Yes OSW, apart from foot sloggers, the services have little where a 2 year service would be any use. The training takes too long, & many are rejected for lack of scholastic ability.

However I don’t think we are talking about military service, but some form of civilian employment.

I would agree with a form of national park ranger work for those unemployed. A much bigger workforce is required to clean up our vermin infested parks, & training involving some hard work would help many to get a grip on life.

If such a system could improve the fire prone problem in the parks, it would be a win for every one.

My main worry with any such program is those who run them. When I offered a unemployed bloke a months work, while a storeman went on holidays, he couldn’t take it. He was on a training course, & was told if he dropped out of it, for any reason, he would loose his benefits for 2 months. Bureaucracy can destroy any good idea.

o sung wo I agree, and from experience, my date of birth came out of the barrel for that war, I was knocked back, but tried to pass medical.
But after many years of debate, it seems clear indy wants it for all?
Do we want to send, as we did in that war, national ser4vice men to die in say Afghanistan?
I do not.
I read Pauls last post, have not bothered of late, and agree with most of what he said.
The washing wheely bin is tipicule of hard headed conservatives, useless making a job, offensive and dangerous one without reason.
If, as I propose over and again, we got kids in trouble and unemployed a job, of service to us all.
Say building and maintaining a national back packers/campers trail in rest areas around our country?
o sung wo, in 2007 I wrote here about Australians ability to stand in line, vote quite differently, and still have a beer or coffee together.
I fear that has gone, and openly say my party played a roll in that.
But are we seeing the birth of hate such as Ireland?
Read the words of indy and a few, now be honest, when did you see such hate from me.
Or words of unhappiness with their party I DISPLAY WITH MINE
Indy used words directed at me here or in another thread, saying I was ruining our country.
No Man any age would getaway with that face to face, yet I am no thug.
Mirrors exist to maybe see our selves as we are, not as we think we are.
80% of Australians think alike on any subject, be on the wrong side, if I am, does not make me bad indy.

Dear Individual,

You ask "What Mentality are our Police?"
And that's not an easy question to answer.
As far as I'm aware the role of a police officer
is to uphold the law. No exceptions, no iffs and
butts. So if a person is over the limit when
breath-tested - it is the duty of the police
officer to apply the full letter of the law.
Exceptions according to the law cannot be made
and officers are obliged to comply with that.

I've watched the RBT program on television and
seen examples that made me cringe. Examples like
a truck-driver who'd gone through a very bad
divorce, and needed to keep his licence in order
to keep his job. He was just a little over the limit
(the low end of the scale), and the officer was not
lenient at all. The truckie almost broke down and
cried. He said he would lose his job, his livelihood,
and he'd already lost so much. The officer could have
let the truckie off with a warning. But no such luck.

I get the point that you're trying to make - however,
I'm not sure how much (if any) leniency is allowed at present.
Perhaps the rules should be changed to allow for
judgement calls by the police officers - depending
on the circumstances? Especially if people are not all
that much over the limit - and there are extenuating
circumstances. I understand that rules are there for a
purpose - however as with all rules, I personally feel
that other factors may come into play and should be
considered.

Forget about the police, what about the judiciary?

<QUEENSLAND'S premier and attorney-general say they will fight to keep a serial sex offender behind bars, even if they lose their initial appeal.

Twice-convicted rapist Robert John Fardon, 64, was scheduled to be freed on Thursday afternoon.

But the government won a last-ditch legal attempt to keep him temporarily behind bars until February 27, when a full appeal will be heard.

Premier Campbell Newman says the government couldn't ignore the public outcry over his release.

He said the government would "pull out all stops" to protect the community.

........

Justice Debbie Mullins ruled on Wednesday that Fardon, who has spent most of his adult life in jail, should be released, as any risks to the community could be overcome.

She imposed a supervision order, with 34 conditions.

In the Supreme Court on Thursday, Solicitor-General Walter Sofronoff, QC, argued the stay on Fardon's release was necessary to ensure the safety of the community.

He said two psychiatrists found Fardon had displayed some rehabilitative growth in the last year, but they were still of the opinion he was a moderately high to high risk of reoffending.

Mr Sofronoff said there was little evidence to challenge this risk assessment, and that Justice Mullins erred in failing to adequately consider these risk levels.>

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/fardon-to-stay-behind-bars-during-appeal/story-fn3dxiwe-1226577967381

Google for this criminal's long history of serious sex crimes. Honestly, who would want to be a cop?

Good evening to LEXI, BELLY, ONTHEBEACH and the many others...

LEXI...

I fully understand, I really do.........But ! As tough as it seems, and appears to be, the copper MUST comply strictly with the rules, apropos RBT. I realize it doesn't seem fair. Neither is it fair that someone else needlessly loses another close to them, as a consequence of a fatality involving an inebriated driver ? I also accept this is a typical, political 'obsequious' or 'urbane' response, however unfortunately it's true.

The community screams '...what are the police doing not locking up drunk drivers...' ? As they say LEXI, damned if they do, and damned if they don't ?

I will agree, there's no real reason a copper can't cut loose someone for some minor, trifling traffic offence ? Provided the alleged offender has that large 'A' sitting above their head.

BELLY old friend, it's all just a bit of fun, we have such a broad divergence of opinion herein, and occasionally discussion can become a little heated, but that's all part of it ? Remember when I had a real head of steam on board, over some forgettable slight someone levelled at me ? You said, just take it easy and let it go through to the keeper, or similar words. At the end of the day, nobody's right, nor is anybody wrong !

Yes ONTHEBEACH...

The Judiciary can make things quite hard for the coppers, as well as for governments too ? The so called independence of our Courts can occasionally clash with the public interest. And when it comes to trying to keep certain individuals locked away, up pops the Parole Board, or the CCA or similar, preaching loudly to all and sundry the 'rights' of this criminal.

OK, what are the 'rights' of society. Is there not an expectation of being able to live, as well as their children live safely in the community, and not fear being assailed by some twisted killer ? Problem being too, often these 'Boards' are heavily laden with stuffy academics also.

Lexi, a question.
Had that cop let the bloke of, with a warning.
And the next day, that driver, while drunk killed kids in a school bus.
Would the cop be praised or condemned.
o sung wo, yes for some.
But try this.
For just a minute pout your self in a Labor voters shoes, one that both names and shames the wrong in his team.
And knows defeat is approaching, without change.
And consider how many times a few, individual has made his double century , tell me I am less of a human, so is my party and its followers.
O sung wo, even in defeat we represent near half of this country, proudly, I reserve my right to defend us all.