New laws to combat alcohol fuelled violence - Will they be effective or not? (2 Viewers)

[nerdasdasd]

or you just wear helmet, can't die from a king hit if you wear a helmet

Or a helmet with spikes lol.

 

[Drifting95]

Or a helmet with spikes lol.

No.

 

[Graney]

The mandatory sentences are a fucking joke;

- won't work as a deterrant, "I'm gonna smash this cunt.. Oh wait what was that I heard about mandatory sentencing, I'd better give this drunken king hit some more thought"
- Longer prison terms = less chance of rehabilitation, not more, 100% proven, this will create worse criminals
- You get a worse sentence for hitting someone drunk than sober, what
- it upsets the whole natural order of the justice system, if king hit =8 years mandatory, why less for sexual assault, murder, domestic viplence etc... Hundreds of years of legal precedent is messed up.

 

[funkshen]

The mandatory sentences are a fucking joke;

- won't work as a deterrant, "I'm gonna smash this cunt.. Oh wait what was that I heard about mandatory sentencing, I'd better give this drunken king hit some more thought"
- Longer prison terms = less chance of rehabilitation, not more, 100% proven, this will create worse criminals
- You get a worse sentence for hitting someone drunk than sober, what
- it upsets the whole natural order of the justice system, if king hit =8 years mandatory, why less for sexual assault, murder, domestic viplence etc... Hundreds of years of legal precedent is messed up.

classic criminal apologist

kerin loveridge is rolling in his grave at you sir

king hittting coward punchers belong behind bars

 

[hayleyemma96]

classic criminal apologist

kerin loveridge is rolling in his grave at you sir

king hittting coward punchers belong behind bars

classic criminal apologist

kerin loveridge is rolling in his grave at you sir

king hittting coward punchers belong behind bars

You do realise the main purpose of sentencing is rehabilitation right? Studies have proven that prison does little to nothing in rehabilitating an offender. The whole purpose of punishment is to rehabilitate the offender so that they do not commit these sorts of crimes again.
In my opinion, the legislation is too harsh. I am in no way condoning the actions of the people who carry out these crimes but honestly, the penalty for sexual assault can be lower than 8 years. How do you think that would make victims of other crimes feel?
As for alcohol being an aggravating factor now in cases, that is absolute rubbish. A person is not thinking clearly while under the influence though the right decision was made in removing it as a mitigating factor.

Please learn to spell before you (attempt) to make an argument


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[wannaspoon]

ermmmm his just trolling...

justice should serve a victim (not just an offender)... centring justice on the notions of rehabilitation is too centred on the offender... they victim (and their families) do deserve some form of justice that is not inadequate to their liking... justice should be based on a holistic approach (not just on rehabilitation)

don't think the family of a victim to these cowardly attacks is really going to give two shits whether a person is rehabilitated or not...

 

[nerdasdasd]

ermmmm his just trolling...

justice should serve a victim (not just an offender)... centring justice on the notions of rehabilitation is too centred on the offender... they victim (and their families) do deserve some form of justice that is not inadequate to their liking... justice should be based on a holistic approach (not just on rehabilitation)

don't think the family of a victim to these cowardly attacks is really going to give two shits whether a person is rehabilitated or not...

He's

 

[Graney]

ermmmm his just trolling...

justice should serve a victim (not just an offender)... centring justice on the notions of rehabilitation is too centred on the offender... they victim (and their families) do deserve some form of justice that is not inadequate to their liking... justice should be based on a holistic approach (not just on rehabilitation)

don't think the family of a victim to these cowardly attacks is really going to give two shits whether a person is rehabilitated or not...

Will the victims family be paying the hundreds of thousands of dollars per prisoner for the extended prison term that exists, by your admission, only to satisfy their desire for vengeance? What about victims families who are satisfied with current prison terms (yes they do exist), are you concerned about their perception of injustice when prison terms are mandatorily extended against their wishes?

In the best of possible worlds, we live in a world of limited resources. When I studied 'justice' within a healthcare ethics context, justice is understood to refer to the equitable distribution of limited resources. Is spending millions of dollars on incarceration of one individual, for the sole purpose of satisfying one families desire for vengeance, to no broader benefit for society, really justice when there are hundreds of thousands of people living in poverty in this country, with inadequate healthcare or education?

