Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Open mike 14/07/2016
169 comments on “Open mike 14/07/2016”
Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.
Comments are closed.
This happens very rarely in our media, facing the uncomfortable truths. Our Olympic team looks too white and maybe we should ask why and what we should do about it. We could do the same in all sorts of areas like prisons, health, etc where Indigenous and Pacific groups are greatly over represented. But that would also be uncomfortable and would question the structure of our society. No lets not do that, too confronting.
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11673656
One way to solve it would be to get waka ama and softball into the olympics, is it possible that non whites don’t enjoy track n field and swimming?.
Oh and chuck the sevens team and Val in that picture and it would look different.
I think softball would be good at the olympics, presume its reasonably global too.
I remember a school athletics day when one of the bad kids who was Māori turned up never having done long jump before and started setting school records straight away. I don’t think he continued on from that day, his school life was a mess and home life probably not much better.
A big factor in Steven Adams success is that he was sent to one of the richest high schools in the country and being forced into an environment with affluent kids, not poor kids gave him every chance.
I note that our badminton team is too Chinese, our league team is too brown and our darts team has Too many fatties and don’t get me started on the women’s touch team …where are the places for men in the team FFs !
Silly Stunned Mullet. As per……resistant to dialogue which disturbs the anti-social psychosis typifying dumb righties. Very well said @ 1 above Maui.
Have you played any representative sport Maui. Sports played by brown people doesn’t get much funding. The elite sports gets all the money and sport played by brown people like Rugby league gets a bad rap and Rugby get much of the pokies money even when they don’t meet the criteria. Same old shert the latest 2016 social report shows low participation rates for Maori and PI in sports and recreation. Us brown people also have to deal with the favoritism, stereotyping and discrimination in sports its very much alive in NZ.
Rugby league gets a bad rap from those who give it a bad rap. Rugby league gets no attention at all from many. Rugby league via the Warriors gets a lot more publicity and attention than some other sports with many more participants.
There is plenty of money in league. Like any business though, the big stores in the big smoke have it all, not the one man operation in the sticks.
Meaning an average NRL player will get much more for a season than some provincial area will be able to generate for its whole structure for a fair number of players.
Up and down the country hundreds of thousands of people put money into their kids’ sports, ordinary fees, gear, travel, tournaments, whatever. Some don’t have the money.
Are there ways to have all kids with equal opportunity? Is it desirable to have equal opportunity? Is not giving money to Mark Todd to compete (for example) going to benefit some kids in Gore or Kaitaia so that their faces end up in an Olympic photo?
Its been a while since I played sports, but the indoor ones had really expensive fees. So not surprising to hear about low participation rates, I would imagine kids of beneficiaries are locked out of sport because of fees and then there’s the cost of getting to games too.
Yeah, the sports that win games medals get the money, I’m not sure about funding sport through pokies either there has to be a better, more moral way.
1000% there Maui (1) Very good post.
When they get back from Rio they should all have a good tan. Problem solved.
I didn’t like the article as it avoided the real issue and attacked the clicks. It couched what is a socio-economic issue (if it is an issue at all) as a race issue.
Worse, he was doing it on arguably racist terms. The writer had no idea at all what the heritage of those in the photos was, he was just labeling people on the basis of their skin colour. For all he knew 90% of those in the picture are 1/16th Maori and could “identify as Maori” if they so wished.
He should have stuck to the real point instead of hunting clicks.
We joke about a heavily armed US police force, but recently on the NZ news I’m seeing regular pictures of our police officers armed with machine guns. Thinking back, for most of my life, you would never see that, only if it was an Armed Offenders Squad member being shown on tv. I can’t say this is a good development for police. The public is going to be more intimidated and fearful of police and then there is the issue of this becoming like second nature to them.
They have semi automatics. Not machine guns. Huge difference.
Correct. It takes 8 seconds to pump 10 bullets into you instead of 2 seconds.
Not much difference for the public – they look like machine guns. Having to move your finger again to fire another shot isn’t much of a safety mechanism.
Yeah who wants facts getting in the way of emotions anyway
when the discussion is about the emotions created when cops carry big guns, emotions are more relevant than the difference between semi vs full auto.
If they were actually water pistols, facts might be more relevant to this particular discussion. But the real question is how can the police follow the Peelian Principles if the public are scared of them, for whatever reason?
Actually thats a fair call. Routinely though NZ police don’t carry firearms on their persons, vehicles are a different story however.
Should have bolt action .22s. Good enough for the Chechen snipers – and the pause is desirable – the Auckland motorway incident would’ve only got one bystander with a bolt action, and over 90% of security force sniping is at less than 200 metres. Doesn’t fit the Rambo meme though. A decent minister would have things to say – but we have the stupid and inhuman monster Collins (vomit).
Yes we need to make sure the criminals are better armed than the police.
Intelligence wins – not ordnance. These are not fights – police are to keep the peace, not play Gunfight at the OK Coral.
You really should take note of your wisdom:
“Better to sit mum and be thought a fool than spew your usual ill-conceived drivel.”
Ah yes – I suppose as a RWNJ it almost goes without saying you long for nothing more than the opportunity to spray gunfire indiscriminately.
The argument that you would need to make however, is that there is some public benefit to be derived from this unusual license. Why do I have to point this out to you?
“Ah yes – I suppose as a RWNJ it almost goes without saying you long for nothing more than the opportunity to spray gunfire indiscriminately.”
The more you speak the more foolish you sound so keep it up 🙂
I believe the police have the right to defend themselves and defend the public.
In the latest incident they went to a property on suspicion of drugs and weapons, as such they were armed which, in the circumstances, is as it should be.
They announced themselves and told the victim to lower his weapon, he didn’t and presented a firearm and was shot.
If it turns out this is incorrect then the full force of the law should come down on the officers, if it turns out correct then well done to the officers involved
“The argument that you would need to make however, is that there is some public benefit to be derived from this unusual license. Why do I have to point this out to you?”
My argument is that the police put themselves in harms way to protect the general population so should be given every opportunity to defend themselves, anything less is naivety on the part of people who will never be in the position themselves
Your argument is American – as is your phrasing ‘in harm’s way’ indeed! In NZ we have the doctrine of equivalent force. If offenders have firearms, so may our police, but if not they should not.
The police had to do considerable fudging to allow the fool who shot an innocent bystander on the western motorway go free. And he has gone free, with his superiors destroying the evidence without losing their jobs. This habit of fudging things – noble cause corruption – is, like allowing the level of police armament to burgeon, not a desirable trend.
I understand that you wish to foist these undesirable trends on the peace-loving citizens of NZ as quietly as possible – but it really isn’t a healthy thing to allow. Police states are not good places.
