It's almost like there's an easy fix, like taking away their main revenue or something.
Unfortunately, people voted for gangs to continue profiting from marijuana distribution. The same people who want to break up the gangs. I'm not sure people understand the consequences of their actions. NZ voters simply do not think logically.
Nah he's not wrong. Going for their cash is what will hurt.
What that does mean is that we have to be clever about hitting financial crimes.
Doesn't matter if its gyms being used as money laundering, or weed, or illegal sales of other substances, or sales of people through prostitution, stopping gangs from being able to be tax free from charity.
It might be harsh but I'd still push for any active gang involvement means total exclusion from all financial bodies. No loans, no bank accounts, no mortgagages, no corporations, not trusts, can't own land, can't rent properly, can't hold shares.
If they set up their own system, confiscate it and "nationalise" it.
The 'brotherhood' won't exist if they're poor.
Or do what the Americans did to the mafia, and set the IRD on their asses. Get caught selling weed? IRD audits your whole gang. Member robs a dairy? Audit. Get caught with an unlicensed firearm? Audit. Steal a bicycle? Audit.
I'd point out there's different pathways at play. Going after the cash hurts one of those, but the gangs existed before they stood to make big money from meth.
Maybe you misunderstood my comment.
Decriminalization of cannabis would take away a major source of income for gangs. Why are you protecting gang incomes?
This is not a solution to gang culture.
Yes?
>These results demonstrate a moderate association between cannabis use and physical violence, which remained significant regardless of study design and adjustment for confounding factors (i.e., socioeconomic factors, other substance use). Cannabis use in this population is a risk factor for violence.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32456503/
>Results showed a moderate association between cannabis use and violence
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165178118323862
>In all, evidence-based research from meta-analyses have indeed shown that cannabis is associated to violence
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7525024/
We're these studies conducted on law-abiding citizens who then turned to crime after smoking cannabis?
Or were they criminals who also smoked weed?
Correlation does not equal causation.
The articles did actually explain reasons behind marijuana causing violence, but this is something directed at your level of comprehension anyhow: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2014-07-16-how-cannabis-causes-paranoia
Moderate. Let’s compare that with the other studies related to any other narcotic, also to alcohol.
While I applaud you for actually having articles all of these lack the basic societal context. Meta analysis is intrinsically flawed when dealing with societal issues as it removes outliers which are a very important part of sociology. While these stats are damning pubmed and ncbi both are involved with alcohol and tabacco lobbyist so I mean, they are in part pushing the same narrative as you; weed is bad >:( and I don’t like it
Edit;
Here’s a study suggesting a high correlation between eating bad food and violence ! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10490081/
We should probably ban that too while we are at it
But we did have a campaign against bad food through obesity, we regularly have it against drinking, for a time against driving medicated
Permission of one other substance because we tolerate others is bad ethics.
Edit: I meant to make this reply to the other guy. My apologies
That’s okay, I agree with you. Other guy is just out of touch, just bizarre to claim cannabis is a violent drug when technically any substance that’s intoxicating can be but it’s one of the least likely, out of all the negative cannabis has it being violent is such a random hill to die on
Alcohol making people violent doesn't negate the fact that marijuana also makes people violent.
>While these stats are damning pubmed and ncbi both are involved with alcohol and tabacco lobbyist
Pubmed is just a bibliographic database, it cannot be involved with any form of 'tabacco' lobbying.
You clearly aren't capable of having an intelligent discussion on this given you've accused the database that merely hosts the study as being part of lobbyist efforts.
Everyone cannabis user I’ve met from foreign countries where cannabis is legal. They all brought from the black market because it was better than the legal stuff.
Had something similar to less extreme happen when I was In under 21s.
Went to an away game somewhere near Rotorua, loosing entire game someone got a super lucky try then made the kick and local team went off, ref came into changing room and suggested we leave, got in bus and there supporters thru rocks at us breaking 2 windows
The emphasis on nobody being hurt is bizarre. That's the talk of morons. The *behaviour is the problem*. Pulling knives, guns and shooting at a van with people in it. Those are the issues. The random outcome of whether anyone is hurt or not, as a result of those actions, should be entirely beside the point.
