Hard News: We still died at each other's hand
140 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Here is the full quote from a later Herald article (not online it seems, got it from ProQuest):
Thanks, Dave. The weird thing is, I had some idea I'd seen this but just could not find it. It's useful to have the context.
-
Dropping sure, but even better is the resolution rate.
http://www.stats.govt.nz/methods_and_services/tablebuilder/recorded-crime-homicide.aspx
I would like to see a study going back to 150yrs to see how 1870 (peak immigration) Gold fields etc come out, or rather how do we compare to the Pioneers? -
even better is the resolution rate.
That is certainly one of the stand-out things about homicide in this country: very, very few go unsolved. It helps that murder is frequently domestic, and the perpetrator is usually immediately identifiable or, even better, still there and sobbing over the body when the cops arrive. Also helping is that we don't tend to have pointless drive-by shootings where there are innumerable possible suspects, no apparent motive, and no clues.
-
I'd put this in the category of "dumb things to say" but not actively stupid, considering the widespread propagation of this particular myth.
And the fact that she explicitly attributed the information too, I guess.
Evidence of poor prep perhaps, but really nothing to warrant the storm of nastiness that followed in the right-wing blogosphere.
It's interesting that the question indicates the "mad January in South Auckland" meme was already going strong in the media. Most of the actual homicides were nowhere near South Auckland.
-
While we're all being pendantic about science and logic and stuff, I feel compelled out that in that PhD. comic that Lucy posted, Galileo appears on the Medieval News Network, when in fact he lived in the early-modern era, or, for the Italians, during the late-Renaissance.
And no educated Medieval denied the world's roundness: see Dante's Inferno, & Purgatory, both of which assume the existence of an antipodes to Jerusalem. And substantively, of course one can meaningfully comment on changes between polls that differ but by no more than the margin of error.
(Live by the geekery, die by the geekery.)
-
That XKCD has a great mouse-over text, too.
Second IMO only to Dinosaur Comics.
-
And no educated Medieval denied the world's roundness
No one who ever saw a lunar eclipse would, that's for sure. What shape casts a round shadow from every angle?
-
Way off subject here. So, Dave Dobbyn. Just watched your show Russell, and that got me thinking. Why don't you cover The Dylan Taite Music Prize ? That seemed obvious in that interview.
-
Um, not sure what you mean there, Sofie.
-
That is certainly one of the stand-out things about homicide in this country: very, very few go unsolved.
Well shall we call that unpunished? I am not alone in thinking there maybe some people in the slammer who may not be innocent but may not be guilty of the crimes they are being punished for.
-
I am not alone in thinking there maybe some people in the slammer who may not be innocent but may not be guilty of the crimes they are being punished for.
Yes the 'oh but they're far from innocent' case for the prosecution doesn't sit too well with my understanding of how our justice system is supposed to work.
-
Russell: My point is that if Minister and MPs say things in stupid ways, they will get criticised for it. If they say them in intelligent ways they will not.
Annette's comment was incredibly stupid for someone of her experience.Ah yes the Experience/Stupid Thing to Say balance, so difficult to get right. In fact Im working on the formula as we speak.
-
The latest from minister Judith Collins:
An utterly craven column, which forsakes any rational argument about three-strikes in favour of emotional browbeating and shroud-waving.
She really is shameless.
-
I don't believe prison should be enjoyable. Prison should be an unpleasant experience so offenders do not want to return.
The justice system's sole focus should not be on punishment. It is very important to give people the opportunity to turn their lives around.
But pressure from those who advocate for the rights of criminals has resulted in too much focus on rehabilitating the prisoners who are least likely to be rehabilitated.
Oh, FFS! Think I might emigrate.
You have to wonder whether she has even read any of the reports in our own Justice Ministry's online library. This approach doesn't work. It's not a question, it's a statement. It is a proven, and well-known fact. Am I missing something? Oh yeah, popular opinion and sensationalist legislating. Great basis for a criminal system, not.
Grrrr. Better go to Good One and have a robust coffee before my head explodes.
-
Reading's for sissies.
-
She really is shameless.
Wot! No freshly cut slack for bad prep? :)
-
Um, not sure what you mean there, Sofie.
Just that ,some sort of follow up through your show.like getting to see the entrants perform or an interview with the entrants each week or some type of media perspective. Never mind :)
-
She really is shameless.
Wot! No freshly cut slack for bad prep? :)
Not in a bylined column, no.
As has perhaps already been made abundantly clear, Ms Collins really gets on my tits.
-
Ms Collins really gets on my tits.
Perhaps Campbell Live will do a story about that.
-
The policy will deter criminals from committing further crimes, keep the worst offenders behind bars for longer and bring certainty to sentencing of the most hardened offenders.
Two distortions and a half-truth in the one sentence, and she only makes three claims. I hope Judith gives that PR lackey a pay increase.
It's a long-established fact that harsher sentences don't act as a deterrent. The murder rates in most states in the US that have capital punishment are higher than in most states that don't. Indeed, last time I checked 60% of the 10-least violent states didn't have capital punishment but 100% of the 10-most violent states did. How's that work, exactly? The deterrent comes from the likelihood of being caught, not what will happen to you if you do. Better to put more money into policing that corrections. The bang-for-buck is higher, and the effect on crime is higher. Instead, we get a cut in the police budget and this bullshit "three strikes" policy. Fucking awesome.
Maybe the policy will "keep the worst offenders behind bars for longer", but maybe it won't. What of preventative detention? What of that harshest judicial tool, the open-ended sentence? Precious little has been said about that, which I consider to be somewhat telling. The media certainly doesn't appear to have been asking the question.
As for certainty of sentencing, umm, what? All that you know is that, if you get convicted, you'll get the maximum time for whatever it is you're convicted of. Given that the maximum sentences for qualifying offences range between seven years and life, I wouldn't call that too much certainty.
I found it very interesting that neither Burton nor Bell would've been prevented from carrying out their murderous rampages had this law been in effect.
-
The latest from minister Judith Collins:
Lets break it down.
Stage 1: Starts out with an anecdote which supposedly justifies her position, and with descriptions of a horrific crime to soften readers up.
Stage 2: Consolidates her position with sledgehammer use of emotive appeals, to think of the pain, the anguish, the suffering, the bravery in the face of mealy-mouthed liberal ideas that wants to just give the offender a slap on the hand and send him back to terrorise..... well.... obviously everyone (or is it just the decent law abiding NZers who could be potential voters).
Stage 3:Throw a bit of hyperbole around "many families" "time and again" that sort of thing. Appeals to a nebulous "safety on teh streets" concept. Always a very good (but empty) high sounding strategy. Woe betide you if you get out of your vehicle in the wrong neighbourhood, a good scare tactic. Or you could be attacked in your sleep, another goodie.
Stage 4: This
In this country we have many people who have made a thriving industry out of making excuses for criminals.
All together now "Goddamn bleeding heart liberals and bottom feeding lawyers"
And this
It's this acceptance that every crime is solely a crime against the state rather than the individual that I believe is at the heart of the situation we now find ourselves in.
Eh! you mean all those judges have/had a secret unspoken agreement to protect the state not people. What have you been smokin'? As they say.
Stage 5: The wrap up. A quick reminder of the opening of the piece, the horror, the horror.
Thenvictims of crime are never truly released from their sentences.
Not if your dead, no. Do you have reach beyond the grave Minister, is that what you are saying?
Stage 6: The pay off .
The Government has announced a three-strikes policy that will escalate the severity of sentences.
Escalate is right, but not what you are thinking.
-
This was the weirdest part for me:
In this country we have many people who have made a thriving industry out of making excuses for criminals.
In the past decade these people have overwhelmed the debate on law and order with their views on the rights of offenders.
The Sensible Sentencing Trust is the most vocal lobby group in this country, isn't it?
-
Off topic I know, but sometimes the smallest things can annoy.
This is the first time John Key has changed his cabinet around; right?
So why do ALL media reports talk of a “reshuffle” ?
-
So why do ALL media reports talk of a “reshuffle” ?
Maybe shuffling was how he allocated them portfolios in the first place?
-
Maybe shuffling was how he allocated them portfolios in the first place?
Heh; But seriously, if people must use the cards analogy, the original cabinet was a “deal”.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.