|
|
|
johnr:muppet: I think Ben Dover and Tay Kit decide which prison, don't they?
excuse while I pi$$ myself laughing
Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation
queenstown: Well i did get busted for cultivation before.This time i got caught with 7 $50's and $300.And i told them i bought an ounce a week since march Im unemployed but when they asked where i got it from i told them i got money of my mum.Really dont want my mum to find out she spent money on my lawyer before.Now im just going to legal aid it.
Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.
scuwp:johnr:muppet: I think Ben Dover and Tay Kit decide which prison, don't they?
excuse while I pi$$ myself laughing
I agree. Award for the quote of the day goes to muppet!
KiwiNZ: You are probably up the creek with out a propulsion unit with this event.
but a tip for the future.....
Don't do crime, stay away from drugs and you will never have this problem, it is so easy really.
Fred99:KiwiNZ: You are probably up the creek with out a propulsion unit with this event.
but a tip for the future.....
Don't do crime, stay away from drugs and you will never have this problem, it is so easy really.
With 15% of the NZ population "using", proving half a century of prohibition to be an abject failure - except for allowing serious organised crime syndicates to prosper - I find myself feeling far more empathy with the OP and his predicament than I do with some of the comments posted in this thread by people who seem to enjoy seeing something very unpleasant about to happen - which won't make one iota of positive difference to the "goodness" of society in general, but will be a lifelong impediment to the OP's future.
Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.
Mike
queenstown: Well i did get busted for cultivation before.This time i got caught with 7 $50's and $300.And i told them i bought an ounce a week since march Im unemployed but when they asked where i got it from i told them i got money of my mum.Really dont want my mum to find out she spent money on my lawyer before.Now im just going to legal aid it.
queenstown: Yeah got way to drunk.Accidentally said okay to getting filmed as i had like 10 drinks on an empty stomach in 2 hours.They said based on what you said on the video we now have enough evidence to charge you with possession with intent.
gjm: I think you'd have more to worry about if you were riding a quad bike on a farm without a helmet on.

Fred99:Geektastic:Fred99:Geektastic:lokhor:Sidestep:lokhor: Unless he is of Maori descent, in which case he is pretty well screwed.
http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/snapshots-of-nz/yearbook/society/crime/corrections.aspx
That's not bias in the courts though.
It's a reflection of societal problems that have young Maori over represented in appearances before the courts in the first place.
You are wrong:
http://www.corrections.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/672574/Over-representation-of-Maori-in-the-criminal-justice-system.pdfWhen self-reported offending (and social background) was held constant,
Māori offenders appeared still to be twice as likely to be subject to Police attention,
relative to non-Māori offenders.
A more recent analysis of the same sample, now aged 21, indicated a smaller but
similar effect related to arrest and conviction for cannabis use. This study examined
the associations between the self-reported use of cannabis, and arrest and
conviction for cannabis related offences. Independently of self-declared cannabis
use, Māori were more likely to be arrested and convicted for cannabis use. Previous
police record, self-reported crime, and being male also increased the likelihood of
arrest and conviction. Fergusson et al found this “consistent with a labelling theory
perspective”.
It also shows that Maori are more likely to be imprisoned, rather than receive monetary fines or home detention.
That's probably because the ones in question usually have no money and/or cannot be trusted with home detention.
Speaking of money, I'd wager that there would be a similar correlation between "wealth" and imprisonment rates as there is with "ethnicity".
Section 8(i) of the Sentencing Act was apparently supposed to address the imbalance, but of course because it can't discriminate based on ethnicity or wealth, in practice it's of much more use to rich kids (of any ethnicity) with expensive lawyers arguing their case than it was ever going to be for any socially disadvantaged group.
Being rich has advantages, otherwise who would bother making the efforts required to get there?
Being born advantaged has considerable benefit too, as it considerably reduces the efforts required to become rich. With almost every measure of "success", the strongest correlation is having wealthy parents. Of course we love the exceptions, rags to riches stories as well as seeing the rich fall hard are immensely popular.
So you either accept that "as the nature of things", deny it (which isn't a credible position to take - despite being a disturbingly widely held opinion these days), or try to do something about it.
"Dong something about it" usually involves wealth redistribution and or sometimes "positive" discrimination - and is often vehemently opposed by some who have become rich, this may undeniably be through their own hard work, and they could rightly see this discrimination against themselves as somewhat "unfair".
I suspect the default position is that most (reasonably well-off) people quietly accept this as the nature of things, but make some concessions which at face value might seem offer solutions (to makes ourselves feel better?), but in reality have never really achieved much at all. If we keep doing what we've always done, we're going to keep getting what we've always got.

andrewNZ: While I don't support your actions at all, I'm frightened by the concept of someone being convicted of a crime based on something they said while very drunk. People say all sorts of crazy things drunk. If the words were backed up by actions, that'd be a different story.
|
|
|