|
Are you a This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| homeowner |
|
39 | 22.41% |
| renter |
|
69 | 39.66% |
| stupid peace of poo poo |
|
66 | 37.93% |
| Total: | 174 votes | ||
|
I am assaulted by Peter Jackson's continued existence, money and fame but that's probably more of a me problem.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:44 |
|
|
Infotainment! posted:Lol, just lol if you think rugby players are actually new zealand's most famous celebrities. Somehow Karl Urban, Peter Jackson, Lucy Lawless et al manage not to assault people on the reg. I dunno, I think Richie McCaw is probably more of a household name in New Zealand than Karl Urban. The people you listed are probably far more recognisable than any All Black OUTSIDE New Zealand, but inside, I think the most famous rugby players would at the very least equal any of them in terms of name recognition. e: also yes, Peter Jackson is a shitheel and a union-buster, but he's never actually done anything career-breakingly illegal, AFAIK, so I don't really see the relevance of the comparison. The Sin of Onan fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Oct 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/73234877/labour-leader-sticking-with-annette-king-for-deputy
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
I'll bet Jacinda can't kick conversions for poo poo anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
Infotainment! posted:I dunno, I can't seem to find any examples of visual artists or authors in the same position? I have a friend who would no doubt have had an absolutely stellar international career in opera and oratorio, except he was stung with a conviction when he was 18 meaning he can't travel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 08:45
|
|
|
Varkk posted:Yes, but it seems that people who are good at sport, or peripherally connected to it, especially rugby, seem to get preferential treatment if they ever see the inside of a courtroom. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10862897
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/73234877/labour-leader-sticking-with-annette-king-for-deputy gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 08:58
|
|
|
Roger Douglas spent $12,612 of taxpayer money on travel last year http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11532909
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 09:24
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Roger Douglas spent $12,612 of taxpayer money on travel last year this actually makes me real made so I'm going to try and laugh instead
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 09:49
|
|
|
sup nz just gonna forge a cop's signature and impersonate a police officer to get my hands on a gun also gonna pointlessly name the store i got the gun from also gonna make out like i was the one that got this loophole closed when apparently it had already been identified and dealt with internally #journalistlife would make me happy in a lot of ways if she wound up facing criminal charges for this
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:sup nz just gonna forge a cop's signature and impersonate a police officer to get my hands on a gun She can't help being South African. Pity her.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
Remember when she did a puff piece on Cam Slater shortly before Dirty Politics came out? http://tvnz.co.nz/seven-sharp/whaleoil-beef-hooked-video-6035344
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:27
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Remember when she did a puff piece on Cam Slater shortly before Dirty Politics came out? speaking of cameron slater i wound up reading this article and agreeing with basically all of it before i saw where it was from http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2015/10/dirtymedia-mediaworks-story-breaks-the-law-to-get-a-story/ i feel a little dirty
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:32
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:speaking of cameron slater i wound up reading this article and agreeing with basically all of it before i saw where it was from Just remember that he's writing from the perspective of a rightwing gun nut
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:Just remember that he's writing from the perspective of a rightwing gun nut eh to be fair it pretty much sticks to the facts, which make her look like a gigantic goddamned idiot you'd think a better way to do it that doesn't involve potentially facing criminal charges would be to CALL THE POLICE AND TELL THEM WHAT YOU ARE PLANNING but i guess this is why i'm not on primetime media and she is
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 10:42
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:CALL THE POLICE AND TELL THEM WHAT YOU ARE PLANNING This is one of the things I brought up in an argument about those Planned Parenthood videos a while back. Why didn't they tell the cops? Why didn't they go to the police with the information if it was so incriminating? No response, as per usual.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
I swear that earlier today the Stuff/Herald article said Greg O'Connor told her how to do it. Did anyone else see that or am I going nuts? He's today announced that he's standing down as Police Association boss 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 12:42
|
|
|
