Wednesday, July 12, 2006

"...because a single crime is too much."

MEC Firoz Cachalia says statistics are irrelevant "...because a single crime is too much." Here is something I believe we can all agree upon. How can you fight what you don't know? If the government wants us to fight crime together, they should supply us with the facts. A single crime is too much but what are the figures? The rest of that article, I believe is very positive on the whole. Granted, we aren't seeing any change yet, but it is a step in the right direction.

In other news, thanks to ECR Newswatch for the report on this blog yesterday. At least East Coasters now know that there are positive alternatives to our problems.

Have a good day everyone.

Addy

Also I would like to say that while I will not edit any comments, any attempts at advertising are being removed quickly, so don't bother trying.

41 Comments:

At 11:17 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey man, have you seen this? It is a serious issue, how Jo'Burg is being turned into a slum?
What are we going to do about it?
http://deathofjohannesburg.blogspot.com/

 
At 11:18 AM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You Fucking White Bastard” – Anti-White nature of SA Crime Revealed
In South Africa, you don’t know if the police are coming to help you or to rob/assault you
'I told him I have Aids, but he just laughed'12/07/2006 07:34 - (SA)
Pretoria - "When he pulled down my pants and underwear, I told him I have Aids, but he just laughed and said: 'Don't worry, so have I'," a 57-year-old woman said on Tuesday after being assaulted and robbed by bogus policemen who'd entered her home in a security complex.
Susan Adler became suspicious after "police officers" arrived at the couple's upmarket home in Sandown in Northern Johannesburg in a white Volkswagen Golf about 12:00 on Monday, wearing police uniforms and bullet proof vests.
They also had a "suspect" in their car and insisted that she identify a man who'd allegedly broken into the house eight months earlier.
Adler on Tuesday told Beeld how she and her husband, Harris, who has a heart condition and is fitted with a pacemaker, allowed the men to enter the house after they'd offered to show them a cellphone photo of the suspect.
She said one of the men later appeared inside the house with the "suspect", who allegedly wanted to use the bathroom.
"I told my husband that something wasn't right, but the next moment the suspect wasn't shackled any more and they were holding guns to our heads."
The robbers tied their hands and feet with pieces of clothing and telephone cord before demanding money and threatened to shoot them, 702 Talk Radio reported on Tuesday morning.
"One of them hit my husband in the face with a gun and wrapped his head in a towel. They called him a "fucking white bastard" and told him apartheid was over," she said.
"They insisted on being taken to a second safe, just like they'd done during the previous robbery, but we have only one. Two of the men took Mrs Adler into the study and, putting a gun into her mouth, threatened to rape her if she didn't give them money.
"When he pulled down my pants and underwear, I told him I had Aids, but he just laughed and said: 'Don't worry, so have I'. I pleaded with his accomplice to help me, but he just ignored me," she said. One of them then indecently assaulted her.
After they'd taken her wedding ring, purse, keys and a nail set, they escaped, and her husband managed to free himself.
"He had to climb over an electric fence with his bare feet and seriously injured them," she said.
Commissioner Oswald Reddy, Johannesburg police chief, told Amanda Roestoff that three top police officers were investigating the incident. They would soon conduct an identity parade. "Police members associated with the car's registration number have an alibi, but all possibilities are being investigated," he said.
Source: http://southafricaiscrap.blogspot.com/

 
At 12:53 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Jam said...

Do us all a favour anonymous - MOVE! I find that getting myself out of situations I don't like is a good way of dealing with not wanting to be there.

 
At 12:53 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Samantha Jankovich said...

Hi Addy,
I am with you on this site. We are all aware of, and affected by crime, but we also have the power of choice.
I have just moved back to Cape Town from Durban and am continually impressed by the positive initiatives taken by Capetonians to deal with crime. In the area in which I live, there is community policing, neighbourhood watch, security guards on bicycles etc. In addition, individuals are taking responsibility for their safety by reporting strange vehicles in their areas etc.
Yes, it's not an ideal way to live, but if we all work together (I know it's a cliche), we can make a difference.
In addition, if we all support our police, how can they fail? I, along with other morbid individuals, watched with glee as about 20 policemen took down a group of hi-jackers in Lynfrae, Claremont. As much as it was awful that the crime had been committed, the collective glee with which we watched our police in action generated a wonderful feeling of unity within the crowd of onlookers. We were together in this and the police were our heroes.
Was this ever reported in the media? Not that I knew of. These are the stories we should be hearing daily, not just the crime one.
Samantha, Cape Town

 
At 3:08 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Frank said...

