| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 106732 | 2010-01-21 04:46:00 | 3 Strikes: Will it reduce crime? | lance4k (4644) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 850413 | 2010-01-21 10:17:00 | The original question was will it reduce crime ? I think it will. But I note that one of the provisions is that judges must give a warning on the second offence. (so if a useless judge forgets to give the warning - then 3 strikes cant apply !) (also what about the situation now, where a judge can give a serious offender preventive detention, which means they may never come out) does this new law mean that they can only get 14 years etc ? I also think that all sentences should be served cumulatively. This would soon wake people up. Now they commit about 10 crimes in one job and get a jail sentence for just one of them. You would only have to build a few more jails till people realised they will be inside for along time, so they would think twice ! |
Digby (677) | ||
| 850414 | 2010-01-21 13:40:00 | As it says here (www.occ.org.nz) There are ages for criminal responsibility in New Zealand: - a child under 10 years old cannot be charged with a criminal offence - a child aged 10 or over, but under 14, cannot be prosecuted for a criminal offence except for murder or manslaughter - a young person aged 14 or over, but under 17, can appear in the Youth Court on criminal charges, or, if the charges are serious, they can appear before the District Court or the High Court - a person aged 17 or over will be dealt with by the District Court for all criminal charges. So you're right, under 14's can only be charged with manslaughter or murder wow it's pretty scary under 14's can only be charged with manslaughter or murder. So here is a list of things under 14's cannot be prosecuted for: sexual assault robbery arson fraud I can't believe under 14's could get away with these crimes. If government wants to reduce crime they should make under 14's liable for more crimes other than just manslaughter or murder. |
lance4k (4644) | ||
| 850415 | 2010-01-21 18:09:00 | If this legislation was in place 10 years ago numerous innocent people would still be alive, rather then brutally murdered by filth, You disgust and revolt me, You would live in fear of their reactions to punishment? **** them, they rape and kill, and they are not interested in behaving in any manner but sheer violence no matter how soft fools like you want to be, when they get given a break, They are just given another opportunity to wreck violence on people. Three acts of violence deserves a bullet in the head. You're the one who seems to be living in fear, and I'm not soft, but the policies you propose don't solve the problem and your much beloved examples of the United States demonstrates that. So when we finally have their high murder rate, I guess you'll be well pleased that your looney theories work. New Zealand has a low crime rate and relatively little violence. We can always improve but the hysteria whipped up my complete idiots like you does nothing to help. |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 850416 | 2010-01-21 18:12:00 | The original question was will it reduce crime ? I think it will. But I note that one of the provisions is that judges must give a warning on the second offence. (so if a useless judge forgets to give the warning - then 3 strikes cant apply !) (also what about the situation now, where a judge can give a serious offender preventive detention, which means they may never come out) does this new law mean that they can only get 14 years etc ? I also think that all sentences should be served cumulatively. This would soon wake people up. Now they commit about 10 crimes in one job and get a jail sentence for just one of them. You would only have to build a few more jails till people realised they will be inside for along time, so they would think twice ! Deterrence doesn't work no matter how much you persist with the belief that it does. Even Garth McMinto acknowledges the death penalty isn't a deterrent, so no one is going to "soon wake up". |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 850417 | 2010-01-21 20:26:00 | Deterrence doesn't work no matter how much you persist with the belief that it does. Even Garth McMinto acknowledges the death penalty isn't a deterrent, so no one is going to "soon wake up". So how do you propose society deals with repeat offenders? If would appear that we either have to lock them up forever or execute them in order to stop them re-offending. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 850418 | 2010-01-21 20:26:00 | You're the one who seems to be living in fear, and I'm not soft, but the policies you propose don't solve the problem and your much beloved examples of the United States demonstrates that. So when we finally have their high murder rate, I guess you'll be well pleased that your looney theories work. New Zealand has a low crime rate and relatively little violence. We can always improve but the hysteria whipped up my complete idiots like you does nothing to help. How exactly does sending people to jail for the rest of their lives not decrease violence? Deterrence may not work, but having psychopath who are repeat offenders walking our streets just waiting for them to strike does not make any of us any safer. When scum is locked up we are safer. I guess everyone who disagrees with the liberal agenda is an idiot? I don't see you proposing anything useful other than the regular prison doesn't reform people. Well we all know it doesn't. But it's a place for scum to rot. |
Cato (6936) | ||
| 850419 | 2010-01-21 20:30:00 | How exactly does sending people to jail for the rest of their lives not decrease violence? Deterrence may not work, but having psychopath who are repeat offenders walking our streets just waiting for them to strike does not make any of us any safer . When scum is locked up we are safer . I guess everyone who disagrees with the liberal agenda is an idiot? I don't see you proposing anything useful other than the regular prison doesn't reform people . Well we all know it doesn't . But it's a place for scum to rot . It's clear Cato,you have not heard of the terrible wet bus ticket treatment,those crims shake at the very thought! |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 850420 | 2010-01-21 20:34:00 | Metla for Prime Minister! +1 for Terry & Catos thoughts |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 850421 | 2010-01-21 20:46:00 | You're the one who seems to be living in fear, and I'm not soft, but the policies you propose don't solve the problem and your much beloved examples of the United States demonstrates that. So when we finally have their high murder rate, I guess you'll be well pleased that your loony theories work. Read this again. If this legislation was in place 10 years ago numerous innocent people would still be alive Whats important are the lives of innocent people, not how badly the scum may react to not being allowed to rape and murder. This in not the USA anymore then it is Russia or China or Norway. Here,read this and think about it. If this legislation was in place 10 years ago numerous innocent people would still be alive Getting through yet?,Try this. If this legislation was in place 10 years ago numerous innocent people would still be alive Or how about If this legislation was in place 10 years ago numerous innocent people would still be alive |
Metla (12) | ||
| 850422 | 2010-01-21 21:01:00 | Take my word for it,your breath is wasted and he says he is not a leftie. | Cicero (40) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | |||||