Thread: Should Have Been More Than a Warning

Originally Posted by timattalon

Indirect victimless crime??? Buying weed is not taxed, therefore you are depriving the NZ taxpayer of money that could be used to support the country....Health, education, police....more tax income equals more budget for the govt to allocate where it is needed. Everyone becomes a victim.

Giving money to gangs that supply drugs...encourages and finances other criminal activity.....= more indirect victims.

Buying from a non gang grower- Undeclared income-they wont pay tax on it either.

Make it legal and tax it - no problem from me. Tax it, study it.

Alcohol also causes victims. But there is tax on booze put into the general fund which part of is also used to counter the negative aspects such as financing hospitals to deal with injuries etc. It still creates victims but it addresses some of the issues as well. (or trys to)

Only way to tax illegal earnings in reality is via a consumption tax such as GST - cash earnings are going to be spent/laundered; ergo tax gets paid. Your argument on this basis is moot - I agree with what it says about character though, and consumption of drugs or alcohol features prominently in interviews for renewing a license for this reason.
At the end of the day: why are we even discussing this? I don't think anyone (other than that dork Systolic/Cahill acolyte) disagrees with the outcome?

Originally Posted by timattalon

Indirect victimless crime??? Buying weed is not taxed, therefore you are depriving the NZ taxpayer of money that could be used to support the country....Health, education, police....more tax income equals more budget for the govt to allocate where it is needed. Everyone becomes a victim.

Giving money to gangs that supply drugs...encourages and finances other criminal activity.....= more indirect victims.

Buying from a non gang grower- Undeclared income-they wont pay tax on it either.

Make it legal and tax it - no problem from me. Tax it, study it.

Alcohol also causes victims. But there is tax on booze put into the general fund which part of is also used to counter the negative aspects such as financing hospitals to deal with injuries etc. It still creates victims but it addresses some of the issues as well. (or trys to)

Tons of things don't result in tax being paid. Selling items for cash. Tradie doing cash jobs etc. The amount of money the govt takes off you through different forms of taxation more than make up for it. Word on the street is the gangs don't give a fuck about selling weed anymore - it's much easier to buy P these days than weed.

Originally Posted by timattalon

A willingness to break the law, even a stupid law is still going to reflect on the person. What I am suggesting that people consider, is are you willing to break the law? What does this say about your respect for the law? And at what point does a law become stupid? Who makes that call?

Someone's willingness to break the law and go over the speed limit, someone's willingness to break the law and smoke weed has VERY LITTLE to do with your fit and proper status. As shown by the out come of this scenario.

Seriously, if someone smokes weed, or speeds when they drive it doesn't demonstrate WHATSOEVER about their respect for the law and suggesting otherwise is actually ludicrous.

What you're suggesting is that all law breaking is equal to any other law breaking. That's simply just not the case.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks about what laws, whether they think they're stupid or not or for whatever reason. It's quite SIMPLY about the SERIOUSNESS of the crime.

We both know @Jexla that if that was the case there wouldn't be one person in NZ with a firearms license. And interestingly there wouldn't be one cop either.

The senior I saw driving while on his mobile Friday. Sacked. The cop two Friday's ago that didn't move into the left lane, sacked.

Lady here in the uk was that annoyed about the ticket she got for being on here mobile phone she sat out side the Marlborough cop shop and filmed the cops coming and going in there cars. Most on there phones she got a cease and desist thrown at her for good measure proved here point though

Oh see it all the time. And fucking truck drivers, do these people not know about bluetooth.

Originally Posted by Wirehunt

Oh see it all the time. And fucking truck drivers, do these people not know about bluetooth.

as one of those "fornacating truck drivers" myself I will answer.....yes we have heard of bluetooth,some of us have trucks fitted with it......however some of us have bosses who are so tight they need operation to fart and those tight bosses declinded to tick the box when ordering a new truck as it "costs us money" eg my scania truck has all the swicthes etc on steering wheel but cant use it as not installed. in case where I NEED to use phone I stop dial number then chuck on my earmuffs and jam phone inside one ear..holds it in place and can talk fine n dandy.
if boss rings me while Im driving I answer on the R.T. that confuses the crap out of them.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Someone's willingness to break the law and go over the speed limit, someone's willingness to break the law and smoke weed has VERY LITTLE to do with your fit and proper status. As shown by the out come of this scenario.

Seriously, if someone smokes weed, or speeds when they drive it doesn't demonstrate WHATSOEVER about their respect for the law and suggesting otherwise is actually ludicrous.

What you're suggesting is that all law breaking is equal to any other law breaking. That's simply just not the case.

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks about what laws, whether they think they're stupid or not or for whatever reason. It's quite SIMPLY about the SERIOUSNESS of the crime.

So are you saying its acceptable to break the law if it is not one you deem serious?

Are you saying speeding is not a serious crime? It may be a crime you deem not serious, but the consequences of a fuck up at speed are VERY serious.

Ever turned up to a crash with a fatality because they were speeding? Tell them it wasn't serious......... These are consequences that as a bystander I hope to never ever see again. Nor do I wish that on anyone else.