Setting goals and action plans is great BUT in this post for example it refers to 10 murders in Gauteng everyday. President Mbeki's stated goal is to reduce crime by 7 to 10% per year.

This means the target is to have 9 murders per day by next year and not 10?

I gues what I am saying is there needs to be a huge step change in our thinking about crime.

 
At 4:14 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Addy i'm sorry but you're ridiculous. My star sign is this, and my favourite books are these...

Neil Watson is trying to achieve something.

You are trying to be the the "other famous guy" associated with Neil Watson.

If you want to be taken seriously, remove your handsome picture, my favourite movies etc.

I mean you list Scary movie 1,2 and 3 as being your favourites....is this because you don't take murder seriously enough? A spoof on gruesome horror movies actually really isn't that funny to people who have lost friends and family through murder.

c'mon Addy, you're young and I can see what you're trying to do, but Neil isn't defaming you on his site so perhaps you should be your own man and do the same.

 
At 4:24 PM, July 12, 2006, Anonymous Nathan L. said...

http://www.4deathpenalty.co.za/

Bring Back the Death Penalty for horendious crimes and you will see the stats going down. Criminals should think twice before acting if they know that they could lose their life if they take away the life of any individual.

 
At 11:49 PM, July 12, 2006, Blogger Willie said...

Want to see the thruth....have a look here...

http://www.africancrisis.org/Photos45.asp

 
At 12:29 AM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you for real - why is the creative commons thing necessary on an altruistic website -

 
At 10:10 AM, July 13, 2006, Blogger Patrick said...

nathan I,

Perhaps we should think carefully about the death penalty.

I think we can agree that there is no moral justification for murder. Prevalent among popular non-justifications is the argument that the person you would murder is himself or herself a murderer, and therefore 'deserves' to die.

After moral considerations, you could think on practical grounds. That the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime has always, to my knowledge, been mere conjecture. I'm not aware of any empirical evidence that would support the claim.

Given these two considerations, reinstating the death penalty would certainly be immoral, and perhaps futile to boot.

 
At 10:19 AM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Tom Salter said...

This is a copy of the email that I sent to Addy - he tells me to comment here:

Hi Addy

Like you, I detest Neil Watson's methods but, like one of your readers
commented, we should really thank him since his misguided efforts have
woken up many South Africans - and we CAN do something.

Yesterday, I was so incensed by Watson's website that I set up another -
http://www.2010forum.co.za - in an effort to allow everyone to have their
say - not just those selected by Mr. Watson. This was before I had had a
chance to go though your blog more thoroughly. Good work !

I did not want to put this on your blog as a comment as it could be seen
as advertising but that is not my intention - I really do feel that on a
subject like this - that affects us all - everyone should have an equal
chance to have their say.

I also do not hold with "anonymouses" - by all means choose a "handle",
choose an avatar but at least be accountable for what you say! For that
reason, posting to 2010forum.co.za is restricted to members - for whom I
have a verified email address. (Membership is free and very simple - just
fill in the form)

Please have a look at the site and I would love to welcome you as Member
#2 - I like what you have to say - and the way you say it.

BTW. Like all good South Africans (and I became one by choice!) we have to
look for the humour in the situation; consider these points :

* News reports have tended to abbreviate the name of Watson's site to
Crime Expo SA - so the owners of capeinfo.co.za have registered that name
to point to their own site - which definitely supports 2010!

* Watson's domain name has only one "e" - so Mark Elkins (who has been
around for years) has registered the same name with two "e"s -
crimeexposouthafrica.co.za - try going to http://co.za/whois.shtml, enter
that name and read the name of the registrant.

* No-one seems to have picked up yet on the fact that Watson's website is
published by MWeb Business - Proudly South African and "South Africa's
Most Trusted ISP" - that one could be fun! ;-)

Have a good day.

Tom Salter

 
At 11:18 AM, July 13, 2006, Blogger Len said...

