Kasey Taylor wrote:
>
> How is it we can possibly give prisoners rights considering what they have
> most likely done to people and why they are in prison??? Why should we give
> them a chance to have a right when it is most likely their victims had
> theirs taken away from them?
Kasey, what do you believe prison is for? Punishment? Revenge?
Rehabilitation?
So, if you believe that prisoners should have their rights taken away
from them (do you make a distinction between prisoners on remand or
those convicted?) is it then alright to bash them and kill them? For
say, possession or using drugs? For evading fines? For murder?
Is property more valuable than a person's life?
We no longer have a legal death penalty but is it alright to murder
someone in prison because they don't deserve the right to live like
those on the outside because they damaged someone's property? Is that
what you mean?
>
> We have to look after the victim and make the prisoner/offender responsible
> for their actions. They commit a crime, they should lose their rights to be
> a citizen for a while. Seems like a fair trade to me. And they should do the
> whole sentence, none of this "Let you out early because you've been good".
> It totally defeats the purpose.
I agree that that offenders should be held responsible for their actions
but taking away their civil or human rights is not the mark of a
civilised country.
Trudy
>
> kt
>
> >From: Trudy & Rod Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: [recoznet2] Aid to the civil authority
> >Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:51:21 +1000
> >
> >
> >
> >Graham Young wrote:
> > >
> > > Trudy wrote
> > >
> > > What is getting people upset is that you are
> > > > defending the indefencible (solely on political allegiance?).
> > >
> > > Trudy, I hardly think I am defending the indefensible, and to accuse me
> >of
> > > only holding a view because of the political party of which I am a
> >member
> > > really is laughable. Go and check the Courier Mail from two years ago
> >when
> > > members of the Liberal Party were calling for my expulsion because of my
> > > public stand on One Nation and tell me if you think those are the
> >actions of
> > > a person who takes the party line. I am on this list in my own right
> >and
> > > not as a mouthpiece or catspaw for anyone.
> >
> >I did not say you were. If you note, there is a question mark after
> >political affiliations. There are a great many instances where our
> >rights have been eroded and especially those of the poor, prisoners and
> >indigenous people but you say they 'could do better' instead of seeing
> >that they have been eroded.
> >
> > I think that one of the valuable
> > > things that I have to offer Reconciliation is insights into how some
> > > Australians view the actions and opinions of many of those involved in
> > > reconciliation. You can't achieve reconciliation if you can't carry a
> >lot
> > > more than 50% of the population with you. You need to be able to
> >gather in
> > > people from well on the right of me, and a great many of those people
> >are in
> > > the Labor Party as well.
> >
> >I don't think this is true. You don't need to carry the right with you.
> >Civil rights in the USA has proved that. Treaties in Canada have proved
> >that. I know a lot of the right are in the Labor party. I am not a
> >member of the Labor party. In fact, every time I vote for them as the
> >only alternative that has a chance, I hold my nose. But I vote for them
> >because the alternative is what we've had for the past four years and
> >the country cannot afford the Coalition. I didn't like the fifties when
> >I lived through them and I don't want to go there again.
> >
> > >
> > > > Your last sentence is the worst sort of cop-out, Graham, and I hadn't
> > > > expected it of you.
> > >
> > > The point here is that we have a very good relative and absolute record
> >on
> > > human rights.
> >
> >I think Indigenous Australians may hold a different view, Graham.
> >
> > Hasn't it struck anyone as odd that, difficult as the
> > > conditions might be here for refugees, we have people taking to boat in
> > > countries like Iran and taking God knows how many risks passing God
> >knows
> > > how many countries to get here.
> >
> >Isn't it strange though that very, very many more head for Canada and
> >the US? I know Ruddock has put about this view that the hordes are
> >coming but we didn't have any more in the last year than the year before
> >that so he is full of hot air as usual. Isn't it strange that a small
> >country like Denmark can take in Kosovars and give them housing, let
> >them go back to Kosovo to rebuild while their families stay in Denmark
> >so the kids can go to school until they are ready to go back? And those
> >who want to stay can do so? While we drag them onto a plane and then
> >toss them out to live on the street with no money and no roof over their
> >head and wash our hands of them? And tell them to be grateful?
