THIS JUST IN
385 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 12 13 14 15 16 Newer→ Last
-
Oh well, that's quite all right, then, if they routinely illegally detain people and wantonly destroy property while using psychological intimidation.
Well illegally detain people and wantonly destroy property is your interpretation. If there was a civil case then it's entirely possible that the police weren't breaking the law by their actions.
What are the police powers to detain people when they weren't committing a crime? Isn't there something about 'refusing to assist a police officer in the execution of his/her duties'? What about restraining someone for their own safety? I know that they have powers to do with mental health, what about a spaz who knowingly puts themselves in danger? Refusing to identify yourself to a police officer? I'm not sure if these are real or if I'm making them up. Graeme?
Your examples are often referred to as 'racism' by those who oppose them and as 'positive discrimination' by those who support them. Both sides acknowledge there's discrimination solely on the basis of race. It's just that some argue that these cases are okay because they address negative discrimination.
I don't disagree with that, but he was working with the definition that you provided, so you could be big about it and admit that it's "positive racism" rather than ignoring the fact that he's turned your words against you quite successfully.
-
I had a boyfriend once (a lot of my worst stories start like this) who constantly carried a 'thermite grenade launcher' around in his pocket. It was totally useless for hunting. Also completely useless for over-throwing the state. Not that that was something Christ's boys tended to be into anyway.
If he kept it in his pocket then it would be good for making a real mess of some parts of his body that he was probably quite attached to.
-
If he kept it in his pocket then it would be good for making a real mess of some parts of his body that he was probably quite attached to.
I never said he was smrt.
-
merc,
Is that a grenade launcher in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?
</sorry, drivel alert> -
Hmmmm
The image you're linking to appears to be a launcher attached to a gun; the launcher on its own would look much less ominous.
-
(Btw that site I linked is just the first google result for "flare grenade launcher")
Well, we have a number of issues.
- do we know the police have actually found one?
- if so, do we know who it belonged to?
- if so, was it a dodgy-could-be-used-for-grenades one or some cuter, cuddlier type of device?
- if so, was it intended for a nefarious purpose or simply for the great NZ male pastime of making things go boom?We have a long way to go on all of those questions. Not so much an elephant, as a shadow in the dark room that could be an elephant or could be something quite different once the lights are on.
-
We are now informed that Tame Iti was deported from Fiji before terror raids and then "A few weeks later he was arrested in New Zealand under its own homeland security legislation." I know this was a direct quote from the head of the Fiji Human Rights Commission, Shaista Shameem, but surely publishing it at this point only serves to paint Iti in a bad light (not that he seems to have done himself any favours in this regard) Shame on you Stuff.
And talking of shame. Kylewhat about a spaz who knowingly puts themselves in danger?
hardly a socially aware statement, I cringed.
-
For those interested, the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill passed its third and final reading a few minutes back. There were 13 votes opposed. Taito Philip Field was the surprise extra vote.
-
I'm also interested in the way the narrative that the Oct 15 raid was an attack on all of Tuhoe has developed. That wasn't necessarily a feature of the early reaction as this Press story two days later noted:
Tuhoe Waikaremoana Trust manager Tama Nikora said his people had been struggling for years to have their voices heard.
The tribe had a strong sense of cultural identity, but for the 19 per cent of members who still lived on their traditional lands there was little work and many people were beneficiaries.
Nikora said the trust was trying to create some work in forestry, but their efforts were being thwarted by tribe radicals.
"What they really want is work. If they were busy in employment they wouldn't be doing what they are doing," he said.
Nikora believed there was some truth in the reports of military training and guerilla-style camps.
He said for some Tuhoe there was no law but their law. "There's only a few actually living out there trying to hold the rest of the tribe to ransom," he said.
"The older people are worried, they don't like what's going on. They don't think the police have over-reacted."
He said young people out of work were easily led astray by more radical older members.I guess what bugs me is the reflexive reaction that if these people aren't terrorists, they're heroes and freedom fighters. I suspect that if I could see all the evidence, I might not think they were terrorists, but I certainly wouldn't think they were heroes.
-
A S,
Hmmmm
The image you're linking to appears to be a launcher attached to a gun; the launcher on its own would look much less ominous.
Yes, but in fact possession of a grenade launcher is a much more serious crime. A grenade launcher of any description is a restricted weapon, and anyone who illegally possesses something like this, should in my view be spending a long spell in prison.
There is a reason that we have such tight controls on semi-automatic weapons (let alone automatic weapons and things like grenade launchers) and that is to prevent people getting hurt or killed (anyone remember Aramoana?). A very, very small number of people are legally permitted to own things like this (generally collectors, museums, movie props people etc.), but with the very important proviso that no-one knows they have them, they are kept in extremely secure conditions and that on top of all of that they must make them inoperable, so that they cannot be used.
