csteele you seem to have far too much self confidence and to me at least it is badly miss placed.
On first appearing here we had some things in common, still do.
It is those that divide us that irks you.
I see the equivalent to body language in your words.
Diverting the issue, blood pressure, shows you are on the defensive.
I hold my views with pride.
Piracy you say is not the term, well let me, doubtfully, concede the point.
Then, as is Green peaces norm in this project, they pumped up with advice about becoming hero's over night jumped a ship for what.
I note your lack of balance in debate involving the middle east Muslims and remember your support for the lies told about a police man.
And too the thuggish, nothing less, middle eastern Muslim mob, out side the courts.
I find no difficulty in ever disagreeing with you.
Rant? if every one who thinks different than you ranks then most of this country are ranters.
In an hour I could plan put together protest about Whaling that would offend only the Japanese.
Problem is leftist are still reading from books written before ww2

I think you're whistling in the wind, csteele.

>>I would indeed expect compensation from the government...if the offenders had escaped what would have been the amount offered, that is what I would expect for compensation to cover out of pocket expenses<<

Ok, what if you had not prevented their escape. Would you still apply for compensation, just for trying?

What if you had injured a passer-by in the process. Why would they not sue you for compensation? If they did, would you expect the government to fork out for that, too? And would it not be quite reasonable for the police to arrest you for reckless driving and causing bodily harm?

What if you had killed one of the offenders. That would clearly be manslaughter.

For all the above reasons - and many more - the police advise the public, in the strongest terms, not to intervene in such situations, unless this can be achieved without the use of excessive force. I submit that running your car into another vehicle is by definition, excessive force.

But beyond all that, there is an issue of responsibility for one's own actions. In my view it is unreasonable, although far too common, that you should expect the government to pay for any fall-out from activities that the individual chooses to take, whether it is the rescue of round-the-world yachtsmen, or the collection of some activists who got themselves into trouble.

Should they perform the rescue? Sure. Should they ask us to stump up for it? Certainly not.

Dear Belly,

I think we might have different reasons for coming to OLO. While I make no bones about firmly putting a position forward I am also expecting, even hoping, I will be forcefully and intelligently challenged on it. I want to learn from the exchange and if I end up having my views adjusted then all to the good.

Take the current exchange with Pericles, while on the surface it looks like an exercise in splitting hairs, and if we choose the wrong kind of hare it could turn into a bloody business, each is putting forward positions that I suspect, while they may reflect a general sentiment, neither of us would die in the ditch over. Yet I for one find the process instructive.

The truth sometimes really does lie in the exceptions, that is why they are worth exploring.

I really don't think I have a go for the throat style unless I perceive something as inherently racist, then I make no apologies for going for the jugular.

I remember as a youth attending a regular fundamentalist Christian bible study meeting every Wednesday evening. Often a young wannabe apprentice pastor would come and try out his message on the group. All through his delivery there would be the constant shuffling of thin rice paper bible pages as those attending would check to see if he had the words of the verses he was quoting correct and that they were in context. If they were found wanting he would be pulled up very promptly. One young chap had three tries with the same theme and I recall him sweating heavily on the third. When he finished there was a pause then one heard the thump of various bibles being closed and heads nodded in his direction. He had done it and the wheat had been separated from the chaff.

Your calling these peaceful protestors pirates was chaff, as you have acknowledged, as was demanding they serve three years for attempting to disrupt illegal whaling.

My offer to desist chaff cutting in your direction still stands.

Dear Pericles,

You said; "For all the above reasons - and many more - the police advise the public, in the strongest terms, not to intervene in such situations, unless this can be achieved without the use of excessive force. I submit that running your car into another vehicle is by definition, excessive force."

I am fortunate enough to have a cousin in the police force and so I have just finished putting the question to him.

His reply was to say the unofficial response by the police of someone ramming a getaway car to prevent their escape would be absolute delight.

As to compensation, all things being equal, there would likely be a submission put by the prosecution to the judge for some measure of restitution for the material loss suffered by the selfless act of assisting in the capture of the offenders.

He then referred me to 462A of the Crimes Act; 

"Use of force to prevent the commission of an indictable offence."

"A person may use such force not disproportionate to the objective as he believes on reasonable grounds to be necessary to prevent the commission, continuance or completion of an indictable offence or to effect or assist in effecting the lawful arrest of a person committing or suspected of committing any offence."

If I were to ram a car in with the intention of disabling it, especially in the case of armed robbery or abduction I would, I am told, be completely covered by this section.

And I submit to you that ramming the car of a child abductor is not excessive force by most people's measure.

Perhaps you have a policeman relative who might have a different perspective.

We, all of us are the product of our life's experiences csteele.
And our views and opinions are our right.
We have the right to be wrong, to be fixed in our own world.
To be uninterested in others views, to even challenge, quite wrongly their rights to those views.
While digging a mote around our own.
My life has been and is a protest.
My reason for living has been promotion of my Union and party by change and never ending improvement.
A plea, that we do not except change for change sake, but good change, based on the wishes of the many, not the few.
Education too, my groups, both once got that at home, we live seemingly unaware that has stopped.
Some of us do not understand , we need to replace that education, by setting examples.
SERVICE, being heard ,seen. inviting other to hear, be heard, is our mission.
Inclusiveness.
My last day in a tiny little school was in a different world.
I suffered just because my family was big and poor.
Found a hole to crawl away in, isolate myself.
But it educated me.
Away from my family I read and wandered in to Communism, then Socialism.
As a youth I helped craft union actions in the left, pure lies, to save the job of the worst workers you ever saw.
I sat in the room, heard the red flag sung, heard the lies constructed.
And started my growth again, I feel still the truth, bosses and those long ago workers, gave no value to it.
And csteele that truth wins in the end.
Your three saints, if not pirates, remind me of that, constructed on foolish acts, to put one sides views.
To hopefully, get Japan to over react, so your side could play the victim.
continued.

I speak often about the left of center, my fears radicals are damaging all in the paddock.
Achievable change, from that group is the only change I want.
The bleating from minority's that Labor has changed/betrayed them, is blind and wrong.
Refusal to even consider better ways to protest, cleaner more sympathy gaining protest is self injury.
I fear not Labor following the majority.
But minority infection of Labor, even when only perceived.
Your lurch in to my thoughts being anti protest.union party is not true.
A protest should do many things.
Bring publicity and supporters, embarrass those we protest against, not be a bed for groups who can not draw a crowd giving $50 notes away, infections.
Out side Canberra's Parliament, Japans Embassy, male and female protesters, dressed in some hand picked way colors the same.
Placards showing Whales and blood, words on posters calling Gillard gutless Japan crude lies highlighted.
Hurts no one and is not like your foolish Friends.
I feel no need to change my thoughts on migration and the problem this country is involved in.
Not in highlighting my City Sydney's shootings, replacing knifing.
And no pain in saying such as your self refuse to confront not all immigration has been good for my country.
Multi is not a word of interest to emerging cultures in my country.