Why does NZ continue to refuse to let actions have consequences?

Forums › Off topic › Why does NZ continue to refuse to let actions have consequences?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

1556 posts

Uber Geek

#1266677 24-Mar-2015 12:09

Geektastic: We clearly do not like consequences.

See most drink-driving offence outcomes for details!

Also the Master of a 38,000 tonne vessel was just fined a mere $3000 for being drunk in charge of it at sea...!

$30,000 and a ban on ever sailing in NZ waters would have been more appropriate.

there is an update not available before. The Master of that vessel has been sacked so big consequence for him.

But in NZ as you say, people dont like consequences and clearly if you have money or could hurt your sporting career you normally get away. Too bad if you or your parents dont have money.
I say people are aware what consequences are so if they misbehave they MUST face the consequences. In the case of these 2 boys, they and their parents signed the code of conduct forms that spelt out the consequences if they misbehaved. I dont just blame rich parents but also the judge for over ruling the code of conduct the boys and parents signed.

HTPC Intel Pentium G3258 cpu, Gigabyte H97n-wifi motherboard, , 8GB DDR3 ram, onboard graphics. Hauppuage HVR 5500 tuner, Silverstone LC16M case, Windows 10 pro 64 bit using Nextpvr and Kodi

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266680 24-Mar-2015 12:12

Gilco2:
Geektastic: We clearly do not like consequences.

See most drink-driving offence outcomes for details!

Also the Master of a 38,000 tonne vessel was just fined a mere $3000 for being drunk in charge of it at sea...!

$30,000 and a ban on ever sailing in NZ waters would have been more appropriate.
there is an update not available before. The Master of that vessel has been sacked so big consequence for him.

But in NZ as you say, people dont like consequences and clearly if you have money or could hurt your sporting career you normally get away. Too bad if you or your parents dont have money.
I say people are aware what consequences are so if they misbehave they MUST face the consequences. In the case of these 2 boys, they and their parents signed the code of conduct forms that spelt out the consequences if they misbehaved. I dont just blame rich parents but also the judge for over ruling the code of conduct the boys and parents signed.

Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

JimmyC

726 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1266684 24-Mar-2015 12:16

networkn:

Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

If I admit to doing the crime it doesn't matter whether my accuser was there or not.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266688 24-Mar-2015 12:18

JimmyC:
networkn:

Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

If I admit to doing the crime it doesn't matter whether my accuser was there or not.

I believe you would fall into the minority. I'd like an investigation and proper consideration into what falls under appropriate punishment myself. Each to their own.

JimmyC

726 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1266715 24-Mar-2015 12:43

It's pretty binary to me. Did they break NZ Civil Aviation law by entering a restricted area? Yes or No?

Your question seems to be, does breaking the law constitute a serious breach of the agreement they signed, whereby they would abide by all school and societal rules and laws? We can talk semantics and ponder the merits of seriously breaking a law as opposed to just breaking one if you like...

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1266721 24-Mar-2015 12:47

networkn: Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

I'm curious as to what you think an investigation may reveal?

The boys and their parents signed a "Code of Conduct" that expressly spelled out that they would be sent home and miss the event if they, among other things, broke any laws.

The boys do not dispute any of the reported facts around the incident. (I.e. They openly admit that they did it and that they know that what they did was wrong/stupid/illegal.) There are confessions, eye witnesses, video evidence, and formal police warnings.

There is no ambiguity or contested story here whatsoever.
(at least none that has been reported in any way)

Can you help me understand your thinking here?

crichton

111 posts

Master Geek

#1266724 24-Mar-2015 12:52

"I believe you would fall into the minority. I'd like an investigation and proper consideration into what falls under appropriate punishment myself. Each to their own."

The school wanted the boys to come back to school immediately for investigation. Proper consideration would follow.
The court preempted that proper course of events.

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266726 24-Mar-2015 12:55

JimmyC: It's pretty binary to me. Did they break NZ Civil Aviation law by entering a restricted area? Yes or No?

Your question seems to be, does breaking the law constitute a serious breach of the agreement they signed, whereby they would abide by all school and societal rules and laws? We can talk semantics and ponder the merits of seriously breaking a law as opposed to just breaking one if you like...

I don't disagree they broke the law, but it's pretty obvious that THAT authority deemed the offending to not be at a level that warranted full prosecution.

My argument is, does the punishment fit the crime, and I don't believe it does. I also don't believe the documented process (Since you have chosen to bring up the agreement they signed) for investigation and assignment of punishment was properly and fully followed properly either.

Gilco2

1556 posts

Uber Geek

#1266737 24-Mar-2015 13:10

6FIEND:
networkn: Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

I'm curious as to what you think an investigation may reveal?

The boys and their parents signed a "Code of Conduct" that expressly spelled out that they would be sent home and miss the event if they, among other things, broke any laws.

The boys do not dispute any of the reported facts around the incident. (I.e. They openly admit that they did it and that they know that what they did was wrong/stupid/illegal.) There are confessions, eye witnesses, video evidence, and formal police warnings.

There is no ambiguity or contested story here whatsoever.
(at least none that has been reported in any way)

Can you help me understand your thinking here?

I was going to answer Networking but this explains it fully , probably better than i could write.

HTPC Intel Pentium G3258 cpu, Gigabyte H97n-wifi motherboard, , 8GB DDR3 ram, onboard graphics. Hauppuage HVR 5500 tuner, Silverstone LC16M case, Windows 10 pro 64 bit using Nextpvr and Kodi

Handsomedan

7293 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1266738 24-Mar-2015 13:10

They signed a code of conduct.
They broke that agreement.
The parents spent a shedload of money to usurp the school's authority.
The boys have never denied the wrong-doing.
The school had a back-up plan for the members of the crew.