-
did anyone else find tv1's close up interview with Tame Iti to be somewhat surreal. what was up with the reporter and his purposely in shot pen?
not to mention his bizarre 'interview' technique and that whole translator thing where they eventually just cut out Tame Iti's answers and just let the 'translator' do the talking.
Wasn't sure if I was watching the news or eating media lunch, but at least Tame Iti was in on the humor of it as he barely restrained a smirk. -
I don't disagree with that, but he was working with the definition that you provided, so you could be big about it and admit that it's "positive racism" rather than ignoring the fact that he's turned your words against you quite successfully.
It seems I should have clarified that 'positive discrimination' means 'positive racism' (positive in that the benefits justify discriminating on race). I foolishly assumed that people would recognise that, given how that's the definition and all, just as 'sexism' is discrimination on the basis of gender and 'ageism' is discrimination on the basis of age, so used the usual term. How did he turn my words against me? I'm stupid and missed that.
-
Ye gods, I've done it again. By 'the usual term' I mean of course that positive discrimination is the usual term to describe these kind of policies.
I assume the reason this is the usual term is to avoid the negative connotations of the word racism, which has become such a loaded term that it is almost impossible to use it sensibly without having to have these kind of discussions ad nauseum.
I think the best way to stop accusations of racism being flung around as insults that attempt to shut down discussion and deal with the full spectrum of racism in society, is to acknowledge reality.
-
David, my issue is that what you're discussing is not a full spectrum of "racism". People don't use the words "positive racism" just like they don't use the words "positive terrorism". If somebody is on your side they're not a terrorist, and if you don't think a racially-directed action is negative then it's invariably not something you'd describe as racism reflexively.
In other words, if somebody describes something as "racist" or "racism" they are saying two things.
The first is your definition above: the thing they are describing is motivated mainly by racial differences.
But the second is the implied negative subtext: Not only is the thing described motivated by racial differences, it is a negative thing.
So, in other words, when somebody uses the word "racism" or "racist" they are by implication criticising the thing they are describing. Given all the dictionary definitions of the word I don't think that's an unreasonable position. I don't use that word positively, and I wouldn't react positively to somebody applying it to me.
-
And talking of shame. Kyle
what about a spaz who knowingly puts themselves in danger?
hardly a socially aware statement, I cringed.
Spaz: One who is considered clumsy or inept.
Though I used it to mean "an idiot who decides to ignore the helpful police officer who is telling him/her 'hey, do not walk down the street there is a person with a gun down there'". Unfortunately I have seen this in action.
If people would prefer an alternative word, idiot, twerp, prat etc could all sit in.
-
Finn, it's not an unreasonable position at all. Of course, there's an implied negative connotation - and as you mentioned earlier, this is mostly a good thing, in that it shows how far we've come over the last 40 years or so (out of 6000 years of civilisation, and approx 200,000 years of there being modern humans around!).
However, that doesn't mean, as you originally maintained, that things like reacting differently to someone of another ethnicity because they're of another ethnicity isn't racism. Further, I maintain that there being an implied negative connotation doesn't necessarily mean that there cannot be such a thing as positive racism. In fact, I reckon insisting on the point helps the debate. Good old emotive language used for rhetorical purposes, eh?
Speaking of which, Kyle, I think you are being disingenuous that in the context
I know that they have powers to do with mental health, what about a spaz who knowingly puts themselves in danger?
to mean
"an idiot who decides to ignore the helpful police officer who is telling him/her 'hey, do not walk down the street there is a person with a gun down there'"
-
Sigh. That should be 'in the context... you claim to mean'. My brain is obviously absent without leave. I'll shut up now.
-
SB
Back on page 15 you compared NZ with Greece & Crete. Freedom Fighter with Bandits.
One of the causes would be a corupt & abusive govt.Here's HRW on Greece - any comparisons here?
Human rights abuses in Greece involved freedom of speech, discrimination against minorities, physical abuse of detainees and prisoners, and violations of religious freedom.
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Helsinki-11.htm
RB
We should remeber where "ninja" came from. A terrorised child describing there reality honestly, not hyperbole.
I'ld dispute masked police as a safety measure. It is clearly a matter of hiding their identification when engaged in terror activities.A S
Semi-autos & bolt/pump action alike have the same class of licence. (I'm pretty sure - but I don't have one).
We have far too loose laws in regard to firearms.
150 firearms were stolen from a Christchurch address, including many pistols. Only 50 have been recovered so far.
There seems to me to be a pretty easy answer to having 100 illeagal firearms on the Streets of Christchurch. Have a max. number in a personal armoury.Johnno or A S - Can you tell me if the "police" who conducted the raids were licenced to use their firearms?
As the pistol clubs in Christchurch claimed Police were held to a lower level of competence than private owners after the recent shooting here. Didn't the AOS shoot each other at Aromoana?
