PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 07:51


And that other EU countries, IF given a vote would vote the same way !!!
It's a bit like the death penalty debate; pollies run for miles and duck for cover whenever a referendum is suggested. From memory the Swiss system allows for a referendum whenever a relatively low number of citizens call for it, hence the vote.

I have no issue with a controlled level of immigration and I think Australia has largely benefited from its non-Anglo immigrants. Many of rthe current arguments against ME immigrants were previously used to argue against accepting immigrants from Europe and later SE Asia, and against Irish Catholics before that, but as history shows Australia did not become a Papist State, a nation of surrenderers or a Maoist collective.

For all that, I wouldn't want to see us take the huge numbers of immigrants that many European countries have accommodated over the last thirty years. One of the reasons for this is that many of them were former colonial powers and had agreements to accept immigrants from those colonies. As a former colony ourselves, this isn't a problem we face and we haven't had the big numbers of immigrants France, the UK and others copped, as shown by the figures below;


Australia has experienced successive waves of immigration over the past century, and each wave has been characterised by a different predominant region of origin, usually related to world events of the period. In the post Second World War period, immigration from Europe increased markedly. In recent times, the proportion of Australians who were born in European countries has declined. As those earlier immigrants have grown older and returned to their country of origin or died, current levels of immigration from these regions have not been high enough to replace them. However in 2007-08, North-West Europe and Southern and Eastern Europe were still the most common regions of birth for Australians born overseas (7.2% and 3.8% of all Australians were born in these regions). The proportion of Australians who were born in the various regions of Asia has continued to increase over the last decade, part of a trend that began in the late 1970s.

Regions of birth, Proportion of Australia's population, 30 June - 1999 and 2009
http://www.abs.gov.au/icons/ecblank.gif
1999
2009(a)
http://www.abs.gov.au/icons/ecblank.gif
%
%
Australia
76.9
73.5
Oceania and Antarctica (excl. Aust.)
2.4
3.0
North-West Europe
7.9
7.2
Southern and Eastern Europe
4.6
3.8
North Africa and the Middle East
1.2
1.5
South-East Asia
2.8
3.4
North-East Asia
1.6
2.8
Southern and Central Asia
0.9
2.3
Americas
0.9
1.1
Sub-Saharan Africa
0.7
1.3

1370.0 - Measures of Australia's Progress, 2010

Of course that doesn't include Australian born 'foreigners', ie people who are first or second generation Australians but still identify with their home country. Some of these have been a bigger problem than the genuine foreigners, particularly in recent times :uhoh: and that's a problem we have to deal with. However, even allowing for a couple of percentage points increase since 2009, approximately 75% of Australian residents were born here and a further 14% came from Europe. About 10% of the remainder are from SE/NE Asia (which I assume includes India, given it's not listed separately), leaving a fairly small group from potentially troublesome places.

Sorry the formatting cocked up.

The cartoons are usually good, which of course is how he came to fame in the first place.

Ken Borough 13th Feb 2014 08:01

I've ignored the post that's been cut 'n pasted from Pickering's blog or whatever it's called. I agree, Worralls, that his cartoons bought him fame and were funny. Sadly, that's no longer the case IMO while he has achieved a certain degree of infamy for other activities. I think he makes the likes of Bolt and Akerman look fair and reasonable.:{

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 08:09

Ah well, it's a free internet. Like any of us he's entitled to run a webpage touting his views, and people are entitled to read it. If it's frequently off the beam then so be it; so are the Socialist Worker. but IMO they're also worth reading every now and again. He certainly has an extensive contacts network, and that alone (IMO) makes him worth an occasional look.

IMO Bolt's just a ranter, and I usually skim past his stuff. The last time I read a Bolt article I actually found myself agreeing with the first third, only to spend the next two thirds thinking 'Yeah Nah. You're still a boring hater :zzz:. '
SocialistWorker.org | Daily news and opinion from the left
FWIW I thought Pickering's recent cartoons about the Indonesian bugging 'scandal' were pretty funny :E.

bosnich71 13th Feb 2014 09:53

Ignoring any argument on whether the E.U. is good/bad but when some foreign tart from the E,U. administration stands up in England and brags that 70% of all laws passed in U.K. are placed in force by the E.U. then it is time to start stringing the bastards up from lampposts.
This may not be democratic but then again neither is taxation etc. without representation etc.

david1300 13th Feb 2014 10:05


Originally Posted by 500N (Post 8316164)
"I wonder why the police did not carry a taser? While the deranged man may not have had his way, a taser would have significantly lessened the trauma suffered by the policeman."