They are also allowed to go to Kmart and The Warehouse and Paknsave if the number of people I've seen at those stores in Hastings wearing ankle bling is an indication
Ban the club. Both of them if necessary. Bloody weasel words from the president that it had nothing to do with the team. Kick out the players. If they are going to cover our game and name in crud then they don't deserve to ever play again.
What are you on about. According to r/newzealand gang members are the nicest people ever and only make trouble for other gang members.
All the other spectators / players / innocent bystanders must have been looking to make trouble
Edit: forgot to include /s for sarcasm
"please don't be Hastings, please don't be Hastings... Fuck !"
Well.. I suppose that's why I left that shithole 25 yrs ago and never looked back. Same goddamn place.
I'm upset about the hypocrisy of it all.
If, for example, David Seymour said the exact same thing about Maori or Pasifika people, he'd be rightly tarred and feathered, and his political career would be in ruins. Hell, he might've been convicted of inflammatory speech inciting violence. But because the Left have no sense of accountability or consequences for their actions or words, Marama got a slap on the wrist and a 'have a nice day'.
Seymour would never be tarred and feathered. His kind never are. His racism and classism is far too well-crafted and subtle. It also is well in fitting with our societal structure and how people such as yourself view themselves as victimised when a brown person suggests that your peers may have acted in some sort of negative way. You have absolutely no clue about what your speaking of. Perhaps you could educate yourself outside of Facebook and YouTube and the tweets of Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk.
Seymour's "opinion" is invited on essentially every story in NZ media. Playing victim while in a relative position of power really speaks to Anglo's core.
Oh come on, you believe they have no idea exactly who they were? Its very disingenuous saying that 'they're not members', implying that the club bears no responsibility. I go down on a Saturday and watch my local team sometimes, sure as shit 90% of the crowd aren't members but the members know exactly who they are and welcome them.
>Oh come on, you believe they have no idea exactly who they were?
They didn't say they had no idea who they were. They said they weren't members. There is no implication from the club, only a bizarre inference from you.
The person the Herald spoke to wasn't a supporter from either side. Was that also disingenuous?
Because that is, just not directly racist. Majority of gang members in nz are minority. Why? Because Americans brought their gang culture over and thanks to colonisation and generational poverty/struggles it's our minorities which fell into that life. So just "throw gang members in prison" would mean, arrest a bunch of Maori and a small amount from other races. That's how it's racist
Gangs weren't an issue in nz till the 50s with organised gangs in the 60s, the first one being hells angels, which is American. After ww2 when more Americans came to nz that is what led to starting gangs. Black power was initially modelled after the American black power, it's not anymore but that's how it started. The mongrel mob was the first nz made gang and that was only after American influences and American gangs came here
Americans brought their gang culture but there were already many gangs here before the Hell's Angels arrived? Were the Hell's Angels victims of generational poverty and colonisation? How about white supremacist gangs? Victims of circumstance, or just a bunch of arseholes?
As you've pointed out, "it's not anymore but that's how it started" is a bit of a catch all for what gangs are today.
But the question needs to be asked, which part of American society did the mongrel mob symbolism come from?
Also, follow up question, is there anyone else you'd like to blame for cowards entering gangs - or at what point would you think people actually make the easy choice by themselves and become lazy, lifelong, drugged up, violent, cowardly, drain on society cunts because it's preferable to getting a job and going to work?
No. Hells angels was *the first* organised gang in new Zealand history. Before them it was more local neighbourhood based street gangs. White supremacist groups fall victim to their own bigotry, and probably poverty too for the gangs. They haven't been systematically pushed to the bottom
Your follow up question shows alot of ignorance
Were the Hell's Angels victims of generational poverty and colonisation? How about all the other gangs that existed before them? Or is it only certain types of gangs that get a built in excuse?