The argument that bringing back the death penalty will alone be a magic pill is naive.
The fact that Texas continued to lead in executions in the USA indicates that they have not achieved this Nirvana they were hoping for.
On the other hand, look how little crime there is in many countries without the death penalty. So, Nathan's logic is based only on emotions and not on facts.
Furthermore, the death penalty is the last of many processes that need to take place, from catching the alleged criminal, to properly collecting evidence, to prosecuting the alleged criminal, finding the alleged criminal guilty and to sentencing the criminal.
If a judge does not give a life or multiple life sentences, then chances are that they will not use the death penalty in sentencing.
Furthermore, it is very likely that some judges will not wish to use the death penalty while others will abuse it.
Another concern I have is that if the death penalty is an alternative for a criminal who knows his time is up, what are the chances that he will
bribe other cops to lose his docket (it happens)
he will mow down possible witnesses (it happens)
would rather go out in a blaze, as the 8 criminals (even without the death penalty) did in Jeppestown.
Indeed, policing would be more dangerous.
Furthermore, because we are a democracy with a constitution, chances that trials will last 5 days is very slim. Even when the trial is over, what are the chances that there will be as many appeals as there are courts in the country? How long and costly was the Shabir Shaik case? It is not even a life imprisonment case.
Furthermore, we know that Zuma and Shaik can afford to throw doubt on their cases, even putting their accusers under observation. What are are the chances that all South Africans will have access to the same justice system, when they cannot even afford a R50 bail.
We also know for a fact that the death penalty has been misused by governments in the past to deal with opponents.
Finally, the present government has failed to provide enough protection to their citizens, yet we are eager to give them access to the death penalty? Do we trust them that much?
Yes, we may trust the ones in power at the moment, but things change

 
At 11:22 AM, July 13, 2006, Blogger Len said...

Another concern I have with Neil Watson's method.
What happens if things change dramatically in the next 6 months to demonstrate the commitment and actions of government.
Would Mr Watson then review his stance and remove his website, or would the source of income and perhaps other issues come up to prevent him from changing his tune?
Wouldn't he then be the one holding South African to ransom, like the criminals we know are already doing?

 
At 12:25 PM, July 13, 2006, Blogger Len said...

I disagree Addy.
Crime is there for all of us to see. We know how it affects us. We should avoid be victims of numbers because they often average things out leading to a situation where you are told that crime has resulted from 3,5 murders a year in a certain region. What does that tell you?
Everyone is too hungup with the numbers. Are you lesss careful when going home that you would be if told that murder rate in the country is 18900 people per annums, as compared to Neil Watson's 20,000
Point is, one murder is one too many and have to agree with Firoz Cachalia.
I also do not agree that chasing investment and tourists will achieve much in the fight against crime.
Would you rather die in a train bombing in Spain or Mumbai, or would you rather die in a subway or airplane in London or New York City, or in a school in Beslan or live in fear in Japan not knowing whether any of the North Korean missiles will go astray as many Americans ones have done so?
would you like to live in Israel where anyday someone can explode themselves next to you, or would you rather be in Iraq and enjoy the civil war there, or what if you went to the Philipines or the favourite Australian escape near Indonesia? Perhaps you will enjoy Mexico more, or the emerging ruins that is Agentina?
Yes, crime is bad, but dying is even worse, regardless of how you die

 
At 1:22 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Barbara said...

Hello All

On the question of the death penalty, there is loads of information on the Amnesty International website. Just go to http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng . I would urge anyone in South Africa who believes that bringing back the death penalty will solve all our problems to go and have a look at that site. This is a ‘cut and paste’ excerpt from the site…

”” Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments. The most recent survey of research findings on the relation between the death penalty and homicide rates, conducted for the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002, concluded: ". . .it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment."

(Reference: Roger Hood, The Death Penalty: A World-wide Perspective, Oxford, Clarendon Press, third edition, 2002, p. 230)””

Criminals don't expect to get caught!!

 
At 1:53 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nathan, as Barbara says, criminals do not expect to get caught.
If they knew their chances of being caught were much higher, I suspect they would not engage in crime, would they? This assumes that criminals have that much deductive sense.
Unfortunately, many criminals are not.
Also, the nature of crime in South Africa does not pose a much higher risk to tourists.
Many of the murdered and raped victims were known the the perpetrators. Does not make it acceptable, but reduces the potential murder of a person unknown to the victim.
A large portion of the murders are family suicides (father kills wife and children), gangster against gangster murder and violence limited to poor areas like the township.
Yes, there is the occassional carjacking, break-ins and farm related murders (farmers kill a few of their neighbours who happen to be black) which is more reported and create an impression which is being exploited by the likes of Watson and Nameless Co.

 
At 2:10 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous I rest my Case! said...

So with the last comment from anonymous we must accept the fact that if you look for shit in South Africa, you will definately be raped, robbed, maimed for life or killed outright with a AK47! Kindly act like a tailgunner to all and sundry my beloved Rainbow nation!

 
At 2:12 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous I rest my Case! said...

So with the last comment from anonymous we must accept the fact that if you look for shit in South Africa, you will definately be raped, robbed, maimed for life or killed outright with a AK47! Kindly act like a tailgunner to all and sundry my beloved Rainbow nation!

 
At 6:16 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, if you guys don't like Neil Watson's page, you will hate
http://southafricaiscrap.blogspot.com/

 
At 6:23 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous GB said...

