Written By: - Date published: 12:50 pm, April 8th, 2008 - 75 comments
Categories: crime, scoundrels -
Tags: crime, scoundrels
The Sensible Sentencing Trust is a backward, reactionary organisation at the best of times but this is a new low.
Responding to comments Children’s Commissioner Dr Cindy Kiro made about tagging, Sensible Sentencing’s Garth McVicar said ‘Her comments are hugely provocative at a time when a decent hard working citizen is facing a murder charge because of his frustration over this issue’.
Who is this decent citizen? Bruce Emery, who stabbed 15-year-old Pihema Cameron to death because he thought Cameron was about to tag his fence.
McVicar has sunk to a new low when he excuses the killing of a young man as an expression of ‘frustration’. Emery is not a decent citizen; decent citizens do not kill other citizens over minor acts of vandalism.
Sensible Sentencing has shown what kind of organisation it is: one that will defend a killer and doesn’t give a damn about the life of a young man who was maybe doing some tagging. To them, the property of a Pakeha businessman comes before the life of some poor Maori kid.
Decent citizens should treat McVicar and his cohorts with the contempt they have earned.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Get the name right, SP.
Hysterical Sentencing Trust.
Well filed BTW, McVicar is a disgrace.
I can’t believe the media go to this fuckwit for comment on crime stories so often. It’s like going to the KKK for comment on race stories. Are they really so politically naive?
I call on Garth McVicar to resign as head of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, for his comments endorsing murder.
Has he been found guilty yet?
I wonder if the kiwiblog right will join you? after all half of them want the death penalty back, so surely endorsing this unwarranted violent attack should have them calling for the resignation of McVicar.
Jay – I think he’s (assuming you’re refeerring to Emery) yet to go to trial, but has been ordered to stand trial after a depositions hearing. Don’t hold me to that though.
A poor choice of words indeed, but I’m willing to give McVicar the benefit of the doubt and assume that he doesn’t endorse murder as the solution to tagging.
As an aside, what is the value of calling people “fuckwits” (and indeed having a category on this site for “fuckwits”)?
Cheers, Sean.
[bro, he says that killing someone is a way a decent citizen can express frustration over tagging. That makes him a fuckwit in my book. You'll see from the catagories list it's not a term we use regularly. SP]
You’re on pretty dodgy ground, Steve, making statements like that before a man has been tried in Court, and exposing the Standard to litigation.
Jay. No, Emery hasn’t been found guilty of murder yet but there is no doubt that he killed Cameron, it has not been denied.
Remember that murdering someone and killing someone are different things- the first is a matter of law, the other is a matter of fact.
OO. Again, there is a difference between being found guilty of a homicide-related crime (which emery has not been at this point) and having, as a matter of fact, killed someone (which is not in dispute).
That’s why I chose the word killed and not murdered. It’s important you understand the difference between the two if you want to make a proper contribution.
I suspect the real reason OO and Jay have focussed on that phrase and tried to scare me with their crappy understanding of the law is that they sympathise with Emery. So, why not have some guts and defend that position, rather than making flawed semantic arguments?
Quite. But Steve, although I dont agree with the the way McVicar made his comments either, would you care to comment on Kiros comments that tagging is a legitimate art form and this art form appropriately balances the rights of property owners and the rights of children and young people…
IN the issue of fairness are you able to post a link to Kiros comments? If she said it is an art form, but there is no excuse for vandalising private property, then Mcvicar comments are over the top, but if she is silent to vandalism then he has a fair point. I know it is an art form, but art is no excuse for defacing private/public property
Thanks Steve. I’m going to go with the poor choice of words theory (ever done it yourself?) as opposed to the Garth McVicar endorses murder as an appropriate response to frustration with tagging theory – I think the former is more likely than the latter.
As for fuckwits, I wasn’t asking how often the term is used, I was asking about its value. I have little doubt that if David Farrar had categories on his blog with catchy titles like “fuckwits” you’d be the first to proclaim how offensive they were.
I personally beleive also that they are fundementally racist. Take for example the case of Jack Nicholas, the farmer up in Hawkes Bay, this was the flagship case for Garth McViccar and the Sensible sentancing trust. With the assumption that due to the history of the area it was likely a group of local unemployed maoris who had been up in the hills growing dope, the SST were all over it, who ever shot him was an animal, bring back the death penalty, public hanging ect. Then finally the guy who did it is caught, shock horror, hes not unemployed hes a farmer too, and worst of all, hes white! suddenly silence from the sensible sentancing trust, what ever has come over them?
like many right wing authoritarian reactionaries he is just plain racist. See there site, notice that its “Labour Government” not just “Government”. McViccar has become just another Rent-a-rightie, just like Ian Wishart.
rjs131. So if Kiro was saying defacing property is ok, then McVicar has a fair point that Emery was just a decent citizen expressing frustration when he stabbed Cameron to death? Weird logic there: A killing is justifed or not depending on a public servant’s comments on tagging after the fact.
anyway. Kiro http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0804/S00048.htm she says some people see tagging as legitimate art. and although its not the point of the thread I would say the best graffiti is great art, it is often humourous and politically incisive. Most is crap as art but is a symptom of underlying social problems, just as most crimes are. Killing taggers, apart from being immoral in every sense, won’t solve the social conditions that got them tagging in the first place.
McViccar has become just another Rent-a-rightie, just like Ian Wishart.
It’s also well known that the SST and National share many of the same financial backers. Go figure.
rjs131
Kiro did indeed say it was an art form, but no, she didnt specifically say there was no excuse for vandalising private property. She is on the side ofteh taggers when she says ” I believe solutions need to appropriately balance the rights of property owners and the rights of children and young people”.