Tell you what, go out smoke a heap of dope and get caught a couple times. Pick up a couple speeding tickets, then reapply for a firearms license....Good luck with that. The whole point is these do have an impact on your "fit and proper status". Personal judgement is definitely taken into account, and frequent moments of lapses or poor decision do and should be taken into account. If the degree of your offending is light they may consider it a moment of indiscretion or lapse judgement. Repetition would however show a stronger disregard for the law. These will have differing affects on a license application, but I assure you that they will be considered.

Originally Posted by Beavis

Tons of things don't result in tax being paid. Selling items for cash. Tradie doing cash jobs etc. The amount of money the govt takes off you through different forms of taxation more than make up for it. Word on the street is the gangs don't give a fuck about selling weed anymore - it's much easier to buy P these days than weed.

Selling your own private goods is allowed and is not taxable.

Tradies doing cash jobs will definitely get them in hot water with the IRD if caught.

Maybe gangs dont care about weed, that much I would not know as I dont have contact with weed or gangs. I am inclined to believe you about the "P" too.

No tax system will ever be perfect. But tax is there for the community to provide for itself. In our case the community is the whole of NZ and what it provides is health, police, shelter, welfare, and many other services and assistance. If someone is ducking out of their tax obligations then they are effectively trying to rip off the rest of the country. They may see it a a victimless crime, but it is everybody else that has to make up the short fall.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

as one of those "fornacating truck drivers" myself I will answer.....yes we have heard of bluetooth,some of us have trucks fitted with it......however some of us have bosses who are so tight they need operation to fart and those tight bosses declinded to tick the box when ordering a new truck as it "costs us money" eg my scania truck has all the swicthes etc on steering wheel but cant use it as not installed. in case where I NEED to use phone I stop dial number then chuck on my earmuffs and jam phone inside one ear..holds it in place and can talk fine n dandy.
if boss rings me while Im driving I answer on the R.T. that confuses the crap out of them.

A mate of mine who was a truckie was being pulled over at a random booze stop when his phone rang, He ignored it while moving partly because the cops could hear it ringing. He passed through the line having the caller (his boss) try several times straight away. When he pulled over after exiting the line of cops and answered the call the boss was yelling and giving him an earful for not answering. Meanwhile one of the officers came over to see if he had been told to pull over and he heard some of the comments like the boss yelling "I dont care if you're driving, answer the god-damned phone when I call" The officer indicted to the driver to give him the phone and listened for a bit. When the boss stopped for air, the officer then proceeded to rip the boss a new one regarding his disregard of the law and suggested that he may receive a call from higher up the chain and that he would likely be getting the ticket instead of the driver..(No actual ticket issued as the driver had pulled over to answer, but the boss didn't know that)...It was about then that my mate decided he didn't like working there anymore so he told the entire workplace about that chat before leaving.

having met that employer, that story still makes me smile....

Originally Posted by timattalon

So are you saying its acceptable to break the law if it is not one you deem serious?

Are you saying speeding is not a serious crime? It may be a crime you deem not serious, but the consequences of a fuck up at speed are VERY serious.

Ever turned up to a crash with a fatality because they were speeding? Tell them it wasn't serious......... These are consequences that as a bystander I hope to never ever see again. Nor do I wish that on anyone else.

Tell you what, go out smoke a heap of dope and get caught a couple times. Pick up a couple speeding tickets, then reapply for a firearms license....Good luck with that. The whole point is these do have an impact on your "fit and proper status". Personal judgement is definitely taken into account, and frequent moments of lapses or poor decision do and should be taken into account. If the degree of your offending is light they may consider it a moment of indiscretion or lapse judgement. Repetition would however show a stronger disregard for the law. These will have differing affects on a license application, but I assure you that they will be considered.

My opinion of what a serious crime has nothing to do with it. Think about what the courts consider to be a serious crime then try again.


Hint: Smoking weed for personal use and a couple of speeding tickets would not be considered serious crime.

Originally Posted by Jexla

My opinion of what a serious crime has nothing to do with it. Think about what the courts consider to be a serious crime then try again.


Hint: Smoking weed for personal use and a couple of speeding tickets would not be considered serious crime.

Quite correct. No it is not considered a serious crime, but it is considered as a crime and when it comes license renewal, this is considered. While it may even be considered acceptable, it is still taken into account.

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

What is wrong with locking the vehicle and classing it as secure? (for that type of situation ie toilet or tucker stop)

technically illegal... if not being constantly supervised

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

Yeah I know that. What I'm meaning is, Why shouldn't a locked vehicle be deemed secure?
A locked vehicle is probably equally as secure as a A cat safe, especially if it is alarmed.

If a vehicle is locked and the vehicle gets stolen (no firearms involved), it was classed as secured in the eyes of the insurance company.

Back to what's a stupid law... Friend wanted to put a safe in his caravan, wasn't allowed but in theory he could bolt it to a tree on his property and get it signed off

My neighbour got his `safe` signed off in his house bus, which is very much still driveable, despite it being his static home.
AO didn't even go an look at it