Member - laura B (NSW) posted:

most people wont say they have fuel...us caltex/shell etc workers have to get it out of people!!! the customers i have dealt with only 20% of them will say they have fuel without me asking.....
Laura B

HAPPY INSIDE WHEN IM OUTSIDE

Member - Blue (VIC) posted:

Some will say he over reacted but if the report on the wireless this morning is correct, I say he had every right... They mentioned a broken nose, depressed fracture of the eye socket and several other suspected fractures.

mick posted:

Not to mention 187cm, 120kg, angry, on the run and weilding a wheel brace that he was quite happy to use on the copper.

These poor coppers never know whats ahead of them, for me,
better to carry a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it.

At the end of the day that poor copper who is risking his *rs for us deserves to go home to his family.

garrycol posted:

I am the first to critiscise the cops but the cop didn't look too healthy on the news - I would say that on this occassion - fair cop

Member - Geoff M (Newcastle) posted:

What about the p...ks that belted the cabby to death in Sydney this week?

Poor bugger, stroke victim trying to earn an honest quid driving a cab and gets bashed to death over a reported $100.00

I agree with your summary on the crims in wigs.

Geoff.

Member - Blue (VIC) posted:

Agreed...

Pajman Pete (SA) posted:

"she gave chase and shot him dead"

That is where the rules about reasonable force come in. If your assailant is fleeing you can't shoot them to stop them getting away.

I have no problem with the guy in WA though. Using force to stop someone beating you up is a whole other ball game.

Pete

Member - Jack posted:

Hi Pete:

Legally you are correct. Morally as far as I am concerned the poor lady has no case to answer. As they say ... "the law is an ass".

I often wonder how many of these attacks there might be if we were allowed to carry weapons and had the right to defend ourselves to the untimate end. Many of these cowards prey on people knowng they cannot defend themselves.

I hope she gets off.

Jack

Bonz (Vic) posted:

"We" I assume covers the assailant too Jack, so he would probably have just shot her rather than bash, The good ol' US of A shows what liberal guns laws can produce and I for one don't want that here.

gramps posted:

In regards to the female security guard, just a case of preventive maintenance really. Odds are that sooner or later the scumbag would have sunk to something lower.

p.s. the previously mild mannered Gramps has left the building ........

Member No 1 posted:

jack could be right...take some localities where gun ownership and the right to carry are allowed (with tuff control measures of course)...lots of data on it...some for and some against...but take the swiss for example...and several states and localities in the states...crime is lower than elsewhere, cos just about every one owns a gun, or in the case of the yanks in those applicable states the "right to carry"...is it a definite deterent?...why are the rates so much lower...
remember - its the crims who dont care about laws....
just ask the bikies er i mean crims how many guns they handed during the very generous $$$ buy-back that Howard demanded...not 1 illegally owned firearm i bet.
so what did they get of the street...guns they knew where they were and owned by law abiding gun owners

Eddy posted:

Not worried about dented pride Trev, just don't want the myself the wife & kids to be confronted with an over enthusiastic young cop sticking a loaded gun in our faces because we clipped a double white line.

Next thing you know housewives will be getting handcuffed through the drivers widow & being dragged off to the cop shop for processing because they double parked while dropping the kids of at school.
(Happened last week in Queensland)

Don't know the rights or wrongs of it but thank goodness for the crime and misconduct commission which keeps an eye on things.
Both the police union and the police commissioner came out strongly via the media to defend the cop even before the Lady had her chance to defend herself in court.
Hard to see how she would get a fair hearing after that little lot.

Eddy

Member - Crazy Dog (QLD) posted:

Eddy,

It works both ways but not evenly. Trial by media for the coppers is a given - guilty! However if a member of the public - well the case of the woman in QLD is typical. You can believe what you want but have you heard the FULL story yet - I haven't except in the MEDIA...

Let's just wait and see what transpires and if the copper(s) did wrong then they should be held accountable but just remember they are had for the smallest indiscretion whereas WE on the other side expect sympathy. Can't have it both ways and good ridance to the worm in the West. My young fella is a copper and I wait for the day the cops come round or we receive the call. So please don't be too judgemental about ALL coppers - most are fine young men and women just doing a job....someone's son or daughter....husband or wife ...

gramps posted:

Well said Crazy Dog. They're doing a job that does'nt have a great deal of appeal for a lot of people but we'd be stuffed if someone did'nt do it.