Still waiting for your comments, Steve.
I believe solutions need to appropriately balance the rights of property owners and the rights of children and young people’
So Dave – do you think stabbing them to death is an appropriate solution? ‘Cos from here bro it’s starting to look like you do.
dave. I would say the best graffiti is great art, it is often humourous and politically incisive. Most is crap as art and can make neighbourhoods less attractive but it must not be forgotten that tagging is a symptom of underlying social problems, just as most crimes are. Killing taggers, apart from being immoral in every sense, won’t solve the social conditions that got them tagging in the first place
Stabbing them is just stupid, Robinsod. I am with comedian Mike Loader who, when asked on National Radio what his perfect day would entail explained that it would involve he and Gisele Bunchen in a hot tub on the Bonneville Salt Flats drinking bubbly and eating strawberries. 100 taggers would be released onto the salt flats followed, two minutes later, by lions.
Tagging is not really an art form. However, graffiti and bombing are art forms. It’s awesome catching the train and seeing all the graffiti. I wish there were more of it in the city. There should be blank walls in the city that people can paint on.
I can’t believe McVicar’s comments, and those of that Manukau City councillor. It’s totally disgusting what they’ve said. Stabbing a kid for being naughty? He was 15 for crying out loud and it’s shameful the way these creeps try to justify his death.
Billy. Wouldn’t you get lions in your strawberries?
Na, they’d go for the Gisele, isn’t that what they eat?
Jeez MP – that’s the best laugh I’ve had all week…
Hmmm. Maybe your hot tub’s in a cage. Maybe the lions are full by the time they get to you. Maybe once you’ve experienced Gisele’s attentions for however long it takes lions to eat 100 taggers you are content to die happy.
Robinsod. Piss off, child. Youre banned for a week, remember. I`ll respond to you, perhaps after you have come back after your l week ban on April 9. And, how come `Sod gets special treatment. Hes either banned for a week or not banned.
Steve – d`ya know the difference between tagging and graffiti art – because it doesnt sound like it.wwe`re talking aboutr tagging here – vandalism, in other words – not grafitti.
dave. He’s had his week out.
Please, enlighten me with your learnings on the difference between graffiti and tagging because we can all see how absolutely pivotal that distinction is in the issue of whether it was OK for Emery to kill Cameron.
Steve, Porter hasnt had his week out, he was banned on 2 April. A week is normally 7 days. Or is the policy of this blog that you come back after serving two thirds of a sentence….
And on the matter of sensible sentincing, you should talk to Garth McVicar. I never commented on whether it was OK for Emery to kill cameron.If you dont know the difference between graffiti art – as opposed to graffiti vandalsim – and tagging, then you should be able to find out from McVicar. He seems to be more clued up than you in this area.
And on the matter of sensible sentincing, you should talk to Garth McVicar
Why dave, is McVicar saying that killing is only ok when use of spraypaint or marker is considered vandalism, and not art? What is your point here?
Of course stabbing some little pratt is completely over the top and shoudl be subject to the highest form of punishment. But if Kiros didnt condemn vandalism (as opposed to some form of acceptable/controlled art) then she should be criticised. However Micvicar was over the top in his comments. vandalism is a crime, to dream up some form of sociological excuse for a crime is jsut as stupid as saying it is ok to kill someone for vandalising your property
dave. McVicar says that killing a tagger is an expression of frustration by a decent citizen. He excuses killing. I don’t want to talk to the scumbag.
I don’t religiously track when people are banned. But as its pissing you off so much, I’m prepared to let Robinsod back a day early.
And i’m well aware that tagging is a variant of graffiti. I was wondering if you were able to articulate the distinction. seems you can’t.
All this worthless bollocks of tagging vs graffiti aside, what is repulsive is that McVicar, by use of that statement, puts the blame on the deceased – as if it’s his fault he was killed. This strikes me as a typical type of distortion from the ‘sensible’ sentencing trust.
Reading Kiro’s statement, she’s advocating against a reactionary law change, and for children to have greater involvement in public spaces (those that are the target of such vandalism). It’s what you would expect from an advocate of children. What McVicar said was indeed a new low – on a par with any type of ‘she was asking for it’ defence.
“I can’t believe the media go to this fuckwit for comment on crime stories so often. It’s like going to the KKK for comment on race stories. Are they really so politically naive?”
It strikes me that you’re the one who is being naive here. Of course the media will get the SST to comment. Why? To get a rise out of people like you.
Surprisingly enough I’ve met a lot of people who seem to have at lot of sympathy for Emery. Proportional response doesn’t seem to be an issue for them. So maybe the media is on to something here and we’re into for a law and order election.
As a recent “victim” of tagging*, I was fucking ropeable about the act. However, as a sensible person, I understand that death, whether judicial or otherwise, is hardly a reasonable penalty. I was/am utterly fucked off by the James Blunts (rhymning slang) who tagged & grafittied my “for sale’ sign. Aside from a few choice words, what else is appropriate – murder? fuck no!
(*I am trying to sell my home. Lovely big sign was tagged within 24 hours. In subsequent weeks it was tagged again. Replaced big photo sign with bog-standard estae agent sign. Also tagged. Pissed off? Damn right. In a killing mood? no. Fuck off McVicor and that cock from the Christchurch City Council.
Jay.
a) ‘a lot’ of people agreeing with something doesn’t make it right.
b) the media’s job is not to ‘get a rise out of people’