Exclamation Marx posted:I swear that earlier today the Stuff/Herald article said Greg O'Connor told her how to do it. Did anyone else see that or am I going nuts? He's today announced that he's standing down as Police Association boss the one i posted from whaleoil discusses exactly that. i'd normally say it was typical bullshit but somehow i didn't doubt it for a second gently caress this whole thing just keeps getting dumber and dumber, if she'd come up with the idea and gone ahead and done it that's bad enough but the head of the police association telling someone to commit serious crimes, and them going along with it? just idiots all the way down Comrade Blyatlov fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Oct 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Somfin posted:This is one of the things I brought up in an argument about those Planned Parenthood videos a while back. Why didn't they tell the cops? Why didn't they go to the police with the information if it was so incriminating? do you mind filling me in? i watch very little tv so i'm drawing a blank here
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:do you mind filling me in? i watch very little tv so i'm drawing a blank here Some folks in the USA decided to try to get Planned Parenthood defunded by claiming that they were selling aborted organ tissue for profit. This would be illegal. As it happens, they were taking money for shipping organs to research labs, but the money they were taking was to cover the costs of shipping the tissue. This is legal. So the folks (same guys who made videos attacking Acorn during one of the US elections) decided to set up a fake research lab, set up lunches with Planned Parenthood higher-ups, secretly film the interviews, and edit them so that when they were talking about the second one it looked like they were talking about the first one. This sparked several thousand social media flame wars. As usual, questions like "who is buying these organs for profit" and "why did they not go to the police" and "who gives a flying gently caress what happens to medical waste" were safely ignored in favour of repeatedly screaming "PLANNED PARENTHOOD SELLS BABY PARTS" until all opposition ceased.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
oh the yankee poo poo i thought you meant something had happened in nz and i was really wracking my brains trying to think when i wonder if good old heathy's been arrested yet
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
lolquote:But Mr Woodhouse told TV3's Paul Henry programme he was not sure a loophole existed. "Putting aside the fact that someone has committed what I think is a pretty serious offence in order to make a point ... I'm not convinced there's some great loophole that has led to significant numbers of weapons being obtained illegally," he said. i think she is starting to realise she may have made a serious mistake
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
I don't see why you're so down on her. Yes she might be prosecuted but if the police names/numbers don't get checked on forms then it's pretty pointless having them at all. I guess she could've gone about it differently, but am I missing something? That seems like a legit thing for a journalist to expose and also only the kind of thing that can be found out by actually trying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
The gun she got was pretty funny though. It's not what you'd expect people to use in an actual fireman offence, right? I'd be worried if people could forge a signature to get sent a shotgun via Courier Post or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Apparently it does get checked when it makes its way back to the police firearms dept for processing, and the AOS is sent out to reclaim the weapon and arrest the purchaser. Not sure how long that takes, or what happens in the event they've used a false address but it's not like it just gets forgotten. e: I feel it was irresponsible of her, to be honest. She's just publicized a non-loophole that anyone determined to obtain a gun under false pretenses would have discovered and now a bunch of opportunistic fuckwits will give it a go, making more work for everyone involved. Any potential "public interest" value needs to be balanced against the potential risk that someone else will take a punt at a thing they didn't know about previously and do something dangerous. Big Bad Beetleborg fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Oct 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
A loophole means you've done a series of legal things that let you do something you shouldn't be able to. She appears to have committed a series of crimes, including impersonating an officer, to get her gun. That's just fraud. I also heard of this loophole where it's easy to get free cash, you just need to beat up an old lady and steal her purse! Our entire system is broken!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
^ that makes a lot more sense however I still think its something that needs to be changed, surely the check should be done before the gun gets sent out? Like the system isn't very functional if you can basically make up everything on the form (including your own details) because then even if the check fails the police have no way to find you. I dont agree with the "fraudsters gonna fraud" argument. Its true, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't make it harder for people to fraudulently obtain guns. Doing the check before sending the gun out would probably mean an extra couple of weeks waiting for the people trying to buy guns, but you have to question the motives of anyone who needs a gun in a hurry anyway, don't you? voiceless anal fricative fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Oct 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