“If offenders have firearms, so may our police, but if not they should not.”
The police believed that drugs and weapons were on the premises, they found a shotgun there.
Should the police have been armed or under those circumstances?
You need to stop getting your information from the USA, this is NZ not the USA if you hadn’t noticed
“Should the police have been armed or under those circumstances?”
If violence is avoided or contained and criminal activity prevented we might decide the decision to go armed, or not to go armed, was correct.
But the facts you present are really insufficient to determine – there are guns in many NZ households, but their presence may not relate to any criminal activity.
Think back to the Dotcom raid – the cops went in like the old SAS movie in spite of the fact that no violence could be anticipated. Had Dotcom resisted enough to demand a warrant (as was his perfect right) he might well have been shot.
There are guns and guns and drugs and drugs. An occasional P smoker who hunts or used to hunt is not the same as a Columbian drug cartel. The only circumstances that license police to fatally shoot citizens are danger to themselves or the public. We expect them to plan to minimise such danger, and a fatal shooting constitutes a failure to minimise that harm.
“Should the police have been armed or under those circumstances?”
“If violence is avoided or contained and criminal activity prevented we might decide the decision to go armed, or not to go armed, was correct.”
So that’s a yes, there are times when police should be armed.
“But the facts you present are really insufficient to determine – there are guns in many NZ households, but their presence may not relate to any criminal activity.”
Since the investigation was about drugs and illegal firearms its a very good bet that yes it was related.
“Think back to the Dotcom raid – the cops went in like the old SAS movie in spite of the fact that no violence could be anticipated. Had Dotcom resisted enough to demand a warrant (as was his perfect right) he might well have been shot.”
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7433675/Gun-fear-in-Dotcom-raid
Pictures of Megaupload millionaire Kim Dotcom carrying a shotgun were part of the reason the country’s elite police team were brought in to arrest him, a court has heard
The sergeant said the second suspect was bodyguard Wayne Tempero. He had made several notes about Tempero, including his alleged association with the Head Hunters gang and his history as a well-trained security expert.
The sergeant also noted Dotcom had a current and an ex-police officer on his security team. The current officer had possible experience with the Diplomatic Protection Squad.
He said the information about the security staff was noted as a potential risk to the officers involved in the raid as those with police experience would be more aware of officers’ vulnerabilities.
No one was shot because no one presented any firearms (see how that works?)
“There are guns and guns and drugs and drugs. An occasional P smoker who hunts or used to hunt is not the same as a Columbian drug cartel. The only circumstances that license police to fatally shoot citizens are danger to themselves or the public. We expect them to plan to minimise such danger, and a fatal shooting constitutes a failure to minimise that harm.”
“An occasional P smoker who hunts or used to hunt is not the same as a Columbian drug cartel.”
So if he only shoots one cop that’s ok is it?
As you have previously stated Stuart you don’t know what you’re talking about because you haven’t trained for it, haven’t studied it and have no experience of it, as you yourself said:
Yep – but as a non-scientist who has neither read nor performed any tests of GM products your opinion falls on the wrong side of Hippocrates’ test:
“There are two kinds of learning, fact and opinion. One increases knowledge, the other increases ignorance.”
See how that works?
It doesn’t work PR – you’re grasping at straws as usual. Dotcom never presented a firearm in his life. Going in like gangbusters escalated the potential for violence – the police were negligent with respect to that possibility.
Your crude and backward attempt to browbeat us into swallowing your ill-conceived militarism fails of course. You didn’t think it through.
“No one was shot because no one presented any firearms” – The police presented firearms to an unarmed family sleeping peacefully in their own home. I realise this is the model for RWNJ society, and consequently you love it – but this is not how it should go – which is part of the reason Dotcom has won so many court battles over the raid.
But I should defer to the stridence of your opinion because that’s how RWNJ argue? – I think not.
Your arguments remain as worthless as ever.
Again Stuart Munro I’ll remind you of your own words:
“There are two kinds of learning, fact and opinion. One increases knowledge, the other increases ignorance.”
You have stated you have no experience, no training and haven’t studied the subject yet you proclaim your opinions as somehow better then mine
Gosh PR – do I have to explain everything to you?
Context matters.
That quote that you repeat like a brain-damaged parrot related to a discussion of a scientific matter on which you had offered your unsupported opinion. You did not seem to recognise the implicit fallacy of endorsing an appeal to authority – when appeals to authority have no standing in science.
This argument does not refer to that, which is why I didn’t rub your foolish face in it again. But your overweening arrogance is such that you want to ‘put me in my place’ ad ignorantiam.
I have read a thing or too about police and guns – my views are informed by facts. The Dotcom raid was punished by the courts, and it may be presumed they had some reason to do so beyond idle prejudice – which is all you’ve brought to the table.
Gosh PR – do I have to explain everything to you?
Context matters.
“That quote that you repeat like a brain-damaged parrot related to a discussion of a scientific matter on which you had offered your unsupported opinion. You did not seem to recognise the implicit fallacy of endorsing an appeal to authority – when appeals to authority have no standing in science.”
No Stuart, the problem is you attempted to belittle my opinion by stating that they had no validity because I’m not a scientist
“This argument does not refer to that, which is why I didn’t rub your foolish face in it again. But your overweening arrogance is such that you want to ‘put me in my place’ ad ignorantiam.”
Not quite, when you state that police should only have a bolt action .22 calibre rifle for defence then you show your ignorance, forgetting the .22 is designed against small game but more importantly when the AOS was set up they were using ex-military rifles
I have read a thing or too about police and guns – my views are informed by facts. The Dotcom raid was punished by the courts, and it may be presumed they had some reason to do so beyond idle prejudice – which is all you’ve brought to the table.
Oh you’ve read a thing or two about police, let me know the websites you visited.
I presented to you the reasonings why the police took the actions they did, the courts decided differently and the police were punished for that
As it should be, just like when the police take the actions and are investigated for those actions
So how many police killings have been deemed unlawful Stuart?
Try as you might PR you have confine to yourself to the truth just occasionally or your trolling becomes ineffective.
I did not forget that .22s were designed for small game, – that’s your surmise – I read an expert opinion that stated that, because of the range at which most security sniping occurs, and because the object of policing is not to kill, the rifles preferred on the battlefield are excessive. In fact .22s are plenty lethal, as the Crewes or the Bains and no doubt many others show, but heavier weapons kill more frequently on less central hits through system shock.