Eddy posted:

Crazy Dog.
No intention to demean your young son or any other policeman.
I have a lot of contact with the force in my day to day dealings.
A lot of respect for the stuff they have to put up with day in day out.

As you say:
"You can believe what you want but have you heard the FULL story yet - I haven't except in the MEDIA..".

If I don't hear it in the media how will I hear it?

So what am I to believe? I wasn't having a go at coppers, just reacting to what Trev88 said which seemed a little bit too LA law style for us in Australia.
The rest of what I said was reported in the media. Right or wrong.
I am just asking for a little bit of balance as some of the comments I have read here would make a lynch mob blush.

Eddy

Member - Crazy Dog (QLD) posted:

Yo Eddy,

Have a read on the post (PostID: 30073) about bacon & eggs - look what happens if you don't pay..... The vitriol surrounding that was astonishing.

Yep you are right about getting the info but lets us all wait until a result comes down from the court and then make a judgement post the hearing and not make judgements BEFORE the hearing. As far as the WA incident goes we haven't heard it all yet and even then I was too quick to react.

I am also asking for the balance but that balance must be equal both ways. Yes I sometimes make hasty assumptions about the media and the law and the way it is reported and I guess that goes with being a coppers old man. Sorry if you took it the wrong way and I appreciate your reply.

Eddy posted:

I think we are all on the same side.
Didn't take it the wrong way, I don't want you to think I did.
Scum bags usually get what they deserve.
Pity that some of them have to put it on a coppers conscience.
I just think the checks & balances are there as much for the protection of the officers as for the scumbags.

dinodog- Central Coast NSW posted:

eddy, that female arrested in qld, for a traffic matter as you put it, was arrested for her behavour after being spoken to by the police not for where she parked her car. it appears that she has a problem with her anger management and that is what got her into strife. she failed the attitude test and the police officer responded in a manner in which he was entitled. she set the standard of responce not the police.

Scubaroo posted:

Assuming he was those poor girls' murderer, karma caught up with him pretty bloody quick. Well done universe.

Robert posted:

"Shame the person was shot and not hauled back to answer his crime."

No, it's bloody good that he was shot dead, as the punishment from the legal system would not have fitted the crime - we don't have capital punishment anymore and life sentencing is a complete joke!

Bonz (Vic) posted:

Allan Irwin said the same, I just know that in my case I would want to see the guy answer his crime if he was guilty of it, then shoot the bugger.

govo posted:

Gee..ol Mike is quiet is'nt he :) :) :)

Exploder posted:

Yes he is..

But I don’t like to mention names, and we are all entitled to a view on a subject, I am sure I have made the odd comment that people have not agreed with or was incorrect, on hear as well.

The second bit of my reply is totally based on experience and not out of a police operational Firearms directive.

Mike Harding posted:

Sorry Govo, you must forgive me taking 21 hours to reply but I have a few more pressing issues in life than reading this forum at one hour intervals.

What would you like me to say Govo?

I made rational and logical arguments to support my point of view and, unlike you, I didn't hurl insults about.

You have failed to deal with any of the points I raised and I'm not going to repeat myself. And, frankly, I'm wondering about the wisdom of debating with someone whose only response is abuse.

Mike Harding

Bonz (Vic) posted:

Never have a battle of wits with an unarmed person Mike.

govo posted:

Ummm mikey me lad ...if saying that you made a stupid comment based on no facts was in your opinion abuse then l take it that you live a pretty shelted life...you sure get upset over a little bit of critizism and lets not forget that it was you that changed you view...firstly you said that cops don't need to carry guns then you say they do .
You made that stupid comment based on no facts of the case, you were not at the scene and did not know what events took place but you jumped right in and said that cops don't need to carry guns and then dribbled on about Africa and the U.K and lots of newspaper articles on police shootings and retraining. l'm wondering what big words you'll come back with now....effrontery....get real mike and get a life.

govo posted:

Quote....I made rational and logical arguments to support my point of view ( all from the print media )

This one really cracked me up