Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

ahhh NZ, what a breath of fresh air !!  With so much of the rest of the world being dictated too by aggressive , power obsessed, stupid old men.... So called leaders whose main interest is s

Well, while that may well be (appears to be) what he means, society has previously decided those under 18 are not sufficiently mature to make these decisions, the mentally deficient are not up to it,

I don't think that's what KM is saying at all.  KM is saying (maybe I'm wrong) that there is is some inherent unfairness when quite a large minority of the population are not able to vote - the m

On 28/10/2020 at 4:22 PM, harrytom said:

Think we need to have compulsory registration(it is I think?) and compulsory to vote or face a fine. Even if you just spoil the voting card you have been recorded as a voter. Those incasterated (prison 12 months or more )no right to vote. 

What should the voting age be set at?? 16 leave school drive a car leave home get married or participate in homosexuality or normal sex.

18 can vote drink alcohol smoke buy lotto go to war

20 can go to casino

anything I missed??

What age limit to vote would I put it at. 20 for everything above.Hmm maybe not sex . 



I think anyone should have the right to vote, apart from idiots that vote National.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

so labour's 2020 'year of delivery'

turned out to be their 'delivery' from their promises

not the actual delivery of them 

so will; 2021, 2022, 2023

become their 'years of delivery'?

Kelvin, the weak-link, once again missing under the high-ball


but then he never got the job because of 'ability' so what'da'expect...

and there's the vaccine deniers to be dealt with! .... will compassion work with science deniers?

ihumatao how long can it be hushed-up?, is shelly bay next? - they certainly hope so!

and will that perennial chestnut

'housing' -  ever get pulled from the fire?


or maybe all our gov. ministers all working so hard keeping covid out

that it is too much to expect them to do any more?




Link to post
Share on other sites

All good questions Eric.

I'm personally against MPs getting involved in management of their departments.  Its not their role.  So Kelvin should be holding the Corrections Manager's to account, but not pulling on his Superman undies and stepping in.

Hardcore vaccine deniers are a small proportion of the population - I suspect enough people will want to travel overseas to ensure that there is sufficient take up.

Housing will take a complete change in our societal expectations around housing and investment.  This means EITHER a huge and irreversable change by a goverment with the mandate, or cross party long term agreement.

I don't think either will happen.  Labour has the mandate but not the will from what I can see - small incremental change will be their schtick.  And the required changes are anathema to National - it means recognising that the market is so badly distorted that govt intervention is the only real solution.  Jacinda has already ruled out key components of the required change under her hand, so thats both of them out of the race.

I'm guessing you are trying to comment on Ihumatao but don't have access to google to get the spelling right.  I would be less worried about Shelley Bay and more about Waikato and Taranaki iwi who are starting to stir about confiscations.  This would be large scale - thousands of hectares of prime dairy land.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very well known which side of politics gains from non compulsory voting.  .. 

It is also very well known why .

It is also very well known why one side of politics is WAY more interested in so called " personal choice" in this matter...but a lot less interested in some other personal rights. 

In the case of Australia it is compulsory to attend a poling booth or similar. In NZ it's compulsory to be on the roll but not to vote... So l can't see what " that" side of politics is winging about. 




Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, erice said:

i wonder what the gov's new approach on crime and gang containment will be now that their 'soft' approach appears to have doubled? gang offending and gun crimes

Gang offending tends to be in-house.  It very rarely impacts "decent" society directly.

On that basis, a logical response would be government-sanctioned six-monthly gladitorial events, fights to the death between the gangs.  Winner takes all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all gang issues

spill out into the community eventually

we see that in gun crimes, presumably linked to the drugs trade and smuggling

The figures, obtained from police under the Official Information Act, show the rates of gun crime went up in both 2018 and 2019. (wonder what happened in 2017???)

Last year, there were 3540 occasions where an offender was found with a gun.

And in both of the last two years, the rate of deadly incidents involving a firearm was the highest it had been since 2009. (guess what the big change was in 2008?)

The number of guns seized by police is also on the rise, up almost 50 percent on five years earlier at 1263 last year.


does our justice minister have a plan?

will he share it?

if our 'disadvantaged' doesn't want to see their youth being shot by police

maybe they could stop them pointing guns at people




Link to post
Share on other sites


Gun crime is notably a male problem.  Hence:

"More than a third of the homicides involved the killing of a family member,..." This is across society.

"...and another third were related to gangs or criminal activity, like drug dealing or robbery."

The second part is hardly earthshattering - crime is perpetrated mostly by criminals - well that's a surprise!

One significant problem at the moment is that there is no requirement to register the change of ownership of a firearm, and no-one knows who has a firearm or how many they have.  This ia a part of how firearms move from legitimate ownership to illegal ownership.  Ironically, legal owners are a part of the problem - they SHOULD ask to sight a licence, but apparently do not in a number of cases.

The current government moved after the mosque shootings to reduce access to firearms and started work on registering individual firearms to owners.    This is being resisted by the firearms lobby but their arguments are flimsy.

Both major parties have at times kicked gun control into touch - National most recently as 2016.  Lets not forget that the majority of "innocent bystander" firearms injuries and deaths have not been committed by gang members but by ordinary (well, plain) members of the public.

Arguably, an increase in the number of firearms being seized by police shows the law as it stands is working - criminals a not able to retain the firearms.

Gangs are a separate, multifactorial problem. There is no one fix, least of all the idea of getting tough on crime.  It taken over 50 years for the gang culture to build and spread here - it cannot realistically be fixed by a reflexive kick in the groin, as evidenced by the fact that no particular government has ever been able to do so despite some having talked a big game on it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...