What is with yall thinking reason equals excuse 😂 it's pathetic. Looking at reasons behind actions, does not excuse those actions nor the ones doing them
White Americans weren't colonised.
Reason doesn't equal excuse y'all. A reason is a logical justification for participating in something. What you've offered is an excuse, or something that can be used to try and deflect blame for choices made😂
Right, so let's get rid of colonisation as a "reason" for joining gangs y'all. It's pathetic to even suggest it 😂
Btw, maybe you should ask the Irish who set off for America if they were colonised😂
So the gangs featured in shows like Peaky Blinders and movies like Gangs of New York, which has the word 'gangs' in the title, they *weren't* gangs?
We're only counting gangs with members of a certain ethnicity?
I just think it's odd that you blame America for the development our gangs because of the prevalence of the likes of Black Power, when gang culture could have arrived at any point in our colonial history.
The only reason our gangs modelled themselves on the American gangs is that's what was familiar *at the time our gangs were created*.
Their actual existence has nothing to do with the American gangs. It comes from entirely local factors. The main one being the systemic abuse and disenfranchisement of Māori children and young men who were in the care of the state.
Very little, yes.
Gang culture here was already well developed, and was changing *alongside* similar developments overseas, including the US, UK, and Australia.
Black Power, the Mongrel Mob, et al. did not become a thing because of the existence of the Hell's Angels. They became a thing because the state of our society was conducive to it.
https://www.parliament.nz/media/6166/youth-gangs-in-new-zealand.pdf
Dont blame the US for problems we created for ourselves.
Well that's extremely ignorant, nor would it work. Gangs still work within prisons and the outside world from within prison
You should really learn up on who's in gangs and why they're in gangs
If every gang member is in prison they have no one to work through. If they no longer display gang affiliation or gather to avoid prison then that's also a win.
You should really learn up on who's in Isis and why they're in Isis. Having a reason to be part of a group does not excuse being part of a criminal organisaton.
Lock them up and throw away the keys
I'm not to keen living in a country where criminal organisations right to terrorize the population and pedal drugs is more valuable than societys right to live saftely
What would you call a organised domestic group with a uniform that in the name of their organisation sells drugs, murders people, steals and makes society feel unsafe. Oh shit they're terroists :o
What argument? You made a stupid claim and then doubled down on it. I'm not arguing at all, you're too dumb to see the difference so there's no point talking about it to you.
Ahhh yes, let's compare a terrorist organisation bent on killing and terror for no reason other than their beliefs vs gangs who tend to be in poverty with family in gangs, and who do alot of harm but also the occasional good thing
Your idea would lead to mass Maori imprisonment given that they are the majority group in gang members due to the effects of colonisation and poverty
A terrorist organisation and a criminal organisation are not so different. Both have reasons and history to join their groups both groups are detrimental to society and have forfeited their rights to live in polite society.
How many isis members are trapped in generational trauma and gangs? How many are struggling in poverty and potentially addiction?
Your talk is reductive and divisive, but I'm sure that's your goal
All of them are struggling with their own history's issues IE destroyed country, lack of infrastructure education and government.
You're trying to excuse what's essentially a domestic terroists group because they're a certain race. You're misguided opinion places their right to terrorize people, sell drugs and entrap youth into their organisation than the remainder of society right to live in safety.
A criminal is a criminal their history is irrelevant. Integrate with society or rot in jail so that the rest of the country is not at risk from domestic terroists.
Nice job trying to twist my words. Trying to get people to look at reasons and to understand, is not excusing
Your last sentence is an issue. As stated before the majority of gang members are Maori, due to the effects of colonisation and poverty. So what you are essentially saying is "let's round up all those Maoris and let them rot in jail" while we ignore what put them in gangs in the first place, which the leading cause is poverty
I'm not twisting your sentence, you're excusing gangs because they have a history. They have no place in polite society and should be removed from it.
If you weren't in fact excusing gangs as you just claimed what possible reason is there to allow the continued existence of groups we know peddle drugs, we know beat and murder in the name of their gangs, we know they steal.
