More mad, murdering muslims

[drinksgin (deceased)]

But-but-but-. how could the situation in OZ have happened, I was under the impression the lace panties ninnies had declared the entire island a gunfree zone!
You suppose the mmm could not read English?

Also, I thought pumps were banned at the same time as self loaders were.

[gitano]

Let's make sure we direct our editorial sarcasm at the proper target. Just as in the US we gun owners are not responsible for the idiotic rules that our politicians make, neither are they in other countries. It wasn't "Australians" that passed those inane firearms laws, it was Australian socialist politicians. The SAME as in this country.

I'm not particularly an advocate of "nuke 'em all and let God sort it out". Now if you want to line up the socialist politicians that want to disarm the law-abiding while ignoring the fact that criminals by definition don't adhere to the law, and "nuke them", I'm OK with that. But those 'types' are EVERYWHERE. I was about to write, "It is the new political paradigm", but it is in fact the OLD political paradigm revisited in the age of "mass communication". I mean of course, mass indoctrination.

My sympathies go out the the Australian firearms enthusiasts that will now have to 'deal with' another onslaught of **** from the socialist press.

Paul

[drinksgin (deceased)]

I would consider lace panty ninnys to be specific to pols , in any country and part of the liberal , socialistic bent mind group which flourishes in all but the most fascist of dictatorships.
It is too bad the majority of people in OZ and other countries allow the pols to roll them over belly up for the baddies to gut at will.
The US is rapidly going that way as well.
It is too bad most of us here have been brainwashed into believing our system of government is supposed to be a democracy, which is actually a dictator ship of the majority, rather than the Constitutional Representative Republic it is supposed to be.

:frown:hanged:

[sakorick]

I was taught that we live in a "Constitutional Republic". A republic is a country governed by elected representatives. The US is a republic.
Constitutional means that the government is bound by a constitution.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

Rick, you are very correct, among the few, all our so called leaders, even the bad joke that is currently president and makes dubious claims to being a constitutional scholar as well as his predecessor and just about all talking heads, pols and bureacraps constantly babble about "our Democracy".
The East German government was a "People's Democratic Republic", as far as that goes, Nazi Germany was a democracy, guess what "NSDAP" means.
I do not have much longer, but my nephews at 25 and 21  I expect will live under a full blown democratic dictatorship before they die.

:cens:

[sakorick]

Rick, you are very correct, among the few, all our so called leaders, even the bad joke that is currently president and makes dubious claims to being a constitutional scholar as well as his predecessor and just about all talking heads, pols and bureacraps constantly babble about "our Democracy".
The East German government was a "People's Democratic Republic", as far as that goes, Nazi Germany was a democracy, guess what "NSDAP" means.
I do not have much longer, but my nephews at 25 and 21  I expect will live under a full blown democratic dictatorship before they die.

:cens:

Aha!! You figured out my current signature....Brilliant!!

[drinksgin (deceased)]

I have a  bad problem with something I just saw on Fox news, some one , I suppose a journalist, got a very clear picture of the MMM through the store window, this was before he murdered any one, yet the lace panty bound cops did not have a sniper with an fmj .308 ready to put the MMM down.
What is it going to take for Oziets to actually get serious about protecting themselves against MMMs?

:cens:

[22hornet]

Wow Don, I could take this one of two ways and seeing that I have been at THL for some time now I do understand your intention, others may not.

In reading my reply please understand that I am in no way saying if something is wrong or right or even if I agree with certain policies or actions. I'm just saying what "the go" is.

We need to look at what actually happened. This was a siege, nothing more nothing less. I don't see it as anything else despite media hype.
I have been involved in sieges with Muslims, Christians, even a Jewish bloke. The vast majority of sieges I have been involved have ended peacefully, no mess no fuss, except for the last one we went to, but no shots were fired. And other couple that didn't end well for the instigators.

In NSW our Police have a policy of surround, gather information and try to come to a peaceful resolution. It is better for all concerned. Better for the Emergency Services, better for the hostages and better for the criminal. This siege played out the same way. As I understand things, everything was going "well" (as well as it could) until the hostages decided to make a break for it. Another hostage wrestled with the gunman, he was the one who got shot. In hindsight if the hostages had followed the plan and relied upon the Police to make the decisions would things have been different?
Most likely the Police could have shot the man several times over during the siege. That is not the policy. The Police were gathering information, the hostages even phoned family members to let them know what was going on. If the hostages were in any immediate threat the Police would have "done their thing". I have worked with these guys at jobs and been on Emergency Management courses with these guys and have a few mates who are "these guys" and they are very good at what they do. I have every confidence they would make the right decisions based upon knowledge at the time.