Rather than rebut this with evidence you’ve tried to browbeat me into submission. Your preference – arming the police as heavily as they choose – is a trend that increases police violence. There are moral hazards like those found with taser use.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Kleinig/publication/31226591_Ethical_Constraints_on_Taser_Use_by_Police/links/554c4a2f0cf29752ee7edc4b.pdf
I don’t have a link for the guy who did the most alarming study, but his thesis on tasers was that they had suffer usage creep. There were introduced as an option for armed offenders who would otherwise be shot – but became the default way of dealing with many situations – so that before tasers one of the Australian states had less than twenty instances of shooting armed persons (not always fatally). Taser use was several thousand in the first year and rising.
NZ is moving quickly towards a US model – a cowboy model. I’ve been in Korea for quite some time – the cops there are armed – but shootings per year are less than ten, probably less than NZ on more than ten times the population. The US model is paramilitary, it is not user friendly. Ultimately I suspect it is unprofessional – the focus is on tech toys and not the discipline that would be the equivalent of military efficiency. Korean cops all did military service – they grow out of the cowboy tendency – also, they have experience with police states – they don’t want to revert to the thug status they earned under Chun do Hwan.
Try as you might PR you have confine to yourself to the truth just occasionally or your trolling becomes ineffective.
“I did not forget that .22s were designed for small game, – that’s your surmise – I read an expert opinion that stated that, because of the range at which most security sniping occurs, and because the object of policing is not to kill, the rifles preferred on the battlefield are excessive. In fact .22s are plenty lethal, as the Crewes or the Bains and no doubt many others show, but heavier weapons kill more frequently on less central hits through system shock.”
Yes I agree that .22s are lethal, especially the range at which the Crewes and Bains were killed, point blank.
I also have read many expert opinions on the right calibre for law enforcement rifles and I bet that I can find more that suggest the 5.56/.223 is better then .22 for a rifle calibre, want to put up what you have and see who can post more?
“Rather than rebut this with evidence you’ve tried to browbeat me into submission. Your preference – arming the police as heavily as they choose – is a trend that increases police violence. There are moral hazards like those found with taser use.”
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Kleinig/publication/31226591_Ethical_Constraints_on_Taser_Use_by_Police/links/554c4a2f0cf29752ee7edc4b.pdf
“I don’t have a link for the guy who did the most alarming study, but his thesis on tasers was that they had suffer usage creep. There were introduced as an option for armed offenders who would otherwise be shot – but became the default way of dealing with many situations – so that before tasers one of the Australian states had less than twenty instances of shooting armed persons (not always fatally). Taser use was several thousand in the first year and rising.”
Got anything about NZ so we can get an accurate picture or does it suit your narrative throw around the use of the term thousands to make it sound really bad?
“NZ is moving quickly towards a US model – a cowboy model. I’ve been in Korea for quite some time – the cops there are armed – but shootings per year are less than ten, probably less than NZ on more than ten times the population. The US model is paramilitary, it is not user friendly. Ultimately I suspect it is unprofessional – the focus is on tech toys and not the discipline that would be the equivalent of military efficiency. Korean cops all did military service – they grow out of the cowboy tendency – also, they have experience with police states – they don’t want to revert to the thug status they earned under Chun do Hwan.”
You state that NZ is heading towards a US model without offering any reasons why this might be, I don’t believe NZ is heading towards the USA, probably more towards Canada if anything
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_Canada#Use_of_force_options
Also our death rate by firearm is still very low:
firearmhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
How long have you spent in the military/police and what training do you have in specific weapons tactics?
None of your damned business PR. But the recommendation came from a veteran in a small US police department – he reckoned going heavy wasn’t the way to go – expensive, high inadvertant kill count, unnecessary.
“There are two kinds of learning, fact and opinion. One increases knowledge, the other increases ignorance.”
You appear to be learning PR – but evidently lack sufficient confidence in your implicit criticism to state it directly.
This is the beginning of wisdom – better to sit mum and be thought a fool than spew your usual ill-conceived drivel.
So basically you don’t know what you’re talking about because you have no training or experience in the field but you have managed to find a recommendation in a small US police department that backs up what you say
If its ok with you I’ll go with my (albeit limited) experience and agree that what the majority of armed forces and police use all over the world is a better cartridge then a cartridge that is designed primarily for small game
Standard armed offenders rifle for the longest time was a bolt action 0.223.
Which remains more than sufficient for NZ purposes.
This is the conservative position – but it’s really a military, not a peacekeeping one. The rifles you prefer have a much greater lethality – and the object is not (or should not be) to kill. This at least was the position of the US Cop I’m paraphrasing. He had been in the position of setting up SWAT for a growing small city and he was aware of the default position and thought he could do better.
We’ve had two fatal police shootings in under a month and in both cases bystanders assert that the victims were not armed or had ceased to resist. This is not a healthy trend, and, it at least suggests that the police are equipped with more deadly force than is desirable in ‘a well-ordered state’.
Hi CV
I believe that the armed offenders squad put themselves in harms way and as such should be given the proper tools to do the job so having access to semi-auto rifles, bolt action rifles, pistols, shotguns and grenade launchers is not unreasonable as it allows for different weapons to be used in different situations
“This is the conservative position – but it’s really a military, not a peacekeeping one. The rifles you prefer have a much greater lethality – and the object is not (or should not be) to kill. This at least was the position of the US Cop I’m paraphrasing. He had been in the position of setting up SWAT for a growing small city and he was aware of the default position and thought he could do better.”
Rifles are basically designed to kill whether its an “evil” ar-15 or a bolt action, unless firing less-lethal rounds although of course they can kill, good luck for him if he can think he can do better but at the moment I’ll go with the NZ police over NZ police matters then a small town cop in the US
“We’ve had two fatal police shootings in under a month and in both cases bystanders assert that the victims were not armed or had ceased to resist. This is not a healthy trend, and, it at least suggests that the police are equipped with more deadly force than is desirable in ‘a well-ordered state’.”
Lets wait until the investigation is complete before we decide whats happened. If the killings are unlawful then the full extent of the law should be applied, if the killings are deemed legal then good on the police for doing their jobs correctly and hopefully it won’t affect the officers to badly
You could suspend judgement and trust the courts and police – or you could go with the line that the preservation of freedom requires vigilance. Rising mortality is a disturbing trend and the courts are not as invariably objective or concerned with prophylaxis as might be wished. Recent events in the US should make it very clear that their conventional police practice involves a number of undesirable outcomes that we would do well to avoid.
“shotguns” you are saying the police should have shot guns. I knew you were a bit of a sick sadist Puckish Rougue – but now you just gave up on morality. Sad man, just sad.
Oh wait you endorse state sponsored murder without knowing all the facts, I should have guessed you go for a weapon like a shotgun.
Sorry PR I do not believe in following the US trend of para-militarising our police forces. Glocks and shotguns in addition to the .223s do make sense. I suspect that the AOS has AR15s now anyway.
