Just about any Law can be criticized for inadequacies or described as fitting into a system or becoming a new system , is this so bad ,how complex would Laws become if every eventuality was described therefore giving all who were prepared to jump in and protect the man at Syd. Airport the knowledge that the law protected them from all eventualities . Asking Civilians or Security Guards to enter such a fray is unreasonable , asking Security Guards to deal with Civilians is reasonable , Bikey Groups are Military Commando's out of control .
The solution has to be Military . Confiscate "ALL" their Bikes , lock them "ALL" up for two years , Confiscate "All" their property to recover expenses .
Let me focus your concentration , a 14 Yr. Old girl becomes a Bike's Moll three months later she is found unconscious in the main street late at night , she's been dumped , Ambos's are called and She is conveyed to Local Hosp . She has serious Tracks (Heroin injection punctures up her arms)main problem is her bladder has Prolapsed into her Uterus (I think I have the words right) and she cannot discharge her urine . I was told that this is the result of a practice called "Fisting" . If you have a soft spot for these sick hero's you should lose it .

The best solution is to rid ourselves of Magistrates and Judges from our Courts , further , remove the Theatrics no Live Lawyers , everything in writing only .
Judgment made by Senior Sargent and Five Civilians .
This way no witness or Juror can be threatened or murdered .

When the Parliament of the Commonwealth set out to completely rewrite the Australian Constitution after 1972, the system of checks and balances put in place to guarantee its integrity, had already been destroyed by the Liberal Party in New South Wales, and the Liberal Party federally, in 1952, when they restricted the right of every Australian to freely access the High Court.

The system of government that should have stayed in place was the one we asked for and got with the Australian Constitution and by referendum in 1899 adopted as law. That it was confirmed in the United Kingdom by an Act of that Parliament is really irrelevant. Without proper accountability every public servant starts to misbehave. This misbehavior extends right from the very top, in the case of Menzies and Fraser, down to the constable driving around trying to balance a State budget, by booking and fining people and generally acting as a State terrorist. The role of the Police in a State with a broken down system is distorted and they work on a system of State terror. They do not really know what the law is, but having accepted a salary they do what the State tells them to, like automatons.

The object of the exercise is to avoid becoming a target themselves. Like normal men and women they have mortgages, and families, and a salary is very important to them. Around 100 years ago the Governments of Australia set out to introduce Roman Catholic law into Australia. A prominent feature of Roman Catholic law is the absence of jury trials. The first State to go this way was Queensland with its Criminal Code Act 1899. Code law is a feature of continental Europe, and is one way of governing, whereas the English adopted another. Under a Code a la Roman Catholic Canon Law, everything is forbidden unless permitted. Under the English law, everything was permitted unless forbidden: but the onus on proving it was forbidden lay on the Crown. It had to convince a jury that there was a victim, and a case to answer

The moral of the story seems to be that all social systems need to let the individual make the final call and minimize pointless authority.
The concept of "minimized authority" actually works quite well in organizations too. "Minimal" does not mean "anarchy", it just means that too much authority is destructive. Anyone who has worked in a big government or business beuraucracy knows what I mean. History teches the lesson repeatedly.
Pelican gets it right: all we can aim for is the best we can do without obsession over the name of the party, the philosophy or the system being used. Excellent example is how in the US people ignore drug convictions for respected republicans, while condemning to death drug users who are poor and black. Tribal, symbolic thinking allows such atrocities to slip through their moral compass. Ignoring the pebbles falling all around, they are shocked at the landslide.
*All* whistle-blowers should be applauded and protected. The systematic corruption due to prohibition needs recognition and attention. (The police are too important to be derailed by the $B drug industry.) Hidden influences on the running of the country need to be aired: secrecy only aids the secretive, and they usually have good reason to hide.
Most of all we need to ensure that in the name of freeedom we *never* allow the travesty of priests and declaration of Good/Evil via sheer opinion. Many died for the ability to hold power to account. To revive it in the name of new-age superstition dressed as christianity is one of the threats to our community.
On the economic front: Can an economy support a financial system that extracts 1/4 of GDP? Where is *real* wealth created? As we now know, the "free market" emperor has no clothes.
Sells: Which brand of Christian should we follow? the "Jesus hates fags" variety, maybe the snake handlers, how about Runners "church of hate everything"... Plenty to choose from. I'm guessing *yours* is the "right" one? Jesus was a Liberalist, only his blinded followers don't get it.