Thread: Hunter admits accidentally shooting wife

Originally Posted by Rushy

You can counsel and cuddle these teenage pricks all you want but while I continue to see ever increasing numbers of people being violently punched, kicked and having knives held to their throats on television news footage I choose not to subscribe to your line of thinking and in fact am waiting for the day that I see camera footage of a shop owner taking a well aimed baseball bat to the knees of a couple of these bloody scumbags so I can be the first to show that the stupid public support such action and can make contribution to the defence fund that the poor bugger would need when he is transitioned from victim to offender by our fucked up society.

Was this meant for another thread Rushy?

Originally Posted by Rushy

You can counsel and cuddle these teenage pricks all you want but while I continue to see ever increasing numbers of people being violently punched, kicked and having knives held to their throats on television news footage I choose not to subscribe to your line of thinking and in fact am waiting for the day that I see camera footage of a shop owner taking a well aimed baseball bat to the knees of a couple of these bloody scumbags so I can be the first to show that the stupid public support such action and can make contribution to the defence fund that the poor bugger would need when he is transitioned from victim to offender by our fucked up society.

I don't want to cuddle them at all.... I want something that works and your way doesnt work. Its never worked and it will continue to not work. What it will do is continue to breed serious criminals and train them in prisons.

Originally Posted by Mauser308

Rehabilitation and correction only work in certain cases, same as only certain people that commit crimes go one to become career criminals. A better study is the one that tracked infants from birth through to adult similar to the Dunedin study, which indicated that it is far more effective to intervene prior to the age of three than at any other time (including correction as a young adult...).

Notably, @Sidney I never indicated name and shame - what I said needs to happen is accurate reporting of the incident and the result of the court action so that others can learn from the incident... Or, you could just go flame on and get the monobrow and the keyboard fangs without bothering to read.

what u said was "publicise and punish accordingly" without excluding naming. Perhaps u are a victim of your own lack of specificity...? Yes u are correct patterns are established very early in life... but the brain is also plastic and can be retrained at any stage... it would seem that the best bang for the buck might be at the start of adolescent criminality in terms of understanding cost and benefit if the figures I quoted above are even close. Harder to do that with plunket nurses.

Originally Posted by Mauser308

Rehabilitation and correction only work in certain cases, same as only certain people that commit crimes go one to become career criminals. A better study is the one that tracked infants from birth through to adult similar to the Dunedin study, which indicated that it is far more effective to intervene prior to the age of three than at any other time (including correction as a young adult...).

Notably, @Sidney I never indicated name and shame - what I said needs to happen is accurate reporting of the incident and the result of the court action so that others can learn from the incident... Or, you could just go flame on and get the monobrow and the keyboard fangs without bothering to read.

Accurate reporting? From the media? When guns are involved....????? I'll have some of what you have been taking....it sounds like fun.

On a more serious note, I stayed out of this so far because I have more questions and very little else?

How can any of us evaluate a fair response / repercussion to the situation when clearly 90% of the information needed to make an informed decision has been withheld?

Since when do the media even try to understand the implications or truth in what they publish? ( A more realistic question is probably "when did they stop?")

As for punitive vs restorative vs vigilante justice; Each situation is different. I can trot out several recent examples and historic ones, that will support both sides of the argument. Each of the offenders and victims has their own situation, and it is up to the judges to decide what form of response is warranted. Like all humans, there is room for error, and in our system this error is compounded by the confusion by lawyers arguing a case. And it i s very confrontational / adversarial. Hence the word arguing is very accurate in its application here.

There must be a better way, but each of the systems has its down sides. Too harsh and leaning towards punish means if we get it wrong we make things worse, too soft and they learn to repeat the behaviour without fear of consequences. My own view is we have swung too far towards the softly softly in discipline and society is now reaping what it sowed with the lack of discipline and boundaries many of us learnt in "harder" times. I believe it starts before they offend, when they are children learning boundaries and consequences for exceeding them.

It used to be that when a youth got dragged home by the police, the youth were more worried about what their parents would say, now it seems the parents will be more concerned about what their child claims the police have done to them....

Originally Posted by planenutz

Was this meant for another thread Rushy?

No.

The guy made a mistake. He didn't need a stricter childhood, or hard line police response or a 'when I was a boy' speech. He was simply negligent.

He nearly dusted his wife, any married man knows he is going to pay for that daily for the rest of his life

Originally Posted by Pointer

The guy made a mistake. He didn't need a stricter childhood, or hard line police response or a 'when I was a boy' speech. He was simply negligent.

He nearly dusted his wife, any married man knows he is going to pay for that daily for the rest of his life

Yes that failed attempt will see him suffer far more than the lynch mob on here could muster up

"Do you remember that time you nearly-"

"Yes dear "

Now YOU cook ME some eggs

"Yes dear"

Originally Posted by Pointer

The guy made a mistake. He didn't need a stricter childhood, or hard line police response or a 'when I was a boy' speech. He was simply negligent.

He nearly dusted his wife, any married man knows he is going to pay for that daily for the rest of his life

Its hard enough to get the in laws to like you now.....nearly killing their daughter will surely make father in law like you even less......

Originally Posted by timattalon

Its hard enough to get the in laws to like you now.....nearly killing their daughter will surely make father in law like you even less......

Wait a minute. Are you telling me that we are supposed to try and get the inlaws to like us? Jeez, I've fucked that from the get go both times. First MIL was a WOII from J Force who was so used to ordering people around she never quit the habit and first FIL was an introverted light house keeper that thought he was in a crowd when he saw his shadow. Second MIL is a POME dyke and second FIL is a retired headmaster that is further to the left than I am to the right. None of them cottoned on to this fellah at all despite my offers to take them hunting.

Originally Posted by Rushy

Wait a minute. Are you telling me that we are supposed to try and get the inlaws to like us? Jeez, I've fucked that from the get go both times. First MIL was a WOII from J Force who was so used to ordering people around she never quit the habit and first FIL was an introverted light house keeper that thought he was in a crowd when he saw his shadow. Second MIL is a POME dyke and second FIL is a retired headmaster that is further to the left than I am to the right. None of them cottoned on to this fellah at all despite my offers to take them hunting.

there is good Sir a word which i believe fits you perfectly
MARTYR

Originally Posted by Rushy

Wait a minute. Are you telling me that we are supposed to try and get the inlaws to like us? Jeez, I've fucked that from the get go both times. First MIL was a WOII from J Force who was so used to ordering people around she never quit the habit and first FIL was an introverted light house keeper that thought he was in a crowd when he saw his shadow. Second MIL is a POME dyke and second FIL is a retired headmaster that is further to the left than I am to the right. None of them cottoned on to this fellah at all despite my offers to take them hunting.

I got pretty lucky on that respect, as I get on with both of her parents, which, after 23 years makes things a lot easier....