Is it fair and equitable to build a prison to satisfy a handfull of people's desire for vengeance, instead of a hospital for a community?

Resources are limited, there's a real unseen cost to the many, when you spend so much on so few to provide no benefit to the broader community.

 

[funkshen]

You do realise the main purpose of sentencing is rehabilitation right? Studies have proven that prison does little to nothing in rehabilitating an offender. The whole purpose of punishment is to rehabilitate the offender so that they do not commit these sorts of crimes again.
In my opinion, the legislation is too harsh. I am in no way condoning the actions of the people who carry out these crimes but honestly, the penalty for sexual assault can be lower than 8 years. How do you think that would make victims of other crimes feel?
As for alcohol being an aggravating factor now in cases, that is absolute rubbish. A person is not thinking clearly while under the influence though the right decision was made in removing it as a mitigating factor.

Please learn to spell before you (attempt) to make an argument


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa1999278/s3a.html

please tell me where it says the MAIN PURPOSE of sentencing is rehabilitation. why, i might just be a common man with a common education, but it seems to me that rehabilitation of the offender is only one of the seven purposes of sentencing. now i don't know about you, but i'm sick of these boozed up louts and ruffians. they're taking over our streets and our children aren't safe.

Will the victims family be paying the hundreds of thousands of dollars per prisoner for the extended prison term that exists, by your admission, only to satisfy their desire for vengeance? What about victims families who are satisfied with current prison terms (yes they do exist), are you concerned about their perception of injustice when prison terms are mandatorily extended against their wishes?

In the best of possible worlds, we live in a world of limited resources. When I studied 'justice' within a healthcare ethics context, justice is understood to refer to the equitable distribution of limited resources. Is spending millions of dollars on incarceration of one individual, for the sole purpose of satisfying one families desire for vengeance, to no broader benefit for society, really justice when there are hundreds of thousands of people living in poverty in this country, with inadequate healthcare or education?

Is it fair and equitable to build a prison to satisfy a handfull of people's desire for vengeance, instead of a hospital for a community?

Resources are limited, there's a real unseen cost to the many, when you spend so much on so few to provide no benefit to the broader community.

you're right

it's much cheaper to medically treat the victims of crime than to administer criminal justice onto the the perpetrators of crime

a warmist like you probably thinks that we can just tax crime out of existence. grow a brain.

RIP Keiran Loveridge

 

[wannaspoon]

He's

I beg of your pardon... I neglected to proof read and upon someone else's appraisal, I have failed at grammar...

I have dishonoured my family and the Internet... I shall repay my debt by committing Seppuku

here we go again

 

[wannaspoon]

Is it fair and equitable to build a prison to satisfy a handfull of people's desire for vengeance, instead of a hospital for a community?

no benefit to the broader community.

idk, you should ask the person who got a job building that prison; you should ask the person who works in corrections, who has a stable form of employment from this so called "profit from vengeance;" the cleaner that cleans these prisons; the cooks who prepare their meals; the lawyer who profiteers from their misery... I'm sure these individuals are more productive than half the scum bags that are incarcerated...

no benefit at all??? really, that's a bit of a stretch...

 

[Graney]

idk, you should ask the person who got a job building that prison; you should ask the person who works in corrections, who has a stable form of employment from this so called "profit from vengeance;" the cleaner that cleans these prisons; the cooks who prepare their meals; the lawyer who profiteers from their misery... I'm sure these individuals are more productive than half the scum bags that are incarcerated...

no benefit at all??? really, that's a bit of a stretch...

That's a textbook example of the parable of the broken window

[youtube]gG3AKoL0vEs[/youtube]

 

[wannaspoon]

I am aware of the Broken Window Fallacy, that video has to be the most condescending piece of shit I have ever seen...

Firstly, he is portraying the viewer as if they are five year old...