> >
> > > That is not to say that we shouldn't be
> > > dealing with refugees in a more just way. It is to say, let's put this
> >in
> > > perspective. And how else do you put in perspective than compare
> >yourself
> > > with others?
> >
> >Agreed, but why compare ourselves with the worst? Why not with the best
> >and strive to become the best instead of not as bad as the worst?
> >
> > >
> > > > I would be interested to hear one instance where the Howard government
> > > > improved our civil rights or even one that hasn't been touched. There
> > > > are plenty of examples where it has gone backward and that is erosion
> > > > not merely 'not good enough'.
> > >
> > > This is an interesting question. You might argue, as you have done,
> >that he
> > > has curtailed a number of the civil and political rights. You gave a
> >list
> > > of examples -The abolition of the legislative review committees
> > > -The failure to appoint human rights commissioners of all stripes until
> > > the last possible moment and then not giving them any due.
> > > -The cutting of legal aid funding and increasing court fees of all
> > > descriptions
> > > -Amending the Native Title Act to make it more discriminatory
> > > -Cutting of ATSIC funding
> > > -Overriding the euthanasia law
> > > -Not overriding mandatory sentencing
> > > -Legislating discrimination on the basis of marital status
> > >
> > > I don't know anything about the legislative review committees, but I
> >don't
> > > see any direct relationship with human rights.
> >
> >The legislative review committees reviewed any proposed legislations and
> >checked it for many things. One of those things was whether or not the
> >legislation complied with human rights demands. This also meant that any
> >legislation was open to public scrutiny because it was reported on.
> >Howard doesn't like being scrutinised, as you know, and you can't sneak
> >in legislation that people may object to so he abolished the review
> >committees.
> >
> >
> > I agree that Chris Sidoti
> > > should have been replaced by now, which is what I assume your referring
> >to,
> >
> >One example - the other was the Mick Dodson. How long did that take? A
> >year or more? How many did he abolish? How long before the Status of
> >Women Head was replaced and then when he finally did that, he curtailed
> >it so as to be meaningless.
> >
> > > but I can't see how this has endangered anyone's civil liberties yet,
> >nor is
> > > it a major denial of rights.
> >
> >Ask Indigenous Australians whether or not they agree with you on the
> >Social Justice Commissioner.
> >
> > > Presumably someone is acting, but the
> > > Commission's website needs updating, so I can't tell who that might be.
> > > Legal Aid funding is a State responsibility.
> >
> >I think you're wrong on that. It was the Commonwealth which cut the
> >funding and then limited it to only Commonwealth matters. They raised
> >the court fees at the same time and a country where only the rich had
> >access to redress in the courts became even worse because the poor were
> >cut off too. How many developed countries do not provide a defence
> >lawyer for those who can't afford one? Tell me how it doesn't affect
> >human rights if an poorly educated, economically disadvantaged person
> >has to defend themselves in court?
> >
> > >Native Title Act I agree.
> > > ATSIC is not per se a human rights issue either. On euthanasia you can
> > > find human rights arguments on both sides - it's a judgement call.
> > > Mandatory sentencing I agree and ditto the last.
> > >
> > > But there is another angle on this which you are completely neglecting.
> >The
> > > Universal Declaration lists a whole lot of so-called positive rights,
> >such
> > > as the right to education and the right to a job. If you have an
> >economy
> > > that is running well, then it will do better in advancing those rights.
> >We
> > > have an economy that is running well by all the conventional measures,
> >so
> > > does Howard get any credit for that?
> >
> >He would if it benefited anyone but the well off. All the studies show
> >that the benefits are not trickling down. The gap between rich and poor
> >has grown tremendously during the Howard years.
> >
> >All the 'mutual' obligations go one way only. $6bn per year on the dole
> >and the recipients have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get it.
