Domestic Politics

[Tesla]

my main point is that I believe the police need as much power to combat this threat as they can

What if I put it to you, the threat could be combated extremely effectively if the police were given the power to monitor every individual 24 hours a day, every day. Or if they had the power to force everyone to spend all day every day locked in their houses, then no terrorist activity can occur because no one can leave their house.

Yes, what I'm saying is completely retarded, but if you're going to talk in absolutes, then I thought I'd give you an example of absolutes.

I've said it many times before, there is a trade off between security and liberty. The right balance between those is for society to decide, but I think it's pretty clear that people aren't currently thinking rationally about it because they're captivated by fear. They then go and talk in absolutes and say things like you have, even though I'm sure pretty much none of them actually beleive in such absolutes if they were to calm down and think rationally.

 

I also wonder how this guy was able to inflict as much damage as he did if he had already been identified as a dangerous suspect, were all the right precautions taken?

You've gone and said you're glad that a man was shot and killed, without any evidence being presented to you, without an investigation having occurred, and, by your own admission, the story not adding up? Again, people need to calm the fuck down.

This isn't really targeted at you, I'm sure many people feel the same way you do.

And I don't mean to be a cunt, I guess I just like playing devil's advocate.

But good things don't happen when people panic, and I think that's where we are at now.

This is not going to end well.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Tesla

[Nate]

Nah, good point.

[HeartFc]

Turns out it was an 18 year old kid who had his passport cancelled for making threats towards Abbott. He was asked to go to the cop shop in Ehills and he rocked up and stabbed 2 cops. He was from Narre Warren (where I live, great) and he was spotted waving the flag around fountain gate shopping centre.

 

Fan-fucking-tasic.

[bt50]

Regardless whether he was a terror threat or not, he just stabbed two cops virtually unprovoked.

They have a right to defend themselves and did so accordingly.

[AyeCee]

Waving that flag around is reason enough to be shot imo.

[Braveheart]

Waving that flag around is reason enough to be shot imo.

It should be a crime yes but shooting people for waving a flag we find offensive is the sorta shit we deplore groups across the world for doing.

 

That said, the cunt deserved to be shot when he stabbed two police officers who had a right to defend themselves. Even if they weren't cops, you have both an intrinsic inalienable right as well as a legal one to use necessary force (lethal if need be) to defend yourself against an imminent threat to your life. 

 

Anyone who has a go at the cop/s for shooting this mental patient has a pretty obvious agenda.

[Tesla]

Even if they weren't cops, you have both an intrinsic inalienable right as well as a legal one to use necessary force (lethal if need be) to defend yourself against an imminent threat to your life.

From my understanding of the law, if they weren't police, they'd be facing criminal charges for what they did. Because they've used a firearm to defend themselves. I know you're speaking in a more general sense, but let's not overstate the rights to self defence that exist in this state, which are fairly poor IMO.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Tesla

[malloy]

Even if they weren't cops, you have both an intrinsic inalienable right as well as a legal one to use necessary force (lethal if need be) to defend yourself against an imminent threat to your life.

From my understanding of the law, if they weren't police, they'd be facing criminal charges for what they did. Because they've used a firearm to defend themselves. I know you're speaking in a more general sense, but let's not overstate the rights to self defence that exist in this state, which are fairly poor IMO.

They would get off. Lethal force matched by lethal force.

[Tesla]

Even if they weren't cops, you have both an intrinsic inalienable right as well as a legal one to use necessary force (lethal if need be) to defend yourself against an imminent threat to your life.

From my understanding of the law, if they weren't police, they'd be facing criminal charges for what they did. Because they've used a firearm to defend themselves. I know you're speaking in a more general sense, but let's not overstate the rights to self defence that exist in this state, which are fairly poor IMO.

They would get off. Lethal force matched by lethal force.

Not convinced at all.

Yes, if we're just talking in the sense of gun vs knife, then it should be fine even though a gun is a superior weapon (and generally you're fucked if you are using a superior form of force, eg weapon vs no-weapon, good weapon vs shit weapon, etc.).

But the person would have to have a very good answer to questions like: Why did you have a gun on you? etc.

Obviously irrelevant in the case of police.