What is obvious is that crime is a problem, and what is also obvious is that the government isn't really that bothered with it, as they'd rather spend millions on the renaming of towns, rather than spend it protecting their citizens.

What SA should do about crime -> Lift up and make the SA police something to be feared.
Pay them better, so that bribes will fall on deaf ears, so that people will actually want to work for them.
Employ A LOT more policemen and women, and equip them properly with both gear and vehicles.
Empower our legal system to protect the innocent, not the current situation where criminals are protected.
Build more prisons. How ? Well, use existing prisoners. What about their human rights ? As convicts, their human right should be to put right what they've done wrong. And they can start by building more prisons.

It's absolutely disgraceful that our existing government fails to protect it's own citizens, and they have to rely on security companies for some form of protection in their own homes. For those lucky enough to be able to afford it and to have a home.

And I can already hear someone saying: But with a 25% unemployment in the country, we will never get rid of crime.
True, but what you want to do is make it a lot less rewarding with actual penalties if caught. Criminals don't fear being caught as our government seems to be endorsing them in all areas

 
At 6:48 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Man tortured, killed in front of kids

http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_1967483,00.html

 
At 9:47 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it is simplistic and exxagering to claim that government is not doing anything about crime.
We inherited an inept policeforce whose previous duties were to safeguard apartheid. 12 years on, amny of these guys still do not know what policing is all about.
WEhen cops believe they can train dogs on human beings, use foreigners as source of income, rounding them up once in a miler to extort bribes, then you can never pay them enough to look away from bribes.
The more you pay someone, the more greedier they become.
Employing more policemen will make the situation worse, if they will learn the same ineptness from their colleagues.
It is one thing to make statement with very little understanding of reality.
Wouldf you be comfortable being stopped at a roadblock by an inexperienced cop who recently joined as is scared shitless and has a finger on the trigger?
Also, what have you don e in your area to protect yourself?
Surely, you do not sleep with doors open expecting a cop to stand on guard. You take precautions even when travelling.
Instead of whingeing, how many actually participate in their policing forums?
We are quick to criticise and judge others, but we lack the urgency to do something for ourselves

 
At 10:40 PM, July 13, 2006, Anonymous GB said...

Sorry Anonymous, I must've offended you quite personally here, are you perhaps working for the government ?
I never said the government isn't doing anything, I said they can't be bothered by crime. If they were, they would've admitted to crime being a problem and gone about corrective action. Look at what America did with New York, this is something SA could do well with learning from.

I wish I could understand your logic in saying that "The more you pay someone, the more greedier they become.". So if we pay policemen/women R100 000 a year, they are now going to become greedy and want R120 000 ? So, let's just pay them R60 000 a year and then they'll be happy and won't want more??

And yes, what I also said was to employ a LOT of untrained cops as that would make things safer !

The bottom line is that police is there to protect the citizens of a country. Our police is understaffed, underpaid, demoralised, lacking in training

What have I done in my area to protect myself ?
Neighbourhood watch
I went to the aid of our 75 year old disabled neighbour and his wife who were being burgled. The police could unfortunately not assist as they only had one vehicle for the area that night and it was already out on an incident.

 
At 7:45 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another police raid in Johannesburg, netting 500 people on top of similar raids this past week. A few more of these on the way. Cape Town police embarking on same initiative.
No acknowledgement of this activity from Neil's site. Perhaps he does not approve?

 
At 7:49 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, government has always admitted that crime is a problem. Merely making remarks that they cannot be bothered is uninformed and perhaps intentionally so.
The Deputy President herself has been a victim of crime when robbers broke into her home in Morningside, Johannesbur while she was asleep. This was immediately after she was confirmed as the DP of the country.
So, while I understand your frustration, making false and unjustified statements does not require a government employee to dispute.
I am keen on proper facts, and no I do not work for the government.
Your ability to decide what others wish to say is legendary.
I never implied that paying people less would be a better option either. Demand quality first and pay that

 
At 8:29 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous SLN said...

Sorry Anonymous, I must've offended you quite personally here, are you perhaps working for the government ?

Ad hominem attacks do not really offend me, they merely tell me who I am dealing with. Even people who work for government are not immune to crime. I have no doubt that they are as vulnerable to attacks by crooks as you re, unless you believe somehow crooks have that much intelligence i.e. distinguish between 2 people who works for the government and who does not.



I never said the government isn't doing anything, I said they can't be bothered by crime.

Please help me here, if you are not bothered by something, and doing something about it, wouldn't that be a contradiction in terms? Surely, if you are doing something about crime, then it does bother you.
So, I have to admit that you have me really confused here.