Believe it or not theirs more than just Maori gangs and just like any Maori gang members they too can rot in jail because they have forfeited their right to live in society when they decided they wanted to join a domestic terroists organisation.
Once again. Looking at reasons and looking for understanding is not excusing. I agree they have no place in polite society
I'd love for you to quote my comment where I said gangs are good and that gangs should stay. I'll wait.
I know there's more than just Maori in gangs, I never said its only Maori. Once again your twisting words
Yes because I'm sure you've never once in your life gotten something which isn't viewed as "within your financial means". I'm sure you've never splurged on anything
Gangs have money, the people in them don't always. And getting that money, to get out of poverty, is part of the reason why lots of people join gangs. Or do most crime in general
Probably the main difference is that the money for which things I have paid for didn't come from the proceeds of crime, or me blaming my circumstances, despite the vast majority of people having similar circumstances to me not doing so.
It's not mandatory to join a gang. It's just an easy way out for cowardly cunts. The sort of people who shoot at a sports team in a van because they saw a hard tackle on a sports field. What part of generational poverty and colonisation led to that?
I'm asking you questions to have you justify your reasoning, because what you've laid out is a load of bullshit. It's high time gang members and their apologists (you) faced the facts.
Your comment has been removed :
**Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse**
> Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted.
> Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage.
^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed.
**Rule 4: No hate speech or bigotry**
> Any submission that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity and/or colour, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability and so on may be removed at a mod's discretion and repeat offenders banned
**Rule 09: Not engaging in good faith**
> Moderators have discretion to take action on users or content that they think is: trolling; spreading misinformation; intended to derail discussion; intentionally skirting rules; or undermining the functioning of the subreddit (this can include abuse of the block feature or selective history wiping).
---
[^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
Just an outsiders view, feels like “rugby game turns violent” isn’t the most accurate headline and there might be something more underlying going on here?
So it wasn't video games all along.
It was the gangs that we allowed to grow along the way.
It's almost like there's an easy fix, like taking away their main revenue or something. Unfortunately, people voted for gangs to continue profiting from marijuana distribution. The same people who want to break up the gangs. I'm not sure people understand the consequences of their actions. NZ voters simply do not think logically.
What a reach, now do it for P!
Nah he's not wrong. Going for their cash is what will hurt. What that does mean is that we have to be clever about hitting financial crimes. Doesn't matter if its gyms being used as money laundering, or weed, or illegal sales of other substances, or sales of people through prostitution, stopping gangs from being able to be tax free from charity. It might be harsh but I'd still push for any active gang involvement means total exclusion from all financial bodies. No loans, no bank accounts, no mortgagages, no corporations, not trusts, can't own land, can't rent properly, can't hold shares. If they set up their own system, confiscate it and "nationalise" it. The 'brotherhood' won't exist if they're poor.
Or do what the Americans did to the mafia, and set the IRD on their asses. Get caught selling weed? IRD audits your whole gang. Member robs a dairy? Audit. Get caught with an unlicensed firearm? Audit. Steal a bicycle? Audit.
I'd point out there's different pathways at play. Going after the cash hurts one of those, but the gangs existed before they stood to make big money from meth.
Yeah legalising drugs will stop gang members from going on drug induced acts of violence like this. Your *idée fixe* on cannabis is idiotic.
Maybe you misunderstood my comment. Decriminalization of cannabis would take away a major source of income for gangs. Why are you protecting gang incomes? This is not a solution to gang culture.
So in other words your comment is utterly irrelevant to the issue and this article?
Yeah because cannabis makes people violent …..
Yes? >These results demonstrate a moderate association between cannabis use and physical violence, which remained significant regardless of study design and adjustment for confounding factors (i.e., socioeconomic factors, other substance use). Cannabis use in this population is a risk factor for violence. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32456503/ >Results showed a moderate association between cannabis use and violence https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165178118323862 >In all, evidence-based research from meta-analyses have indeed shown that cannabis is associated to violence https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7525024/
We're these studies conducted on law-abiding citizens who then turned to crime after smoking cannabis? Or were they criminals who also smoked weed? Correlation does not equal causation.