Because we had a cock head of a Chief Commissioner who was all for lovy dovey policing and not cold hard policing although not just her, the one afterwards as well.

And because of the do gooders who jump up and down about them killing people which gets great media coverage, negative coverage for the Gov't.

The do gooders jump up and down if Police shoot someone but then jump up and down when the Police say they want to introduce a "less lethal" method such as Tasers. They even jumped up and down at the introduction of Capsicum spray or OC Foam :ugh::ugh: You can't win with them.

The end result is only Spec Ops teams (2 types in Vic) have them although they are being trialled in some bad areas - Bendigo and a couple of others.
In fact, a Taser was used in Bendigo on the same day as this shooting for the first or second time.

The fact is, this was a classic case where a Taser might well have allowed him to be disarmed instead of shot, with being shot still an option of last resort.

I have not probs crims being shot but as we both agree, the cop has to deal with it as well.

Here is another view (pardon the long extract from this TED talk: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons - Stephen Coleman.)

The issue becomes the inappropriate use of non-lethal force merely to achieve the enforcers wishes, and here in Queensland this is an issue as demonstrated in the talk. I particularly laughed at the thought of an 86 year old disabled woman being tasered in her bed because she took up a threatening position IN HER BED.
Stephen Coleman: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons | Video on TED.com
The police --and knowing because I've actually helped to train police --police, in particular Western jurisdictions at least,are trained to de-escalate force,to try and avoid using forcewherever possible,and to use lethal forceonly as an absolute last resort.
So I actually started to investigate some of those issuesand have a lookat the way that police use non-lethal weapons when they're introducedand some of the problems that might ariseout of those sorts of thingswhen they actually do introduce them.And of course, being Australian,I started looking at stuff in Australia,knowing, again, from my own experience about various timeswhen non-lethal weapons have been introduced in Australia.
So one of the things I particularly looked atwas the use of O.C. spray,oleoresin capsicum spray, pepper spray,by Australian policeand seeing when that had been introduced, what had happenedand those sorts of issues.And one study that I found,a particularly interesting one,was actually in Queensland,because they had a trial period for the use of pepper spraybefore they actually introduced it more broadly.And I went and had a look at some of the figures here.Now when they introduced O.C. spray in Queensland,they were really explicit.The police minister had a whole heap of public statements made about it.They were saying, "This is explicitly intendedto give police an optionbetween shouting and shooting.This is something they can use instead of a firearmin those situations where they would have previously had to shoot someone."
So I went and looked at all of these police shooting figures.And you can't actually find them very easilyfor individual Australian states.I could only find these ones.This is from a Australian Institute of Criminology report.As you can see from the fine print, if you can read it at the top:"Police shooting deaths" means not just people who have been shot by police,but people who have shot themselves in the presence of police.But this is the figures across the entire country.And the red arrow represents the pointwhere Queensland actually said,"Yes, this is where we're going to give all police officers across the entire stateaccess to O.C. spray."So you can see there were six deaths sort of leading up to itevery year for a number of years.There was a spike, of course, a few years before,but that wasn't actually Queensland.Anyone know where that was? Wasn't Port Arthur, no.Victoria? Yes, correct.That spike was all Victoria.So it wasn't that Queensland had a particular problemwith deaths from police shootings and so on.So six shootings across the whole country,fairly consistently over the years before.
So the next two years were the years they studied -- 2001, 2002.Anyone want to take a stab at the number of times,given how they've introduced this,the number of times police in Queensland used O.C. spray in that period?Hundreds? One, three.Thousand is getting better.Explicitly introducedas an alternative to the use of lethal force --an alternative between shouting and shooting.I'm going to go out on a limb hereand say that if Queensland police didn't have O.C. spray,they wouldn't have shot 2,226 peoplein those two years.In fact, if you have a lookat the studies that they were looking at,the material they were collecting and examining,you can see the suspects were only armedin about 15 percent of caseswhere O.C. spray was used.
It was routinely being used in this period,and, of course, still is routinely used --because there were no complaints about it,not within the context of this study anyway --it was routinely being usedto deal with people who were violent,who were potentially violent,and also quite frequently usedto deal with people who were simplypassively non-compliant.This person is not doing anything violent,but they just won't do what we want them to.They're not obeying the directions that we're giving them,so we'll give them a shot of the O.C. spray.That'll speed them up. Everything will work out better that way.This was something explicitly introducedto be an alternative to firearms,but it's being routinely usedto deal with a whole rangeof other sorts of problems.
They get used out in the real world,like in Texas, like this.I confess, this particular casewas actually one that piqued my interest in this.It happened while I was working as a research fellow at the U.S. Naval Academy.And news reports started coming up about this situationwhere this woman was arguing with the police officer.She wasn't violent.In fact, he was probably six inches taller than me,and she was about this tall.And eventually she said to him"Well I'm going to get back in my car."And he says, "If you get back into your car, I'm going to tase you."And she says, "Oh, go ahead. Tase me." And so he does.And it's all captured by the video camerarunning in the front of the police car.So she's 72,and it's seen that this is the most appropriate way of dealing with her.
And other examples of the same sorts of thingswith other people where you thinkwhere you think, "Is this really an appropriate way to use non-lethal weapons?""Police chief fires Taser into 14 year-old girl's head.""She was running away. What else was I suppose to do?"(Laughter)Or Florida:"Police Taser six year-old boy at elementary school."And they clearly learned a lot from itbecause in the same district,"Police review policy after children shocked:2nd child shocked by Taser stun gun within weeks."Same police district.Another child within weeks of Tasering the six year-old boy.
But my personal favorite of these ones, I have to confess,does actually come from the United States:"Officers Taser 86 year-old disabled woman in her bed."I checked the reports on this one.I looked at it. I was really surprised.Apparently she took up a more threatening position in her bed.(Laughter)I kid you not. That's exactly what it said."She took up a more threatening position in her bed."Okay.