If they were, they would've admitted to crime being a problem and gone about corrective action.

So, you are now back to them doing nothing about it? I think you are confusing yourself.
Yes, they are concerned about crime and yes they are doing something about crime. Yes, their actions are not ENOUGH and yes MORE needs to be done.


Look at what America did with New York, this is something SA could do well with learning from.

What did America do with New York?
I lived in NYC for 15 months and there are certain part of that great city I would not venture into at night.
Yes, any brown person got stopped and often thrown to jail without much else other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
America is a big country with 50 states. Each state has state police and city police. It was the NYPD that did something about crime, supported by the Governor of the State of NY. So, let us get all the facts before brandishing it as if we know what we are talking about.
Yes, crime in NYC is much lower than it has, but civil liberties were trampled up.
About 5 years ago, more than 3000 people died in NYC. Do you know why?

I wish I could understand your logic in saying that "The more you pay someone, the more greedier they become.". So if we pay policemen/women R100 000 a year, they are now going to become greedy and want R120 000 ? So, let's just pay them R60 000 a year and then they'll be happy and won't want more??

I think you need to examine your own logic.
I can write a book about this, but to save space, I said what I said.
If a policeman knows a way to make more money, increasing their salary from R100K to R120K would not do much to wean him from such activities. That is human psychology. The more we get, the more we want. This is why the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor. Furthermore, you IMPLY that merely paying poor performing police more money would make them deliver? You make no differentiation between the police who are doing their job, and the one doing absolutely nothing to earn their salaries as of today.
Paying them more will do absolutely nothing to teach them how to do their jobs.
I would recommend that a performance appraisal system be put in place. Those officers found to deliver what is expected of them and more, would be paid more.
The ones who have shown very little inclination to perform should be weeded up. They can re-apply for the positions at the same salary as before, but after signing an individual performance contract with performance stipulations.
Many cops have been killed as a result of other corrupt cops. Increasing their salaries will not help.
Furthermore, if you want a better salary, you perform or go where you can find something more fullfilling. There is no justification to stealing because you are not paid as much as you believe you are worth.
We all would want more.
You seem to suggest that we should pay everyone more regardless of performance.
I really hope I misunderstood your point.

And yes, what I also said was to employ a LOT of untrained cops as that would make things safer !

And how does putting guns on the hands of untrained cops make things safer? Surely, you jest.


The bottom line is that police is there to protect the citizens of a country. Our police is understaffed, underpaid, demoralised, lacking in training

And yet you wish to pay them more, after admitting they lack training?
We often talk about understaffed, do you have numbers to indicate that they are under staffed? What would be the proper number to indicate that the police are properly staffed?
Do you know how many policepeople have been employed in the past 5 years, or perhaps you are repeating something you heard, but have no proof of that?
I have encountered policemen moonlighting, playing football or merely sitting behind bushes trapping people. All the while, the police vehicles are sitting there not being utilized in police activities.
Have you ever been involved in policing forums or street committees? Have you ever gone to your local police station to volunteer or even find out if you can help?
Becareful of repeating things without really understanding the actual facts.

What have I done in my area to protect myself ?
Neighbourhood watch
I went to the aid of our 75 year old disabled neighbour and his wife who were being burgled. The police could unfortunately not assist as they only had one vehicle for the area that night and it was already out on an incident.


And you believed that crap?
I am interested in what area you refer to, because I find that hard to believe. There are always complaints about shortage of vehicles, yet you see vehicles used as taxis by the police, sitting somewhere doing nothing, or parked under bridges doing nothing.
I really do suggest you check the facts first before passing them as information.
BTW, I have been a victim of crime 3 times and have rreported other crimes 3 times, but none of them have ever been investigated?
Lack of resources or pure lck of will by the police?
You tell mee.

 
At 8:37 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Stram said...

G'day Addy, or Andy, or BarnA. Thought that this is an incredible way to fight the manner in which people perceive South Africa. I have talked to a number of people about your blog and they all find it inspiring that you have taken a stand. So I thought I might as well add my comment. The Unbroken Barometer is brilliant. Anything more profound will require more than just a few minutes thought. That's if you read this. Go you firefighter.

 
At 8:42 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

All you bleeding heart liberals are missing the crucial point about the death penalty.

A dead murderer can never escape from jail to offend again, a dead murderer can not influence others, a dead murderer can never get parole or release to offend again.

In short, a dead murderer cannot become a recidivist.

The recidivism rate amongst offenders is unacceptably large. Not only in South Africa.

