I watched the news tonight and switched between Campbell Live and Close-up. I haven’t done that in ages and now I know why, TV is rubbish.

Item 1 on Close-up was about farming and eating our native fauna. 85% of txt pollers said “fuckin’ ‘A’ let’s tuck in”. The DOC wanker though doesn’t want a bar of it. Not a surprising from a career bureaucrat with a vest interest. The farmer/entrepeneur reckons if we farm our birds and the like, and I would include Whales in there too then they would actually increase in numbers and be removed from the endangered lists. He has a point. DOC isn’t working and they have no real reason to have it work because if all those species were no longer endangered they wouldn’t have anything to save. Weka and Kereru are supposed to be delicious. Kiwi is said to be bloody awful. I reckon we give it a go. Let’s have people permitted to grow and farm native fauna.

There was a news item about a poor cab driver who got knifed by some scumbag. Now the cab drivers want the government to fix the problem by stumping up some cash for cameras and safety equipment. Well I have this to say about that. Fuck off. If they don’t care enough about their own safety to install it then why should the government. Fuck ‘em. They are in business not bludgers with an entitlement mentality. unfortunately this is what 9 years of Clark-ism and 50 years of creeping socialism has given us. Small business owners, for that is what they are, putting their hand out for an entitlement to pay for their own safety. heres a thought, invest in your workplace/business. I can see it now though, if the government “fixes” the cab drivers problem, then we will have every bottle store owner in the country wanting a government handout for security cameras and grills, then dairy owners. Hell let’s just give up and hand everything over to the state. For god’s sake stand on your own two feet.

Back to One News because as the title says this is Random Shit. We hear that the idiot Nick “Quota” Smith and his faithful puppy-dog John Key have got their way and are going to sign NZ up to Copenhagen. If they just pulled their heads out of their arses for just a moment they would realise that this con has been rumbled. Don’t they read the papers, the blogs or the news. Pachauri has been caught in the back of the proverbial sheep, trousers down. There are daily reports of new failings in the much vaunted IPCC AR4 which as it stands now is really a collection of fairy-tales interspersed with some nice scenery photographs. There are major errors in the “peer-reviewed by thousands of scientists” document. Most of the errors are because the IPCC accepted snipping from magazines, telephone conversations with mountaineers and just plain lies as the scientific consensus for Global Warming, and when caught shagging that proverbial sheep their reaction was to deny, slander, and lie. If there is one thing that is likely to make me goes biblical on National it is this issue.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Judith Collins has an opinion piece in the NZ Herald and in her indomitable way puts liberal panty-waists like “FIGJAM” Power on notice that at least one of our politicians is staying in touch with the people in the street.

Time and again, victims of crime have told me they feel let down by a system that seems to put greater emphasis on the rights of offenders than victims.

People expect safe communities, where they can walk the streets without the threat of violence or intimidation, where they can sleep at night knowing their families are safe in their homes, where there is respect for property, people and the law.

These things are among the most fundamental obligations of any government. I believe we need to revisit the basic principles of punishment and reform.

As far as I am concerned, Offenders have no rights except the right to be housed and fed. We seriously do need to look at our Justice system.

In this country we have many people who have made a thriving industry out of making excuses for criminals.

In the past decade these people have overwhelmed the debate on law and order with their views on the rights of offenders.

By making excuses for criminals, these people send a very strong signal that crime is acceptable in our communities, that it is an accepted fact of life.

One thing I do not understand is how you can tell someone whose life has been torn apart by crime that it is acceptable.

Recently, a senior judge told me that he believed there was “far too much emphasis on victims in our courts at the moment”.

That Judge should be sacked. it is their job to protect society by putting crims away, not dishing out big hugs and cuddles. Collins is right, making excuses for criminals victimises the victim al over again. This is one of the reasons I set up SHAME. To stop people making excuses and hiding from the awful crimes that they committ.

For every crime there are victims like Leigh and her family, and for justice to be truly done it must strive to bring peace and closure to those victims. I believe it is time to reclaim a few basic ideas of what justice is and what it is supposed to do.

The public expects the system – first and foremost – to punish those who have broken the law. Punishment for serious crime in the majority of cases should be harsh, because anything less fails to acknowledge that victims of crime are never truly released from their sentences.

I don’t believe prison should be enjoyable. Prison should be an unpleasant experience so offenders do not want to return.

The justice system’s sole focus should not be on punishment. It is very important to give people the opportunity to turn their lives around.

Precisely. Judith Collins is right in touch with the feel on the streets, she clearly doesn’t ensconce herself in the rarefied atmosphere of the beltway. Serious Offenders need serious punishment, not PLasma screens and heated floors and cuddle toys and warm blankets. They need hard punishment and then when they get that message we can start looking at rehabilitation.

