Hard News: When that awful thing happens
425 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 17 Newer→ Last
-
Surely a positive benefit of having sensible recreational substance laws would be that the police could divert their limited resources into investigating people who actually pose a risk of visiting real to others in their community ?
Hard to argue with that. The only trouble I've ever seen stoners cause is cleaning out all snack supplies. Decriminalising would remove the association with bad people and gangs who deal. No links to hand, but I recall it's been established well enough somewhere. Just politcally unpalatable to implement yet.
-
People keep on talking about what intelligence police had with respect to Molenaar's arsenal. Looks to me that they may well have had very good intelligence about him, so they went around to his place at a time when they knew he was out walking his dog (his daily habit, apparently), or would be just on the point of returning from his daily walk, when he wouldn't have immediate access to his guns.
-
They got a shot at him and took it on day one.
Ah, but Grant wouldn't have missed on that shot, see.
-
Point snipers at the window he's shooting from. Move rescuers into safe position. Shoot on first sight.
Simple. Problem over. Officer rescued.Ha, so we've moved on from the Wile E Coyote approach to the "I've seen it HEAPS in Bruce Willis movies" approach I see.
-
Bingo, Gareth.
-
Great point Mikaere.
I think Matthews point on the registry system is a good one too but there must be someway to at least revisit gun law, even if it's just education.
I don't want cops facing guns in suburbia (or anywhere) but of course I don't have the immediate answer.
-
Community policing may well have been a policy for the last two decades but a major policy it is not.
I can confirm that it is a major policy and has been all along. It's put police officers into schools, it's put police officers working with community groups, it's led to investments in capital and training, neighbourhood watch, it's redirected 175 staff from what they used to do to be community constables. That's about 3% of the uniformed workforce, not insubstantial.
Don't let whatever might be (or not be) going on in your local area distract you from the reality of the big picture.
-
I am not one to agree readily with you Russell but I do wholeheartedly in this piece. Thank you for putting some perspective back into it.
I feel that most commentators watch Jack Bauer or the latest James Bond flick (Grant, are you there?) and then they’re experts, and the cops, who have hundreds (thousands?) of years of combined experience are goofs and couldn’t find a shoe in a shoe box. And I say this as someone who spent six years on the frontline. I have read some truly embarrassing writings on this event - mostly on the blogs admittedly and perhaps that’s the problem.
The police did an exemplary job. They should get nothing but our full praise. I think this piece says it superbly.
-
Grant, did you even follow the news on this? They got a shot at him and took it on day one.
I read that only two shots were fired by police.
Does this one shot constitute (or two) constitute what you would consider an attempt to get to the fallen officer? Guns can be fired for a number of reasons, Russell. Claiming that one was fired does not mean that every attempt was made to get to the fallen officer with all the risk placed upon the perpetrator.
-
Surely a positive benefit of having sensible recreational substance laws would be that the police could divert their limited resources into investigating people who actually pose a risk of visiting real to others in their community?
Just curious, what do you think the police could've done to develop intelligence that Molenaar had firearms? Would more available bodies have made the slightest bit of difference? Unlike drugs, people don't tend to deal firearms. They can't grow them, and they're not in demand by anything like a third of the population (if figures I've seen in here about pot consumption are accurate). One of the common ways the police find tinnie houses is that they get tipped off about unusual foot traffic, or the power companies pass on word about a property that's got apparently excessive electricity consumption. Neither of those applies to a weapons hoarder.
It's all well and good to call for reforms of cannabis laws, but I haven't yet seen a single case that anything would've been the slightest bit different about what happened in Napier, other than that it wouldn't have been a pot warrant that the officers were holding. If nobody volunteered to the police that Molenaar was stashing an arsenal under his stairs, I'm completely at a loss to work out how changing pot laws would've suddenly got them that information. I really, truly do not see any confluence between the two positions, and to be honest I find it somewhat distasteful that people are making the suggestion. Snee hasn't even been buried, for crying out loud!
