LOL. That sounds like the stock “argument” against any reform.
Printable View
How much has crime increased in NZ?
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/19-...ally-increased
Almost every part of the country has experienced double digit increases in the frequency of crime compared to before the pandemic.
Labour gave full benefits to single mothers who previously would not name the father of their children, so those tomcats can contribute to family support.
In answer to a direct question on this mornings The Hui, Minister Sepuloni answered a total of 64000 kids were included in that change.
Get rooted NZ while the rooters continue unabashed and not responsible.
Thanks Labour.
‘Seeds of apartheid’ - Winston has read the mood of the vast majority of the electorate out there, sick of having separatism and favouritism towards one race shoved down their throats.
Done by Ardern for votes - not to lift the majority of Maoris and NZers up to greater and better standards in all things.
Watch this become the biggest election issue of 2023.
Winston will not benefit from it as he is the one who installed Ardern & her mob into power.
Ardern & Labour have no defence and will get swept out of office.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nz-fir...4AWK43DN4BGVI/
"What's going on in this country is straight-out racism and I'm against it and so are my colleagues."
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nz-fir...4AWK43DN4BGVI/
On Three Waters reform, Peters described the plan as "retarded theft".
So says Mr "Don't Blame Me" ;)
The Prime Ministers refers to a report from MSD and says child poverty is going down as the reports says slightly fewer children are experiencing hardship.
She conveniently forgets to mention that the report does not count children living in hotels, motels, caravans & cars. No shame
With all due respect ... I think it is more complicated.
The US do have a shockingly high crime rate (well, for any western country) - despite having as well the harshest penalties in the Western world. They have as well a rather high proportion of innocent people in their jails - even 10% on death row are innocent. Do they need harsher sentences?
We do need an effective criminal system (i.e. criminals can rely on being caught). We need a competent police force you can trust (i.e. without bias, without hidden corruption, without favouring buddies). We need a court system which produces fair sentences in months, not unfair sentences in years.
We don't need policemen planting evidence because they think somebody is guilty, and we don't need courts locking up innocent people for many years just because somebody must pay.
In general - we don't need harsher sentences, we need better (i.e. fairer) sentences for the offenders and a better system to distinguish between the guilty and the innocent.
And - we do need to grow a society which is growing less prison birds. We need to support family values, we need to help families to rear children, we need to provide a supportive environment helping these children to do the right thing and we need to educate in our schools responsible citizens.
This is what we need, not harsher penalties for the unlucky ones which are caught by the system (whether they are guilty of not).
That's suitably vague!
What weaker sentencing laws ? Give us a few examples where sentences have been changed.
I can't think of any.
The only thing was the repeal of the 3 Strikes law, which didn't reduce or weaken the judges ability to impose the maximum sentence but allowed them discretion where circumstances dictated it was justified, e.g. the mentally impaired chap who had to be given a prison sentence for trying to kiss a stranger in public, under the 3 Strikes law.
I think many who want harsher penalties are quite sanguine about the costs associated with having a more divided society of extremes, with a larger prison population American-style. Provided “we” have the luxuries and “feel” safe from “them”.
Agree with almost all of your post BP. But I do not agree with what is happening now, which is the use of so called “cultural reports” that reduce sentences in a big way, for mainly criminals of Maori descent. Handing out sentences and leniency based on race is disgraceful and leaves more criminals in our communities, unafraid of being caught.
I base it on a lengthy conversation with a barrister friend and reports from a close family member who works in one of our District Courts. I am shocked at what’s happening but hey, Labour promised to reduce the prison population.
https://www.act.org.nz/press-release...for-sentencing
Again, if this is what is happening, than I agree - this is not good and needs to be changed. However - in this case its not about tougher sentences, but it is about everybody getting the fair sentence, no matter what their race, gender or nationality. That's the reason Justicia is blind folded ....
You have my full support on that.
Not so sure about the ACT source ... while I used to like some of their policies, others made me wonder about their sound judgement. Just because they perceive (or claim) there is a problem, does not mean that it is, and it certainly does not mean that they have the right solution.
Just remembering their atrocious (and highly unfair) 3 strikes policy ... and find it really hard to take anybody supporting our gun lobby serious. Maybe I should, but then I would fight them.
ACT used to be once a liberal and decent party with the goal to further the common good (wasn't it the Association of Consumers and Taxpayers?). These days they appear to be more a collection of fringe groups lobbying for their own selfish goals, like gun rights (Aka NRA) and tougher penalties (sensible sentencing just in name) without looking at and understanding the real problems.
Simple solutions for complex problems do not work. Just another populist party.