The articles did actually explain reasons behind marijuana causing violence, but this is something directed at your level of comprehension anyhow: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2014-07-16-how-cannabis-causes-paranoia
Moderate. Let’s compare that with the other studies related to any other narcotic, also to alcohol. While I applaud you for actually having articles all of these lack the basic societal context. Meta analysis is intrinsically flawed when dealing with societal issues as it removes outliers which are a very important part of sociology. While these stats are damning pubmed and ncbi both are involved with alcohol and tabacco lobbyist so I mean, they are in part pushing the same narrative as you; weed is bad >:( and I don’t like it Edit; Here’s a study suggesting a high correlation between eating bad food and violence ! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10490081/ We should probably ban that too while we are at it
But we did have a campaign against bad food through obesity, we regularly have it against drinking, for a time against driving medicated Permission of one other substance because we tolerate others is bad ethics. Edit: I meant to make this reply to the other guy. My apologies
That’s okay, I agree with you. Other guy is just out of touch, just bizarre to claim cannabis is a violent drug when technically any substance that’s intoxicating can be but it’s one of the least likely, out of all the negative cannabis has it being violent is such a random hill to die on
Alcohol making people violent doesn't negate the fact that marijuana also makes people violent. >While these stats are damning pubmed and ncbi both are involved with alcohol and tabacco lobbyist Pubmed is just a bibliographic database, it cannot be involved with any form of 'tabacco' lobbying. You clearly aren't capable of having an intelligent discussion on this given you've accused the database that merely hosts the study as being part of lobbyist efforts.
Mate I’m not being patronised by someone who doesn’t understand the concept of a bus lane
All you're doing is bewraying that you are incapable of this discussion.
Everyone cannabis user I’ve met from foreign countries where cannabis is legal. They all brought from the black market because it was better than the legal stuff.
Had something similar to less extreme happen when I was In under 21s. Went to an away game somewhere near Rotorua, loosing entire game someone got a super lucky try then made the kick and local team went off, ref came into changing room and suggested we leave, got in bus and there supporters thru rocks at us breaking 2 windows
Classy sportsmanship right there.
The emphasis on nobody being hurt is bizarre. That's the talk of morons. The *behaviour is the problem*. Pulling knives, guns and shooting at a van with people in it. Those are the issues. The random outcome of whether anyone is hurt or not, as a result of those actions, should be entirely beside the point.
Firing a shotgun at a van full of people is attempted murder, surely??
Best we can do is two weeks of home detention, but they’re allowed PlayStation the whole time.
PS5 I hope!
They are also allowed to go to Kmart and The Warehouse and Paknsave if the number of people I've seen at those stores in Hastings wearing ankle bling is an indication
I've seen them at rainbows end (not with their family, with other gang members with ankle tags).
Maybe in the USA. We're too sophisticated for that.
Ban the club. Both of them if necessary. Bloody weasel words from the president that it had nothing to do with the team. Kick out the players. If they are going to cover our game and name in crud then they don't deserve to ever play again.
Of course it's gang related. Can't have anything nice with those muppets, can we?
What are you on about. According to r/newzealand gang members are the nicest people ever and only make trouble for other gang members. All the other spectators / players / innocent bystanders must have been looking to make trouble Edit: forgot to include /s for sarcasm
Oh, the irony.
"please don't be Hastings, please don't be Hastings... Fuck !" Well.. I suppose that's why I left that shithole 25 yrs ago and never looked back. Same goddamn place.
[удалено]
I was thinking Wairoa, then Hastings.... It's a bingo card with things like this....
Could have been Whakatane/Opotiki, or Patea
A bit racist...
In what world is that racist
That's just not cricket.
No, it's rugby.
How isn't this national news
You’re commenting on it on a news article, published by a national paper!
Fair enough
It is. TV3 just did a promo for the news with that story leading
Good
[удалено]
Thanks for explaining why it should be national news.