-
Obviously not by doing something stupid .. which are all the ideas you seem capable of. How about this: Point snipers at the window he's shooting from. Move rescuers into safe position. Shoot on first sight.
Simple. Problem over. Officer rescued.
... and we'd avoid the case that actually happened where the perp went on shooting indiscriminately for the next day or so ...
Oh, right. I see where I'm going wrong. Clearly you're right.
But, hold on a minute....
What if Jan (or some other future nutjob) is psychotically insane, but not actually as dumb as a rock?
So, instead of leaning out of the window screaming 'come on coppers!' with a bulls-eye stencilled on his forehead in his dead mothers lipstick, maybe, just maybe, he turns off the lights and draws the curtains and lies on the floor most of the time, making it just a little bit harder for him to see out and shoot out, but extremely difficult for anyone to see in.
And, maybe, just maybe, this nutjob who has spent months fortifying his house has cut loopholes in the walls which he can shoot out of, but which are, like, rilly rilly difficult for the police sniper teams to even see into, let alone shoot into.
So, your elite snatch squad is all ready to go and grab the body. They're lined up by the wall all ready to go. All they need is confirmation from the sniper team that they've taken him out - 'shoot on first sight' as you put it.
And they wait.
And wait.
And wait.
Just like they did in Napier, in fact.
-
perhaps its time to pause and say a wee leavening prayer (or even bake a pavlova) for the poor addled wench taken out by policemen in whangarei, policemen who appeared not to be able to tell the diff 'twixt an airgun and a shotgun?
-
And I say this as someone who spent six years on the frontline. I have read some truly embarrassing writings on this event - mostly on the blogs admittedly and perhaps that’s the problem.
Thanks Nick. I am amazed at the way people become instant experts on policing when something like this happens.
-
perhaps its time to pause and say a wee leavening prayer (or even bake a pavlova) for the poor addled wench taken out by policemen in whangarei, policemen who appeared not to be able to tell the diff 'twixt an airgun and a shotgun?
That was a sad case, but frankly, I don't expect the police to be able to identify the weapon being aimed at them from a distance. Especially when she had previously sent a text message to the man she was holding saying "pay up or you'll be dead".
-
perhaps its time to pause and say a wee leavening prayer (or even bake a pavlova) for the poor addled wench taken out by policemen in whangarei, policemen who appeared not to be able to tell the diff 'twixt an airgun and a shotgun?
uh, what are you on about?
She wouldn't be the first person, even in NZ, to have been shot after presenting an airgun at an armed cop. Mr Leo at, IIRC, Helensville, holds that dubious honour I believe. He was ordered to drop what turned out to be an air pistol, instead began to point it at the armed cop, and was shot for his troubles. -
Matthew @ "Most firearms used in crimes have been stolen, not bought. A registry won't fix that."
If stolen military weapons are used in crime, the answer has to be follow Aussies lead and destroy all military weapons (& pistols too) not used by the NZDF & Police. As happened after Port Arthur.
Q - What's the difference here?
A - The Judge decided there was no crime.
"They found a quantity of military gear which the 37-year-old Shapiro said he was storing for someone else, and that led to the charges involving unlawful possession of weapons and explosives (power gel)." & "At the trial last year, Wolland said the police search team had found two military flares, a smoke grenade, a thunderflash explosive, part of an anti-personnel mine, eight sticks of Powergel, a grenade launcher, and two semi-automatic weapons. The court has since heard that the grenade launcher was only able to launch flares."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch/1390028Anyone remeber Op8?
-
Oh, right, that woman in Whangarei. As I said, wouldn't be the first. As Russell said, at a distance an air rifle looks like a real one. A cop isn't going to take the time to find out if it's a .22 or an air rifle, because they could be dead before the determination is made.
-
Yeah, and there's no need to do other outdoor activities such as skiing, tramping, or birdwatching either. People do these things because they are fun, not because they are the most efficient way. And people hunt because they enjoy it, and because they enjoy eating the meat.
That is a facile comparison.
Hey I enjoy sitting at home smoking the local produce, but thats illegal.Try watching Hunting Aotearoa on MTS sometime (which is produced by my brothers, so I suppose I'm going in to bat for the whanau on this), and you'll see that the hunters are simply people who enjoy hunting.
Are you using brothers in the familial sense or the other way?
Simply people who enjoy hunting? Pity there are no moas around isnt it.
Why dont they use a bow and arrow I hear they can be quite high tech nowadays.And as for the city wag aghast at the thought of having to kill an injured animal. Are you just extrapolating a weird case to make a point.
Most farmers dont go herding with a gun, but a mobile phone is often close by so a quick call to a vet is probably quicker. -
If stolen military weapons are used in crime, the answer has to be follow Aussies lead and destroy all military weapons (& pistols too) not used by the NZDF & Police. As happened after Port Arthur.
Yes, because there's no other source of weapons in this country than the military. That'll fix it for sure.
Hint: the majority of firearms in this country are not, and never have been, in the hands of the military. Most are privately-owned. Military firearms are not easy to get one's hands on, and it's pretty rare that they show up outside official arsenals. I've heard rumours that some Maori separatists have crates of M16s and MP-5s, but never seen any real supporting evidence. It's pretty easy to get them smuggled into the country by ship, in any case, and there's just too much coastline to police effectively.
Firearms owned by individuals are a much easier target. The security is reduced, and houses are far easier to escape from than a military installation. Turning a semi-automatic rifle into a fully-automatic one isn't too difficult for someone who's got the right tools and knowledge, from everything I've read and heard. -
You're letting your paranoia get away from you. This was an extraordinary situation, requiring extraordinary measures.
Well that's how it rolls. This hysteria via a "routine drug bust" was created with the help of the MSM. I don't recall routine drug busts being routine. I do recall the police however listening to drug info( often given by some other drug taker/user) and relying heavily on that info being truthful. Although a threat of your worthless life being saved from jail by the kind policeman, should definitely make you pass on truthful information, more often than not you will find ( and I suspect the police know this) that most of the info is just to save your own arse and the odd bit of truth thrown in to get off your own charges.
Also the threats of planting drugs (courtesy of the drug squad) is known to happen so bullshit info would be preferable to being banged up. Therefore it would be better for the police to be paranoid, than assume any raid on a home would be "routine" -
I might have missed something but don't air rifles kill people too?
-
I was presenting evidence rather than working in the hypothetical. By comparison nothing much was found in Op8.
-
Thank you Kyle, I find that comforting.
However, I was just talking to my father in law. He had the misfortune to be right behind a car accident last night, apparently a old chap swerved to avoid a slowing vehicle in front of him in the hailstorm and rolled his van. My father in law did all the right stuff, calling the appropriate services, lifting the van off the guy's arm making sure not to move him etc. When the police arrived the first thing they did was, literally, push the people helping the guy out of the way and telling them to "Stop gawking" then stopped all traffic for two hours My father in law was not alone in thinking the police treated those assisting the victim as if they were guilty of something.
The police must change their attitude, we are not the enemy. -
[community policing] is a major policy and has been all along
But who do these 'community police' talk to, apart from school staff and others that they are officially engaged with, or who have reported a crime?
The police tend to self-isolate from communities. How many of you have a cop in your circle of friends, or expect to meet one at a party?
A lot of this is (like I said before) down to laws like drug prohibition not being accepted by large numbers of people.
-
Broader than policing, we seem to be witnessing a single failure and demanding wholesale changes in public systems.
There is no way to prevent incidents like this, which thankfully are rare. No amount of intelligence or resourcing can produce completely foolproof results, although lack of resource can cause some unattractive behaviour.
Life involves a certain amount of risk, but it feels a bit crude saying that right now. I guess a discussion like this may help us feel more in control of the situation or come to terms with tragedy, but it does get undignified when there are participants not yet out of harm's way or laid to rest, and little likelihood of similar immediate threat to anyone else.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.