However there are specialty units which can be called out if a more serious situation occurs.
Hi Adam
Not sure what your beef is with shotguns, shotguns are used for breeching ie blowing locks off doors and such like, they can also fire non-lethal rounds
There’s probably even capacity for firing off gas as well and also not to discount the physiological effects of hearing the pump action itself though that’s probably not used as much
so I’m not really getting where you’re coming from
Hi CV
Heres what they carry:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armed_Offenders_Squad
Hi PR
AOS members armed with AR15s, scopes which appear to have image intensifier or night capability, barrel grips and tactical lights attached, as well as their service Glocks.
Apart from frag grenades, these police officers are better armed than ordinary World War 2 Kiwi/Brit/US soldiers.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/67803186/armed-offenders-squad-change-focus
Well CV considering you’re talking 70 years difference I’d hope they were as well.
Should the police use cars from the 1940s? Carry six pence to use public payphones?
Stab proof vests, pepper sprays, tasers etc etc all weren’t around 70 years ago either
Should the cops just be issued a truncheon and leave it at that?
Is there a reason they shouldn’t have the weapons and the technology?
I’m guessing you have never fired a shotgun have you PR? I’m also guessing you have never seen the result of someone shot by a shotgun.
I’d also add that all the thing you bring to the defence of shotguns can be done by other means.
Shotguns have one purpose, and that is to kill. And they kill in an appalling way. It is lazy to use them, not to mention a violation of human rights.
I get shotguns are useful for certain game hunting (ducks and quails come to mind) , but when people become the target, they are truly nothing more than a terror weapon, and an abomination.
The reality is we are not living in a cop show, this is not an episode of cops. Shotguns are not needed.
“I’m guessing you have never fired a shotgun have you PR? I’m also guessing you have never seen the result of someone shot by a shotgun.”
You guess wrong, I quite enjoy clay bird shooting
“I’d also add that all the thing you bring to the defence of shotguns can be done by other means.”
Yes they can but in certain situations shotguns do it better
“Shotguns have one purpose, and that is to kill. And they kill in an appalling way. It is lazy to use them, not to mention a violation of human rights.”
Show me these violation of human rights
“I get shotguns are useful for certain game hunting (ducks and quails come to mind) , but when people become the target, they are truly nothing more than a terror weapon, and an abomination.”
How many people have been shot by police wielding shotguns?
“The reality is we are not living in a cop show, this is not an episode of cops. Shotguns are not needed.”
Agreed this isn’t a tv show or movie, thats why the police should be as well armed as they need to be to carry out their function.
Regarding shotguns, a senior AOS chap I was speaking to back in the day was against them, because you’re responsible for every projectile fired. He went right off them when one of the nine pellets went through a window 500 yards down the road, rather than all nine going where he intended.
But then he was an old fashioned cop anyway. He preferred to use his words.
Well McFlock I’d agree with you that shotguns shouldn’t be the only weapon at a cops disposal, for the reasons above, but rather as one of a number of tools the AOS can use
My concern is that the number of “tools” tends to override training in lower-level responses.
There’s a real friction between community policing and paramilitary policing models, and the paramilitary model has been given the advantage in the post-compstat managerialist era. Community policing involves soft skills and indicators that don’t readily translate to quantitative analyses. The trouble with paramilitary policing is that when it’s unchecked it turns the police force into an army of occupation.
Firearms are the ultimate binary solution, but they give absolutely no indication as to systemic or individual performance in the grey area leading up to that decision.
“My concern is that the number of “tools” tends to override training in lower-level responses.”
Do you mean not having enough training with the firearms themselves or do you mean using firearms a first response?
“There’s a real friction between community policing and paramilitary policing models, and the paramilitary model has been given the advantage in the post-compstat managerialist era. Community policing involves soft skills and indicators that don’t readily translate to quantitative analyses. The trouble with paramilitary policing is that when it’s unchecked it turns the police force into an army of occupation.”
Anything’s possible of course, although I think NZ is still quite a ways to go before we get to that stage
Firearms are the ultimate binary solution, but they give absolutely no indication as to systemic or individual performance in the grey area leading up to that decision.
I’d imagine (if I was running the police anyway) that whenever theres a shooting that lessons would taken to see how IAs (or whatever the police call them) can be improved
However considering this situation: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/81760880/Marlborough-man-admits-dangerous-driving-after-chasing-police
I’d say the NZ police haven’t hit the trigger happy stage yet
Firstly, “the police” are not clones.
But I don’t think anyone, even the US cops, are trigger happy as such. What I believe is that there’s significant overlap between situations where shootings are justifiable and situations that can be resolved without gunfire. In several instances of pistol vs steel bar or pistol vs golf club, quite frankly news reports read like police escalated the issue rather than worked to defuse it.
The irony of this discussion is that the AOS seem to be the cops most patient in waiting the guy out and negotiating (by and large, but not always). It’s the regular shift officers who seem to draw their weapons when colleagues from previous generations would have still kept with the words.
Firstly, “the police” are not clones.
But I don’t think anyone, even the US cops, are trigger happy as such. What I believe is that there’s significant overlap between situations where shootings are justifiable and situations that can be resolved without gunfire. In several instances of pistol vs steel bar or pistol vs golf club, quite frankly news reports read like police escalated the issue rather than worked to defuse it.
That is a distinct possibility
The irony of this discussion is that the AOS seem to be the cops most patient in waiting the guy out and negotiating (by and large, but not always). It’s the regular shift officers who seem to draw their weapons when colleagues from previous generations would have still kept with the words.
Lack of training or panicking?
Who knows. Almost certainly varies from situation to situation.
It could just be mindset, a bit like not thinking about pink hippos. Or maybe the security of the firearm on occasion makes the officer confident enough to approach closer to the big man with the club than they would have, at which point a quick and certain put-down becomes needed. Or the mere presence of the firearm on the hip escalates the situation – I had one chap try to pick a fight with me when working security, just because I was wearing an earpiece that night. Or simply that the ready-made binary solution is easier for an unimaginative officer than more complex soft skills.
I’m pretty damned sure that it’s not just providing tools for the job – I think that the perceived requirements of the job also change to reflect the contents of the toolbox.
Who knows. Almost certainly varies from situation to situation.
It could just be mindset, a bit like not thinking about pink hippos. Or maybe the security of the firearm on occasion makes the officer confident enough to approach closer to the big man with the club than they would have, at which point a quick and certain put-down becomes needed. Or the mere presence of the firearm on the hip escalates the situation – I had one chap try to pick a fight with me when working security, just because I was wearing an earpiece that night. Or simply that the ready-made binary solution is easier for an unimaginative officer than more complex soft skills.
