Thread: Hunter convicted

Originally Posted by Sidney

And not any more than anyone else.... precisely the point

Must be a rugby player.....I wasn't agreeing with you.
If your career involves the probability of overseas travel then you know the risk you take if you choose to break the law,
Breaking the law is a choice not an accident, it doesn't matter if your a rugby player, CEO or a night packer if you break the law thats on you.
If the consequences are greater because of your career well guess what that's also on you.
Entitlement thats all it is expecting to be let off with a lighter penalty because of who you are or what you do.

Originally Posted by dannyb

Must be a rugby player.....I wasn't agreeing with you.
If your career involves the probability of overseas travel then you know the risk you take if you choose to break the law,
Breaking the law is a choice not an accident, it doesn't matter if your a rugby player, CEO or a night packer if you break the law thats on you.
If the consequences are greater because of your career well guess what that's also on you.
Entitlement thats all it is expecting to be let off with a lighter penalty because of who you are or what you do.

Wrong... I completely understood that you weren't agreeing with me on attempt.. even though you completely ballsed it up.. I also completely understand that you don't understand the issue..

the fact is that penalty for some is greater than for others and despite all the expert opinion on here, there is a requirement to consider that as part of the process.

Sentencing is a complex process that experts struggle to get right, and frankly you lot haven't got a clue. Opinions without capacity or even knowledge are only emotions.

Originally Posted by Sidney

Wrong... I completely understood that you weren't agreeing with me on attempt.. even though you completely ballsed it up.. I also completely understand that you don't understand the issue..

the fact is that penalty for some is greater than for others and despite all the expert opinion on here, there is a requirement to consider that as part of the process.

Sentencing is a complex process that experts struggle to get right, and frankly you lot haven't got a clue. Opinions without capacity or even knowledge are only emotions.

WRONG, I understand it just fine and probably a little more than most around here as I have seen the process first hand many times.
I do however think it's not right, I could bang on all day about it a give examples but at the end of the day you have your opinion I have mine and I'm not about to have a keyboard war with you about it.

Originally Posted by Sidney

Wrong... I completely understood that you weren't agreeing with me on attempt.. even though you completely ballsed it up.. I also completely understand that you don't understand the issue..

the fact is that penalty for some is greater than for others and despite all the expert opinion on here, there is a requirement to consider that as part of the process.

Sentencing is a complex process that experts struggle to get right, and frankly you lot haven't got a clue. Opinions without capacity or even knowledge are only emotions.

Well Sidney we have plonkers making these decisions, if found guilty the punishment should be universal. No buts or ifs, clearly one size fits all. As mentioned before on here, a king hit on my son was treated by some idiot judge as so immaterial, the offender was given diversion? Fat useless Islander should have been charged with a min of grievous bodily harm. Sentences are crap!

Originally Posted by Maca49

Well Sidney we have plonkers making these decisions, if found guilty the punishment should be universal. No buts or ifs, clearly one size fits all. As mentioned before on here, a king hit on my son was treated by some idiot judge as so immaterial, the offender was given diversion? Fat useless Islander should have been charged with a min of grievous bodily harm. Sentences are crap!

Not even close Maca... every situation is different, so every outcome has to be as well... to suggest universal outcome is plain stupidity...

I have no idea about the appropriate outcome for your son and everybody gets stuff wrong. But as usual we haven't got all the facts and the judges don't determine what charges are laid. There is usually a reason for that and we don't know what that is either.

Look most of us understand the concept of fairness or proportionality and that doesn't stop suddenly because of personal emotional involvement. In that situation those decisions have to be made by others in order to attempt to maintain some degree of proportional response.

The fact is there is much more to consider that just the feeling of the victim or their families. And it wouldn't matter what was done for many victims, it would never be sufficient or appropriate in their opinion. Look at your response and then consider the contrast with the shooting victim's position in this story... in your case it doesn't matter to you what the offenders story is, in the shooters case he gets convicted anyway in spite of his victim's feeling about the matter...

Society has to consider the downstream effects of making decisions... victims are usually limited in that...

Originally Posted by Sidney

Not even close Maca... every situation is different, so every outcome has to be as well... to suggest universal outcome is plain stupidity...

I have no idea about the appropriate outcome for your son and everybody gets stuff wrong. But as usual we haven't got all the facts and the judges don't determine what charges are laid. There is usually a reason for that and we don't know what that is either.

Look most of us understand the concept of fairness or proportionality and that doesn't stop suddenly because of personal emotional involvement. In that situation those decisions have to be made by others in order to attempt to maintain some degree of proportional response.

The fact is there is much more to consider that just the feeling of the victim or their families. And it wouldn't matter what was done for many victims, it would never be sufficient or appropriate in their opinion. Look at your response and then consider the contrast with the shooting victim's position in this story... in your case it doesn't matter to you what the offenders story is, in the shooters case he gets convicted anyway in spite of his victim's feeling about the matter...

Society has to consider the downstream effects of making decisions... victims are usually limited in that...

I think you have just explained why the world is so fucked up, maybe you should take a step back and take off you rose tinted glasses and see it as it really is. I’m trying to enforced some payment that has been through the courts and awarded to me, I have bailiffs working on it. Hahaha the crim is telling NZ law it doesn’t apply to him, NZ law is telling me it’s my fault. Great when the judgement goes for you but the offender gives the law the big finger and gets away with it. It’s a civil matter you know! No it’s not it’s a weak system, with no teeth, to much PC shit, yes they are imports and NZ law doesn’t want to be racist, we’re stuffed!!!

Originally Posted by Maca49

I think you have just explained why the world is so fucked up, maybe you should take a step back and take off you rose tinted glasses and see it as it really is. I’m trying to enforced some payment that has been through the courts and awarded to me, I have bailiffs working on it. Hahaha the crim is telling NZ law it doesn’t apply to him, NZ law is telling me it’s my fault. Great when the judgement goes for you but the offender gives the law the big finger and gets away with it. It’s a civil matter you know! No it’s not it’s a weak system, with no teeth, to much PC shit, yes they are imports and NZ law doesn’t want to be racist, we’re stuffed!!!

The only thing that I can say about my perspective Maca - is that it is unlikely to be as narrow as yours. Your probably need to to concentrate a little harder to work out where you think I might have said that the system works well, for everyone all of the time. Not many would describe my world view as Rose-tinted.

That however is an entirely different thing to on-balance thinking that our system is problably one of the best human systems for attempting to address the confliciting needs between individual rights, individual responsibilities and societal expectations that humans have ever designed in all of human history.

And here is another news flash for you - just because you are not getting the outcomes you think are appropriate through the system, neither makes the system at fault or proves failure of the system. We know nothing of the other side of your issues.

You and 257 ought to form a Hatfields and McCoy appreciation society...