It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by RFBurns
Answer this tezza. Have you since day one of this issue written any letter or email or made a phone call or even threw a rock at the halls of justice about this matter?
Once again, this is not just about the girl. Its about the sentence, why it was needed, how it came through legislation. This means you need to address the issues I have raised about the need for the rights of other to be respected and protected. You only focus is that this girl recieved a harsh penalty. WHY IS THAT? I have continuosly expressed the needs of society, expressed through councils, buisnesses, citizens and the State Govt. that sought and legislated these laws. Your are yet to show why these are unreasonable. You will not argue that there is no need to increase penalties via sentencing by discussing the broader issues that effect our State to the cost of $200 million dollars. You will not explain why tougher sentences are irrational given our police force has recieved over 100 thousand call relating to Graffiti and vandalism in one year. You have not shown that councils and buisnesses, some councils spending 3 million per year, have been unfair in lobbying my State Govt. to introduce tougher sentences.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by atlasastro
but you and tezza have yet to explain or argue why these new laws are unjust,
We've been showing why this law is unjust for the past 15 pages. Maybe you should reread the thread?
Originally posted by atlasastro
Your solution is not working,
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by RFBurns
This might surprise a few members here but I actually think the judgement itself is definately byond the scope of the offense.
Huh? It took you 15 pages to admit that we are right? Why bother arguing for that long?
Originally posted by tezzajw
What I stand by firmly, is the fact that the law was broken by this individual.
That's not a problem we can all see that. She wrote her name on a wall. I'd call it an error of judgement more than breaking a law. Still, we can agree that she did do something that she shouldn't have.
Originally posted by tezzajw
I did not write the law there in Sydney, I just believe that the law should be obeyed and enforced by the legal system.
The law has failed, it's excessive (you agree) but you still think it should be obeyed? Ok... I'll be chewing on that logic bone all night long.
Originally posted by tezzajw
I can dislike the sentance all day long, but that doesnt change my position on the fact that the law was broken.
We all agree that she 'broke the law' and you also admit and agree that the sentence was excessive.
So where we differ is that because it's a written law you think it should be BLINDLY followed. Interesting. Pulling your strings, justice is done (Quote from Metallica). If I type what I really think I'll be warned, so I'll leave it at that.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by RFBurns
Answer this tezza. Have you since day one of this issue written any letter or email or made a phone call or even threw a rock at the halls of justice about this matter?
You probably haven't worked out yet that I do things my way, to my agenda. Not to your's.
Halls of justice painted green, money talking (another quote from Metallica). If you haven't figured it out by now, I've got next to no respect for the legal and (in)justice systems.
I've written lots of letters to all ATS readers to show how she's been shafted by the Aussie legal system. That's MY way, RFBurns. You do it your way.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Your solution is not working,
Mr McRae gave her a sobering wake-up call, saying graffiti cost the community millions in clean-up bills and taggers or graffiti vandals needed to be sent a clear message.
He said that unless the courts start treating it seriously people would continue thinking it was an innocent offence.
Originally posted by atlasastro
Once again, this is not just about the girl. Its about the sentence, why it was needed, how it came through legislation. This means you need to address the issues I have raised about the need for the rights of other to be respected and protected.
You will not argue that there is no need to increase penalties via sentencing by discussing the broader issues that effect our State to the cost of $200 million dollars. You will not explain why tougher sentences are irrational given our police force has recieved over 100 thousand call relating to Graffiti and vandalism in one year. You have not shown that councils and buisnesses, some councils spending 3 million per year, have been unfair in lobbying my State Govt. to introduce tougher sentences.
All you have is "She wrote on a wall, her sentence is tough, its her first offence etc", attacks on the court and accusations of madness and heavy handedness without addressing or considering the society and the system that sought and asked for these penalties.
Your solution is not working, that is why society has lobbied policy makers to act.
I agree, once again, these penalties are harsh and will ask one more time, what other option not previously used by the State should our law makers have taken?
Originally posted by atlasastro
Sorry, but like I said, you need to realise that society as a whole is sick of this arguement and legislation is not there to cater for individuals.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Again, you question my motives, as though they should make sense to you. There's no point for you to try and justify why I am here or why I type what I type. Your incorrect speculation will deflect from the issue raised in this thread.
Originally posted by tezzajw
A teenage girl wrote her name on a wall with a texta and she was sentenced to three months jail. That's the issue. Not why I am here or who I should be contacting.
Originally posted by atlasastro
Here is the Judge, again, open your mind.
Mr McRae gave her a sobering wake-up call, saying graffiti cost the community millions in clean-up bills and taggers or graffiti vandals needed to be sent a clear message.
He said that unless the courts start treating it seriously people would continue thinking it was an innocent offence.
Did i say that you will not be an individual. I said laws are not legislated to cater for just YOU, or I, or a girl that just wrote her name on the wall. For individuals. They are Laws. Laws for us all. LOL. look out Terra, they be a comin for ya, them there Individuals police.
Originally posted by tezzajw
Originally posted by atlasastro
Sorry, but like I said, you need to realise that society as a whole is sick of this arguement and legislation is not there to cater for individuals.
That's a quote worth framing in Gold.
Public Announcement:
People of the free world, as long as you are part of a society, you WILL NOT be recognised as an individual.
I obey the law. I guess you do, unless you are in Jail. You do as society tells you.
You will conform to society.
What is deviating any way, posting on ATS,ohhhh, you extreme Individual. You obey the laws, other wise you get in trouble, you do not deviate, you do as society tells you.
You will not deviate from society.
And you don't Terra?, you listen when society says you need to wear clothes, you drive on the correct side of the road, you pay taxes, you obey the law. You pay your bills, You use the health system, you bank your money. You read papers, you watch TV.
You will do what society tells you to do.
Yes. the Law. The Laws say we are free to behaviour in any manner that does not break these laws.
You will obey the will of society.
Society, as a collective of individuals with common goals and interests, could not exist without Indviduals. It recognises that not all Individuals will act in the best interests of other individuals. That is why we have Laws.
Society is a self-sustaining entity that does not recognise individuals.
LOL. look out Terra
And you don't Terra?
No one is keeping you here Terra.
Did i say that you will not be an individual. I said laws are not legislated to cater for just YOU, or I, or a girl that just wrote her name on the wall. For individuals. They are Laws. Laws for us all.
I obey the law. I guess you do, unless you are in Jail. You do as society tells you.
What is deviating any way, posting on ATS,ohhhh, you extreme Individual. You obey the laws, other wise you get in trouble, you do not deviate, you do as society tells you.
you listen when society says you need to wear clothes, you drive on the correct side of the road, you pay taxes, you obey the law. You pay your bills, You use the health system, you bank your money. You read papers, you watch TV.
Yes. the Law. The Laws say we are free to behaviour in any manner that does not break these laws.
Society, as a collective of individuals with common goals and interests, could not exist without Indviduals. It recognises that not all Individuals will act in the best interests of other individuals. That is why we have Laws.
Originally posted by LeTan
My step sister on the other hand, got put into juvenile hall for stealing some clothing at MACYS. Yep, she's in federal prison now for identity theft. Maybe if someone showed her some compassion, she would have ended up like me and turned a new cheek.
[edit on 2-2-2009 by LeTan]
Originally posted by noonebutme
I don't have a problem with it because a) I don't commit crimes and am wholly sin-free and b) I don't see why my extrenuous taxes must pay for the delinquency of others. If those that commit what society has deemed as a crime, then they should pay the price. For those that feel it was too harsh and that some other form of rehabilitation is needed (i.e., hugs and love) then I'd ask those people to pay up for the removal of the vandalism. Done.