Alcohol fueled violence

McLovin said:

The death penalty has been proven to not be a deterent, so I doubt mandatory sentencing will do much except clog up the gaols and appease talkback radio. The proven best deterent to any crime is increasing the chance of being caught and convicted, not increasing the sentence.

Click to expand...

OK. So I get caught, turn up in court and face no actual consequences for my actions. Why would that deter me? The only downside I can see is waste of a day or so in court.

Using a different example, the reasonably high chance that I will receive a $35 fine for parking too long in the one spot is no real deterrent. It could be considered a fee for service almost. In contrast, the much lower chance that I'll be caught and consequently lose my driver's license for driving 38 km/h over the speed limit is however a big deterrent. Regardless of the probability, the consequences of the latter are substantial whereas the former is trivial at most.

In the above example it's the sentence, not the probability of being caught, which acts as a deterrent. We're talking about harming innocent people here, not about convicting a few drunks who harmlessly stagger out of the pub at closing time and cause no fuss.

McLovin said:

The death penalty has been proven to not be a deterent, so I doubt mandatory sentencing will do much except clog up the gaols and appease talkback radio. The proven best deterent to any crime is increasing the chance of being caught and convicted, not increasing the sentence. Generally, in these incidents the perpetrators are not hardened criminals, they're just boozed up idiots who don't think about the consequences of their actions. For the overwhelming majority knowing they have directly caused someone to lose their life is a far greater sentence than any court could impose.

Mandatory sentencing also has the unintended consequence of making the prosecution the defacto judiciary. There is a reasonable argument to be made about the seperation of powers.

Click to expand...

So McLovin going off post #108 and the current post you don't like sniffer dogs and you don't like the death penalty.

McLovin said:

The death penalty has been proven to not be a deterent, so I doubt mandatory sentencing will do much except clog up the gaols and appease talkback radio. The proven best deterent to any crime is increasing the chance of being caught and convicted, not increasing the sentence. Generally, in these incidents the perpetrators are not hardened criminals, they're just boozed up idiots who don't think about the consequences of their actions. For the overwhelming majority knowing they have directly caused someone to lose their life is a far greater sentence than any court could impose.

Click to expand...

I disagree. For some time now just being caught and convicted seems to make no impression on many because they know they'll receive the obligatory verbal lecture and probably a suspended sentence. You are not talking about people here who have a high moral compass. If they did, they wouldn't be repetitively offending in the way they are.

In some instances there's a good case for compulsory victim/offender conferencing, which forces the offender into having the victim detail to him face to face the consequences of the event. Especially in drug fuelled offences where the offender is focused only on his need to assault and rob in order to obtain money for the next fix, there's an outside chance that if they see an injured, terrified victim in front of them, they may belatedly realise the impact of their selfish violence.

Smurf1976 said:

OK. So I get caught, turn up in court and face no actual consequences for my actions. Why would that deter me? The only downside I can see is waste of a day or so in court.

Click to expand...

Yes, exactly, and this is just what happens.

Using a different example, the reasonably high chance that I will receive a $35 fine for parking too long in the one spot is no real deterrent. It could be considered a fee for service almost. In contrast, the much lower chance that I'll be caught and consequently lose my driver's license for driving 38 km/h over the speed limit is however a big deterrent. Regardless of the probability, the consequences of the latter are substantial whereas the former is trivial at most.

In the above example it's the sentence, not the probability of being caught, which acts as a deterrent. We're talking about harming innocent people here, not about convicting a few drunks who harmlessly stagger out of the pub at closing time and cause no fuss.

Click to expand...

+1.

Smurf1976 said:

OK. So I get caught, turn up in court and face no actual consequences for my actions. Why would that deter me? The only downside I can see is waste of a day or so in court.

Click to expand...

I said, extending sentences and mandatory sentencing does not work. I didn't say their actions should be consequence free. There is a big misconception about the deterrence of imprisonment.

Sherman argues that “(f)or
too long democratic societies
have assumed that all punishment
has a general deterrent or
preventive effect. But criminology
has increasingly disproven that
assumption.” (Sherman 1993, see
also Braithwaite 1997, p. 314).
Deterrence assumes that people
are rational actors who weigh the
costs and benefits of committing
a crime before deciding whether
to commit that crime. However,
much crime is impulsive and to
the extent that there is any deliberation,
“(f)or people who see no
attractive options in the legitimate
economy, and who are
doubtful that they will live another
ten years in any event, the
threat of an extended prison stay
is likely to be far less threatening
than it would be to a well-employed
person with a family”
(Blumstein, cited in Tonry 1996, p.
138).

