Is Police Response Rate 2 Firearm Thefts Good Enough? "Caller Mike" Again.

"Caller Mike" on Chris Cahill saying one thing and NZP doing another. Kiwi Gun Blog:

https://kiwigunblog.wordpress.com/20...s-good-enough/

Some good comments.

Attachment 83618

Aye the real problem Cahill should be talking about - the weak or non existent sentences. Any half decent journo should be taking the cops, judiciary and politicians to task on this

Just read that! Very interesting!
Shame they have a photo of a cop dusting for fingerprints. 1 when they don't bother turning up. 2 on the inside of the door jam? Um the handle?

Had my arms inspection last night.

Police justifiably in many instances receive a beat up. Just saying that my encounter with the service / "force" last night was extremely cordial and that the representative was a credit to the organisation he represents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chainsaw

Aye the real problem Cahill should be talking about - the weak or non existent sentences. Any half decent journo should be taking the cops, judiciary and politicians to task on this

---

The cops have nothing to do with sentences, that's all on the judiciary and politicians.

I liked this comment

"But in fairness to NZ Police, they are ENTIRELY correct to prioritise speeding drivers over gun thieves. Drivers kill many, many more innocent people in New Zealand than firearms ever did — any and every year! Killer drivers are far less likely than gun thieves to ever do time for the crime. And cops who are often first to attend the road carnage get to later attend court so they can also witness the guilty walk free. I can only guess at the detrimental effect this combination of mental trauma and frustrated justice has on cops’ mental health, never mind on that of the survivors."

It shows that the lack of punishment is nt just confined to firearms but that the judiciary have gone soft in many areas.....

And priorities as cars do kill more than guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chainsaw

Aye the real problem Cahill should be talking about - the weak or non existent sentences. Any half decent journo should be taking the cops, judiciary and politicians to task on this

---

Jounralism in NZ is at a disgusting standard.

At least the heifer is out and gone

Done a fair bit of SOCO work I take it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sideshow

Just read that! Very interesting!
Shame they have a photo of a cop dusting for fingerprints. 1 when they don't bother turning up. 2 on the inside of the door jam? Um the handle?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cigar

The cops have nothing to do with sentences, that's all on the judiciary and politicians.

---

But they do suggest law and policy changes. What is being suggested is that they lobby to get the judicial system sorted, which is where a big chunk of the issues arise. There are fewer issues with law abiding firearms owners in general. Target the actual issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertle

Done a fair bit of SOCO work I take it?

---

I know enough I have a relative that is one so have more than an average understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timattalon

I liked this comment

"But in fairness to NZ Police, they are ENTIRELY correct to prioritise speeding drivers over gun thieves. Drivers kill many, many more innocent people in New Zealand than firearms ever did — any and every year! Killer drivers are far less likely than gun thieves to ever do time for the crime. And cops who are often first to attend the road carnage get to later attend court so they can also witness the guilty walk free. I can only guess at the detrimental effect this combination of mental trauma and frustrated justice has on cops’ mental health, never mind on that of the survivors."

It shows that the lack of punishment is nt just confined to firearms but that the judiciary have gone soft in many areas.....

And priorities as cars do kill more than guns.

---

@timattalon

I have no problems with the cops' priorities (deduced from what what they actually spend their time doing - the true test), namely ticketing speeding drivers. Thumbs up, even if it means they attend later or not at all at a gun burglary. Danger to life takes priority; danger to many lives more so.

The only real problems are Mr Chris Cahill's flapping lips and long nose.

Attachment 83671

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sideshow

I know enough I have a relative that is one so have more than an average understanding.

---

so, just so i understand, you have a relative, so you have a more than an average understanding.......hmmm well as someone who has, and when required does lift prints, i wouldn't exclude any area at POE, but hey your the expert

So what’s with the go slow then?
Since your the man on the coal face, maybe you can shed some light on why there seems to be a lack of turnout to stolen firearms and two days later?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sideshow

So what’s with the go slow then?
Since your the man on the coal face, maybe you can shed some light on why there seems to be a lack of turnout to stolen firearms and two days later?

---

No, ill leave it to arm chair quarterbacks and critics! you seem to have it all sussed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tertle

No, ill leave it to arm chair quarterbacks and critics! you seem to have it all sussed

---

Typical response that was to be expected cheers for your input:P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sideshow

Typical response that was to be expected cheers for your input:P

---

In all honesty, he is in a position where commenting could have a reflection on his employment. I know in my industry there are things I can say publicly and things I cannot. A lot has to do with privacy of our clients as well as sensitive business information and there are clauses in contracts regarding commenting on an employer in the public domain. I may or may not agree with my employers decisions but while I am welcome to discuss these difference with my employer directly and without ramification, to do so in a public forum would likely have serious consequences especially when it could put me in breach of my employment contract. For @Tertle to go further into some of these subjects I would expect he would have simlar or even more stringent clauses in his contract that means he needs to be diplomatic and careful. I have met tertle on a few occasions and, for what its worth, like most in his position, he strikes me as a decent, straight up fellow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cordite

@timattalon

I have no problems with the cops' priorities (deduced from what what they actually spend their time doing - the true test), namely ticketing speeding drivers. Thumbs up, even if it means they attend later or not at all at a gun burglary. Danger to life takes priority; danger to many lives more so.

The only real problems are Mr Chris Cahill's flapping lips and long nose.

Attachment 83671

---

Oh how right you are @Cordite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timattalon

In all honesty, he is in a position where commenting could have a reflection on his employment. I know in my industry there are things I can say publicly and things I cannot. A lot has to do with privacy of our clients as well as sensitive business information and there are clauses in contracts regarding commenting on an employer in the public domain. I may or may not agree with my employers decisions but while I am welcome to discuss these difference with my employer directly and without ramification, to do so in a public forum would likely have serious consequences especially when it could put me in breach of my employment contract. For @Tertle to go further into some of these subjects I would expect he would have simlar or even more stringent clauses in his contract that means he needs to be diplomatic and careful. I have met tertle on a few occasions and, for what its worth, like most in his position, he strikes me as a decent, straight up fellow.

---

Yep I fully understand that hence the :P in the last post.
Also why I didn’t post which relative, just a relative.