Now it's one thing to have an unreformed car thief or burglar, it's another thing altogether for a paedophile, rapist, murderer.

A dead murderer is exactly how I like my murderers, dead, never able to offend again.

The death penalty is no deterrent to crime but it is a means to cull society of scum that society frankly doesn't need.

You all bleat on about South Africa's wonderful constitution and democracy.

Well, explain to me then why the people of South Africa are flatly refused the right to a referendum on bringing back the death penalty?

Why are our democractic rights suspended on this particular issue? I'll tell you why, because an absolute clear majority would vote in favour of instituting the death penalty again. A majority so overwhelming that it would show the constitution for the sham it is.

There is a relatively small university educated elite responsible for holding the vast majority of citizens to ransom over the issue of the death penalty.

I'd far rather use the money that we currently pay towards housing murderers in prison for social upliftment programs or, indeed, the building of more prisons.

Dead men cannot kill, rape or molest.

Not exactly a metrosexual, hug-a-bunny, intellectually elite argument, I know, but it's my opinion.

The scum that murdered my parent had a previous conviction. If he had been executed after his first offence, he'd never have had the freedom to offend again.

 
At 8:57 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Would you pay her more

"A radio operator from the East-Rand police was arrested after her husband, an alleged hijacker, led police members to the couple's house, where they confiscated an illegal police uniform, insignia and a hijacked Volkswagen Golf. "

 
At 9:29 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

A dead murderer can never escape from jail to offend again, a dead murderer can not influence others, a dead murderer can never get parole or release to offend again.

I think you are missing a large piece of the puzzle.
In order for the murderer to be killed, he needs to be arrested first. Are you implying that the death penalty would succeed where other forms of punishment have not?
Furthermore, the process taken to actually prosecute someone can take years. It is therefore untrue to claim that they cannot influence someone, they cannot escape and cannot kill again after being sentenced to death.


In short, a dead murderer cannot become a recidivist.

you have to catch them first.


The recidivism rate amongst offenders is unacceptably large. Not only in South Africa.

What is the rate of catching criminals in South Africa? Of the murderers, how many do you know that think they will be caught when they commit their crime?


Now it's one thing to have an unreformed car thief or burglar, it's another thing altogether for a paedophile, rapist, murderer.

So, you would kill paedophiles too? What else? Surely, car thiefs should be killed as well, right?
You seem to forget ONE simple thing. Criminals do not expect to be caught.
BTW, solitary confinement can actually do all the things you believe murdering criminal would achieve.

A dead murderer is exactly how I like my murderers, dead, never able to offend again.

Would you like to catch him first?


The death penalty is no deterrent to crime but it is a means to cull society of scum that society frankly doesn't need.

I would think that catching them, prosecuting them and then sentencing them would be more effective


You all bleat on about South Africa's wonderful constitution and democracy.

Well, explain to me then why the people of South Africa are flatly refused the right to a referendum on bringing back the death penalty?


Probably for the same reason that the people of South Africa are not able to ask for prosecution of apartheid criminals. Perhaps the same reason the people of South Africa cannot just move into your home, even though they know your home is built on land their ancestors owned.
Imagine if we would test the opinions of people on other issues too.
In any case, the ANC was elected by 66% of the population even after stating their opposition to the death penalty.


Why are our democractic rights suspended on this particular issue?

why only on this issue, and not other issues? One of the problems with majorities is that they are not always right. I would think that lessons of history would have taught you that already.
I have no doubt that the majority of people in this country would want as much revenge for the suffering they experienced under apartheid, but I suspect that the ruling party has tried to prevent this from happening.
Minorities do need protection, especially on some issues.


I'll tell you why, because an absolute clear majority would vote in favour of instituting the death penalty again. A majority so overwhelming that it would show the constitution for the sham it is.

One of the problems with democracy and majorities is that there are times when you find yourself in the minority. You would not want your rights or morals to be trampled over because you happen to be in the overwhelming minority.
you seem eager to have your way when you are in the majority, but not interested in testing other views that might put you in a minority and affect you negatively.
If revenge is what you are after, then I suppose you will not be too upset if another majority demand everything the minority that affected tthem negatively in the past is forced to give up everything they own. Somehow, I suspect you will start claiming the constitution was a sham?


There is a relatively small university educated elite responsible for holding the vast majority of citizens to ransom over the issue of the death penalty.


And the very same small elite is responsible for keeping the demands and aspirations of those affected by apartheid in check.
Without them, the transition would not have been as smooth for you and me.


I'd far rather use the money that we currently pay towards housing murderers in prison for social upliftment programs or, indeed, the building of more prisons.

