Lester and Jo, do you think it would be a good idea for our government to decisively deal with bikie criminal activities?

Or would it be better for them to attack the problem indecisively, tokenistically, disingenuinely – being seen to do something while not actually achieving anything of any significance?

Or would it have been best if they just hadn't bothered at all and let the status quo remain?

What is the job of government here?

Ok so you’re worried about the infringement of civil liberties of those who undertake harmless bikie activities but can be charged under the new laws. Fair enough.

But you haven’t mentioned the infringement of civil liberties of those who are negatively impacted upon by bikie criminal activities.

If any law is going to be effective, then its going to step on some innocent peoples’ toes, yes?

I would like to see the Newman government extend their efforts and strive to improve the rule of law across all of society. Not least with road rules and the policing thereof.

The sheer hypocrisy and double standards of this article are appalling.

As usual the left wing completely ignore the difference between consensual and non-consensual transactions which invalidates their entire argument.

But only deliberate dishonesty, or complete ignorance of what they are talking about, can explain their misrepresentation that libertarians stand for the liberty of the wolves. If they had bothered learning anything about libertarianism other than the caricatures they teach in the state indoctrination factories in which they serve as functionaries with a vested interest in big government, they would know that the grounding tenet of libertarianism is the non-aggression axiom. The fact that Lester and Jo oppose that, means they are in favour of aggressive violence; it's they, not libertarians, who stand for the liberty of the wolves.

Let's offer the authors a chance to prove me wrong on that precise point. At what stage, Lester and Jo, short of actually shooting people, do you renounce the violence involved in the enforced funding of the ABC and your own comfortable sinecures which no-one voluntarily pays for?

Stupid lefties can't believe individual editors do as they see fit and aren't the puppets of Murdoch.

They never seem to think the ABC is a puppet of the Abbott government though. I smell hypocrisy.

The authors should perhaps address the continuing murders committed by convicted murderers who are released from prison? What about that? One of the most telling arguments against capital punishment was that an innocent could be executed. Neither author has ever suggested that convicted murderers should be held for ever in case they murder again in fact quite the opposite. What about valuing a human life? How many years and what about two murders?
In Victoria a felon got 11 years for his first murder, 10 years for his second and now we are told a full life sentence for his third.
What about the authors having a crack at this sort of problem where the result is not another big pay day for some sleazy lawyer.

...There are two imperatives (among many), for incoming Government priority; they are to stack the bench of the High Court, and to stack the management of the ABC; the State arm of the propaganda machine.

So where were you, Lester, when Nicola Roxon was trying to shut down freedom of the press? Where were you when Bolt was being prosecuted over an article in a newspaper which "offended" people who claimed to be aboriginal?

The one outstanding aspect of the human rights lobby is that it gets all self righteous over the "rights" of criminals, terrorists, illegal immigrants and homosexuals, but is conspicuously missing in action when anything involves the rights of everybody else.

Because of this clear double standard, which every member of the public is aware of, nobody gives a tinkers cuss anymore when characters like you puff your chest out and start moaning about "rights." It is totally unacceptable that criminal gangs who traffic in drugs and commit murders can roam the streets with labels on their back identifying themselves as dangerous criminals and there is nothing that the police can do about it. If that is the law, then it is time to change the law and change the perception of "rights."

You and your friends blew it, Lester. The public enemies are the bikie gangs who roam our streets, kill people, shoot up houses, intimidate witnesses, kill police officers (WA) and control the drug trade with standover tactics and threats of beatings. Nowhere in your little rant did you even bother to mention that. No, to specimens like yourself, it is the police who are the enemy and so are the politicians who are responding to what the public expects.

What is wrong with you trendies? Why do you reflexively take the contrary line to every responsible proposal? Peer pressure? The need to think you belong to a select group?

Whatever, the rest of the population are fed up to the back teeth of people like you and I hope that you get beat up by the Commancheros so that you can grow a brain and grow up.