But pressure from those who advocate for the rights of criminals has resulted in too much focus on rehabilitating the prisoners who are least likely to be rehabilitated.

We should accept that some offenders will never be rehabilitated, and divert resources to those who could benefit from it.

The Government has announced a three-strikes policy that will escalate the severity of sentences.

Hoorah! The days of the panty-waist liberals running our prison is over. In the Police and Corrections Minister we have a minister who knows and understands about the victims of crime and what we need to do about. Som eoffenders are beyond redemption and the faster they are worked to an early grave the better. Perhaps under our free trade detail with China we could outsource the detention of lifers to China. They at least know how to make their sorry lives useful, often by using them as organ donors. The Chinese are very efficient when it come to making the useless useful.

Popularity: unranked [?]

National and Act have just announced their agreement to implement the 3 strikes law.

Agreement on the policy, which will be incorporated into the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill, was announced by the Prime Minister John Key, ACT Leader Rodney Hide and Police and Corrections Minister Judith Collins today.

The new regime will uphold the Government’s election pledge to remove eligibility for parole for the worst repeat violent offenders, and incorporate significant aspects of ACT’s three-strikes policy.

Under the regime, an offender will receive a standard sentence and warning for the first serious offence.  For the second offence they will get a jail term (in most cases) with no parole and a further warning.  On conviction for their third serious offence, the offender will receive the maximum penalty in prison for that offence with no parole.

Good, time for us to put some people behind bars for a very long time.

In the revised Bill each strike will be based on an offender receiving a conviction for a qualifying offence. In the Bill as introduced, the threshold was a sentence of five years or more for a qualifying offence.

On their third strike offenders will get the maximum sentence for the offence rather than a life sentence with a minimum period of imprisonment of 25 years as originally proposed.

As a general rule, the list of qualifying offences comprises all the major violence and sexual offences with a maximum penalty of seven years’ prison or more.

The really interesting thing is that it was “Crusher” Collins at the press conference announcing this law and she is going to be the Minister implementing it. Normally this is the purview of the Minister of Justice, but Simon “FIGJAM” Power must have annoyed too many people to be trusted with this key piece of legislation. At least we know that “Crusher” will deliver, everything she has promised so far has manifested itself under her guiding hand, this law will be no different.

This is also a significant policy win for ACT and Rodney Hide can justifiably be proud of the impact his party is having on the government. The response from Labour will be interesting. Phil Goff would privately support this, but could he carry his caucus to supporting it. I seriously doubt he can do that.

Batter up I say.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Becoming a victim of crime is probably in the forefront of most peoples mind. They want it like they want cancer.

Miranda Devine writes in the SMH about the plague that liberalism has become and how politicians seem to always go for spin and woofterism instead of dealing with issues.

If I were a mother in India, I wouldn’t want my son going to Melbourne to study, after the spate of “curry-bashings” that has now resulted in a death. Accounting graduate Nitin Garg, 21, from Punjab, was fatally stabbed on Saturday while on his way to work as night manager at a Hungry Jack’s store in Melbourne’s western suburbs.

Police and other Victorian authorities immediately claimed it was not a racist attack, but how could they know that, especially when his wallet was left behind?

Garg’s mother, recently widowed, fainted when she heard the news about her younger son, a clever ”well-behaved, gentle, law-abiding boy”.

As is usual these days from the liberals it was the victim and their community that was to blame, not the inherent racism that exists in Australia and in Melbourne especially, the underlying criminal elements that run unchecked by the Police. Is it any wonder that crimes like this occur when you get this sort of nonsense from the State Government and State Police.

Yet the tragedy should have been avoidable if the Victorian Government had taken seriously protests by Indian students in Melbourne and Sydney over lax policing over years; Victorian police have confirmed there were 1447 assaults on Indian students in the year to July 2008. The Federation of Indian Students says the real figure is four or five times higher, and increasing.

Instead, senior police criticised Indian students doing their own security patrols at Melbourne’s crime-ridden western suburbs railway stations.

Oh yes, let’s blame the victims, The Federal Government wasn’t much better.

Instead, politicians pulled out the spin machine.

On visits to India Prime Minister Kevin Rudd his deputy, Julia Gillard, Trade Minister Simon Crean and Victoria’s Premier, John Brumby, tried to hose down anger and safeguard our lucrative education industry.

They provided little beyond motherhood statements about what a “safe and welcoming place” Australia was. There were new scholarships for Indian students, and two inquiries that simply added to a raft of bureaucratic measures that do little to address the real cause of the problem: inadequate policing.

”The key initiatives will include extending the state’s education service managers . . . international scholarship program . . . expert reference group”, Brumby told the Indians. Blah blah blah.

This is exactly the problem, right there. Woofterism, mealy mouthed liberal politicians refusing to grasp the nettle and deal with crime and criminals.