> >$6bn per year handed out for free to business with no strings attached,
> >no 'mutual' obligation and no discernable benefit to anyone except the
> >business involved. No, no added jobs either.
> >In this 'well running' economy we can't afford to fund education or
> >hospitals. We can, however, afford to fund private schools and rebate
> >the rich for what they spend on private health insurance.
> >
> > >
> > > What I am saying Trudy is that things have to be looked at in
> >perspective.
> >
> >I agree. :-) What we don't agree on is the type of perspective.
> >
> > > I don't often involve myself in debates on this (or any other) list
> >because
> > > they become time consuming, as this one is, but if this list has a fault
> >to
> > > me, it is that it is too monochromatic in its opinions.
> >
> >I remember, not so long ago, there were a lot of complaints to the
> >contrary.
> >
> > >So I bought into
> > > this debate because I thought it needed a different perspective and that
> > > perhaps the whole argument was just feeding on itself. I really
> >appreciate
> > > the time that Suze put into the email that followed yours. I now have a
> > > better understanding of where she is coming from as a result, and a
> >better
> > > appreciation of her point of view, and I thank her for it.
> >
> >I, too, appreciate Suze joining the list and believe she will bring a
> >lot to it.
> >
> >Sandy also made some very good points and I guess that is why I was so
> >disappointed at the last line of your response.
> >
> > >
> > > I also object to the complete demonisation of Howard by some. He's got
> >a
> > > lot of faults, but also some virtues. I can't see how demonisation
> >helps
> > > anyone to make an accurate judgement as to what is going on, and if you
> > > can't make an accurate judgement then the actions that you take will be
> > > wrong.
> >
> >Howard makes it very easy to demonise him. I would like to know about
> >some of his virtues. Personally, I am still looking for some redeeming
> >features.
> >I also don't see how recognising someone's faults clouds your judgement
> >in other areas. As far as accurate judgements go - accurate judgements
> >are those where others agree with you and inaccurate ones are the ones
> >you have alone. It's all very subjective.
> >
> >Anyway, if you're out of time for more of this, so am I...:-)
> >
> >Trudy
> > >
> > > Graham
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Trudy & Rod Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 11:04 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [recoznet2] Aid to the civil authority
> > >
> > > > Your last sentence is the worst sort of cop-out, Graham, and I hadn't
> > > > expected it of you. What is getting people upset is that you are
> > > > defending the indefencible (solely on political allegiance?).
> > > > I would be interested to hear one instance where the Howard government
> > > > improved our civil rights or even one that hasn't been touched. There
> > > > are plenty of examples where it has gone backward and that is erosion
> > > > not merely 'not good enough'.
> > > > Yes, there are countries that have a much worse record but that is not
> > > > the point. Every despot starts somewhere and Howard is more stealthy
> > > > than most. He probably won't progress to chopping people's arms off
> >but
> > > > wherever he can limit the redress of the poor and those who don't fit
> > > > his model of the 'deserving' ie. rich or investors, he will.
> > > >
> > > > Trudy
> > > >
> > > > RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
> > > http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived
> >at http://www.mail-archive.com/
> > > To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in
> >the body
> > > of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
> > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
> > > This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
> >permission from the
> > > copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
> >research under the "fair
> > > use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be
> >distributed further without
> > > permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
> > >
> > > RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
> >
> >--
> >**********************************
> >'Click' to protect the rainforest:
> >Make the Rainforest Site your homepage!
> >http://www.therainforestsite.com/
> >**********************************
> >------------------------------------------------------
> >RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/
> >To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the
> >body
> >of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
> >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
> >This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without
> >permission from the
> >copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and
> >research under the "fair
> >use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed
> >further without
> >permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
> >
> >RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
> >http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
>http://www.mail-archive.com/
> To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
> of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
> This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
>from the
> copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
>the "fair
> use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
>without
> permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
>
> RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
>http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
--
**********************************
'Click' to protect the rainforest:
Make the Rainforest Site your homepage!
http://www.therainforestsite.com/
**********************************
------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
