|
25th August 2010, 12:04 | #1 | |
Objection!
|
New Zealand Police - setting fine examples!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4057...nsured-officer Quote:
|
|
25th August 2010, 12:11 | #2 |
Frag-muff
|
Awesome. That's just scary. Ethics? Wassat then?
Speaking of perceptions of the police, I recently *555ed a member of police brass for driving dangerously and rudely in a "plain-clothes" police car recently. They asked me if I wanted him charged. I just said I wanted him taught to drive defensively rather than offensively. They're going to see what they can do. The cop investigating has been very communicative and straight with me, which made me feel a bit better about the idiot behind the wheel. I guess that's the point though. |
25th August 2010, 12:17 | #3 |
|
Where's Mark when you need him?
|
25th August 2010, 12:24 | #4 |
|
Ethics, isn't that when you can tell the race of the person you're framing ?
(yes I know it's spelled Ethnics) |
25th August 2010, 12:50 | #5 | |
Awesome Ring Master
|
Quote:
|
|
25th August 2010, 14:04 | #6 | |
|
Quote:
Two cops perfectly willing to fuck over some poor kid. Another great work story. |
|
25th August 2010, 14:05 | #7 |
Objection!
|
It's absolutely amazing in the first place that this clownboat wasn't sacked. That's error number 1. Error number 2 is that even if you can't sack a clownboat with zero appreciation of ethics and public duty, you don't promote him. The most egregious error of all is to promote someone who sets an absolutely TERRIBLE example into a teaching/example-setting role.
What's gonna be next? Hire an ex-rapist to teach cops the dynamics of sexual assaults? |
25th August 2010, 14:12 | #8 |
I have detailed files
|
The exception of course being the cybercrime division...
|
25th August 2010, 14:30 | #9 | |
|
It was a strange move to promote him after he abused his position.
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
25th August 2010, 14:32 | #10 |
Objection!
|
It could have been. Seriously, two years at a government department taught me how assclowns involved in hiring can consistently come to a view that an inferior candidate has beaten out far, far better people for the job.
|
25th August 2010, 14:35 | #11 |
get to da choppa
|
"Oh, yet another thread about a couple of bad apples in the NZ police", I thought. "Wonder who started it? It couldn't be cyc, he doesn't have a massive grudge against them or anything".
Before you go and run off about how I have some love affair with the police, I have no problem with them being brought to justice for abusing their powers. But is it thread worthy? Fuck no. |
25th August 2010, 14:50 | #12 | |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Quote:
|
|
25th August 2010, 14:57 | #13 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
Juju fail = yes. Juju retarded? Absolutely. |
|
25th August 2010, 15:13 | #14 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
|
|
25th August 2010, 16:14 | #15 |
|
Cyc - I love how you make personal attacks on those who don't agree with you.
I'd like to see you make similar comments in a courtroom when a judge makes a decision you don't agree with.
__________________
Carpe Diem |
25th August 2010, 16:18 | #16 |
Objection!
|
YAWN.
Here, Madmaxii, for the last fucking time: I have no issue with people disagreeing with me. I have an issue with idiots like Juju simply responding with useless one-liners that don't address the issue. He accuses me of having a personal beef with the police when all I did was reference an article with contents that obviously spoke for itself for everyone else. Either get yourself a pair of glasses or get the fuck over the fact that I don't post to seek your approval. |
25th August 2010, 16:39 | #17 |
|
Ok - just this once I'm getting down to your level.
You're so fucking bitter I bet you've been sticking almonds up your arse for the last 20 years.
__________________
Carpe Diem |
25th August 2010, 16:42 | #18 |
Objection!
|
lame, lame, lame. |
25th August 2010, 16:43 | #19 |
Marginal Poster
|
i have to agree with cyc on the OP, but he could do a better job of not being a prick to everyone himself
|
25th August 2010, 18:13 | #20 |
get to da choppa
|
Sure, I missed the bit about the guy being promoted (Which doesn't look terribly good) due to skim reading the article. But the rest of what I said stands.
You do seem to make a song and dance about the Police all the time on here - it's getting old. So is the old "I disagree with you therefore you are completely stupid and retarded. Plus I'll throw in some other childish insults for good measure" rebuttal you always seem to have. "Haha, retard is as retard does." "How old are you, retard?" "Retard!" "Send in the retard rescue squad!" I know you are you said you are so what am iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii? |
25th August 2010, 18:31 | #21 |
The Deliverator
|
cyc: you sir are one ANGRY man!! Get laid dude.