I’m pretty damned sure that it’s not just providing tools for the job – I think that the perceived requirements of the job also change to reflect the contents of the toolbox.
I agree, more training is needed especially in the correct handling of weapons but also in deescalating situations and also knowing when or when not to use weapons
think it very foolish to try and make any sort of comparison between the various US law enforcement agencies and the NZ Police.
Well will you accept this recommendation from an RAF security officer and infantry officer qualified as an All Arms weapons instructor. You cant talk your way out of a gunfight. You are at a disadvantage if you have lesser weapons. Police are their to keep the peace, a small part of their job but they are there to uphold the law! They are there to protect us and themselves from armed criminals and should have the means to do it with the least risk to themselves!
With respect, the difference between police and infantry is that police are expected to de-escalate situations if possible. Nor does the least risk to themselves apply without limit – we don’t expect police to use drone strikes or tactical nukes.
What we are seeing in the US at present is a police culture in which some officers are prompting an aggressive response and then killing the citizen. This is one of the dangers of allowing police open slather and increased killing power.
Historically NZ police have been more mature and sensible than that. We’d prefer that they stay that way.
There seem to be an awful lot more armed incidents as well with shooting being the preferred option to disarm an alleged offender.
our police should not routinely carry firearms on their persons.
And all armed officers should wear body cameras.
they probably should any way given their ability to use pepperspray and tasers
In the age of gopro its a no brainer for cops to wear cameras 24/7 , it would make both sides of the law behave.
The evidence seems to say cop-cams are mostly a good thing, but there’s still open questions on how to get the best benefit from them. Do it wrong and it might make things worse.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/consumer-electronics/portable-devices/do-police-body-cameras-really-work
They magically fall off or footage vanishes at critical times too.
There’s ways to address that.
Have it so that the cameras (yes, plural) are part of the clothing worn and not a clip on.
Have them in constant radio communication so that what the cameras see is recorded at a remote location that is not in police control.
Battery technology is not good enough to transmit to a remote location in that manner, without either carrying heavy/bulky batteries, or having to replace batteries regularly. So then you’ve just moved it to “oops, the battery ran out” – easy to imagine someone keeping a battery with low charge ready and purposefully installing that ahead of going into a confrontation, so that no footage is recorded.
I’d actually expect it to transmit to the police car which would then transmit so, like a cellphone, the device would only require low power.
And, like modern cellphones, I’d make them so that the batteries can’t be changed, the battery status would be broadcast as well and that they would automatically charge when in the police car. In other words, trying to replace the battery would be detected and so would any attempt to run it down.
Having a short-range transmission to something like a car could improve the battery situation.
You have of course now introduced another point of complexity in the system, that can go wrong, or be maliciously tampered with.
“and that they would automatically charge when in the police car.”
Proximity based charging only works across very short distances, which isn’t really feasible if these things are sewn into someone’s shirt. Since you’re ruling out user-replaceable batteries, if you require someone to take the camera off in order to put it somewhere in the car to charge, then you’ve just introduced another very weak point into the system.
Actually, I was thinking more of them simply getting in the car with it still on to charge it. And, yes, the technology does exist to make that possible:
Probably needs some further development but certainly not out of the realms of possibility.
The complexity isn’t really a worry as long as good maintenance processes are in place and I doubt anyone would be able to successfully tamper with a solid block of plastic without being caught when it’s on the video transmission from the car.
Our NZ Police are acting like they have been watching too much American TV. In fact under our Tory government the NZ Police have become very authoritative and controlling. This is not good for our country because we don’t want to see public shootings of our officers but if they continue along the line they are we will.
I’d suggest its the NZ media has been watching too much American TV, trying desperately to link anything to do with crime, drugs or firearms with whats happening in the USA as though they’re comparable
Guardian is reporting (via The Sun admittedly) that May has sacked George Osborne.
It seems to be true. One bit of good news. Meanwhile meet the new Foreign Secretary
Presumably on the basis he’ll be too busy flying around the planet to be able to make much mischief in London.
Following that line of thinking…
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/753309625773162497?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Had to chuckle as an academic from Reading University dryly suggested on Morning Report today that Boris Johnson could be quite good as Foreign Secretary because he has no ‘moral compass’.
So, a spittley Hurrah Henry with no moral compass. Beware the mischief Theresa.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-race-row-fury-527310
Where he refers to black people having ‘water melon smiles’. This is not going to end well is it.
& here are 7 reasons the Sun reckons he his a disaster waiting to happen on the world stage
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/7-reasons-boris-johnson-probably-8416540#rlabs=1%20rt$category%20p$6
Good move, he either cleans up his act or consigns himself to a ukip styled existence.
So hes out of May’s way in westminster and under constant performance review on the world stage. About time folk saw the true value of the Boris.
As New Zealand reintegrates back into the global military and imperial web of alliances both secret and open, New Zealand gets to parade with the French Military Forces.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/289192/us-naval-ships-invited-to-visit-nz
God defend New Zealand
Selective remembrance?
NZ Defence Force to parade in Paris in Bastille Day to remember New Zealanders who were killed in defence of France in World War 1.
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11664793
Will there be any token of remembrance in word or deed, by our Defence Force, or the French armed forces, of Fernando Pereira killed in New Zealand by French forces in an act of State Sponsored Terrorism?
Will the New Zealand Defence Force be asking a Greenpeace representative to attend to finally honour and acknowledge an innocent man wrongfully killed by a detachment of the French Armed Forces?
Will a wreath with Fernando Periera’s name on it, be allowed to be carried in honest remembrance and sincere regret?
Has France changed?
Has New Zealand changed?
Or have we just merely selectively forgotten?
Is this really a celebration of the end of war?
Or just another saber rattling militaristic display welcoming New Zealand’s Defence Force back into the fold?
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/about/history/the-bombing-of-the-rainbow-war/rainbow/Death-of-a-Rainbow-Warrior/
“The Feilding and District Steam Rail Society has been left with no option but to abandon the town’s train station after KiwiRail tripled the rent.”
stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/news/82044787/feilding-steam-rail-society-forced-out-of-railway-station
how many stupid decisions does kiwirail get to make before they are told to sharpen up thier act?
wind down workshops,
participate in the race to the bottom by buying cheap chinese locos,
finding out how cheap and nasty the locos were, committing to buying more, stopping the very popular manawatu gorge rail walk (lions club fund raiser), because of ‘health and safety regulations’.
they make it harder and harder to advocate for more rail over trucks.
That’s bloody sad news, gsays. The Feilding rail society has done a terrific job maintaining the yards and facilities, as well as their more core business of running steam excursions. The building, which also serves as a bus stop, will presumably deteriorate if there is no one there looking after it on a regular basis.