I thought prisons housed murderers. Are you sure you meant what you are saying above? It does lack sense and logic. If you are opposed to paying money to maintain jails, why would you want your money to go into building more jails?


Dead men cannot kill, rape or molest.

Same applies to those kept in jail for life in solitary or limited contact cells.


Not exactly a metrosexual, hug-a-bunny, intellectually elite argument, I know, but it's my opinion.

That it is your opinion is clear. Unfortunately, that is all it is.


The scum that murdered my parent had a previous conviction.

The scum that murdered my brother and his friend are free today and probably enjoying state retirement. You see, they were cops and instructed by the state to murder political opponents regardless of race or creed.
Do I want them dead? No way. I am not as nice as you think. I want them to be reminded daily of what they did.


If he had been executed after his first offence, he'd never have had the freedom to offend again.

Your logic is indeed warped.
Are you implying if there was a death penalty that this scumbag (I am really sorry about your parent, btw) would have been executed, yet without the death penalty (in the presence of life sentence without parole) the next best alternative was to free him?
Sorry, that does not make sense.
We have life sentence without parole today to deal with criminals whose offense would have qualified for execution.
Any criminal that is eligible for parole would not have been executed and would not have been given a life sentence.
Only those given life sentences without parole would have been eligible for execution.
This would have no effect on the people that killed your parent, unless such people escaped from jail. If that is the case, they must hve received help from other law enforcement agents, the very same agents that would supervise the person if he was in death row.
So, either way, your way if full of too many ifs.

 
At 9:31 AM, July 14, 2006, Blogger Patrick said...

anonymous in favour of death penalty,

I'm so sorry that your parent was killed. The father of a good friend of mine was murdered in Zim a few years ago, and it was terrible to see the pain and grief it caused her (and her family and friends).

 
At 9:57 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More good news:

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=vn20060714044534849C462123

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=qw1152855181385B265

 
At 10:27 AM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Neil has now made R2310 on SMS's alone, never mind donations.
From a financial perspective, he is making a killing for doing nothing.
Now, he will register his company as a Section21, meaning the money he receives will be exempt from tax.
I suspect, that what he makes will be much better than any commission.
We do not hear that the money donated will be used to assist some of the victims?
I admire Neil for using an issue to rob people blind.

 
At 12:30 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Time to rise up and start rounding up the foreign african scum that have this country in its EVIL grip. We need to exteminate these pests and throw their dead bodies back into their own countries. JHB is infested with these "sub-humans" and the rest of the country is not far off. The people who this land belongs to are being murdered by these soul'less beings and we do nothing. Its not crime anymore its guerrila warfare and the only way to stop it is to fight force with force. We need to have the eye for an eye attitude. We should take the example from Arab states execute them publicly and like in the medieval days hang there rotting corpses for all the other scum to see.

 
At 12:49 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Time to rise up and start rounding up the foreign african scum that have this country in its EVIL grip.

This is xenophobia at its best. Scre facts, just go with your hatred and all will be saved.
Oddly enough, many a crime have been committed by Chinese in our shores. Is that more acceptable?
I doubt if your attitude ever solved anything.


We should take the example from Arab states execute them publicly and like in the medieval days hang there rotting corpses for all the other scum to see.

Yes, I can see Iraq providing us with great pointers on how to deal with our problems

 
At 1:46 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the anonymous that replied to my mail supporting the death penalty.

You seem to delight in taking what I write in black and twisting it to read blue.

It is self-evident that they need to be caught first. That they need to be tried, convicted and allowed the full appeal process.

I simply advocate that once that process has been exhausted and they are still found guilty, they should be executed.

I have huge sympathy and understanding for the point that extreme poverty leads essentialy decent people to crime. I don't like it but I accept it.

What I refuse to accept is that rape and murder need to accompany theft as a casual accessory. Almost an afterthought or byproduct.

Despite what you assert, life in prison too often doesn't actually mean a whole lifetime in prison in South Africa. Too many murderers and vicious rapists are released one way or another, be it through escape, bribery or the legal process.

I made it quite clear that I do NOT see the death sentence as a deterrent, I see it only as a means to continually cleanse society of individuals who have relinquished their 'right' to be a part of society.

I see no reason whatsoever to maintain them for the 15, 20, 30 etc. years of their lifetimes.

Unlike you, I have no faith whatsoever that they will spend a lifetime regretting their actions and even if they did, that would not equate to the loss of my family members life.

I would be equally as delighted to see the perpertrators of apartheid atrocities brought to court and sentenced for their crimes.

The scum that murdered your brother and his friend, ostensibly acting under the reasoning they were protecting South Africa's security, I would imagine, should have been held accountable for their actions and the full weight of the law thrown at them.