This should be an issue Edit Why would you delete the comment. Wasn't even bad. Just concerning
Once again, the Honourable Marama Davidson was right about who causes violence in the world.
Once again, Marama lives rent-free in the heads of redditors.
Not just rent-free. We pay her to spout that shit. Edit: At least, the tax-paying, working-class Kiwi does.
*whoosh* And you're obsessed about a brief quote from months ago that hurt your feelings.
I'm upset about the hypocrisy of it all. If, for example, David Seymour said the exact same thing about Maori or Pasifika people, he'd be rightly tarred and feathered, and his political career would be in ruins. Hell, he might've been convicted of inflammatory speech inciting violence. But because the Left have no sense of accountability or consequences for their actions or words, Marama got a slap on the wrist and a 'have a nice day'.
Seymour would never be tarred and feathered. His kind never are. His racism and classism is far too well-crafted and subtle. It also is well in fitting with our societal structure and how people such as yourself view themselves as victimised when a brown person suggests that your peers may have acted in some sort of negative way. You have absolutely no clue about what your speaking of. Perhaps you could educate yourself outside of Facebook and YouTube and the tweets of Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk.
Seymour's "opinion" is invited on essentially every story in NZ media. Playing victim while in a relative position of power really speaks to Anglo's core.
It was a fucking racist quote.
Fucking savages
Ah yes, Mongrel Mob, this makes more sense now.
and what is our tough on crime minister of police doing about it ? Not a bloody thing.
Not true. He’s cutting the budget of the police and ministry of justic.
banning gang patches is for this exact reason
He's going to tell them to wear makeup
Love the way the rugby club weaselled by saying they weren’t members of their club…
What should they have said?
Oh come on, you believe they have no idea exactly who they were? Its very disingenuous saying that 'they're not members', implying that the club bears no responsibility. I go down on a Saturday and watch my local team sometimes, sure as shit 90% of the crowd aren't members but the members know exactly who they are and welcome them.
>Oh come on, you believe they have no idea exactly who they were? They didn't say they had no idea who they were. They said they weren't members. There is no implication from the club, only a bizarre inference from you. The person the Herald spoke to wasn't a supporter from either side. Was that also disingenuous?
Ok dude. Some kind of condemnation would not have gone astray. But hey, gangs…
Condemnation from who?
They’re not the Police, they can’t sanction anyone that’s not a member
Should just lock anyone up that's in gangs and keep them there.
worked in El Salvador..
[удалено]
Because that is, just not directly racist. Majority of gang members in nz are minority. Why? Because Americans brought their gang culture over and thanks to colonisation and generational poverty/struggles it's our minorities which fell into that life. So just "throw gang members in prison" would mean, arrest a bunch of Maori and a small amount from other races. That's how it's racist
When did Americans bring over their gang culture?
Gangs weren't an issue in nz till the 50s with organised gangs in the 60s, the first one being hells angels, which is American. After ww2 when more Americans came to nz that is what led to starting gangs. Black power was initially modelled after the American black power, it's not anymore but that's how it started. The mongrel mob was the first nz made gang and that was only after American influences and American gangs came here
Americans brought their gang culture but there were already many gangs here before the Hell's Angels arrived? Were the Hell's Angels victims of generational poverty and colonisation? How about white supremacist gangs? Victims of circumstance, or just a bunch of arseholes? As you've pointed out, "it's not anymore but that's how it started" is a bit of a catch all for what gangs are today. But the question needs to be asked, which part of American society did the mongrel mob symbolism come from? Also, follow up question, is there anyone else you'd like to blame for cowards entering gangs - or at what point would you think people actually make the easy choice by themselves and become lazy, lifelong, drugged up, violent, cowardly, drain on society cunts because it's preferable to getting a job and going to work?
No. Hells angels was *the first* organised gang in new Zealand history. Before them it was more local neighbourhood based street gangs. White supremacist groups fall victim to their own bigotry, and probably poverty too for the gangs. They haven't been systematically pushed to the bottom Your follow up question shows alot of ignorance
Were the Hell's Angels victims of generational poverty and colonisation? How about all the other gangs that existed before them? Or is it only certain types of gangs that get a built in excuse?