Click to expand...

http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/C/1/E/{C1EFCBE4-7FCE-4B22-8BB9-AFD965E2E536}ti138.pdf

Smurf1976 said:

That's what I'm saying. Gaol is not a deterrent, because homicide is not usually premeditated. The drunk idiot looking to start a fight isn't thinking about the consequences. And when it is premeditated, the sentence is increased accordingly. The death penalty doesn't deter crime so locking people up for ever increasing periods won't do it either. The rational choice to me would be to save the money of having them incarcerated.

Using a different example, the reasonably high chance that I will receive a $35 fine for parking too long in the one spot is no real deterrent. It could be considered a fee for service almost. In contrast, the much lower chance that I'll be caught and consequently lose my driver's license for driving 38 km/h over the speed limit is however a big deterrent. Regardless of the probability, the consequences of the latter are substantial whereas the former is trivial at most.

In the above example it's the sentence, not the probability of being caught, which acts as a deterrent. We're talking about harming innocent people here, not about convicting a few drunks who harmlessly stagger out of the pub at closing time and cause no fuss.

Click to expand...

I'm talking about criminal offences not parking fines or other summary offences that really are victimless crimes.

McLovin said:

I'm talking about criminal offences not parking fines or other summary offences that really are victimless crimes.

Click to expand...

True.

But doesn't that mean that the consequences of those criminal offences ought to be more severe than the other examples I used rather than the reverse?

A quick Google search finds that the fine for travelling 5 km/h over the speed limit in NSW is 1 point plus $105. That's somewhat more severe than the punishment many of these thugs are given. Shouldn't a punch be considered more serious than doing 85 in an 80 zone?

Punishment only works with children, they learn from it.

Crims dont learn anything, the worst of them should be kept in cages away from decent society, the offender who killed that girl recently was out on parole after kiling someone else. (I forget the details)

People who assualt others should be locked away ......period.
Sex offenders likewise.

You would be horrified if you knew the types you rub shoulders with every day.

What's the point of punishing a pedophile, they are what they are, lock them up for good.

So there's no point "punishing" these people just lock them up and throw away the key until someone can prove they wont offend again.

Drunkenness, with the ensuing violence, is part of our culture and there is nothing we can do about it. We have even established a tradition, quaintly called "rite of passage" where thousands of school leavers annually descend on unsavoury places like Surfers Paradise to hone their skills in drunkenness and violence and promiscuity.

The police enter into the spirit of the occasion and issue daily bulletins on those who have graduated to being arrested. The TV news bulletins seek out the violence and present pictures of these teenagers drinking, fighting and proudly being loaded into the paddy wagon.

After a week of this the Queensland revellers are followed by the NSW contingent. The irony here is that the locals are mainly only 17 and cannot legally buy alcohol. This creates a brisk trade in false identity cards.

Very true, Calliope. A culture I have never been a part of nor do I encourage, and thank God my children arent a part of this rubbish.

Manslaughter is murder by accident and therefore I expect the full extent of the law to be put in place in all these cases, as anyone arriving somewhere with the intent to fight is pre meditated and should pay the consequences.

We should be allowed to walk the streets in peace.

Alcoholic Violence

……………….
1998.........
1999 ........
2000 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2001 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2002 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2003 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2004 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2005– innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2006 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2007 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2008 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2009– innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2010 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2011 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2012 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2013– innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2014 – innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough s enough
2015– innocent victim killed by “king hit” – public outrage – enough is enough
2016 …………………………..







90 killed in single-punch assaults since 2000
http://www.smh.com.au/national/90-killed-in-singlepunch-assaults-since-2000-20131201-2yjtr.html

Re: Alcoholic Violence

Australia is a drinking country.

We laud heavy drinking.
We laud getting drunk.
We laud teenagers getting off their face with alcohol - its a right of passage.

We encourage people to drink, starting at an early age.
We laugh when we see our young staggering the streets and vomiting from too much alcohol.