__________________
My real signature is not nearly as legible as this one. |
25th August 2010, 18:49 | #22 |
|
Thread is now threadworthy.
|
25th August 2010, 19:03 | #23 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
retard |
|
25th August 2010, 19:49 | #24 | |
|
Quote:
I mean it's not like Juju came in and made a substantial argument, he literally attacked the fact that it was made by cyc, rather than any content within. Yes cyc should be nicer, but it's not exactly like Juju came on and argued with him about something other than attacking the argument on the basis it was made by him. |
|
25th August 2010, 20:03 | #25 |
|
FWIW I have a couple of lawyer friends and I know never to argue with them because I know I'll never win.
|
25th August 2010, 21:42 | #26 | |
|
Last post to Cyc - fuck you're a dick. Night night poor little prick.
And an old, old saying - I suspect it's as old as the oldest profession. Quote:
__________________
Carpe Diem |
|
25th August 2010, 22:15 | #27 | |
Objection!
|
Quote:
|
|
25th August 2010, 23:35 | #28 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
|
26th August 2010, 00:24 | #29 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
26th August 2010, 00:28 | #30 |
Objection!
|
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10668781
Either Howard Broad is putting on The Greatest Act Ever or he genuinely has a clue. Let's hope it's the latter. |
26th August 2010, 01:22 | #31 | |
Stunt Pants
|
Fucken pigs.
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
|
26th August 2010, 09:24 | #32 |
The Deliverator
|
If every thread needed to pass some criteria for 'thread worthiness' before a thread was opened well..... there wouldn't be much going on would there?! :P
__________________
My real signature is not nearly as legible as this one. |
26th August 2010, 09:36 | #33 |
Don't worry, be harpy
|
I think CCS might have been exercising sarcasm. Of course, I don't know for sure as he didn't use italics.
|
26th August 2010, 10:06 | #34 |
|
cyc's all good tbh, he needs a cigar, a shatner mask and some intro music.
BOW WOW CHIKA WOW WOW WOOOOWWWW <3 |
26th August 2010, 11:38 | #35 |
|
The entire justice system really needs to be redone. It is fairly self defeating and illogical, people are just attached to the concept of revenge and punishment, even if it is not what is most effective at reducing crime, which is the apparent goal of the system.
I wouldn't be surprised if we're all judged by our childrens children for our ongoing unwillingness to readdress our judgmental, hypocritical and borderline pseudo masochistic attitude towards poverty, social issues and their symptoms. |
26th August 2010, 12:35 | #36 | |
Stunt Pants
|
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
|
26th August 2010, 12:41 | #37 | |
HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE
|
Quote:
Please elaborate, or STFU.
__________________
Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand... |
|
26th August 2010, 12:50 | #38 |
|
|
26th August 2010, 13:03 | #39 | ||
|
Quote:
Clearly you had absolutely no interest in knowing what the story was about, by your own admission, otherwise you would have seen that it was about the guy being promoted, not just about 'some bad cop doing something'. Not that it has any relevance, but now that you know what the thread is about, do you feel it is "thread worthy"? Even if it was "just" about a cop doing something shit, does that mean that it shouldn't be a thread? Are 'bad cops' so common now that news of them is mundane? Wait, that is basically what you said. Quote:
Guess what? It's a discussion board. People are talking about stuff (when not rubbing one out in the Pic of the Day thread). I was interested in the story, as, it appeared, were everybody else until you interjected, but, as you stated from the state, your objection was really just because cyc created the thread. Hot tip: If you don't care about the topic, then don't click on the thread. It's that simple. I don't give a fuck about the Touchless carwash thread, but I'm not going to go and post in it just to say "CARWASHES AREN'T THREAD WORTHY. STOP WASTING MY SCREEN REAL ESTATE WITH THAT THREAD TITLE." Just in case you weren't aware, it tells you on the main screen who started the thread - it's right below the thread title [I assume it's the same in both colour schemes]; you didn't need to open the thread to find out that it was cyc who started it. Final note: A thread is defined by its posts, and "kept alive" / brought to the top by each new post added. Your main point appears to be that you think the topic wasn't "thread worthy", yet by posting in the thread (repetitively) you perpetuate it's existence. |
||
26th August 2010, 13:31 | #40 |
HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE
|
This thread needs more kiss and make-up.
__________________
Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand... |