This whole thing is a farce.

As a parent of two growing boys, one of which is a gifted sportsperson, I wholeheartedly side with the school.
I signed a code of conduct for my son when he last went away on a sports trip. He also signed it.
The consequences for breach of the code would have been immediate expulsion and I would have had to pay to get him home.

I would have backed the authorities in that, if my boy had misbehaved in a manner such as these two molly-coddled little darlings.
The end result from all of this is that their names have now been put out there in the public domain - they are probably worse off now than they would have been if they had quietly accepted the punishment.

I can't help but think that the reason they were let off with a warning by the authorities was so as not to limit their chances for the future with a criminal conviction at such an early age. I applaud that.
What I don't applaud is people thinking that the "punishment wouldn't have fitted the crime". That's utter bollocks and you know it.

As I said...I am a parent. I understand what it's like to have a kid with a promising sports career ahead of him. It's up to him to make sure he doesn't F that up.

I will support my kids, but I won't allow them to make a mockery of authority, like these two have...well, actually, their parents.

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266742 24-Mar-2015 13:15

6FIEND:
networkn: Do you understand no investigation was held, no teacher was present at the time of the incident and they only punished some of the kids?

Are you ok with being accused of a crime by someone not present, and being punished without an investigation?

I'm curious as to what you think an investigation may reveal?

The boys and their parents signed a "Code of Conduct" that expressly spelled out that they would be sent home and miss the event if they, among other things, broke any laws.

The boys do not dispute any of the reported facts around the incident. (I.e. They openly admit that they did it and that they know that what they did was wrong/stupid/illegal.) There are confessions, eye witnesses, video evidence, and formal police warnings.

There is no ambiguity or contested story here whatsoever.
(at least none that has been reported in any way)

Can you help me understand your thinking here?

Look, at the end of the day we have a fundamental difference of opinion here, I don't see much to be gained by continuing to bang respective drums saying the same thing over and over. Had the kids of gone to the school, regardless of the outcome, they would have missed the event. The school did not follow it's own investigative process fully (In criminal law this would be a technicality which could see you set free of premeditated murder). I don't believe that them getting to compete in this event will see us watching them on tv on a violent drug fuelled rampage 5 years from now, but if I am wrong, feel free to PM me and I'll gladly eat some crow.

Also technically they haven't committed a crime as far as the law is concerned unless they are charged and convicted, so therefore, they broke no laws and I don't believe they could be held accountable for doing so under the agreement they signed. It's semantics I'll agree, however.

The thing they did I believe falls under "silly", or "stupid", rather than "dangerous" or "malicious" and I think factors like that should be taken into account during any sentencing, especially of young people.

I believe they will face consequences, ones which will be rather unpleasant for them, whether that teaches them the lesson they need to set them straight is a job for the time to tell.

I guess when it comes to young people, within reason, I believe in offering the benefit of the doubt. I 100% believe in consequences which are appropriate to the transgression.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1266746 24-Mar-2015 13:20

trig42: While I agree there should be consequences, I feel that the consequences in this case did not fit the crime.

I rowed at High School, and you spend 4 years slogging your guts out to make it into a crew that can compete for the Maadi Cup. It is a big deal (I think the Maadi regatta is the biggest school sports event in NZ by numbers participating). Maadi winners generally go on to represent NZ at Junior level, next stop after that if you are dedicated (I wasn't :)) is World Championships and Olympic Games.

I also rowed at high school, and competed in the Maadi Cup final. For a week before the regatta our crew were in a training camp located at some camp ground whose exact name and location I can't remember (hey, it was 36 years ago) and two of the crew were caught vandalising camp facilities (writing on the walls of a bunkhouse). They were dropped from the regatta, given additional punishment by the school on our return and I know their parents also added to their punishment. If their own actions and choices lead to them not making a representative, world champs or Olympic squad then that's their own fault - nobody else's.

Sometimes acting like a d!ck has consequences. It's no different to having a conviction against your name for certain offences then finding out you can't get past Immigration when you go on holiday to Australia.

And for what it's worth, one of the two guys I rowed with who was sent home still went on to represent New Zealand at the Olympics, but it was Moscow in 1980 and much of the Western world boycotted so nobody cares.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266809 24-Mar-2015 14:07

All I can say is that I am glad my parents never called attention to me at school in this way. I doubt that they have given much thought to how this would affect the children in terms of their peers etc.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek

#1266910 24-Mar-2015 15:29

networkn: Also technically they haven't committed a crime as far as the law is concerned unless they are charged and convicted, so therefore, they broke no laws and I don't believe they could be held accountable for doing so under the agreement they signed. It's semantics I'll agree, however.

I'm not a lawyer (if there are any following this thread please correct me if I'm wrong) but a crime is an act that contravenes the laws of the country in which the act is committed. Many people commit crimes every day and don't get caught, charged and/or convicted. If you steal a chocolate bar from the dairy, or murder someone, a crime has been committed whether you get away with it or not.

networkn

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1266912 24-Mar-2015 15:31

andrew027:
networkn: Also technically they haven't committed a crime as far as the law is concerned unless they are charged and convicted, so therefore, they broke no laws and I don't believe they could be held accountable for doing so under the agreement they signed. It's semantics I'll agree, however.

I'm not a lawyer (if there are any following this thread please correct me if I'm wrong) but a crime is an act that contravenes the laws of the country in which the act is committed. Many people commit crimes every day and don't get caught, charged and/or convicted. If you steal a chocolate bar from the dairy, or murder someone, a crime has been committed whether you get away with it or not.

But you can't legally be punished for a crime you have not been convicted of.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9