Fact is, even in your house your gun needs to be locked away, so even if some guy breaks into your house with a gun himself, you're going to have to explain how you were facing an imminent threat but had time to go fetch your gun.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Tesla

[Begbie]

So VicPol had been monitoring him for 3 months as a terror suspect, knew he had been waving an IS flag in a shopping center and still agreed to meet with him on the street to talk.. what the fuck were they expecting to happen?
There doesn't seem to be any news on the officers, one who was stabbed in the neck and chest, I assume they're relatively okay..

[Braveheart]

 

 

Even if they weren't cops, you have both an intrinsic inalienable right as well as a legal one to use necessary force (lethal if need be) to defend yourself against an imminent threat to your life.

From my understanding of the law, if they weren't police, they'd be facing criminal charges for what they did. Because they've used a firearm to defend themselves. I know you're speaking in a more general sense, but let's not overstate the rights to self defence that exist in this state, which are fairly poor IMO.

They would get off. Lethal force matched by lethal force.

 

Concerning the death specifically, you are both right to a degree. Malloy's statement is in essence correct see; Victorian Crimes Act 1958: Section 9

 

"9AC Murder—"self-defence" 

A person is not guilty of murder if he or she 

carries out the conduct that would otherwise 

constitute murder while believing the conduct to 

be necessary to defend himself or herself or 

another person from the infliction of death or 

really serious injury."

 

 

 

Technicalities arise re:circumstances and 'reasonable belief of intent' and 'undertaking of lawful conduct' which if can be proven to be absent then the charge of Defensive Homicide could be brought.

 

In the case of the weapon: 'Unlawfully discharging a firearm in a public place', 'unlawful possession of a firearm' if it was unregistered or the person was unlicenced, 'unlawful possession of ballistics in a public place', 'possession of a proscribed/controlled weapon in public (particularly if it was a handgun). There's probably a few more I could chuck on there but that's the gist. 

 

TLDR: You wouldn't get in trouble for defence with lethal force but you would for the way in which you did it. 

Edited September 24, 2014 by Braveheart

[Tesla]

So if Labor doesn't want to build the East West Link, what are they going to do about the Melbourne Show?

Cancel it? Relocate it? Relocate it to where?

Anyone that thinks the current situation where it takes 2 hours to travel the 6km to the Eastern is acceptable is clearly deluded. A major route in this city is basically a parking lot because of the Show.

Deciding to not build the EWL = deciding to end the great Melbourne tradition that is the Melbourne Show.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Tesla

[Tesla]

TLDR: You wouldn't get in trouble for defence with lethal force but you would for the way in which you did it.

Exactly what I was getting at.

[Tesla]

So VicPol had been monitoring him for 3 months as a terror suspect, knew he had been waving an IS flag in a shopping center and still agreed to meet with him on the street to talk.. what the fuck were they expecting to happen?

There doesn't seem to be any news on the officers, one who was stabbed in the neck and chest, I assume they're relatively okay..

One was ok while the other was in intensive care, but I believe they then said he was ok now.

Being "stabbed in the neck and chest" could mean many things, I've seen "attacked to the head with a machete" = a small little cut on someone's forehead. Still accurate, just hard to know the degree with these things.

[HeartFc]

Clearly Abbott brainwashed that kid to stab those cops. #whatbudget

[cadete]

Clearly Abbott brainwashed that kid to stab those cops. #whatbudget

Exactly - I am sure it's the only rational reason Monday nights Q&A panel would have found for the incident.

[HeartFc]

Finally people have got to together to protest terrorism, about time... hold on... it's not what you think.

It's a protest for 'terrorism against muslims'. Yes that's right, Brisbane has officially become the dumbest city on the planet. Well done the ABC you achieved your goal of trying to get the nation's average IQ under 50.

[Young Polak]

Terror laws clear Senate, enabling entire Australian web to be monitored and whistleblowers to be jailed

 

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/terror-laws-clear-senate-enabling-entire-australian-web-to-be-monitored-and-whistleblowers-to-be-jailed-20140926-10m8ih.html

Edited September 26, 2014 by Young Polak

[cadete]

Terror laws clear Senate, enabling entire Australian web to be monitored and whistleblowers to be jailed

 

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/terror-laws-clear-senate-enabling-entire-australian-web-to-be-monitored-and-whistleblowers-to-be-jailed-20140926-10m8ih.html

 

Bipartisan support = Non Issue.

[Tesla]

Terror laws clear Senate, enabling entire Australian web to be monitored and whistleblowers to be jailed

 

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/terror-laws-clear-senate-enabling-entire-australian-web-to-be-monitored-and-whistleblowers-to-be-jailed-20140926-10m8ih.html

Bipartisan support = Non Issue.

[xXJawsaXx]

Terror laws clear Senate, enabling entire Australian web to be monitored and whistleblowers to be jailed

 

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/consumer-security/terror-laws-clear-senate-enabling-entire-australian-web-to-be-monitored-and-whistleblowers-to-be-jailed-20140926-10m8ih.html

 

What a joke.

[malloy]

Whilst overall I don't like it. I actually agree with people who leak classified information being jailed. I know I will cop shit for it, bu IDGAF.

[bt50]

I tend to agree tbh.

Whistleblower is a bit of a glorification IMO. There's whistleblowing and then there is putting the peace of your country at risk by leaking details better not exposed to the public.

I don't subscribe to 'government is out to get us' type things in this country. If they don't want us to know, it's because they think it's for our own good.

Other countries with a greater deal of corruption, maybe not so much.

Edited September 26, 2014 by bt50

[xXJawsaXx]

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/09/26/heyasio-online-users-respond-tough-new-terror-laws-tongue-cheek-messages Did lol at the Lionel Richie one haha!

[Shahanga]

Whilst overall I don't like it. I actually agree with people who leak classified information being jailed. I know I will cop shit for it, bu IDGAF.

Some people thought Assange should have been given some sort of peace prize or medal.  i thought by releasing that information he contributed more to starting world war 3 than anyone has before.  A lot of nations have uneasy relations, still they try to be polite(ish) in public.  Releasing publicly what they say about each other behind closed doors just hardens their positions against each other and stirs up their populations "for action".

 

I put Snowden in pretty much the same game.  The revelation is governments' spy.  That's a revelation?  Are you retarded??  Snowden brought out the issues between Australia and Indonesia into the public eye and caused both nations to feel they had to posture, instead of just getting on with business.

 

These people aren't heroes.  They're dangerous publicity junkies. 

[Tesla]

 

I put Snowden in pretty much the same game.  The revelation is governments' spy.  That's a revelation?  Are you retarded??  Snowden brought out the issues between Australia and Indonesia into the public eye and caused both nations to feel they had to posture, instead of just getting on with business.

 

Don't be ridiculous.

Yes, the fact Australia spys on Indonesia was obvious.

But are you telling me the revelations relating to governments spying on their own citizens were obvious? To the extent that was uncovered?

Fact is, people like you who hold these anti whistle blower positions would have generally been the first people to dismiss any claims about widespread systematic spying on ordinary citizens by their government as a "conspiracy theory".

Yes, some people did know about it. Others certainly suspected it. But anyone claiming it was happening would have been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. And the vast majority of people wouldn't have thought it was happening.

So yes, it is a revelation.

As for what Assange and Snowden have done. I can see why it's illegal, and I can see the point if view you guys have. But personally I can't see them or their actions as being bad. I think the opposite in fact, especially for Assange.

[malloy]

 

 

I put Snowden in pretty much the same game.  The revelation is governments' spy.  That's a revelation?  Are you retarded??  Snowden brought out the issues between Australia and Indonesia into the public eye and caused both nations to feel they had to posture, instead of just getting on with business.

 

Don't be ridiculous.

Yes, the fact Australia spys on Indonesia was obvious.

But are you telling me the revelations relating to governments spying on their own citizens were obvious? To the extent that was uncovered?

Fact is, people like you who hold these anti whistle blower positions would have generally been the first people to dismiss any claims about widespread systematic spying on ordinary citizens by their government as a "conspiracy theory".

Yes, some people did know about it. Others certainly suspected it. But anyone claiming it was happening would have been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. And the vast majority of people wouldn't have thought it was happening.

So yes, it is a revelation.

As for what Assange and Snowden have done. I can see why it's illegal, and I can see the point if view you guys have. But personally I can't see them or their actions as being bad. I think the opposite in fact, especially for Assange.

 

 

 

When Assange leaked shit about military operations which were underway it jeopardised those operations and significantly increased the risk to those soldiers undertaking those operations.

 

As for spying on Indonesia it is obvious, but it is an unspoken thing that all countries do. Once it is in the media leaders are obliged to do something (other than playing spy games). That something could have very serious consequences. 

 

fwiw I think that kind of "whistleblowing" is closer to treason than actual "whistleblowing" 

[cadete]

I put Snowden in pretty much the same game.  The revelation is governments' spy.  That's a revelation?  Are you retarded??  Snowden brought out the issues between Australia and Indonesia into the public eye and caused both nations to feel they had to posture, instead of just getting on with business.

Don't be ridiculous.

Yes, the fact Australia spys on Indonesia was obvious.

But are you telling me the revelations relating to governments spying on their own citizens were obvious? To the extent that was uncovered?

Fact is, people like you who hold these anti whistle blower positions would have generally been the first people to dismiss any claims about widespread systematic spying on ordinary citizens by their government as a "conspiracy theory".

Yes, some people did know about it. Others certainly suspected it. But anyone claiming it was happening would have been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. And the vast majority of people wouldn't have thought it was happening.

So yes, it is a revelation.

As for what Assange and Snowden have done. I can see why it's illegal, and I can see the point if view you guys have. But personally I can't see them or their actions as being bad. I think the opposite in fact, especially for Assange.

 

 

When Assange leaked shit about military operations which were underway it jeopardised those operations and significantly increased the risk to those soldiers undertaking those operations.

 

As for spying on Indonesia it is obvious, but it is an unspoken thing that all countries do. Once it is in the media leaders are obliged to do something (other than playing spy games). That something could have very serious consequences. 

 

fwiw I think that kind of "whistleblowing" is closer to treason than actual "whistleblowing"

Ah I remember when Julian Assange was Tesla's hero.

[Tesla]

His hardly my hero, but honestly, how is a messenger/publisher like Assanage to blame for anything?

If releasing that information is dangerous, than shouldn't blame lie on the governments for poor security?

The information that has been released highlights far more deaths and crimes than anything Assanage has done himself.

Cunts should be focusing on were our governments are wrong, rather than the actions of one man who is just a messenger.

Please stop referring to yourselves as conservatives when you are in fact neoconservatives.

Edited September 26, 2014 by Tesla

[cadete]

His hardly my hero, but honestly, how is a messenger/publisher like Assanage to blame for anything?

If releasing that information is dangerous, than shouldn't blame lie on the governments for poor security?

The information that has been released highlights far more deaths and crimes than anything Assanage has done himself.

Cunts should be focusing on were our governments are wrong, rather than the actions of one man who is just a messenger.

Please stop referring to yourselves as conservatives when you are in fact neoconservatives.

I don't really see myself as a Conservative - I sometimes use the term to describe myself but mainly because I find it humorous and ridiculous how certain parts of society seem to think that just because someone is Catholic they are therefore also a Conservative.  

 

I instead like to define myself as a Liberal in the way that Menzies, FDR and John and Bobby Kennedy used the term... 

[Shahanga]

Snowden is facing a lot greater penalties than Assange, yet i think his action was a lot less dangerous (and Snowden hasn't gone on to seek the lime light either).  Of course you are right in that Assange was just acting like a media outlet, not a criminal, yet, for example, doing things that were obviously going to further destabilise the already poisonous relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran was irresponsible to say the least.  My point is you can be dangerous and reckless but still not break the law.

 

In regards to "who knew the government was spying on communications"- I remember in the late 1990s and again after September 11 there was a lot of talk about how government agencies monitored this stuff to track terrorists etc.  I just thought everyone knew that and was kind of shocked by the response, but people have short memories I guess.  Whether to do this is right or not is another matter- I can see both arguments that's for sure.

 

As to political labels- well i don't really put them on myself but its fair to say I'm pro-democracy, pro-capitalist and pro-small government.  In most places that makes me slightly to the right i guess but in Melbourne (for whatever reason) it definitely seems to put me well to the right on a lot of stuff.  Oh well.  