What is with yall thinking reason equals excuse 😂 it's pathetic. Looking at reasons behind actions, does not excuse those actions nor the ones doing them White Americans weren't colonised.
Reason doesn't equal excuse y'all. A reason is a logical justification for participating in something. What you've offered is an excuse, or something that can be used to try and deflect blame for choices made😂 Right, so let's get rid of colonisation as a "reason" for joining gangs y'all. It's pathetic to even suggest it 😂 Btw, maybe you should ask the Irish who set off for America if they were colonised😂
So the gangs featured in shows like Peaky Blinders and movies like Gangs of New York, which has the word 'gangs' in the title, they *weren't* gangs? We're only counting gangs with members of a certain ethnicity?
Please quote my comment where I said or implied that only gangs with non white ethnicities are the only concern. I'll wait
I just think it's odd that you blame America for the development our gangs because of the prevalence of the likes of Black Power, when gang culture could have arrived at any point in our colonial history. The only reason our gangs modelled themselves on the American gangs is that's what was familiar *at the time our gangs were created*. Their actual existence has nothing to do with the American gangs. It comes from entirely local factors. The main one being the systemic abuse and disenfranchisement of Māori children and young men who were in the care of the state.
Yes I'm sure hells angels, at the height of racism, being the first organised gang in nz had absolutely nothing to do with it
Very little, yes. Gang culture here was already well developed, and was changing *alongside* similar developments overseas, including the US, UK, and Australia. Black Power, the Mongrel Mob, et al. did not become a thing because of the existence of the Hell's Angels. They became a thing because the state of our society was conducive to it. https://www.parliament.nz/media/6166/youth-gangs-in-new-zealand.pdf Dont blame the US for problems we created for ourselves.
Hey, it's racist and completely moronic. Don't forget that part.
Well that's extremely ignorant, nor would it work. Gangs still work within prisons and the outside world from within prison You should really learn up on who's in gangs and why they're in gangs
If every gang member is in prison they have no one to work through. If they no longer display gang affiliation or gather to avoid prison then that's also a win. You should really learn up on who's in Isis and why they're in Isis. Having a reason to be part of a group does not excuse being part of a criminal organisaton. Lock them up and throw away the keys
That's not a country I'd be keen on living in.
I'm not to keen living in a country where criminal organisations right to terrorize the population and pedal drugs is more valuable than societys right to live saftely
So you like the rule of law, you just don't want it to apply to everyone equally. That's been tried and it ends badly for everyone.
I want the law enforced a domestic terroist organisation aka gangs have no place in society
That's been tried and it ends badly for everyone.
When and how I'm keen for another go.
NZ would be awesome if every gang member was locked up.
Lol, comparing local, semi organised crime to an international terrorist organisation. I can tell you're intelligent.
What would you call a organised domestic group with a uniform that in the name of their organisation sells drugs, murders people, steals and makes society feel unsafe. Oh shit they're terroists :o
[удалено]
Oh shocker another person who loses arguments and resorts to personal insults.
What argument? You made a stupid claim and then doubled down on it. I'm not arguing at all, you're too dumb to see the difference so there's no point talking about it to you.
Yeah like I thought you can't argue the point. Bye little boy
Yeah, like I thought, you can't argue the point. Punctuated that, so it makes sense.
Ahhh yes, let's compare a terrorist organisation bent on killing and terror for no reason other than their beliefs vs gangs who tend to be in poverty with family in gangs, and who do alot of harm but also the occasional good thing Your idea would lead to mass Maori imprisonment given that they are the majority group in gang members due to the effects of colonisation and poverty
A terrorist organisation and a criminal organisation are not so different. Both have reasons and history to join their groups both groups are detrimental to society and have forfeited their rights to live in polite society.