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 10:41

Man that's a horrible link to read, but I take your point. Tasers are a lot easier to use than a firearm, and maybe they're being used indiscriminately and haphazardly. That shouldn't happen; they should be used as per the use of force scale rather than as an easy solution to non-compliance.

I think that prior to tasers, many of those situations would have previously been solved with batons or the evergreen Police Boot technique, which aren't nice either. The issue I see is not the tool, but the use of the tool and whether it was justified in the circumstances. That's a issue that needs to be addressed both by policy and on a case by case basis, ie did the officer concerned :mad: up and go crazy?

The most recent newsworthy taser incident in Queensland related to a woman who was directly tasered in the eye and will probably lose sight in that eye :(. That's not good, but according to media accounts (and I have nothing else to go on) police arrived to an absolute bun fight and the woman threatened police with a weapon.
Woman blinded in one eye after being tasered by police officer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

I still think it's better for police to be armed with a (generally) non-lethal alternative to their firearm and I'd prefer that a deranged, violent offender was subdued with a taser rather than shot if the option were available. How they use that weapon is another question, and the various police services should make sure that tasers are not used indiscriminately, because they can cause harm or death. However, so can batons, punches and police boots. How their tools are used should be subject to clear and constant public scrutiny, but it's easy for us on the sidelines to be experts after the event. We weren't there.

Fliegenmong 13th Feb 2014 10:56

I still think it's better for police to be armed with a (generally) non-lethal alternative to their firearm and I'd prefer that a deranged, violent offender was subdued with a taser rather than shot if the option were available. How they use that weapon is another question, and the various police services should make sure that tasers are not used indiscriminately, because they can cause harm or death. However, so can batons, punches and police boots. How their tools are used should be subject to clear and constant public scrutiny, but it's easy for us on the sidelines to be experts after the event. We weren't there.

Simple solution.....very cheap and easy simple solution.....a cap mounted camera......, similar to the ones that cyclists use to take to the police to effect arrests of motorists...attached to the brim of a police cap......these things nowadays film 4 plus hours of continual audio video colour footage!!!

Receive call....turn on camera...arrive on scene even up to 30 mins later, still 3.5 hours of 'Cop Cam' filming.......:D

I wonder why they don't adopt it? :hmm:

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 11:01


I wonder why they don't adopt it? :hmm:
You think they haven't already done this? ;)
Assume that any conversation you have with a police officer is being recorded :suspect:. Likewise any driving incident; many truckies and commercial drivers are deploying GoPro cameras on their dashboards. So are plenty of private road users, particularly motorbike and bicycle riders.

A recent 'news' story on a mainstream network (caution, follow-on from previous rant :}) centred around alleged bullying behaviour by car drivers towards cyclists on Brisbane's Coronation Drive. The Go-Pro footage from the aggrieved cyclist depicted a ute driving behind him. Apparently said ute then swerved to try and hit them, but the camera wasn't pointing in the right direction to show it. :hmm: Too bad, so sad, but it like, really happened!! :bored:

Fliegenmong 13th Feb 2014 11:14

Well I did have a rather [email protected] member of the QFRS advise me that our entire conversation had been recorded once.....I didn't want to further antagonise the smarmy little cnut, so I left it at that, but wondered what sort legalities there are in recording / filming someone without their knowledge, or consent?

