Monday, March 26, 2007

Patching it up

What an unedifying spectacle Michael Laws provided on Campbell Live tonight. Campbell had a reasonable go at holding him to account, but the item really did show up the futility of trying to discuss even a simple political story in five or six minutes.
Laws seemed to have two justifications for banning gang patches, a measure which combines that oh so appealing mix of freedom abridgement and ineffectiveness!
1) Gang members commit lots of crimes, so we really ought to introduce a law to allow us to prosecute them. The question one has to ask is, if they are committing so many crimes, why can't the police prosecute them for those crimes? Is this just providing a handy stick with which a lazy/incompetent police force can beat the gangs?
2) Gang members intimidate people, even when they arent committing crimes. The problem here is twofold. Why should we criminalise a certain form of dress, just because it makes others uncomfortable? Also, does Laws imagine the average Mongrel Mob member is going to stop being intimidating, just because their patch is removed? He might have to ban tattoos, leather jackets, bandanas and menacing expressions as well. Maybe we should just have a Laws approved dress code and be done with it!
I don't have any affection for the gangs. But the thing about civil liberties is, you can't just protect them for people you happen to like.

2 comments:

Span said...

Michael Laws in Regressive Attack on Social Liberties Shock!

I didn't see the Campbell Live thing, but I don't see the point in banning gang patches, for similar reasons to you. It's the thin end of the wedge, the start of the slippery slope, etc etc. Cliches yes, but true.

Unknown said...

Banning "menancing expressions" - good luck with that!