The decision makers within kiwirail clearly don’t factor these things in when making their balance sheet decisions.
Youre too generous. Its an idelogical driven trashing of rail under national as I very much doubt much more thought than ‘how do we get rid of them…’ was probably given to the decision.
So Christchurch got hit with about 15,000 earthquakes, which destroyed homes, killed dozens and dozens of people, saw hillsides and cliffs collapse around communities, and liquefaction and other ooze spew up from the ground.
Christchurch got blasted like a war zone.
This affected all people, but especially children. Our own and those around us have been through the lot. It has taken up anything from their entire lives to date, to a minimum of about half of their lives. They cry more easily. They are traumatised. The experts have been warning of this. The experts have said it has happened.
So what does this government do in the middle of all this turmoil? It decides to take the childrens schools in the city, toss them up in the air, and see where they land. Complete and total upheaval in the schools…
… as if the children didn’t already have the maximum to deal with… Hekia Parata decides that this is the ideal time to disturb the only stability in their lives…
[Deleted]
Hekia Parata is a complete [Deleted]for this unnecessary travesty.
Hekia Parata is personally responsible for the additional trauma caused by this and lumped on top of the already maxed-out children.
Unnecessary.
Makes me so very angry, the way this government did that..
And now check this out … http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/82053224/education-ministry-admits-start-of-christchurch-schools-shakeup-not-handled-well
In confirmation of all the warnings, the reality, and the fucking bleeding obvious. Fuck you Parata – you have visited unnecessary trauma on our family and those around us.
[Really getting tired of your women hating vitriol, VTO. No more. TRP]
To be fair, only about 10 of the earthquakes “destroyed homes, killed dozens and dozens of people, saw hillsides and cliffs collapse around communities, and liquefaction and other ooze spew up from the ground”.
your pedantry amuses at times mr lanthanide… but in this case that detail is immaterial to the issue pointed out …
Parata has been very cruel
She is a cruel person on the evidence
And on top of that, the rebuild of schools is being delayed again and again and again.
I reject that trp. Cruel men get called [Deleted], cruel women get called [Deleted]. This is nothing new and no bounds have been overstepped.
There is nothing women-hating in it…
… just as there is nothing man-hating in calling out a [Deleted]
No apology
No acceptance of your view
[Those terms and your attitude are unacceptable here. Any further use of gender based insults or language that belittles women will see you removed permanently. TRP]
only non-gender based insults allowed….. ha ha ha that is very funny
vive la difference… except here in weirdo New Zealand
There has been no belittling of women… that is your view from your own little funny corner of the standard spectrum… you should get out more … it is curious though that you never pull me up when I lay the insults on the male politicians – NEVER..
I will carry on per usual and if you wish to ban me permanently then that is the way it goes …. all good
’til next time eh
Hmmm, might explain some things…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/boredom-and-political-extremism_us_5786491de4b03fc3ee4ea12c?section=
Interesting 🙂
Interesting research – I didn’t know about the glass cliff but it explains a lot to me.
http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/world/82057318/Forget-the-glass-ceiling-women-in-leadership-are-facing-the-glass-cliff
I think people recognise that times are changing.
I think people realise they are being hounded by ‘liberal progressive PC clap trap’
Which is why they choose not to participate
I see Grant Robertson has shown his usual illiteracy regarding tax and tax law. Where it applies it UBER.
Mr Robertson….Tax has NEVER been paid on revenue, only profit.
UBER take about 20% of revenue from drivers , who are independent contractors.
So UBER’s revenue is about $200 000 this would mean, their costs including advertising, head office wages etc etc would be about $173 000 (sound about right?) leaving $27 000 on which tax is $9000 company tax. so they are paying the correct tax on profit.
The drivers collectively are paying tax on $800 000 revenue less costs probably about $400 000 (just a straight guess) so they would be taxed on $400 000…ie $133 000..total tax take from UBER and it’s drivers is actually around $142, 000.
Just using the numbers Grant himself gave.
Uber is running the usual tax minimisation games that all international corporates run.
Tax take from UBER should be increased while the tax take from the drivers should be decreased.
aside from the tax avoidance/evasion issues there is the most important factor of the destination of that revenue from this market …when it is extracted to the offshore base it is removed from the churn of the local economy…start adding up all the foreign providers of goods/services, especially those with minimal local investment and begin to wonder if we will ever have a positive trade balance.
That assumes Uber is booking the full revenue from drivers.
Their financial statements are available at http://www.companies.govt.nz – company number is 4451818. According to those, payroll is about $231,000, rent is about $58,000 and Other Expenses are about $140,000. Mobile expenses are over $500,000 but there’s nothing there about drivers.
Then look for their terms and conditions.
Drivers are independent contractors, so are responsible for their own tax.
References I have seen state that UBER take 20% of the revenue, so drivers keep 80% ie $800 000 estimate (guess) expenses and the remainder is taxable
So $400 000 taxable income ie $133 000 tax paid by drivers that would not be there if not for UBER.
Ubers revenue is therefore $200 000 expenses would be large and so it is, on these numbers (Supplied by Mr Robertson) that when expenses are taken off, $9 000 is reasonable, regardless of any off shore taxation agreements between nations.
I’m not sure how you got that out of my post – most of the income is spent on mobile expenses. Drivers aren’t stated, which suggests to me that Uber are only putting their 20% in their financial statements, not the whole amount, so drivers presumably get $4,000,000 between them, not $800,000.
loose lips sink ships?
Say it ain’t so.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/opinion/opinion-loose-lips-sink-ships-mr-joyce-2016071210#.V4apoeheUaR.twitter
“I can just hear Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett announcing it, saying something like: “These are vulnerable people, and those dividends are better spent re-investing into new houses for those in need”.
But no. Steven Joyce tweeted it out on Sunday and Monday following Labour’s announcement and no one knew what he was talking about.
I thought it was spin. Labour said he was lying. The Budget clearly stated $38m in dividends this year, and $54m next year.
But no, Mr Joyce was right. The Budget was wrong. The Budget was outdated. He’d seen what’s called a Statement of Performance Expectation. It’s a secret document which said HNZ would prefer not to pay the dividends, and instead, use the cash to build more houses.
What’s more, Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett had no idea about the debacle when she appeared on RadioLive for her weekly panel with Labour’s finance spokesman Grant Robertson. She was blindsided by what Mr Joyce had been doing. To put it lightly, she would have been pissed off.
She played it down of course, but I’m sure there would have been some tense phone calls or texts between the two last night. Social housing is Ms Bennett’s baby.
