Dock their benefits? Hell no! Lock the scumbags up!

Mark Mitchell is a good bastard and this is a good bill.

But watch the left-wing prove that not only are they criminal-friendly but they are the party of bludgers. With this bill they can get a twofer in proof…criminals and bludgers.

Offenders who don’t carry out community sentences could have their benefit stopped under a Bill that’s going to be debated by Parliament.

It’s a member’s Bill drafted by National’s Mark Mitchell, so it’s likely to get Government support.

Under the Bill, the Department of Corrections would be able to issue warnings with the consequence of withholding benefit payments.  Read more »


Is it time to implement a debtors’ prison?

Why aren’t these debt dodgers in a debtors’ prison?

Victims of crime are waiting for tens of millions of dollars from the people who offended against them.

The reparation owed to five district courts with the biggest bills added up to $52 million at the end of the 2014/2015 financial year.

Judges can order an offender to pay reparation if their crime has caused emotional harm to a victim, or if the victim has lost property.

But one deceived employer says his reparation – a third of what he lost – just trickled in for a year.

The court with the biggest bill, $14.3m, is Manukau District Court, according to figures released under the Official Information Act.

Auckland District Court is owed $13.9m, followed by Christchurch District Court on $12.6m.  Read more »


What about respect for my privacy, Vernon?

Vernon Small has written an opinion piece at Fairfax, complaining about Westpac allegedly breaching Nicky Hager’s privacy.

The revelation Westpac handed over author Nicky Hager’s bank records to the police – without so much as a by-your-leave from the courts – should send a shiver down the spine.

It ought, too, to be a wake-up call to any other corporates out there who think their customers’ records are fair game for any authority figure that comes knocking.

They are not.

Kudos to the likes of Spark, Vodafone, Air New Zealand, Jetstar and TradeMe for recognising that – and refusing a similar request from the police.

In the case of Hager’s records – sought when the police were trying to find who hacked blogger Cameron Slater’s computer (providing the material for Hager’s book Dirty Politics) – there is more at stake than simply tracking down a potential criminal.

As the Media Freedom Committee’s Joanna Norris has pointed out, there was no suggestion Hager had committed a serious crime.

The main investigation was aimed at a third party, the self-named Rawshark. It would be bad enough if the police had come seeking the records of a member of the public but it is more chilling still when it is a journalist, who relies on being able to keep his or her sources confidential and who will on occasions interact with people “of interest to the police”.

But that should not be an excuse to access their bank, phone and travel records willy-nilly.

Read more »

Kelvin Davis reports Kiwi crims considering rioting to stay in Australia. Can anyone see a problem with that?

Some Labour MPs I’ve spoken to in recent days are pleased with the way Kelvin Davis is raising his profile.

I’ve questioned this, asking them how cuddling criminals in Australia, in New Zealand and continuing to pimp the indigent, the useless and the work shy is helping voters with the impression that Labour doesn’t represent working New Zealanders anymore.

You can hear crickets chirping as that sinks in.

But no matter Kelvin Davis is still cuddling criminals, this time in Australia.

Kiwi detainees in Christmas Island detention centre are so angry, hungry and traumatised they are considering rioting, Labour says.

MP Kelvin Davis had a five-hour “highly emotional” visit with detainees yesterday, gaining access to the centre after a week waiting on the island.   Read more »

John Key supportive of “loophole” being closed

John Key is supportive of the closing of a loophole that simply doesn’t exist.

Moves by police to close a potential loophole in the gun buying rules was a “sensible step”, Prime Minister John Key says.

The police tightening of its rules came yesterday, after they launched a criminal investigation into the purchase of a .22 rifle online by MediaWorks journalist Heather du Plessis-Allan using false details online.

A review into the processes around firearms licensing had been looking at online or mail-order firearms buying rules since January.

Today, Mr Key welcomed the police reaction to du Plessis-Allan’s TV show sting.

“At this stage that was a sensible step,” he said.

There wasn’t a loophole.   Read more »

Dear Diary, today I broke the law and just can’t believe I’m in trouble. I’m a journalist!


Dear Diary,

I just can’t believe it. All I wanted to do was to prove that there is a legal loophole that allows people to buy firearms online. That’s a good thing right? That nice union guy Bob told me how to fill out the form in order to get the gun. He wants to arm the police and thought it would be a good idea if we ran a story that proves it is really easy to order a gun online.

He was right, it is easy but I must admit our first attempts were total failures and had to be edited out.

