Forum Home
PC World Chat
 
Thread ID: 97075 2009-02-03 13:38:00 Discussing stuff... rob_on_guitar (4196) PC World Chat
Post ID Timestamp Content User
744610 2009-02-04 08:33:00 If you were selecting people to populate your Island paradise would you be targeting the dregs?

Well, it simply isn't true that New Zealand was populated by the dregs of Europe, anyway. 		Deane F (8204)
744611 2009-02-04 08:41:00 That is the sort of thing I mean about evasion and equivocation I mentioned in another thread which may have gone over your head or not as the case may be.

So, let me get this right - because I do want to understand what you are trying to say - selective quoting (whatever that actually means) is equivocation and evasion? 		Deane F (8204)
744612 2009-02-04 08:45:00 Well, it simply isn't true that New Zealand was populated by the dregs of Europe, anyway.

That honour was awarded to Australia!! :D 		johcar (6283)
744613 2009-02-04 09:14:00 I have been told that the Auckland Island is good at this time of year.Plenty of sunshine. Rob99 (151)
744614 2009-02-04 09:20:00 I have been told that the Auckland Island is good at this time of year.

Perhaps we drop all repeat offenders off there along with a supply of plant food like spuds etc. We let them get on with it and pick up survivors (if any) after twenty years or so.

This will have the benefit of us not having to have extra prisons. In the event a prisoner is found not guilty on appeal then we can go pick him or her up in the event he/she is still alive. They can catch seals or eat each other.

For Deane F please note I said REPEAT OFFENDERS that are beyond rehabilitation.

Dont want crooks in Auckland Islands its a nature reserve. There wouldnt be any survivors veges dont grow there stink climate and peaty acid soil. DOC killed every single rabbit, cow pig and goat.
Maybe Waiheke Island would be better. 		prefect (6291)
744615 2009-02-04 09:32:00 What about dropping them off in the North Island - and cutting the cable...? Deane F (8204)
744616 2009-02-04 09:34:00 So how do you go about defining this "REPEAT OFFENDERS that are beyond rehabilitation" ?

And are you really happy to give this power to a government?

two questions this time.

1. A repeat offender I would think is fairly obvious.
I think even you should know this. A person can be paroled and certain persons are. Others like those that commit rape and other crimes of violence just eventually get themselves back in prison in the event the Police actually prove the offence. In my view a prison only keeps some of us safe in so far as the prisoner is locked up. It is called preventative detention and some Judges use this measure from time to time.

2. Yes.

I might add that as a Lawyer you seem to ask questions to which you do not know the answer.
When you get to Court there are only questions and if the witness has a brain they can answer several ways, Usually three ways is the best way.

You ask your question and I reply.
Yes.
No.
I don't know.

I would not normally elaborate because my opinion would not count and some lawyer could or would object as to hearsay or leading question etc.

So I swear that I tell will the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

But you see that I am only allowed to say in Court whatever the lawyers and the Magistrate and or Judges decide what is admissable. 		Sweep (90)
744617 2009-02-04 09:44:00 2. Yes.

History shows that governmets cannot be trusted with the sort of ultimate power that you would be happy to hand over.


I might add that as a Lawyer you seem to ask questions to which you do not know the answer.
When you get to Court there are only questions and if the witness has a brain they can answer several ways, Usually three ways is the best way.

You ask your question and I reply.
Yes.
No.
I don't know.

I would not normally elaborate because my opinion would not count and some lawyer could or would object as to hearsay or leading question etc.

So I swear that I tell will the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

But you see that I am only allowed to say in Court whatever the lawyers and the Magistrate and or Judges decide what is admissable.

Have you been drinking? 		Deane F (8204)
744618 2009-02-04 09:45:00 I might add that as a Lawyer you seem to ask questions to which you do not know the answer.Is that not the point of asking a question?


LOL I just asked a question that I know the answer to. :banana 		Rob99 (151)
744619 2009-02-04 09:47:00 So how do you go about defining this "REPEAT OFFENDERS that are beyond rehabilitation" ?

And are you really happy to give this power to a government ?

You define them by their repeat offending,pick a number, call that enough, the line in the sand.

I'm happy with 3, Prove your a big enough stain on the community by being locked up 3 times and that's it ,Your out, Off to live on Sweeps Island. 		Metla (12)
1 2 3 4 5