If you make up the address for your mail order gun where do you think it's going to be delivered.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:the one i posted from whaleoil discusses exactly that. i'd normally say it was typical bullshit but somehow i didn't doubt it for a second Oh, that's where I read it  mirthdefect posted:e: I feel it was irresponsible of her, to be honest. She's just publicized a non-loophole that anyone determined to obtain a gun under false pretenses would have discovered and now a bunch of opportunistic fuckwits will give it a go, making more work for everyone involved. Any potential "public interest" value needs to be balanced against the potential risk that someone else will take a punt at a thing they didn't know about previously and do something dangerous. Hasn't there been a spate of people cutting off their electronic monitoring bracelets after Story showed them how?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:If you make up the address for your mail order gun where do you think it's going to be delivered. your workplace? a friend's house? your parent's house? Anywhere you could realistically be to pick up a package yourself the point is, gun shops have to sight a licence before they can sell to you in person, and its not secure to do that over the internet so some other steps need to be taken to have the same level of safety/checks voiceless anal fricative fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Oct 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
fong posted:^ that makes a lot more sense The thing is it has already been changed. The document now has to be sent by the police officer. So good job committing fraud I guess
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
fong posted:your workplace? a friend's house? your parent's house? Anywhere you could realistically be to pick up a package yourself
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:My point is that those would all be places tied to your actual identity so it really seems like basically the worst someone using this method can do is commit fraud and then go on a shooting rampage before the paperwork gets to the police. There's plenty of other ways of illegally obtaining firearms that don't require you to wait for the mail or effectively reveal your identity to the police. almost like it was a bullshit piece designed to get ratings nawwwww
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:The thing is it has already been changed. The document now has to be sent by the police officer. ah, that seems to be the main point. They should've talked to the police first I guess? Ghostlight posted:My point is that those would all be places tied to your actual identity so it really seems like basically the worst someone using this method can do is commit fraud and then go on a shooting rampage before the paperwork gets to the police. There's plenty of other ways of illegally obtaining firearms that don't require you to wait for the mail or effectively reveal your identity to the police. still not a reason to change the rules for online gun shopping to be in line with face-to-face shopping
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
fong posted:still not a reason to change the rules for online gun shopping to be in line with face-to-face shopping
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
fong posted:ah, that seems to be the main point. They should've talked to the police first I guess? it just kind of creates an interesting point because regardless of what her intentions may have been, she did actually commit several crimes by doing this. her argument is clearly that it is in the interest of the public good, and up to you whether you accept that or not, but that does not change what she has done. which leaves me wondering how a judge would deal with this if it gets that far - seems like letting her off is making a nasty precedent to let the media do what they like. i wonder how this is going to pan out
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:So we agree? No I think I messed up the double negatives. It shouldn't be easier to get a gun online than it is in person. The fact that no system is perfect doesn't change this. Two Finger posted:it just kind of creates an interesting point because regardless of what her intentions may have been, she did actually commit several crimes by doing this. her argument is clearly that it is in the interest of the public good, and up to you whether you accept that or not, but that does not change what she has done. which leaves me wondering how a judge would deal with this if it gets that far - seems like letting her off is making a nasty precedent to let the media do what they like. i wonder how this is going to pan out The point that what she did was actually illegal (against several fairly serious laws) is a good one, but only because I don't think she did really act in the public good. If she had the she would've actually talked to the police directly about it first before doing her test (or not in this case, because they would've told her they were aware of the problem and were fixing it) voiceless anal fricative fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Oct 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
truther posted:The gun she got was pretty funny though. It's not what you'd expect people to use in an actual fireman offence, right? I'd be worried if people could forge a signature to get sent a shotgun via Courier Post or something. I wouldn't want to be shot in anger by a .22
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
A cop was murdered by a frickin air rifle not so long ago
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 06:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:44 |
|
|
Displeased Moo Cow posted:I wouldn't want to be shot in anger by a .22 Might not be as lethal as a .303 or something but it'll put a pretty good hole in you all the same
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2015 07:08
|
|