So why didn't they shoot the "mad Muslim" through the window? I don't know. Policy? What information did they have at the time? What else was going on? How many more gunmen were there? Dangers? I could go on and on. This will all come out in the debrief I guess. I do know from experience if an offender can see the opportunity to resolve peacefully they will, if they feel they are backed into a corner they will tend to follow a more aggressive outcome.

Pump shotguns banned? Yep sure are. But so is armed siege, taking hostages, threatening members f the public, etc. I don't need to preach to you guys, as law abiding firearms owners you all know where I am coming from.
If members of the public carried firearms would this change things? Probably not. "You" guys have more firearms with the general public than us and you still have shootings, hold ups, sieges etc, so I think that logic is flawed.

You are right Paul, the aftermath of this will be that the law abiding firearms owner will bear the brunt of this. We are fighting as best we can to maintain safe and law abiding firearms ownership, coupled with workable firearms laws. We have a political party supporting us. They have members in the Senate fighting for our rights.

My thoughts go out to not only the families who have lost loved ones at this time but also to hostages who will take a lot of time to come to grips with this event. I would also like to thank all the Emergency Service workers who put their lives on the line and who conducted themselves with professionalism, courage and proved their worth.

[gitano]

Excellent response 22Hornet. I have been saying for DECADES that the US police's policy of "shoot first ask questions later" is BAD. ALL sieges, except those in which the assailants start throwing dead bodies out, can be handled by NO SHOOTING. The Philadephia police burned SIX SQUARE BLOCKS of the city when the TEAR GAS grenades they fired into a building caused a fire. Supposedly they were fired because "children were being molested" in the building. Anyone that believes that is an idiot. (The children being "molested" were burned to death in the ensuing fire.) Recall that the reason given for burning David Koresh and most of his clan to death was that "children were being abused".

The definition of a fascist is a government official that believes that EVERYTHING the government does is "right" by definition. In other words, a government agent can NOT do something "wrong", because whatever they do is "right" because they are the government.

The police - AT ALL LEVELS - in this country, are a fascists. PERIOD. And they are FULLY supported by the judiciary. Some day the people in this country will wake up. I suspect STRONGLY, that when they do, it will be WAY too late. It is very likely already too late.

PATIENCE, when dealing with barricaded "bad guys" is the genuinely WISE way to deal with them. Surround them. How are they going to "get away". With the US police it's a matter of "How dare you CHALLENGE US. We will KILL YOU." And "Oh yeah, if a whole bunch of other, innocent people get killed too, well, that's just too bad. We can't have people "defying" the police!"

The same thing could have, and has, happened here in the US even though AS A NATION we are fairly well-armed. HOWEVER, most major metropolitan areas in the US have VERY draconian concealed carry laws. So it isn't a logical error to assert that "it couldn't happen here". Rather that statement is just to broad. The proper statement is, "It wouldn't likely happen in RURAL America, where it is highly likely that SOMEONE near will be armed."

Gun crime in the US happens in the areas with the greatest gun restrictions. That is an undeniable fact. Even the anti-gun idiots can't, with a straight face, deny that. The statistics data is too prevalent. The idiocy is that people continue to think that disarming the law-abiding public makes it a safer place to live. The stupidity of that is mind-boggling. If you reject the "stupidity" - as I do - then the only explanation of the ASSAULT on private gun ownership is a desire to DISARM THE PUBLIC.

Anyway, thanks for the measured, and thorough response, 22Hornet. Now get back to that "boat in the Pacific" and have a very merry and festive Christmas!

Paul

[drinksgin (deceased)]

All I can say is a dead mad murdering muslim cannot do any damage to the innocent, unarmed public or the police.
The muslims have stated their ultimate objective is to kill all who are not muslims so it is stupid to allow them to kill non muslims while being PC and all feeling good and polite .
There should be some common sense shown , some where.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

I am reminded of the 4th airplane at 9/11. what if the people had waited for the police to gather information?
Insane religious fanatics do not have any sense, or any compassion and can only be handled when they are dead.
There are 2 types of standoffs , accidental and deliberate , the accidental may be resolved with out killing the criminal, those who stage a standoff on purpose are planing on dieing and the police should do  them as soon as possible so as to protect the rest of us from the criminally insane.
Common sense.
 How many mmm stand offs/ atrocities have resulted in the mmms giving up peacefully unless they were seriously injured?
You cannot reason with an insane religious fanatic, their brain is not wired that way.
Self defense is the first law of life, killing those who are trying to kill you or other innocent people is the only logical thing to do.