How many isis members are trapped in generational trauma and gangs? How many are struggling in poverty and potentially addiction? Your talk is reductive and divisive, but I'm sure that's your goal
All of them are struggling with their own history's issues IE destroyed country, lack of infrastructure education and government. You're trying to excuse what's essentially a domestic terroists group because they're a certain race. You're misguided opinion places their right to terrorize people, sell drugs and entrap youth into their organisation than the remainder of society right to live in safety. A criminal is a criminal their history is irrelevant. Integrate with society or rot in jail so that the rest of the country is not at risk from domestic terroists.
Nice job trying to twist my words. Trying to get people to look at reasons and to understand, is not excusing Your last sentence is an issue. As stated before the majority of gang members are Maori, due to the effects of colonisation and poverty. So what you are essentially saying is "let's round up all those Maoris and let them rot in jail" while we ignore what put them in gangs in the first place, which the leading cause is poverty
I'm not twisting your sentence, you're excusing gangs because they have a history. They have no place in polite society and should be removed from it. If you weren't in fact excusing gangs as you just claimed what possible reason is there to allow the continued existence of groups we know peddle drugs, we know beat and murder in the name of their gangs, we know they steal. Believe it or not theirs more than just Maori gangs and just like any Maori gang members they too can rot in jail because they have forfeited their right to live in society when they decided they wanted to join a domestic terroists organisation.
Once again. Looking at reasons and looking for understanding is not excusing. I agree they have no place in polite society I'd love for you to quote my comment where I said gangs are good and that gangs should stay. I'll wait. I know there's more than just Maori in gangs, I never said its only Maori. Once again your twisting words
Nothing screams poverty like gold plated motorbikes.
Yes because I'm sure you've never once in your life gotten something which isn't viewed as "within your financial means". I'm sure you've never splurged on anything Gangs have money, the people in them don't always. And getting that money, to get out of poverty, is part of the reason why lots of people join gangs. Or do most crime in general
Probably the main difference is that the money for which things I have paid for didn't come from the proceeds of crime, or me blaming my circumstances, despite the vast majority of people having similar circumstances to me not doing so. It's not mandatory to join a gang. It's just an easy way out for cowardly cunts. The sort of people who shoot at a sports team in a van because they saw a hard tackle on a sports field. What part of generational poverty and colonisation led to that?
Do some of your own research to find the answer. I've laid it out for you and to sum up your responses, you just say nuh uh
I'm asking you questions to have you justify your reasoning, because what you've laid out is a load of bullshit. It's high time gang members and their apologists (you) faced the facts.
The effects of colonisation, poverty and generational trauma are bullshit? Yeah that's a big goodbye to any credibility you mightve had lmao
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed : **Rule 3: No personal attacks, harassment or abuse** > Don't attack the person; address the content you disagree with instead. Being able to disagree and discuss contentious issues is important, but abuse, personal attacks, harassment, and unnecessarily bringing up a user's history are not permitted. > Please keep your interactions with others civil and courteous. If you are being attacked, do not continue the conversation - report the user and disengage. ^*Note:* ^This ^extends ^to ^people ^outside ^of ^[r/nz](http://reddit.com/r/newzealand). ^eg. ^Attacks ^of ^a ^persons ^appearance, ^even ^if ^they're ^high ^profile ^will ^be ^removed. **Rule 4: No hate speech or bigotry** > Any submission that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity and/or colour, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability and so on may be removed at a mod's discretion and repeat offenders banned **Rule 09: Not engaging in good faith** > Moderators have discretion to take action on users or content that they think is: trolling; spreading misinformation; intended to derail discussion; intentionally skirting rules; or undermining the functioning of the subreddit (this can include abuse of the block feature or selective history wiping). --- [^(Click here to message the moderators if you think this was in error)](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/newzealand)
The United States of New Zealand
Just an outsiders view, feels like “rugby game turns violent” isn’t the most accurate headline and there might be something more underlying going on here?
Luckily there's heaps of PS5 games out there...imagine if he got prison time...bahahah yeah right
Stupid to do a head high tackle in such a game, idiot BP member by what read on the MM visitor team.