last few periods of National govt as idylls of low crime and effective policing in comparison with the intervening periods of Labour govt.

9/01/2005 05:33:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home