what we really need is more money for wiccans to hold an inter-faith service celebrating the solstice...

As I´m sure some people may know, a few gentleman accustomed to motoring around the countryside on two wheeled contraptions had a bit of a contretemps at the Sydney Airport the other day. This little encounter among gentleman has rather upset some people, especially those who think that maybe the people responsible for security at the airport should have ¨done something.¨

Peter Faris, of the The Australian, suggests that the incident demonstrates gross incompetence by the AFP, that Mike Keelty should resign and asks the question what if those involved had been terrorists?

Key paragraph:

After Mumbai and Lahore, what is even more frightening to consider is that jihadist terrorists could arrive at Sydney airport by taxi, shoot hundreds of people in the terminal, and escape by taxi. It seems there would be no intervention by AFP security or anti-terrorist police. This, of course, is much more attractive to the jihadists, because they would not need to die in suicide bomb attacks.

I have to stand up and agree with the general thrust of this article, although I´m not sure I´d be putting more funding into the AFP. There are certainly excellent reasons to have an AFP, amongst them the coordination of efforts in dealing with crimes that cross state and federal boundaries and the past history of massive police corruption at a state level in various jurisdictions (most famously NSW). But improving and strengthening state police forces I believe is a much better solution, in concert with the continuing work of the AFP and the ACC. Although I would get rid of Keelty, he´s dead weight and has been for years now.

Faris says that citizens pay their taxes and deserve to be safe on the streets. I think it´s more important than that. I believe that a fundamental part of a nation´s social and economic well being is based upon the rule of law and the safety of citizens and their property.

While some may disagree with me, how about this for a theory. The crime and drug problems of African-Americans in the ghetto are not caused by poverty, lack of opportunity or lack of jobs. Rather, lack of opportunity and lack of jobs is caused by crime. Who´s going to start a business, or invest in a business or a property if they live in an area where every day you at risk from violent criminals? I´ve seen The Wire, so I know what´s it like the ghetto!

Why have many Asian countries dragged themselves upwards while many African nations continue to wallow in the pit of poverty and aid dependence? It´s obviously not corruption, since by reputation many Asian countries are ridiculously corrupt, especially Korea, one of the strongest Asian economies.

The difference is that it is incredibly difficult to start a business (a proper business, not selling some cabbages by the side of the road) in many African countries, many of them continue to use aid as a crutch to avoid doing anything to start an economy (a topic for another day) and many African countries cannot guarantee basic law and order for petty crimes, let along major ones such as kidnapping, rape and murder. Not only that, but there is a difference between corruption (skimming some off the top) and a police force or military that just takes whatever it wants.

If we want to maintain our free society and our strong economy, we need to ensure that we continue to keep our citizens and their property safe (and in these present economic circumstances that seems reasonable).

First step? Forget about more money, lets see much more respect given to those who enforce the law.



I think, as a general principle, that if a person were to spit at a policeman, than that policeman should (in approximate terms), kick them in the crotch, beat them lightly around the legs and body with a baton, chuck them in the paddy wagon and spray some pepper gas on them for good measure.

Instead, we have police copping abuse both physical, oral and psychological (in one of the toughest jobs out there) and having no real recourse, apart from courts that will often impose nothing but the mildest sentence, if anything. In Victoria we´ve even had a Police Commissioner going further than that, trying to get police to talk more and seeking less physically confrontational (read small female) police officers.

Police do a crappy job without the powers (of physical abuse) that are a traditional part of their repertoire. Can´t we move into the 21st century in a way which incorporates the good parts of physical violence and intimidation without the bad parts (corruption, criminality and beating confessions out of suspects)? And by the good parts I mean, again, that people respect police and if they don´t like them they certainly don´t voice their opinion because they know what´s good for them!

I think that would be a major step in reducing crime in Australia, particularly violent crime such has increased in a massive way in Melbourne´s nightclub district in recent years.

I have much more to say on this topic, but i´ll leave it there as an intro.