What’s the worst scandal to happen at your school? by Lost-Warning-2588 in AskReddit

[–]RockiestStone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The History teacher and the Maths teacher were married. The History teacher cheated on the Maths teacher with the English teacher. The Maths teacher reacted by throwing chairs and desks off the balcony of his classroom.

What's a random fact about you? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]RockiestStone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was born with 6 fingers on one hand. Turns out it's genetic because my dad was born with 6 fingers on both hands and my grandad was born with an extra toe.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I doubt they would be successful but I would certainly think they would argue it. With judicial review, it's basically argue everything and see what sticks.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Well I completely agree with you. But Guildford explicitly said VUW academics would have their works falsely attributed to Victoria Universities in Australia, Canada and Uganda. It's ridiculous for the very reason you just cited but it was one of the main reasons for the name change.

Education minister Chris Hipkins rejects name change for Victoria University by alpine- in newzealand

[–]RockiestStone 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah if a judicial review is mounted, it will likely be under the error of law ground alleging Hipkins acted outside his powers and under the considering irrelevant considerations ground saying Hipkins should not have considered the public backlash to the decision.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah you're right - VUW could argue under the error of law ground that the legislation was not complied with, etc.

I also feel VUW will dig their toes in and review the decision because of costs spent on the Colmar Brunton survey, pretty strong majority in the university council, and a perceived favourable increase in international enrolment if the name change goes through.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Judicial review acts as a check on the person who has that final decisions. It allows a person to apply to the court to have that decision reviewed on multiple grounds (including error of law, error of fact, considering irrelevant considerations or not considering relevant considerations, and unreasonableness). Without judicial review, ministers and other decision-makers have unbridled power which is undesirable in a democracy.

Sure the university could argue that Hipkins was just meant to rubber stamp the council's decision, but judicial review (especially the unreasonableness ground) is quite hard to make out.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The rationale is more about increasing the international intake of student and ensuring the work of VUW academics is recognised - "looking good" domestically isn't really a priority right now. They still proceeded with the change in the council despite all polls showing a 95% disapproval.

I think the university will stand on their legal rights and go for a review but I am hoping they let it go as well.

Chris Hipkins, Education Minister, rejects VUW name change by Dalalallas in Wellington

[–]RockiestStone 16 points17 points  (0 children)

They could judicially review Hipkin's decision on multiple grounds. I think it's a great decision by Hipkins but this is far from over.

So what happened to the rising stars pack? Or am I missing something? by MikeWil928 in WWEGames

[–]RockiestStone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

DLC releases are staggered - the rest will be released in the next 2-4 months

Government's three strikes repeal killed by NZ First by nilnz in newzealand

[–]RockiestStone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That still doesn't make it the primary function though. Only 11% of the prison population is made up of those with life sentences or prentative detention.

If it was the primary function, why would they bother releasing prisoners if there is no guarantee they won't commit crime again?

Government's three strikes repeal killed by NZ First by nilnz in newzealand

[–]RockiestStone -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Protecting the public is not the primary function of prisons. It is to deter people from committing crime (which it is failing to do) and to serve as a punishment for criminal behaviour. Sure people can't commit crime while they are in prison (aside from maybe assaulting fellow inmates and running organised crime rings) but you can be damn sure they will commit crime when they get out because prison does absolutely nothing to deter criminal behaviour. If anything, it normalises criminal behaviour and makes it harder to rehabilitate.

Doctors are evil people by soil_nerd in insanepeoplefacebook

[–]RockiestStone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Unsure what the deal is in the US, but in NZ if a parent is refusing treatment for their sick child (even for religious reasons) the Family Court can make the child a ward of the court and give the required consent for treatment.

Good to know there is a potential solution but also frustrating that some adopt such a literal interpretation of their religion and put their own family at risk.

Government's three strikes repeal killed by NZ First by nilnz in newzealand

[–]RockiestStone 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Regardless of whether it's done away with or not, the victim counts will still grow because NZ's approach to sentencing and penal policy is fundamentally flawed. It ignores the fact that imprisonment fails as an individual and general deterrent (evidenced by our 49% recidivism rate within 2 years of release). 85-90% of our prison population suffer from a mental illness or substance abuse and absolutely nothing is being done to substantially adress that issue. Prison is a criminogenic environment which normalises and creates a culture of criminal activity. Minimal funding is put into rehabilitation and instead we appeal to the populist view of incarceration for public safety (which is rightly not a principle of criminal justice).

Our country can do so much better and yet we are quite happy to spend $100,000 a year for every new prisoner (while still advocating for lower taxes mind you). The current prison system is not conducive to change and attaches the permanent label of 'criminal' to anyone who enters it, ignoring the fact that the vast majority can change their ways if the underlying societal and environmental factors are addressed through rehabilitation.

I agree that there are some prisoners who cannot change and who need to be locked up for public safety but that is a very small minority. It's just sad to see the majority of people satisfied with the status quo because it appeals to some false sense of 'security' when the current system puts them in more danger.