I make no excuses for them and, seemingly unlike you, I could never come to terms with the fact that they were not prosecuted and dealt with. I could not derive any comfort from the thought that they 'might' regret what they did. What if they don't?

I am sincerely sorry to read what happened to them. I hope you understand that I'm not trying to denigrate your means of dealing with the situation if that offers you the most comfort.

I hear what you are saying with regards equating the majority's desire for the reimposition of the death penalty and the majority's desire to take revenge for their suffering under apartheid.

There is an essential difference though, the majority clamouring for the reimposition of the death penalty transcends race, culture, religion and 'tribal' groupings.

It is an issue that has united a broad swathe of people right across society. It is not confined to one particular grouping and the consequences of it are not confined to one particular group.

I am obviously not calling for a blanket death penalty for all murderers and rapists. The courts would need to take into account the circumstances of individual cases.

I simply see no need to keep repeat, or particularly vicious or barbaric, offenders alive and I know, for a fact, that a dead offender cannot offend again.

You, on the other hand, cannot guarantee that a sentence of life, without parole, will ensure that it actually means life without parole. Not in the chaos that is South Africa's policing, judicial and prison system. Too many still get out and too many offend again.

I won't address your points, point by point, but I would just like to comment on this:

Me-

If he had been executed after his first offence, he'd never have had the freedom to offend again.

You-

Your logic is indeed warped.
Are you implying if there was a death penalty that this scumbag (I am really sorry about your parent, btw) would have been executed, yet without the death penalty (in the presence of life sentence without parole) the next best alternative was to free him?


I'm struggling to see where your confusion arises from. My point seems abundantly clear. If that man had not been released from prison, he wouldn't have had the wherewithal to murder my mother.

So, where was the 'presence of life sentence without parole' when we needed it?

It's too late for my mother now and it's too late for my father who basically died of grief not considerably long after.

Where I agree with you is that the death penalty, in and of itself, is not the solution to the deluge of crime in South Africa.

I grew up as an ardent aboltionist and it is only reluctantly that I have increasingly come to the conclusion that that point of view is a luxury in a society under concerted attack from individuals so callous that they cannot differentiate between taking a cell phone and putting a bullet in your chest, or raping a 2 year old child.

Why would you want to keep such people alive?

You strike me as being far more intellectual and articulate than I am so I am sincerely interested in your opinion. Please don't feel this as an attack on what you believe.

 
At 2:26 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with the death penalty. You can never change the Hannibal Lector type people who are running around our country murdering people in the most gruesome ways.

It was so cool driving to work this morning listening to Mansfield getting us all motivated for the World Cup. For a moment I still thought yes, we can and will do it. 2 minutes later - Meyerton is in chaos. 1 dead and two critically injured. Ordinary people, probably dads and husbands doing an honest days work - for what????

 
At 3:05 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oddly enough, many a crime have been committed by Chinese in our shores. Is that more acceptable?

That is odd,
I would like to see those statistics please. I wonder how many of those Chinese criminals actually climbed over border fences to get into South Africa. Could you also include in the statistic how many of those chinese criminals were actually illegal immigrants and if they were caught and illegal surely they would be back in China by now.
Where they belong or perhaps if they were not caught maybe they just blended into the general population hoping that no-one with make out that they are chinese.

Scre facts Ok lets see some fact then!!

Yes, I can see Iraq providing us with great pointers on how to deal with our problems

Yeah Fight fire with fire!!!!

;-) Have a nice day!

 
At 10:43 PM, July 14, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Addy, come to to Gauteng!..here the criminals will break your Barometer for you !!!...stay in yer perfect world son...do you think the ANC will pay Homage to you for this "Free Blog" ....YOU ARE WHITE SON !!!!

 
At 12:00 AM, July 15, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is self-evident that they need to be caught first. That they need to be tried, convicted and allowed the full appeal process.

No, it is not.
That is where the biggest problem of our justice system lies, not in killing the ones we find guilty, but in finding them.



Despite what you assert, life in prison too often doesn't actually mean a whole lifetime in prison in South Africa. Too many murderers and vicious rapists are released one way or another, be it through escape, bribery or the legal process.


and somehow, miraculously, it will not happen with those about to be prosecuted?

Really?
You sort out the prison mess by killing those found guilty of crime rather than fixing the problem that causes these people to be released?
Sorry, cannot understand this logic.
If people can escape while serving life, what are the chances of escape when their life is on the line?

 
At 5:01 PM, July 17, 2006, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why isn't anyone hacking Neil's site????

 

Post a Comment

<< Home