We are the lucky country ???

But when will we grow up???

Re: Alcoholic Violence

dutchie said:

Australia is a drinking country.

We are the lucky country ???

But when will we grow up???

Click to expand...

I am ashamed of our drinking culture. I drink and sometimes a bit too much but I never drive when I do and I have never ever been in a fight over it, it's all about control and respect for others.

I travel extensively to many other countries and you don't see this lunatic asylum kind of behavior elsewhere. Recently I was in Singapore and I was hungry at 3 AM so I decided to go out and look for something to eat. When I got out of my hotel I was amazed to see several cafes open and full with people eating and drinking. Many were only drinking and the crowd was mixed. There were 70 year olds and there were 20 year olds and there were families with kids too, all having a drink. Not a shred of violence anywhere and this was in Geyland in the Red Light District. I would never ever venture out in our hot spots in fear of being killed.

I have witnessed many many violent attacks here in Australia, one of my mates was king hit right in front of me. When the Police turned up I identified the culprits and they made no effort to chase them up or arrest them. Australia has a lot of drunken morons around just looking around to hurt someone, there is something definitely wrong with this culture. I didn't even see it to this extent in London when I was there and they are known for heavy drinking too. What sort of country do we live in when an oldie just doesn't feel safe going out at night? What a shame. How can we change this?

Re: Alcoholic Violence

With Western society becoming more and more androgynous there are very few outlets for young men these days. Mix in some inhibition loosener and you get males wanting to do as they do naturally but are not allowed to anymore (be dominant/agressive etc).

I think sports can help curtail a lot of this, especially team sports where you understand your actions, even outside of a team 'location/environment' can have an effect on others within your team.

Asia has a totally different culture and mentality so it is hard to compare, but Europe seems to have a better standard as they grow up drinking early with food and it becomes a social activity rather than a rite of passage

Re: Alcoholic Violence

Bill M said:

I am ashamed of our drinking culture. I drink and sometimes a bit too much but I never drive when I do and I have never ever been in a fight over it, it's all about control and respect for others.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%

Night clubs and alcohol vendors have far too much freedom, we seem to tolerate recreational drugs, and our "justice" system is absolutely pathetic. No wonder the police lack enthusiasm.

Singapore is supposed to have a low tolerance for misbehaviour and corporal punishment for offenders. Is that what we're missing?

Re: Alcoholic Violence

UPDATE: Alcohol, "king-hits", a young man killed
Inbox x

Ralph Kelly via Change.org <mail@change.org>
10:30 AM (8 hours ago)

to me




dutchie -
We’d prepared ourselves for this kind of news, but it still came as a shock.
On New Year’s Eve, in almost exactly the same spot in King’s Cross where our beloved son Tom was killed, another young man had fallen victim to the rage of alcohol-fuelled violence.
A single punch. Another young man fighting for his life. Another family distraught and torn apart. When is this going to end?
Our hearts go out to the family of young Daniel Christie. No-one outside the family can really understand the pain they are going through right now.
Police allege that Daniel’s attacker had drunk eight beers and a glass of wine beforehand and that he was already on a good behaviour bond for assault.
Because someone has been charged, we can’t comment more on this particular case right now. But we know that something has to change. Too many lives are being taken from us. The toll is mounting, and the Government is far too slow to act.
Just a few days after Kieran Loveridge was sentenced to a miserly four years jail for killing Tom, we started a petition at change.org/thomaskelly calling for minimum sentencing laws in cases of manslaughter.
More than 23,000 people have already signed our petition and we’ve had some encouraging signs from the Government.
And while we are still determined to see changes to minimum sentencing laws in cases of manslaughter, it’s clear that more needs to be done to tackle the spiralling issue of alcohol-fuelled violence.
Can you take a few minutes to share our petition by forwarding this email to friends and family?
In particular, we need laws that will send a strong message to young people and the community in general that alcohol abuse and excessive drinking should not serve as an excuse for violence. Right now, the law doesn’t do that.
Too often, criminals are using excessive drinking as an excuse for their behaviour.
We need to turn this around 180 degrees. The central plank of our new proposal to the NSW Government is to increase the penalties for any crime committed whilst affected by alcohol or drugs.
Recently, accompanied by leading Sydney lawyer Alexander Street SC, we met with Attorney-General Mr Greg Smith to propose three key areas of reform to the NSW Sentencing Act.
The three additions that we have proposed to the Attorney General - now reflected in our updated change.org/thomaskelly petition - are:
1. Any crimes committed whilst affected by alcohol or drugs are identified as a "mandatory aggravating factor" that must be taken into account on sentencing.
This will serve to send the right messaging of the primary role that alcohol plays in violence and crimes within NSW and require sentences to reflect this aggravating feature.
2. The aggravating factor of "conditional liberty" expanded to any "good behaviour bond".
This will tackle the issue of repeat offenders.
3. Youth and the inability of a victim to defend themselves as being aggravating factors that must be taken into account.
This would help stop attacks on the most defenceless and vulnerable in our society.
We have asked the NSW Government to incorporate these three key elements into the Act. Importantly these additions would be incorporated within all areas of criminal activity, including domestic violence and sexual assault.
Right now, our sentencing laws are completely out of sync with public sentiment. 18 months ago we lost Tom. 3 days ago, another family’s boy was attacked. Until something changes, the only thing we can be sure of is that there will be more.
Social and behavioural change only occurs when we stand up as one and demand that change happens.
Now is that time.
Time to say that we’re fed up with the culture of excessive drinking.
Time to say that we’re fed up with violence on our streets, fuelled by rampant alcohol abuse.
Please share our petition at change.org/thomaskelly with friends and family. Together, we can do this. Thank you.
Ralph and Kathy Kelly