I’m sure Bill English is brassed off too. HNZ is his portfolio responsibility, and surely he’d want to announce the dividend U-turn himself, especially because he’s the finance minister as well.
National’s been hammered for weeks on housing and this latest defensive blurting from Mr Joyce shows he’s panicked about Labour nailing his party on housing.
Mr Joyce is usually a sleek, calculated operator within National. But he’s been outplayed.
Forgoing two years’ worth of dividends is an admission they got it wrong.
It’s an admission social housing is broken.
It’s an admission of failure they’d never make.”
H
Entrapment , social control, usury and blackmail of the poorest beneficiaries of New Zealand
…so their entrapment forced debt will make them compliant to a jonkey nact state which abuses them and their rights and makes them less likely to protest for social and political change?
This articulate highly intelligent precariat beneficiary calls them out
‘Battling WINZ to stop overpayments’
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201808227/battling-winz-to-stop-overpayments
“Work and Income figures on beneficiary debt show that $672 million is owed by people who were overpaid by accident, and have to pay it back. Rotorua beneficiary Bryce Sinclair has two part time jobs and his hours of work fluctuate from week to week, and therefore his income. Bryce declares this income to WINZ, but because of the way the system works, he’s found himself overpaid, and he and his wife now owe nearly 2 thousand 8 hundred dollars. He tells Kathryn Ryan that despite his best efforts, the debt has mounted, which he finds very stressful.”
( a new government of the Left should pledge to wipe this entrapment debt….and the same for tertiary students)
https://www.bloomsburycollections.com/book/the-precariat-the-new-dangerous-class/
This is brilliant…a must listen
‘Who’s ruining the internet?’
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201808232/who's-ruining-the-internet
“Cory Doctorow is a world famous digital activist, science fiction author and co-editor of the website Boing Boing. He stands among those who’d like to see big changes in how we use the web.”
Excellent interview, chooky! Thanks for posting the link.
So who was the MP referred to, sounds like he/she should be asked some very pointed and public questions!!!
If this is true, and I have my doubts, then the global financial system is fucked. Of course, due to it being delusional the global financial system is fucked anyway but a new Gold Standard Reserve Currency will bring it down a lot faster.
The Amazing Thing About Bad Ideas
And that is why capitalism fails. It only listens to the ideas of people in power and ignores the ideas of everybody else with the end result being that only bad ideas get implemented.
We saw it in Brexit as the ‘experts’ ignored all the experience of those being made worse off by being in the EU and ‘free-trade’. We see it in our political parties as the people at the top continue to support and prop up failed policies that are increasing poverty and decreasing our sustainability.
We need a new system, one that can listen to and discuss everybody’s ideas about issues so that great ideas can be developed and implemented.
Thou shalt not question the holy tenets of Captialism
Labour unveils interactive site to show housing crisis.
http://www.labour.org.nz/housingmap
Does it make me a bad person if i gave a little wohoo when it told me my houses value had risen by 9% in the last year.
It also told me I’m charging $40 a week under the average for renting that house out..
You are one of the reasons why young kiwis will never own a home!
I’m not sure the about the numbers Labour are using, they have my house at $20 grand above where I think it is and my home at $50 grand below
What a neat little tool Labour has put together…
I added a bit to one page.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/82104175/police-shoot-man-in-rotorua
As I pointed out earlier:
Puckish Rogue 2.4.1
14 July 2016 at 8:48 am
I’d suggest its the NZ media has been watching too much American TV, trying desperately to link anything to do with crime, drugs or firearms with whats happening in the USA as though they’re comparable
How many times is whats happening in the USA linked to this latest incidence as if it has any relevance at all
interesting timeline down the bottom: 20 people shot in the 60 years up to the millenium, 12 in the 15 years since.
Are we now up to three in the last 12 months?
Tools my ass, militriasation just means more people get shot.
If the killings are unlawful you may have a point, if they’re not then you don’t.
Bull.
The problem isn’t whether a shooting is legally justifiable, it’s whether the shooting was reasonably avoidable. The two are not the same thing.
PR ” Lets wait until the investigation is complete before we decide whats happened”
Therin lies the problem . The “investigation” will be a whitewash . Thats the problem , thats why the police killings increase.
Ok then lets not investigate anything, lets just all decide its wrong and be done with it
Hell lets do away with trials as well, they take time
Lawful is not a carte blanche. If any were avoidable that’s a police failure. Good police work involves not forcing confrontations unnecessarily.
That too , falure of culture, falure of leadership …. in the end lawfull (if it was) still wont cut it
So who decides if its unavoidable or not and how is that decision made?
As per my post earlier today, before this latest shooting. Cameras on all armed officers at all times. No camera no weapon.
You know most officers aren’t armed
No idea and who knows.
Which is the problem with arming the police as they currently are.
How about these guys?
http://www.ipca.govt.nz/
lol good luck with that
Ah, the Police Whitewash Authority. Yeah, that’ll do it.
It appears that many people’s default position is either
a) it’s the police’s fault
or
b) it’s the alledged offenders fault
– prior to any information being available let alone a full presentation of the facts I would suggest these are particularly daft positions to take.
In individual cases before the facts come out, yes.
But looking at the systemic increase in police-caused deaths, one has to wonder whether it is related to the systemic up-arming of police in the same time period.
In the sixty years before 2000, 19 officers were killed by criminal acts in the line of duty.
in the 15 years since, 4 have been killed.
Basically, 50:50 to three times the number of offenders.
There seems to have been a systemic change in when police choose to shoot people.
I would suggest that there have been many many changes in the last seventy five years over and above the arming of the police that would need to be taken into account before one could draw anything but the most cursory assumptions.
“There seems to have been a systemic change in when police choose to shoot people.”
True all police now have much easier access to firearms via gun safes in patrol cars.
A major influence in the last 15 years has been the arrival of P in large amounts. Not only the massive $ to be made, but the effect on a user of P.
A cop confronted with a suspect high on P is faced with someone who does not listen to reason, is unpredictable and in a struggle is very hard to put down safely (for both the suspect and cop).
Assumptions are one thing.
Concern at the number of people being shot in apparently avoidable circumstances and the apparent reliance by investigations on legal justification rather than avoidability are perfectly reasonable, though.
Before we get into that, have you even had to work with colleagues to put down and hold down a drugged up nutbar who’s clocking off?
Because I have. It sucks.
But the question I can’t help wondering is “when a cop shoots someone who had been bashing windows with a golf club, why did the cop get close enough for that club to be a threat to the cop’s life?”
Well, in this case, it appears that holding a taiaha and doing a haka is now enough to get you killed by the police:
Looking at the video he wasn’t an immediate danger to anyone.
