http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/compose-message-general.asp?discussion=2381
I have issues about murder in Australia.
I wanted to raise the issue further in this forum.
This is a test.
If this is censored then murder is officially condoned -
YOU HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING
There have been threats already published indicating unlawfulness and police shooting in reckless ways.
I bring the matter of confiscation of life into the public domain and you now refuse to discuss matters settled at Nurnberg about 60 years ago?
I tried to raise matters that would make the situation plain.
You refuse the facilitation of that input.
You accept utter discordant drivel but will not countenance reason. As someone mentioned the other day - “ they don’t decide against you for any reason - they decide against you because they CAN.”
Clearly you CAN anonymously stuff me about in a little corner of my life and resultantly cause me to consider my options.
Clearly you DO believe yourself too gutless even to begin intellectualising about what child murder means.
Clearly you are perfectly right. You disgust me.

I am so annoyed my last for good reason.
I spent quite some time putting together a proposal for my first thread - about a matter touching on this subject - and from the point of view of law.
I was censored by the 'moderator' whatever insect that is - for speaking fact.

Col Rouge ,
Obviously the very nervous type !

This was a sad and impossible to understand action ,No excuses , [apart from the abysmal Police Management and Government sanctioned training] .

We have seen it often - hour upon hour of firearms training, all focussing it seems on the heart at point blank range.

Why ??

Any Policemen or women out there want to answer a very pressing question ??

Gibo ,
On reading your posts [from your policeman's point of view] all I can say is that surely there should be more training of assessing combatants with obvious severe psycological problems and decide on a course of action that guarantees that the person's life [or the police's] are not lost.

Surely science can produce something that can be fired using a paint - ball rifle or similar at a person's face, that will glue their eyes up, or is that toxic that the fumes in the material will render them almost immediately disorientiatd or unconscious .

Or Tazers used responsibly ?

As others have said we don't know the full story yet. However there was a similar case on a Sydney beach a few years ago - a lone man waving knives on a beach who was then shot dead by police.

Back then, it seemed fairly straight forward to me. If the police could evacuate themselves and everybody else from the scene such that the man is a danger to no-one but himself, then that is what they must do. In the Sydney incident we had a man on a beach, drunk from memory, waving knives. My guess is if the police had not turned up at all, no one would have got hurt. If the police had turned up and evacuated the area, no one would of got hurt and the man would has been prosecuted by a judge, and a jury of his peers.

As it was, the police stood their ground on the beach, aggravated the situation by making demands on a drunk angry man, then killed him when he reacted in an entirely predicable way. Because it was predicable, and because the man was no danger to anyone but himself, sounds like murder to me.

We will see how this case pans out.

I was out running the other day when I came across a young fellow throwing knives at a tree. He was very accurate. I wonder if this 15 year old who was shot had of thrown one of these knives at the chest of one of the policemen what we would be saying. Just a thought.

Looking at the way the left loonies jumped to the defense of a terrorist (Hicks) you can see that they love to condemn any form of legitimate authority.

In saying that one can't help to be saddened by the death of such a young life. I am sure the police responsible feel it more than any of us. Or do we assume the worst of them as many here have done.