SIGN THE PETITION AT change.org (tom kelly) , please
cheers, dutchie

Re: Alcoholic Violence

Do we really need another thread on this? We already have a thread " Alcohol fueled violence".

Agree, dutchie, here we are again saying the same thing.

Once upon a time, these drunks were frowned upon and now its encouraged and they are even trying to push drugs -- unbelievable.

So true, enough is enough.

I was walking from my work site near circular quay down to world square this morning. I counted the 10 advertisements for alcohol. Johnny Walker Red - something about being bold, also Corona with smiling friends on the beach.

Not sure what the answer is. making it hard to buy alcohol is probably not the solution When I look at Europe or japan it's so easy to buy alcohol there, yet they don't seem to have this problem.

I like the idea of using the term cowards punch rather than king hit. At least it takes the macho element out of it.

Maybe less advertising, and I think some adverts of police videos of real drunk people would maybe make people not want to be like that. Then again, the few times I've had a bad hangover I didn't intend on drinking that much. After a few glasses the alcohol has pretty much dumbed down the parts of the brain that keep up out of trouble.

I doubt harsher sentences on their own will help, yet slaps on the wrist are not good enough. The victims can have life long consequences if they survive. Maybe all venues need the ID scanning tech and if you are caught drunk and disorderly, along with any other alcohol involved crime, then you have an automatic ban for X months.

I also think we have to fix up the wine equalisation tax fiasco. Why can you buy 5L Berri wine casks for $15? That's 43 standard drinks. It's the alcoholics brand of choice. There's no cheaper way to tank up.

sydboy007 said:

Why can you buy 5L Berri wine casks for $15? That's 43 standard drinks. It's the alcoholics brand of choice. There's no cheaper way to tank up.

Click to expand...

I bought 3 for $33 recently. It should only be available to us poor pensioners on production of our cards.

Tink said:

Agree, dutchie, here we are again saying the same thing.

Once upon a time, these drunks were frowned upon and now its encouraged and they are even trying to push drugs -- unbelievable.

So true, enough is enough.

Click to expand...

I didn't catch it fully, so I may not have the full story, but I saw Bob Hawke at the cricket today downing a glass of beer in one go and appeared to be egged on by a crowd of people. He finished by throwing the empty (plastic) glass on to the field in front of him. Hardly an example of drinking responsibly.

bellenuit said:

I didn't catch it fully, so I may not have the full story, but I saw Bob Hawke at the cricket today downing a glass of beer in one go and appeared to be egged on by a crowd of people. He finished by throwing the empty (plastic) glass on to the field in front of him. Hardly an example of drinking responsibly.

Click to expand...

Nor does the Aussie cricket team with their record attempts on flights to the UK - boonie with 52, marsh 46, Doug walters 44.

When you wear the name keg on legs as a badge of honour you know we have a problem.