Yeah, I don’t see what the problem is with backing away from the offender. Like a lot of these incidents the presence of the police immediately escalates the situation – he’s pissed off with you not anyone else, so just keep backing away, get as many people out of the area and keep an eye on him and wait for an opportunity to apprehend him probably with dogs or when his concentration slips.
As someone who uses that roundabout on a regular basis, I’m not overly fussed about what methods the cops use to take down a drugged-up nutcase with a machete who’s attacking cars there – they can incinerate him with a flamethrower for all I care, just as long as he isn’t wandering about with a machete afterwards.
And how would you write the letter to the deceased’s family?
Your misbehaving son was incinerated because he was blocking traffic and we couldn’t be bothered waiting.
And anyways drug rehab is more expensive than a couple of 9mm rounds and there aren’t any beds available.
And how would you write the letter to the deceased’s family?
Oh, they wouldn’t want me to do it, because it would read something like “Your drug-addled waster was attacking cars with a machete and tasers wouldn’t take him down, so we upped the ante and now all we have left to hand over to you is this box of ash with some bones in it. On the plus side, he didn’t get to kill anyone so let’s chalk this up as a victory for public safety. PS: we’re keeping the machete.”
You forgot to charge the family for the two bullets and the cop time.
The number of people being shot dead by the police seems to be on the increase .
Can anyone tell me what has happened to the carrying by the police of tasers?. Surely they were issued in the first place to stop people being killed ,
The police are still carrying them and I’d imagine the statistics are out there somewhere on their use
They have tasers (and pepper spray), but if someone is intoxicated enough (whether drugs or alcohol, especially P), they don’t always work.
The Waipa and Waikato councils are preparing to meter every house for water .They are also planning to start a council owned water company.
I would like to hear from fellow Standard readers if they believe this is the first step towards privatization of water .
Its the final step company==private ownership
Metering on the face of it might be reasonable and sensible
company regardless of council owned (for now) or not is alienation
Not if the company is set up as Watercare is in Auckland.
A CCO which is not used to produce a dividend for the Council by Act of Parliament its is a Not For Profit company and cannot be sold.
There may be some aspects of WC that could be improved but in the main it seems to work as intended.
Metering is BS – most of the cost of providing water is fixed, and there’s very little variable cost to it.
Boris Johnson on Africa.
Yup and May was against Brexit so IMO its a case of there you go Boris, not a low ranking role so your ego and skills put to good use and everyones watching you now.
Off you go son.
This is a good read
http://thespinoff.co.nz/featured/14-07-2016/a-non-homeowners-guide-to-the-bubble-that-is-going-to-take-you-all-down/#.V4cLAZUs4WJ.twitter
“Finally can I just say that when this bubble bursts I hope the Government doesn’t start bailing you people out. I’m not a rabid free-marketeer but I believe the brainy person’s saying here is Caveat Emptor – let the buyer beware. The banks and everyone who pumped this bubble up must be prepared for the possibility of losing their shirts when it bursts. Sorry. And before you say “well that’s going to take the whole economy down,” let me just say that that is on you. The greed of property owners and banks and the weakness of politicians created this mess – not anyone else. Take responsibility for your own mess.”
Very good, I have plenty of greedy relatives who are so smug at the moment, they think they business people/wealth creators but they just greedy hoarders afaic.
“the people who should have fixed this are too dumb, greedy or lazy to do it.” – too true!
lol….pretty good summary for a self professed non expert…probably worth paying him 400K to sort it out.
A question for those of you who believe that the MSM would never intentionally mislead you:
In this image, where is this man’s right hip, under the girl’s right knee or back behind and under his elbow?
https://i1.wp.com/www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2016/06/22/101394424_Brendan_Cox_husband-NEWS-xlarge_trans++9-zn32UdN-2qebTEmhS1ZQN9TAiRB7yBIN2vUmPSfC0.jpg
what the hell are you on about now?
Just answer the question.
It looks a bit like he’s slouching in mum jeans, but the jacket obscures it if you have that much time on your hands.
And you’ll love this documentary proof that photographs mislead folk. Fucking illuminati, they’re everywhere.
Yeah, I haven’t yet found anyone yet who will answer the question. Most people just sidestep and say it’s an optical illusion. The reason you can’t identify his hip is because the photo is a fake.
Here’s a real photo of a man sitting cross legged for comparison.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRqTUjno0qFqubN7JJSfNwT0vZyW-Wpj6XPR7kB_nm4fMeG8WkK
lol
thanks for providing the “comparison” of how people sit.
I’m sorry my answer wasn’t clear enough for you. The jacket obscures his exact posture. You might as well ask which side he dresses on, because there’s not enough information in the photo for that, either. That doesn’t mean the photograph is faked.
Everything is faked: the Illuminatii have been hiding the real world for centuries. It’s behind Pak ‘n’ Save (they’re not hiding it very well, but hey, it still works on a few people).
The jacket doesn’t obscure the bend behind the girl’s right leg. The bend isn’t his knee, that much is clear from the other photos. The bend is also too far from his upright torso to be his hip.
“upright torso”
That’s your assumption.
“that much is clear from the other photos”
What other photos? You only linked to one.
If he’s sitting on the seat slightly side-on, twisting to look in the general direction of the camera, it looks like a typical sprog-holding posture. When was the last time you saw someone with a toddler on their lap? Were they sitting bolt upright, straight on to the seat?
As I said, I think you have far too much time on your hands.
Coleman’s a $25 bastard. What happened to the Hippocratic Oath, $25 bastard ?http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11674692
Now if only Australia would do this.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-concentrating-solar-tower-is-worth-its-salt-with-24-7-power/
“We can ramp up electricity generation for utilities based on the demand. We can turn on when they want us to turn on and we can turn off when they want us to turn off,”
Kevin Smith SolarReserve CEO
If there is any country that is crying out for this technology it is Australia.
Maybe New Zealand could build one of these above power plants to spur Australia into doing it.
Australia and New Zealand are close cultural cousins, both majority white settler countries, with a common language, and a shared history of British colonialism, both with an indomitable native population, living close to and imbued with strong ethos of respect for nature and the environment.
Even our flags look the same, and despite what John Key says. What we do here matters on the world stage.
Northland would be the perfect place for such a project, higher average sunshine, at the far end of our electricity grid, crying out for a needed jobs boost. And long ignored by the government, compared to other regions, in government energy and infrastructure investment.
THINK BIG!
Northland needs to become the 21st Century energy capital of Te Ika a Maui.
The tail that is the powerhouse to drive the fish over the coming rapids,
Instead of wasting $billions tunneling under the Waitemata Harbour, this is what we need to be doing.