But we have more with the 1st shot.
A month ago that was Aussie.
Printable View
I don't think we know much of anything because there is a suppression order (that the Govt will attempt to get lifted).
That doesn't seem to be stopping a certain rabid individual from commenting.
Balance is so quick to judge on the facts he doesn't know.
Only he could turn this into a political issue.
Balance might be jumping the gun....but when the facts become clear this will undoubtedly become political.
Phil Goff this morning alluded to the Hate Speech laws that Labour are looking to push through. The horrible irony is that I can see them using this to justify draconian measures on everyone, when if existing laws were properly applied it would be unnecessary. Watch this space!
This reasonably lays out what is known about 'S' - premium unfortunately
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/why-is...UHDHJILE2C3TI/
There is a law change before the select committee I believe to address some of this.Quote:
The Crown sought to prosecute a 32-year-old man — known only as "S" for legal reasons — under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002, but a High Court judge ruled that preparing a terrorist attack was not in itself an offence under the legislation.
S was instead prosecuted on lesser charges. On May 26, he was found guilty by a jury of possessing propaganda-style material supportive of Islamic State. He was acquitted on other charges of possessing a graphic video depicting a prisoner being decapitated and possession of an offensive weapon.
According to a report prepared for his sentencing in July, S has "the means and motivation to commit violence in the community". Despite the police concerns about the threat to public safety, S was sentenced to one year of supervision, a community-based sentence designed to rehabilitate low-level offenders.
You are right, though, that changes in the law will be seen as draconian by many.
Politicians never win so long as people think they are doing things for the wrong reason.
I'm afraid you aren't correct on that one Dobby.
Aussie is still clearly ahead of NZ for % of eligible population where just the 1st shot has been administered.
Aussie - 61%
NZ - 57%
What is also concerning is when our PM (the Chief-in-Commander of "the source of truth") says, "sorry sheeple, we have a demand issue, not a supply issue with the vaccine".
Rather bad optics, especially for her!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-wounded.html
The headlines sum up the arse-about-face terrorist law of NZ perfectly :
‘ ISIS supporter was let free to rampage as powerless cops watched him 24/7 waiting for him to attack.’
After the CHCh terror massacre in 2019, what has the Labour government been doing to fix NZ’s obviously archaic & ineffectual anti terrorist laws in the last 2.5 years?
Where are the useless turd
police minister Poto ‘I represent South Auckland criminals’ Williams
&
justice minister Kris 'Completely out of his depths & it shows' Faafoi?
WTF have they been doing? Yet another great example of Cindy promising plenty and delivering, in this case critical injuries to 6 NZers.
Jacinda - wastes no time getting on top of things.
Attachment 12926
To both - don't they have to follow the law?
Preparing - thinking - thought crime? I'm not a lawyer and I don't know the law but if the judge says he can't convict then who am I (or you) to say he is wrong?
Whatever - the law needs to change but be prepared for noise about unintended consequences or that it could be used for other things.
Remember the law last year that said police could come into your house to check for a party (under level 4) (don't quote me on the exact law) and people here were saying that police state was next?
A change is before the select committee I believe - passed the first reading in May.
I believe, from what I read, that this person and the inability to prosecute for 'planning' an attack (whatever that means) prompted it.
Maybe they should just make new rules on the fly - sort of like a dictatorship could do (or your favoured China - now they know how to fix things)?
Police are out there arresting people for breaking the COVID curfew without good cause. Shouldn’t they be waiting until these people are either infected or infect someone else(?) Amazing that you can be arrested in NZ for leaving your house for reasons other than exercising or getting food or going to a workplace as an essential worker, but if you are planning a terrorist attack you are apparently doing nothing wrong. That’s what they said on the radio today: it’s not an offence to plan an attack. I wonder if they had uncovered that he was putting together plans to blow up Parliament whether that might be an issue.
When all is said and done, I’d rather take my chances of walking past someone in Taihape who is wearing a mask than confronting an ISIS terrorist who has just sunk a knife between my shoulder blades.
Since this country embraced left wing ideologies wholesale and as a matter of course we have become much less safe and moreover, we have become quite bizarre as a country. We are sadly lacking in good old fashioned common sense.
When an Australian madman came here here and did something horrific suddenly the spotlight was turned on NZ Europeans and the political Right as if that terrorist had been spawned here. Apparently the police were ‘looking in the wrong place’. The ‘ideology of hate’ was apparently something unique to ‘racist’ (white) NZers.
We are still yet to spawn a NZ born & raised terrorist here. Terrorist acts on our soil have been perpetrated by imports.
We’ve been told that police were ‘looking in the wrong place’. I think we need to know how many other Jihadi’s are on the NZ ‘watch list’ and how many ticking time bombs there are out there with police resources traipsing around monitoring them.
So you're saying people are being over the top in decrying the advent of a Police State, while calling for harsher laws, when the problem appears to be the current laws are wrongly implemented.
If the guy is on a charge of assaulting corrections staff, and he is already on 24 hour surveillance, who in their right mind would give him bail on the assault charge?