:cens:

[Jorge in Oz]

Good explanation hornet.

DG I was saying the same thing to the missus why didn't they take a shot when they had it but I guess 22hornet would know more about operational procedures in relation to sieges.

I think they will get a lot more serious about dealing with MMM (good acronym DG) and may have a more sledge hammer approach.

[22hornet]

Good explanation hornet.

I think they will get a lot more serious about dealing with MMM (good acronym DG) and may have a more sledge hammer approach.

I don't think so. How do you know it is a terrorist thing v's a non Anglo Saxon committing a crime? How do you know you are dealing with a really bad guy?
 Is having a heavy handed approach going to help things or make things worse? And now for the really big issue, what is going to be the political gain from doing this and will it backfire? Sad but that is the reality.
 
 Look at the USA now with all the accusations about torture on suspects after the Sept 11 attacks. That was all well and good back then but now I understand people are getting somewhat upset by it. I'm waiting to see who is left holding the bag on that one.

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

I wonder how many of the innocent victims the Aus. cops shot...

I really hate that paramilitary look they use.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

A logical approach, based on past episodes, the muslim is a religious fanatic, so he is mentally unbalanced and not open to reasoning , he took a shotgun to the coffee shop for the purpose of murdering people and of becoming a martyr, given that, no sensible person would expect any good to come of trying to talk him down.
The logical and reasonable action is to stop him as soon as possible
The most sure way is to shoot him in the head at the first chance.
Do I expect logic and reason from government employees, NO
The situation could have ended with1 dead mmm and no one else, but the gov. had to wait and mess around, so the total is now 3, congrats to the powers that be they were able to make a bad situation even worse.

:sarc::cens::frown

[22hornet]

I wonder how many of the innocent victims the Aus. cops shot...

I really hate that paramilitary look they use.

Answer to the first one, that will come out in the After Action Review. At this stage though none.
 
 Second, that look is not only very daunting but also serves as PPC /PPE for the individual. Body amour, flame resistance overalls, goggles, respirator, etc.
 It's funny that you mentioned that as in the UK Police don't generally carry firearms do they?

[gitano]

Now, finally, we are getting to the point that people probably agree on.

Don, your initial comments were clearly aimed at the Australians, NOT at how to deal with MMMs regardless of nationality. It's pretty difficult to argue against shooting MMMs that take hostages. I certainly would agree that shooting them "as soon as possible" is the best, and appropriate action. However, the "nature" of the hostage SITUATION - not the hostage taker - should be assessed before engaging lethal for ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SAFETY OF THE HOSTAGES. Anyone that perpetrates an ARMED hostage-taking, should expect to be killed. I do not suggest 'negotiating' with them, or "fact finding" about them, or doing ANYTHING that increases the probability of a hostage being harmed. PERIOD. BUT...

The police in the US have an "US vs THEM" attitude. They care FIRST AND FOREMOST about the "challenge" to their AUTHORITY, and they do NOT put the safety of the hostages above PROVING that they are not to me "messed" with. They DON'T CARE - other than the risk of bad publicity - about ANYONE ELSE.

I don't think "who" or "what" or what religion, or ANYTHING ELSE the hostage taker is matters one whit. To me THAT is immaterial. Let me use another 'situation' to clarify my point. I have TRAINED my family that when I am away on a trip and someone "invades" the house, they are do the following:
1) Upon becoming aware of an intruder, they are to YELL for them to "Leave the house". Once. It has been demonstrated OVER AND OVER that burglars - people intent on stealing your stuff - DO NOT break into houses that are occupied. A "burglar" will leave a house they thought was unoccupied. If an intruder remains in a house after finding out it is occupied, THEY ARE WILLING TO HARM THE OCCUPANTS.
2) If the intruder does not leave the house immediately, my family members are to either get to a bathroom and lock the door, or lock the door to the room they are in. EVERY room in my house is 'armed'. There is NOTHING in a bathroom that is worth stealing. Therefore, if the intruder comes to the bathroom door, my family member is to yell at them to LEAVE. They are NOT to say "I am armed", or "I have a gun", or "I will shoot you". They are to yell "LEAVE", ONCE. If the intruder continues to try the door handle or talks or does ANYTHING other than LEAVE, they are to empty the firearm into the door. NO "NEGOTIATIONS". KILL THEM.

