This is our future, and don’t kid yourself that it won’t happen here.

Posted on March 14, 2012 by KG

Kafka would have loved it:  EU arrest warrant

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to This is our future, and don’t kid yourself that it won’t happen here.

  1. Darin says:
    March 14, 2012 at 03:39

    Our legal system in the US is screwed up,but nothing like what’s across the water,jeez arrested with no changes? :wtf

  2. pmofnz says:
    March 14, 2012 at 05:01

    “it won’t happen here”…

    I wonder if Kim Dotcom would agree with that statement.

  3. Moneo says:
    March 14, 2012 at 05:31

    “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation…”

    From the Declaration of Independence – unfortunately Britain has acknowledged EU laws. Would that they realise their mistake before it is too late.

  4. KG says:
    March 14, 2012 at 09:14

    Sovereignty is just so old fashioned Moneo..
    /sarc

  5. PeterPumkinhead says:
    March 14, 2012 at 09:25

    An utterly unthinkable travesty, which, regretfully, we have to think about.

    In some states in the US, I am told, it would be the elected Sherriff’s duty to protect his states’ citizens from illegal arrest.

    I have heard some talk of interest in localised policing here in NZ.

    Your thoughts, gennulmen?

    • KG says:
      March 14, 2012 at 09:40

      PP, I reckon localised policing by elected “sheriffs” (or whatever they would be called) would be a disaster in NZ. There’s no real history of grassroots citizen involvement in local law enforcement for starters.
      And tell me how you think it would work in an area like East Cape, for example. Does anybody seriously think that a maori law-enforcement officer in areas such as that would apply the law without fear or favour?
      I’ve lived in a predominantly maori area of the Far North, and the policing by the local maori cop was a travesty.

  6. PeterPumkinhead says:
    March 14, 2012 at 09:48

    Then it is called ‘getting what you voted for, good and hard’.
    New Zealand is used to that – for the last 15 years or so.

    And perhaps an armed citizenry is just what we need…?

    • KG says:
      March 14, 2012 at 09:55

      “Then it is called ‘getting what you voted for, good and hard’.”
      No it isn’t–nobody in that area voted for race-based policing.

  7. PeterPumkinhead says:
    March 14, 2012 at 09:50

    And one might suggest that your experience is not a strong case for the status quo.

    • KG says:
      March 14, 2012 at 09:53

      Don’t be deliberately stupid–I wasn’t suggesting it was. But that, allied with the record of maori nepotism and corruption certainly suggests that any predominantly maori area which elected it’s own law enforcement officer would not adhere to the colourblind, neutral model of policing.

      • PeterPumkinhead says:
        March 14, 2012 at 11:44

        But from what you are saying, it does not now, and with centralised (policing and government) structures, there is no way of making a difference.

        CR, I am not intending to be deliberately obtuse, and am sorry I am coming across as such.

        What I am suggesting is that maybe we could consider different approaches to protecting our liberty, property and rights.

        Imagine, for example, that you were Kim CotDom, and your would be ‘arrestors’ were first required to convince the local law enforcement to not impede your arrest?

        • PeterPumkinhead says:
          March 14, 2012 at 11:49

          …or (to stop thread crapping) the unfortunate chap who is the subject of this post?

        • KG says:
          March 14, 2012 at 11:55

          “What I am suggesting is that maybe we could consider different approaches to protecting our liberty, property and rights.”
          Well, we certainly need to do that, PP. But what we, the people, want no longer seems to matter. And I don’t know how we can change that.
          As far as the Kim Dotcom thing goes, I find it shameful that the case didn’t first have to be made to a New Zealand court for his arrest, that a man can have his house searched, property seized and his privacy invaded without the law in his country of residence protecting him.

  8. KG says:
    March 14, 2012 at 11:56

    Don’t worry about off-topic stuff here–we don’t mind it at all. :smile: