Nigel Owens on inclusive rugby.

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I am a gun owner. Have been for over 40 years.

(and to answer NKW's obvious next question, I was in the Air Force at that time, and I kept my guns in the Base Armoury.

Got any semi automatics?

[L'irlandais]

I genuinely don’t get the USA’s fascination with firearms.
This BBC article on the subject suggests it’s cultural, but that only leaves me more perplexed.

Isn’t it more a $ thing?

The annual revenue of the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry stands at $13.5bn.

Some folks are getting rich and don’t want to stop getting richer, whatever the cost to North American society.

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I genuinely don’t get the USA’s fascination with firearms.
This BBC article on the subject suggests it’s cultural, but that only leaves me more perplexed.

Isn’t it more a $ thing?

The annual revenue of the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry stands at $13.5bn.

Some folks are getting rich and don’t want to stop getting richer, whatever the cost to North American society.

I suggest it is fear.

A comparison of UK to USA would require equal demographics. I would also, without looking suggest, the average IQ is higher in UK, but I'm guessing. That is also a factor to gun ownership either positively or negatively.

The $ thing, thru supply and demand, also makes guns affordable.

The BBC article is impactful, but liars figure and figures lie. It is cultural alright, simply look at black homicide rate is US or suicide rate amongst white middle age males. Something is awful, and I don't think anyone knows how to fix it.

[SimonSmith]

I genuinely don’t get the USA’s fascination with firearms.
This BBC article on the subject suggests it’s cultural, but that only leaves me more perplexed.

Isn’t it more a $ thing?

The annual revenue of the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry stands at $13.5bn.

Some folks are getting rich and don’t want to stop getting richer, whatever the cost to North American society.

It's because of the 2nd Amendment, which has been abused in its interpretation over the years.

The idea of letting the people arm themselves to be able to defend themselves against a tyrannical government was brilliant in its day. Now? Less so

[Ian_Cook]

I genuinely don’t get the USA’s fascination with firearms.
This BBC article on the subject suggests it’s cultural, but that only leaves me more perplexed.

Isn’t it more a $ thing?

The annual revenue of the gun and ammunition manufacturing industry stands at $13.5bn.

Some folks are getting rich and don’t want to stop getting richer, whatever the cost to North American society.

Here is a brief explanation of why Americans are obsessed with guns.... With thanks to Michael Moore



It all boils down to one word..... FEAR!

[damo]

If he's found guilty, I don't understand how he doesn't have a conviction.
Part of my issue is the recency effect. Would I hire him soon after his act of violence and conviction? Nope. A good few years afterwards and he has demonstrated learning and consistency of behavior? Yeah, likelier.

But in this situation? Not so much

RE the bolded bit.

A 'discharge without conviction' is a sentence that a judge in NZ can hand down in criminal cases. It is often described (in my circles at least) as a s106 order because that is the relevant section of the Sentencing Act. It is legally treated the same as an acquittal.

The jurisidiction to make a s106 order is found in s107 of the Sentencing Act, which reads:

107 Guidance for discharge without conviction
The court must not discharge an offender without conviction unless the court is
satisfied that the direct and indirect consequences of a conviction would be out
of all proportion to the gravity of the offence.

(emphasis added)

The point is that where a person has committed an offence, but were to receive a conviction for said offence, the consequences of this conviction would be so detrimental to the person compared to how bad the offence was, the judge can elect to convict, but then remove that conviction from the record. A person is often still sentenced and punished under a s106 order (like a fine, community service and/or reparation) but they do not get a criminal record.

The section has various uses. It is used most often where someone's career depends upon that person not having a conviction, and it is felt that to deprive that person of their career is a disproportionate penalty compared to what they did. All sorts of people routinely get s106 orders, such as nurses, teachers, bus drivers, students etc. By definition you can only get it for minor offences. A criticism made of it is that it is used by the rich and famous to get off offences, but I believe that is perception rather than reality.

By discharging Reece without conviction the judge effectively said that the consequences of a conviction for DV (likely never playing rugby anywhere again) is too greater sentence for what was quite a minor offence in the scheme of things.

For example, I had a client (in another jurisdiction) who got convicted for assault (throwing a lunchbox at his then partner). He successfully argued that while he admitted he had thrown the lunchbox, to convict him and make him lose his job was a disproportionate punishment. I note that he still had to pay a fine and had the mandatory protection order put against him - he was punished commensurate to his offence and no more. He did not have a particularly glamorous job.

Does the USA not have similar laws?

[damo]

Tom (21 yrs old) punches Jimmy.
He's charged with assault.
Its his first offence of any kind.
He's found guilty, discharged without conviction and fined $1000.

From your perspective, he is now never, ever allowed to work in any employment, ever again, for the rest of his life?

That is a very good way of throwing a young man on the scrap heap by driving him into a life of crime. You just created a serious problem for all his future victims for the next few decades until he's caught, at which point you will have cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of dollars to incarcerate him... good work!!

I guess you are against rehabilitation?

I never had you down as a Bleeding Heart Liberal Ian.


(For the avoidance of doubt, I heartily approve of your post)

[SimonSmith]

Sorry to be cynical, but that reasoning is the same that a number of judges use over here for nice young men who have done a bad thing but because of who they are and what they can do get a soft sentence; see also female medical students at Oxford.

[Not Kurt Weaver]

see also female medical students at Oxford.

or see also Mary Jo Kopechne

a classic example

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Here is a brief explanation of why Americans are obsessed with guns.... With thanks to Michael Moore


It all boils down to one word..... FEAR!

Got any semi automatics?

12345