We happened to be listening to a certain talkback host today, talking about the Beast of Blenheim. After an analysis of the cost of relocating Stewart Murray Wilson to a house outside the wire but in the grounds of Wanganui Prison, the host made the comment "Wouldn't a bullet be cheaper?".
Now we don't want Wilson relocated to Wanganui, but we accept that he cannot legally be held in prison after 1 September 2012, and he has to go somewhere. Similar to the ABC's in the Labour Party, we are in the ABW camp; anywhere but Wanganui.
But to suggest, even in jest that Wilson be shot does not help this debate on iota. Those who want to see Wilson killed or beaten up, though one can to a degree understand their motive, are pretty much as bad as he is. Wilson has done his time under the law as it was (which ruled out Preventive Detention as an option), and threats of violence or worse are a step down the slippery slope to anarchy.
Which brings us back to the talkback host in question. If some loose unit who heard this morning;'s programme was to act on the "Wouldn't a bullet be cheaper?" remark, would the talkback host be in some way culpable? What say our legal eagle readers?