The first time I didn’t provide a signature from a Police officer and they wouldn’t take my money and refused to process my purchase. The second time the firearms license number that I provided was checked and found to be a fake so again my purchase was declined.

Read more »


Heather du Plessis-Allan under police investigation

Back when Nicky Hager ran his Dirty Politics hit job I was attacked for dusting up regulators, texting John Key, getting OIAs turned around quick smart, emailing my mates and having chats that were a bit colourful. None of that was illegal at all, two police investigations, two government inquiries all proved that nothing was illegal.

Even though none of it was illegal the Media Party went all in and hounded me and my friends. An illegal act of hacking and stealing my data was excused by Nicky Hager, Herald journalists, and other media as “public interest”. They lauded the criminal as a hero when he was in reality a criminal. They also worked with and know who the hacker is and still protect him to this day. They are as complicit as the hacker is in the crimes they committed.

Yesterday it was revealed that two other journalists have participated in a crime, obtaining a firearm illegally. They too have justified this as “public interest” like it gives them a free pass to commit crimes.

They are wrong. In Sweden three journalists, including their boss were charged for just such a crime.

Heather du Plessis-Allan and Duncan Garner went big on the story and with the able assistance of Greg O’Connor had a good story. Right after they started ramping up the promos on radio and started spilling the beans things started to go awry.

I don’t think they have realised how much trouble they have gotten themselves involved in. This involved firearms. It is serious. And we know it is serious because they’ve breathlessly told us so. My earlier post points out how dimly the Police should take their actions.    Read more »

Rodney Hide on 3 Strikes

Rodney Hide writes in the NBR:

Some 135-plus New Zealanders are walking about today not bashed, beaten or worse, thanks to the Three Strikes legislation. It’s a good result.  Another 135 fewer people are in prison.  That too, is a good result.

The numbers aren’t mine but lawyer Graeme Edgeler’s, who, while opposing Three Strikes, nonetheless has the intellectual integrity to gather up the data and report that, yes, the law is having the hoped-for deterrent effect.

Three Strikes is a dramatic example of the economics of crime and punishment. Do would-be criminals weigh the costs and benefits of crime? Are they rational? Does the risk of being caught, convicted and the extent of expected punishment enter their decision-making?

Crime experts say No. Economists say Yes.

Read more »

3% of adults experience 53% of crime

And for that, I would like to thank them.

I’ve always been enormously sceptical of official crime statistics and surveys.

They bamboozle you with numbers that suggest fewer crimes have occurred than the year before, and the year before that, and you’re invited to believe that everything is sweet in paradise.

It’s a cynical process that rather reeks of propaganda compiled by public servants and police officers pandering to their political masters.

Massaged numbers aside, the only question that really matters is this: do you really feel like you live in a safer society?

Do the children in your family walk to school (like every child did in the first half of the 1980s?)

I’ve been the victim of several crimes that were more trifling than traumatising. And after serious thought this week I must say I do feel generally safer.

But I’m also keenly aware that potential crime is always lurking. I never leave bags or valuables in a parked car and I stick to well-lit areas. I’d never leave home with a window or door unlocked.

I’m conscious that there are little things I can do to prevent property crime. But I confess my contents insurance is probably on the low side, I haven’t marked all my household items so if they were stolen I might one day get them returned, and I haven’t taken photos of all my property and stashed them safely with all the receipts.

Is this because I don’t really think about being burgled, or because I haven’t got off my chuff and done it. A bit of both I’d say.

So what to make of this week’s latest survey on crime? It’s all slightly confusing, but apparently we’re living in utopia.

While the scumbags and ferals mostly target each other, it certainly feels that way.   Read more »


Is three strikes working?

The liberal elite and crim-hugging classes say no. They’d prefer criminals back on the streets.

The rest of us don’t care, so long as criminals are locked up good and long, we simply don’t care.

But what do the statistics say?

Let’s see what a statistician says rather than liberal elite legal hand wringing types.

The usual objection to a “three-strikes” law imposing life sentences without parole, in addition to the objections against severe mandatory minimums, is

  • It doesn’t work; or
  • It doesn’t work well enough given the injustice involved; or
  • There isn’t good enough evidence that it works well enough given the potential for injustice involved.

New Zealand’s version of the law is much less bad than the US versions, but there are still both real problems, and theoretical problems (robbery and aggravated burglary both include crimes of a wide range of severity).

Graeme Edgeler (who is not an enthusiast for the law) has a post at Public Address arguing that there is, at least, evidence of a reduction in subsequent offending by people who receive a first-strike warning, based a mixture of published data and OIA requests.   Read more »