I'm not a criminal so I really don't care....just wondering if I had a cap mounted camera and was pulled over by a 'Friendly' traffic cop for a minor infringement, how it would play out if I started filming / was already filming /

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 11:45

Without looking up the legislation (and it's too late for that, also Roy and HG are on :cool:)...from memory, as long as one party is aware that the conversation is being recorded then it's all legit. You can record any conversation you are part of, and so can the other person (whether face to face, by telephone or internet). Recording a conversation between two other people without their knowledge is a different matter.

Various interactions between QPol and motorcyle riders have been recorded and broadcast on the internet without contravening any laws (much to Boy Wonder AG's disgust :mad:), because the rider was recording the event. No doubt there'll be legislation to combat this, because we can't have Queenslanders recording conversations with the coppers! That might lead to discussion and informed debate...:uhoh::}

500N 13th Feb 2014 14:21

I think some tasers do have cameras mounted on them as part of it.

"Assume that any conversation you have with a police officer is being recorded"

Likewise the reverse, I leave my mobile phone camera set to "video mode" so all I have to do is press the button twice and it starts video recording but it also records the sound. So even if you leave it on the seat of the car, it records everything that is said.


davd, worrals

It comes down to training and making sure it is not used in inappropriate circumstances. Helps of course if you don't employ dickheads. On the other hand, senior police can easily send a very strong message to the first cop who goes overboard.

500N 13th Feb 2014 15:32

Looking at the Age headlines, not sure Corby is endearing herself to the Indos.
Seem to be clamping right down on her, banning any interviews, not happy with the photo of her holding a beer, stying in a posh hotel instead of family compound and the whole issue of her early release is causing political problems.

Not a good way to start Parole in a foreign country.

I find it hard to believe that she will last a few years on parole without breaking something that will land her back in jail, I just don't think she is that smart.

Andu 13th Feb 2014 21:14

Re that woman in Bali: after seeing one or two seriously unflattering still pics of her on the news, I can't help but feel that there's a really arcane reason we're not seeing the multi-squillion dollar interview on Channel 7 quite yet...

They've got her on a crash diet.

She looked, in those photographs... well, the only word to describe it is FAT - and I'm sure that's not the image the Channel 7 publicists want for their 'big' interview nor for the glossy, multi pages of soft focus photographs** in the wimmin's magazines.

(**The cover story on Julia Gillard just after she became Prime Minister done by 'The Wimmins Monthly' comes immediately to mind.)

500N 13th Feb 2014 21:19

She's always been "chunky" !

I'd be very surprised if she gives and interview now, if she does she is an idiot.

It will just give the Indos an excuse to lock her up again which they would dearly love to do, not just because a lot of peope think she got off lightly but because the Indos would like to stick it back up Australia and say, we followed your wishes (read pressure), she couldn't stick to it so she can do the full 20 years.

Andu 13th Feb 2014 21:34

Whatever her attributes, she fails - and I mean FAILS - the most important test a woman ever faces - the Mum Test*, and from those photographs taken after her release, she seems well on the way to proving its accuracy.

(For those not familiar with the Mum Test, it is "take a look at the mother - that's what she's going to look like 25 years from now".)

500N 13th Feb 2014 21:39

Andu

The other Mum test is "would I take her back to meet my mum" ? :O

I think she'd fail that one as well, as would the sister.

Worrals in the wilds 13th Feb 2014 22:28


Seem to be clamping right down on her, banning any interviews, not happy with the photo of her holding a beer
I'm sure one of her parole conditions was that she didn't drink, which would make sense in a Muslim/Hindu country. She really is a d:mad:khead. :ugh:

I can't help but feel that there's a really arcane reason we're not seeing the multi-squillion dollar interview on Channel 7 quite yet...
You may be right. I'd figured that either they'd gotten cold feet because of the public backlash (and there was a huge backlash, which shows Australians aren't as dumb as their media like to assume), the Indons had kyboshed it or it was of such poor quality that they couldn't broadcast it. :uhoh:

Actually your theory goes hand in hand with option three.

Pappa Smurf 13th Feb 2014 22:41

Whos interested in an interview.Whats she going to tell we don't already know.Only thing of interest is,if she did it,who organised it etc etc,and she wouldn't say that.
No money for an interview,but a few grand for a lie detector test would be the best.

Ken Borough 13th Feb 2014 23:07

To put it in the simplest form, these people give bogans a bad name. :yuk:

500N 14th Feb 2014 00:22

Ken

Lol :D:D:D


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:57.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.