[xXJawsaXx]

Snowden is facing a lot greater penalties than Assange, yet i think his action was a lot less dangerous (and Snowden hasn't gone on to seek the lime light either).  Of course you are right in that Assange was just acting like a media outlet, not a criminal, yet, for example, doing things that were obviously going to further destabilise the already poisonous relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iran was irresponsible to say the least.  My point is you can be dangerous and reckless but still not break the law.

I agree here. In regards to Snowden, all he really did was reveal that the NSA had been spying on the populace. Sure, he did reveal that the US had spied on Germany (Was that him? My memory is kinda fuzzy haha), but for the most part it was all about the NSA spying on the American public, and I think that the public has a right to know if they are being spied on extensively.

 

As for political affiliation I am what most would call a Libertarian Socialist. I am for non-hierarchical, small government, the protection of civil liberties and free speech. The promotion of equal rights and of course I am anti-capitalist. However. Like most on the Libertarian Left including Anarchists I don't believe in centrally planned economies and nationalisation of industry.

Edited September 27, 2014 by xXJawsaXx

[malloy]

http://m.theage.com.au/act-news/islamic-state-fighters-wanting-to-return-home-to-australia-need-help-say-experts-20140927-10moxy.html

[cadete]

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/jacqui-lambies-attempt-to-ban-the-burqa-could-be-unconstitutional-say-legal-experts-20140929-10nd5e.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=social&eid=socialn%3Afac-14omn0583-optim-nnn%3Apaid-25%2F06%2F2014-social_traffic-all-postprom-nnn-ebaby-o

 

This is the kind of shit why PPL should stick with the Major Parties...

[Tesla]

Seems like the issue has a fairly simple solution, just treat it as any other face covering (mask, motorbike helmet, etc.) Not an expert but I'm guessing current law is along the lines of people must remove face coverings if asked to do so by police and any individual business/premises has the right to ban people from its premises if they have a face covering. Though I also remember my high school telling us all that masks were illegal in public places in the lead up to muck up day but petty sure they were full of shit.

Regardless, why would this be a federal issue? Honestly might as well abolish the states since very few people seem to understand the concept of a federation.

Not that I'm for abolishing the states, but they are almost irrelevant with the complete ignorance people have in this country in regard to the concept of federation.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Tesla

[cadete]

Seems like the issue has a fairly simple solution, just treat it as any other face covering (mask, motorbike helmet, etc.) Not an expert but I'm guessing current law is along the lines of people must remove face coverings if asked to do so by police and any individual business/premises has the right to ban people from its premises if they have a face covering. Though I also remember my high school telling us all that masks were illegal in public places in the lead up to muck up day but petty sure they were full of shit.

Regardless, why would this be a federal issue? Honestly might as well abolish the states since very few people seem to understand the concept of a federation.

Not that I'm for abolishing the states, but they are almost irrelevant with the complete ignorance people have in this country in regard to the concept of federation.

Federal Government’s from both sides of Parliament try to legislate on everything these days... just look at Education and Health under both Abbott and Rudd.

 

And the High Court has hardly been any barrier towards the erosion of Australian Federalism.

[Nate]

I'm of the opinion that Education should be managed at Federal level.

[cadete]

I'm of the opinion that Education should be managed at Federal level.

Really?

 

Because IMO Education is something that is far too important for this nation to be treated at such a broad level.

What is the best education system can also often vary greatly from place to place and even from student to student.

 

Having lived on both sides of this country alongside having working behind the scenes in the Education Sector for a while now I have to say that sometimes even the State Level can sometimes be too broad for running of an Education system. Then again I am a staunch Federalist.

Edited September 29, 2014 by cadete

[Nate]

 

I'm of the opinion that Education should be managed at Federal level.

Really?

 

Because IMO Education is something that is far too important for this nation to be treated at such a broad level.

What is the best education system can also often vary greatly from place to place and even from student to student.

 

Having lived on both sides of this country alongside having working behind the scenes in the Education Sector for a while now I have to say that sometimes even the State Level can sometimes be too broad for running of an Education system. Then again I am a staunch Federalist.

 

It's difficult because there needs to be a balance between creating a universal standard and best meeting the various needs of students and schools and I don't think we've found it yet.

[cadete]

Personally I just feel Centralised Government for a nation the physical size of Australia is not the way to go...