-
Sorry Shep. what I said was
Eerily similar but totally different? The uniforms are the same but the people are not so much "Freedom Fighters" as bandits and the parallels we can draw here are merely circumstantial. It leaves me wondering whether our police were, in a kind of sick fantasy way, hoping our "Guerrillas in the Mist" were a little more challenging and gladly they were not. It seems we do, by comparison, live in a peaceful corner of the world and heavy handed actions of police and lawmakers would only serve to destroy this. Let's hope sense prevails and the TSO gets quietly swept under the carpet. You 17 can all go home now, nothing to see here. Sorry.
And sorry to anyone who went back to page 15
I think you missed my point, notice I said "The uniforms are the same but the people are not so much "Freedom Fighters" as bandits and the parallels we can draw here are merely circumstantial." maybe I should have said Coincidental in retrospect but I still stand by what I meant i.e. the sick fantasy bit as part of police mindset. As to the rest of your assertions, sighCan you tell me if the "police" who conducted the raids were licenced to use their firearms?
Tuesday drinks anyone?
-
Steve - you sure left me behind there & drinks would be playing a bit too much catch-up for me - enjoy (if you think you shud drink in that mood).
You know something of police incompetence with firearms then Steve?
-
Semi-automatic firearms are in them selves not such a big deal. It is only the military style ones with large magazines that are to be worried about.
There is probably all you want to know here
. -
You know something of police incompetence with firearms then Steve?
You did say licenced, not competent
Johnno or A S - Can you tell me if the "police" who conducted the raids were licenced to use their firearms?
Ok I was being picky but if you had meant what you said it would indicate something other than knowledge ;-) I must ask. Why "Police" are you suggesting they weren't real police?
-
A S,
A S
Semi-autos & bolt/pump action alike have the same class of licence. (I'm pretty sure - but I don't have one).
We have far too loose laws in regard to firearms.
150 firearms were stolen from a Christchurch address, including many pistols. Only 50 have been recovered so far.
There seems to me to be a pretty easy answer to having 100 illeagal firearms on the Streets of Christchurch. Have a max. number in a personal armoury.Johnno or A S - Can you tell me if the "police" who conducted the raids were licenced to use their firearms?
Actually that is incorrect. Pump and bolt action sporting rifles use the same category (commonly called A cat), semi-automatic rifles that have limited magazine capacity (less than 7 rounds), no pistol grip, no ability to fix a bayonet and no flash suppressor can also be classified as A cat.
Any semi-automatic that has any of the forbidden attachments is classified as Military Style Semi Automatic. There are significant restrictions on who can own an MSSA, and the details of each of these weapons is held on record by the police, along with the details of the owner.
On your point about loose laws, I call bullshit.
We do not have too loose a firearms laws, every licence holder must be vetted by the police, who interview spouses, next of kin and other referees to ensure people are fit and proper to hold a licence, criminal records are checked, and the applicant is interviewed to ascertain whether or not they are fit to own/use firearms. In addition you must sit and pass a test, and before you can get a licence you must also have secure storage for firearms, which has to be approved by the police, regardless of whether or not you actually own firearms. These requirements are the absolute minimum for A cat firearms.
For other endorsements (pistols, collectors etc.), applicants have to be members of recognised clubs, be vouched for by other members of clubs (whose own endorsements will thereafter be contingent on the applicant never doing anything stupid), go through a much more intrusive vetting process, and have secure facilities for storage which often cost thousands of dollars (safes that are a minimum of 6mm steel, and often running to something like a bank vault). The number and type of weapons is strictly controlled, with the police having to issue a permit for every firearm purchased, and the details of each being recorded in police records.
By contrast, almost any moron can front up to apply for a drivers license and then go on to happily maim and kill people, without anywhere near the same checks and balances, or assessments as to whether they are fit to be let loose on the roads. I guess this is reflected in the road toll annually.
I think a report several years ago estimated that there were something in the region of 20 to 30 thousand illegal firearms in circulation. The fifty you are talking about aren't even a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
Further, I completely fail to see the logic in blaming those who obey the law to suggest further restricting their lawful activities, to somehow make up for the actions of those who really couldn't give a rats, such as those currently on firearms charges. If it wasn't for people like them, or the rest of the criminal fraternity, do you think there would be such a demand for illegal firearms?
Finally, the police don't need licenses to own or use firearms. The police act allows them to. This is the same as for the army, navy and airforce. None of them require firearms licenses to possess or use firearms or other weapons.
-
I think a report several years ago estimated that there were something in the region of 20 to 30 thousand illegal firearms in circulation.
That is interesting. Can you find the reference?
-
A S,
That is interesting. Can you find the reference?
I can't remember where I saw it, i remember that it was a NZ publication. It was one of those figures that sticks in your mind.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.