It seems to me that the police have lost sight of what their goal is. It is not to arrest criminals; it is not to maximise successful prosecutions; it is not to maximise the sentence of a successful prosecution; it is not to minimise wasted money on unsuccessful prosecutions; it is to minimise crime.
Allowing these criminals to continue with their offending in the hope of being able to ping them with the most serious crime possible is repugnant. Why not arrest them on a lesser charge as soon as possible. Even if that lesser charge doesn’t hold up in court, then, if these teenagers have any chance of rehabilitation, narrowly avoiding a jail term might just be the wake up call they need.
(Correct me if I’m wrong, but the police could arrest them for the more serious charges as well, but then drop them before court, just to worry them even more – or to perhaps get a plea bargain on the lesser charge).
It appears as if the police are fixated on the idea of protecting society by locking criminals away for as long as possible, rather than trying to get law-breakers to change their behaviour.
... but when the announcers start talking we just have to turn it off as it is so mind numbing
I'm pretty much the same with most radio stations. KiwiFM is the big exception for me - the announcers sound like real people talking to you, as another person.
Yet I have more disposable income now than I've ever had, surely someone wants to sell stuff to my demographic?
Ditto. A phone call earlier in the week wanted to talk to a male in the household between 18 and 44 - can't oblige there - we're now outside the target demographic.
So do advertisers really expect me to not buy any different brand for the rest of my life ? Interesting.
Unless you live in a non-coverage area, your Freeview terrestrial signal will look and sound better than the old analogue broadcast did. It’ll quite probably be fine on rabbit ears. No ghosting, and I’ve actually never experienced rainfade on a terrestrial signal.
I'd like to take exception to your anecdata. I live one suburb closer to the CBD than you, and we have continual problems with the Kordia Mux (Prime, Maori, et al), rainfade, and pixellation. Never a problem with analogue. Bought a brand new, freeview recommended, aerial but it hasn't solved the problem, which I think is the next door neighbour's two large palm trees between us and the sky tower. So I've oriented the aerial to Waiatarua, which is LOS for us. It's better, but we still lose signal about once a month.
Really missing TVNZ7 and hope it (or something like it) gets resurrected for public broadcasting.
Why do all STV multi-seat electorates have odd numbers ? What's wrong with 4 or 6 seat electorates ?
I was originally not at all interested in the America's Cup - expensive toys for billionaires. But then I saw video of them sailing and whoa - I was hooked. I've watched every race in the final series, and can't wait for the next one. The way those boats manoeuvre, and the physics-defying speeds they attain - I just find it awesome to watch. Big dose of nationalism thrown in as well, but I do like to see NZ doing well on the global stage.
Also your jury numbers would have to be odd or have a non-voting chair. You’d want an odd number of people voting to secure majorities
Not necessarily. A jury of 12 requiring a 7 / 5 split to pass would be perfectly acceptable. The fact that they are called juries, made me that they needed unanimous (or almost unanimous) votes to accept the legislation.
Voted against the Chiefs every step of the way - no reason to change now.
I think it would be vital that those who are on the jury are not known. If they were known then they would be liable to pressure / bribery / harrassment. Perhaps the use of technology such as anonymous web connections would allow a limited form of discussion (eg pointing out relevant data on the web), and raising matters for consideration with each other.
I think 1 year is too long. Perhaps 3 months would be better. Each jury member only has to understand the ramifications of the laws being passed, and either okay them, or turn them down due to particular clauses or effects.
I think the mere presence of the juries would mean that legislation being passed would be better as controversal aspects would tend to be ameliorated to make them palatable to at least one the juries.