That describes my "attitude" about hostage takers. Give up or die. BUT, I do NOT condone the STUPID "COWBOY" attitude or BEHAVIOR of the American police. And I will not castigate another nation for having a less aggressive "attitude" than the one American cops have.

As for the "militarization" of the civilian police. I think the "solution" is pretty simple actually. I would not allow the police to have ANYTHING that the general public was not also allowed to have. If the police get fully automatic weapons, the public gets fully automatic weapons. If the police get teargas, the public gets teargas, if the police get armored vehicles, the public gets armored vehicles. I suspect the police would have a serious "attitude adjustment" if they had to face "equal force". As a general RULE - more common that NOT - the police in the US are THUGS and BULLIES. The militarization of their equipment simply reinforces that VERY BAD attitude.

So I don't give a tinker's dam what race or religion a hostage taker is. A policy of "kill them as soon as IT IS SAFE TO THE HOSTAGES" "works" for me. But I'm not going to castigate other NATIONS for their "patience" when we in the US have the exact opposite PROBLEM, and DEAD whether by a cop's bullet or an MMM is STILL DEAD. Given a choice between "nanny cops" and "fascist cops", I'll take the "nannies" every day. There IS "middle ground".

By the way, "social networks" were apparently a PROBLEM for the police in Sydney. If I found out about someone posting police tactics in REAL TIME on social media, (I see a cop sniper climbing a ladder on the building opposite the cafe"), I would prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law for "aiding and abetting a criminal act" including MURDER if a hostage or a cop died.

Paul

[drinksgin (deceased)]

My first comments were actually aimed at anyone who found that the shoe pinched, as we say in Texas, unfortunately, there are plenty of lace panty ninnies in Texas, too.
One just ran for Gov. and got her butt severely whipped but Texas is hardly typical compared to Comiefornia, New Jerk, New Jersey and even Colorado which is rapidly going down the same tube as the left coast, not sure how far Oregon is gone but they are VERY close to a major source of the infection., Sounds as though Washington is rapidly going down as well.
Things are not looking well for the home team anywhere.

[Jamie.270]

The battle lines here are being drawn as we speak.  The Gov wants expanded background checks, and a couple of the hand-wringing ninnies in the statehouse want them too.  Unfortunately, the party of ninnies is in control in all 3 houses.  Although there are many gun owning electors of said ninnies.

But we haven't had a "gun show loophole" for a decade or more, so at least they can't use that catch phrase.

I expect a lead ammo ban battle here too in the next 3-4 years.  We actually have a contingent here that wants to bring condors up here, claiming they were once a native species.

It may not matter much though,  Between the out-of-control cougar numbers and the wolf re-introduction and protections, we're headed for predator pit status, with game herd numbers in some units low enough to question the ethics of insisting on a tag.

The antis have taken a multi-pronged approach here that has been very well funded and is well received by the 4-5 most populous counties.
Which dictate policy to the rest of the state.

[j0e_bl0ggs (deceased)]

that look is not only very daunting but also serves as PPC /PPE for the individual. Body amour, flame resistance overalls, goggles, respirator, etc.
 It's funny that you mentioned that as in the UK Police don't generally carry firearms do they?

First part of that statement is correct, Its use is for intimidation. The second part was the 'party auto response' - expected.
The only real function as PPE is to hide the identity of the thug. You do not need to be 'all black' to use PPE. I too can invent requirements up and hide behind H&S.

The UK cops generally do not carry firearms but the armed units dress up this way too, pure intimidation and wanting to look tacticool.

It is a fact that the cops want to be paramilitary and want the division - the us and them.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

We have a new outbreak of MMM, in France this time and the MMMs got away clean,  not even a broken fingernail.
France is going to the MMMs anyway, hope some people do put up at least some resistance.

[Jorge in Oz]

Counterfeit religion which breeds violence and fanaticism.

[drinksgin (deceased)]

Yep, sure enough!

[22hornet]

So the preliminary enquiry has been conducted, the coroner will do a more detailed enquiry and hand down recommendations.
 
 It turns out the two victims killed by the gunman, one was killed by a bullet fired by the police which ricochet off concrete and struck her in the chest. This part, if true is a complete game changer when it comes to relying on the police to do their work.
 The other  victim was shot in the back of the head by the gunman as everyone was running out. The word is now that he may not have fought with the gunman as first thought.
 
 Also just to add, the Gov have now declared this a terrorist incident, which now limits the financial responsibility of the insurance companies. :frown

[gitano]

There are some questions being asked regarding the 'facts' surrounding the Charlie Hedbo incident. There certainly were some interesting "lucky breaks" for the "good guys".

Paul