Secondly, he did not acknowledge the original source of that theory... (the theory was created by Frederic Bastiat in the 1850's, in a book called "That Which is Seen, and That Which is Unseen")

Thirdly, citing that as a reference would also be a stretch... Mr. Bastiat's theory, would only be applicable if there is full employment (no unemployment)... Truth of the matter is, there are people that are unemployed and they do eventually profit from these negative influences (it opens the door to be employed)... The mishap (for instance, a broken window) provides the opportunity for that unemployed individual to become, let say, a glass fitter... Therefore, bringing some form of benefit to the community... as heartless as it sounds...

Fourthly, the broken window theory promotes money liquidity... I doubt that dickhead would have bought a suit, he probably would have kept it in the bank for a "rainy day" like every other pleb worried about the economy...

Lastly, that video looks like it was created by one of those 9/11 "truthers..." A collection of people who: have too much time on their hands and are extremely anti establishment... (Left wing knobs)

 

[Graney]

Are you also in favour of the government paying people to dig holes and fill them in again?

 

[wannaspoon]

Are you also in favour of the government paying people to dig holes and fill them in again?

If it gives a man a roof over their head, food on their plates and if the government is stupid enough to pay for such an endeavor; then so be it

 

[funkshen]

wannaspoon

correct me if i'm wrong

but you're saying that alcohol fueled violence is great for the economy because cunts caving in other cunts' faces makes cunts spend money on, among other things, medical care and law enforcement

 

[isildurrrr1]

If it gives a man a roof over their head, food on their plates and if the government is stupid enough to pay for such an endeavor; then so be it

what a great way to create economic inefficiencies not to mention the corruption that will come with winning bids and contracts. war must be good for the economy right? everybody works in a wartime economy!

 

[TheGreatest99.95]

today its all about getting tattoos, going to the gym and trying to look like a crazy c*nt. What needs to happen is the cops stop being pushovers. lock up people who are causing trouble and deal with it the next day. instead trying to reason with them and talk logic into the idiots who roam the streets ends up meaning the cops get yelled at and spat on. look at how they deal with shit in amercia, the cops dont f*ck around. people do whatever they want because they know the cops cant do anything and if they do get caught, the justice system will get them off on a good behavior bond. lock out will do nothing but create more angry people who cant get into clubs and have no way of getting home because theres no public transport and taxis cost wayyy too much!

legalise weed. the only thing that should be worried then is a mars bar and a chocolate milk

 

[wannaspoon]

wannaspoon

correct me if i'm wrong

but you're saying that alcohol fueled violence is great for the economy because cunts caving in other cunts' faces makes cunts spend money on, among other things, medical care and law enforcement

I'm saying there is economic benefit from trying to control alcohol fuelled violence... I'm not saying that a person getting their head kicked in is actually economically beneficial... I am saying it is beneficial to TRY and act upon a problem; rather than piss fart around and say how money can be better spent...

what a great way to create economic inefficiencies not to mention the corruption that will come with winning bids and contracts. war must be good for the economy right? everybody works in a wartime economy!

anything seems inefficient and corrupt to some... and yes, digging a hole to only fill it again does seem quite daft... However, don't think the government would be stupid enough to hand out contracts to dig and fill hole (I do have my reservations upon that; seen the government to stupider shit)

 

[newcastle2012]

Sentences should be much much harsher for any kind of violent crime but the thing is Australian's in general want a mix between rehabilitative justice and retributive justice which results in a system which can't deal with offenders and now those that commit violent crimes once they finish their terms come out of jail not only more likely to commit the same crimes but in 80%+ of cases commit even more serious crimes!

Australian's get all upset when tragedies happen like coward punches, murder and rape but then no one is willing to go the hard yards to actually support any form of solution for it as rehabilitative approaches are denounced as going soft on the offender (even tho it has been found very effective to reduce recidivism) and retributive approaches such as capital punishment are seen as draconian (once again even tho it saves lives as on the prior reasoning one guilty murderers life doesn't equal one innocent persons life but often 2 or 3 innocent peoples lives.)

Australian's need to get real and support one way or another because our current lax system has been shown to be ineffective with recidivism around 66% approaching 70%. These laws just look like going down the middle path again when the other two would be far more effective than the current one.