But after a decade of policy dictated by leftist academic criminologists, who cling to the myth that crime is caused by poverty and social injustice, the most vulnerable people – such as Indian students working late at fast-food outlets – are paying the price, while ministers trumpet the lie that Victoria is the safest place in Australia.

It has long been the “root cause” dogma of the left that crime cannot be combated in the traditional manner by police on the streets. This allows big government to launch all sorts of utopian “social inclusion” programs to “address poverty and disadvantage”, and effectively hobbles frontline police who would prefer to be out arresting crooks.

Sound familiar? This is exactly the same claptrap trotted out endlessly by the last government and by liberals like Simon “FIGJAM” Power.

This week the Indian Government issued a travel advisory against Australia, warning Indian students to be “alert to their own security while moving around”, particularly in Melbourne, where “increasingly . . .. acts of violence are often accompanied by verbal abuse, fuelled by alcohol and drugs”.

What an indictment of Australia that it can’t keep visitors safe. Meanwhile, in New York, when I visited before Christmas, you couldn’t feel safer. There is a highly visible police presence on the streets, even to the point of police walking into department stores to look for shoplifters. Police cars cruise around constantly. Former no-go zones such as Times Square, in the heart of Manhattan, have been transformed into tourist meccas.

Since the zero tolerance policy instituted under the former mayor Rudolph Giuliani and his police commissioner, William Bratton, in the early 1990s, violent crime has dropped by 75 per cent. Last year there were 461 murders, a record low, down from a high of 2245 in 1990 when criminals ruled the roost. That was when, as the former lawyer Heather McDonald wrote in New York’s City Journal, “packs of feral youth attacked innocents”. Sound familiar?

The FBI now deems New York to be the safest big city in the US, a stunning achievement. Bratton’s idea was that if you cleaned up the small crimes, such as vandalism and public drunkenness, you eliminated the public disorder and fear that made residents leave the streets to criminals.

Again, does this sound familiar, the Australian part not the New York part. Enough of the liberalism, we now know it doesn’t work. The experiment was a failure. In parts of South Auckland there are definite no-go areas. Ask any cop, ask any security guard and ask any road maintenance worker. They just don’t go into those areas and therefore they get handed of to the crims and the thugs. Meanwhile the no-go zones become dilapidated and run down perpetuating the the very environment that liberalism with crime started in the first place.

This is why we need more politicians like Judith “Crusher” Collins and their solutions and much less of Simon “FIGJAM” Power bleating on about poor misbegotten unfortunates who commit crimes that are societies fault.

Popularity: 39% [?]

The answer of course is yes, and a classic example of how dumb the repeaters are is an article on Stuff from NZPA about missing chemicals a year after they went missing.

A chemical which could help make nearly $1 billion worth of the drug methamphetamine, or P, is still missing, nearly a year after it was stolen.

One thousand litres of hypophosphorus acid, a key ingredient in P manufacturing, was stolen from a Mt Maunganui factory in January – the biggest theft of its kind in New Zealand. The acid was worth at least $1 million on the black market and had the potential to make 900kg of P, worth about $900 million, the Bay of Plenty Times reported.

Details of the January raid on a Mt Maunganui factory were revealed at the sentencing of Tauranga beneficiary Terrence Rangihouhori Tata, 36, in Tauranga District Court this week.

Uhmmmm….they didn’t work out that it isn’t missing, it got made into methamphetamine and got smoked up a pipe by thousands of addicts. Of course the acid hasn’t ben recovered, because it doesn’t exist anymore.

No wonder cops have to chase breaches in name suppression they can’t even work out what happened to a precursor substance that went missing.

Popularity: unranked [?]

Cactus Kate has an explosive revelation on her blog that APN one of the biggest publishers in New Zealand won’t print anything that comes within a broad definition of causing them possible legal problems.

Essentially they have put their hands up and surrendered.

There are categories of people who are more inclined to sue if they are the subject of adverse publications, so particular care should be taken in reporting allegations of misconduct against lawyers, doctors, judges, other professionals, politicians, critics and wealthy businessmen/women.

Right so if you are one that group and say stand up in the press and make yourself the spokeman for some crowd all the while hiding the fact that you like to conduct cervical smear tests without gloves on and are a serial rooter of your staff and patients, you will get a free pass from the APN because they are scared that you will sue them.

Or if you run a dodgy inertia selling outfit with complaints about your business practices before the Commerce Commission and a failed finance company whose documents are sealed by the court because the “whole house of cards” may come tumbling down then you also get a free ride in the media, or even better a patsy interview to explain yourself away.

These are but two examples that this blog has run but are unlikely to be touched by APN at the least and also Fairfax because of their issues with telling the truth. It is now up to brave bloggers to take on the “establishment”.

Popularity: unranked [?]