Australian terrorist

[octave]

What !."Coming Armed, & attacking" is a lesser crime than self-defense ?.

 

Only in a bias Australia.

 

He came to that public meeting, With Intent to commit a "Crime" against the speaker.

 

In another country he could, with certainly have been Shot dead.

 

spacesailor

The response was not proportional. But having said that at a time when 50 innocent people were shot dead and about the same number are injured some fighting for life it seems bizarre that so much airtime is devoted to this trivial egg based event. I have read Anning's statement re the Christchurch massacre and it is despicable and indefensible.

 

I also find it interesting that after past terrorist attacks there have been many angry posts condemning it, this thread seems to be more about what gun is suitable for what type of hunting and the finer points of egging,

 

 

[spacesailor]

Octave TRUE

 

BUT in defense !

 

hundreds drowned in flash flood in a third world country ( not a picture in the news).

 

INDONESIAN earthquake 50 dead, (Anyone see it on the news)

 

Another shooting States side. (No news.

 

Ongoing jumbo jet crash ongoing,(without news).

 

And CARS kill Thousands yearly, (No talk of banning them)

 

But it was an Australian.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[octave]

Octave TRUEBUT in defense !

 

hundreds drowned in flash flood in a third wold country ( not a picture in the news).

 

Another shooting States side. No news.

 

Ongoing jumbo jet crash ongoing, without news.

 

And CARS kill Thousands yearly, (No talk of banning them)

 

But it was an Australian.

 

spacesailor

 

So we have multiple tragedies that don't make the paper, we have 50 men woman and children gunned down plus countless others injured and a man being egged and it seems you feel most outrage over egg boy.

 

Can I ask if you actually agree with Anning's press release? Have you read it?

 

 

[Marty_d]

How on earth does a person get into the senate on 19 primary votes? Goes to show even proportional representation has its issues!

Oh, 'cos the bloke in front of him was found to have UK citizenship. He had a whole 77 votes...

 

An egg can damage , whatever it lands on. An eggshell can & has blinded one that I knew

In the BACK of the head?

 

 

[spacesailor]

I read it.

 

But even tho I don't like it. .It's his "freedom of speech" that should be upheld.

 

And an "Armed person" going to do that Premeditated egg attack. Was not upset by the actual speech.

 

Otherwise he would Not have come Armed.

 

If I dislike what the Muslims teach. AM I allowed to throw things at their teachers .

 

spacesailor

 

 

[spacesailor]

My witnessed egg attack hit the victim on the cheek, then the shell took-out the lens of his eye.

 

was big in the UK about the 50's. (egging passers-bye)

 

spacesailor

 

 

[octave]

I read it.But even tho I don't like it. .It's his "freedom of speech" that should be upheld.

 

And an "Armed person" going to do that Premeditated egg attack. Was not upset by the actual speech.

 

Otherwise he would Not have come Armed.

 

If I dislike what the Muslims teach. AM I allowed to throw things at their teachers .

 

spacesailor

I would be willing to bet that those words would cause so much more psychological injury to the friends and relatives of a 3-year-old murdered by this loser than the egg. I am not condoning it by any means but for goodness sake, he was not injured but people were killed. Using your "but other bad things happen all the time" argument. Most weeks some sports ball players will punch each other in the face, surely more dangerous than an egg.

 

By the way, my opinion of the reaction was this, the first slap was probably justified due to initial surprise but a punch in the face was not warranted. The pile on was not justified. The chokehold could easily have been fatal. The kick whilst he was held down was pathetic. If you feel this was a reasonable force then I seriously question your judgement. If the police had apprehended this person in this fashion I would think it would be investigated. However, whether anyone is charged or not is trivial compared to other events would you not agree?

 

 

[spacesailor]

Agree.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

What !."Coming Armed, & attacking" is a lesser crime than self-defense ?.

 

Only in a bias Australia.

 

He came to that public meeting, With Intent to commit a "Crime" against the speaker.

 

In another country he could, with certainly have been Shot dead.

 

spacesailor

Octave put it exactly how I meant (I am on a phone for short periods this week - lots of work to do).

 

Spacey - I agree with you - Egg Boy has a charge to answer. It is a battery (application of unlawful force - oft misquoted as an assault) and form the footage, seemed pre-meditated. Self defence, by the way is not a crime; it is a defence to the accusation of battery (or worse). It has to be proportional to the threat you face and the assailant's characteristics - and the law gives quite a bit of leeway taking into account the latter and any other factors. So often, self defence is relied upon successfully even when on the surface, it was disproportionate - because one is usually in fight or flight mode in a violent situation.

 

My point is it went from Self Defence to a potential crime in its own right because the self-defence actions went well beyond what looked reasonable by the video. At this point it moves from self defence to a crime of battery in its own right. And the thugs retraining him certainly went beyond a citizens arrest or simple restraint to active aggressive violence - they were hardly threatened and the threat to Anning had well and truly passed. Are you condoning such actions in a civilised country? Or shall we descend it the caliphate state tghat was ISIS and shoot anyone for any misdemeanour?

 

Oh, 'cos the bloke in front of him was found to have UK citizenship. He had a whole 77 votes...FFS! 77 Votes + 19 Votes - now I see how it was a majority of the vote..

 

In the BACK of the head?

I read it.But even tho I don't like it. .It's his "freedom of speech" that should be upheld.

 

And an "Armed person" going to do that Premeditated egg attack. Was not upset by the actual speech.

 

Otherwise he would Not have come Armed.

 

If I dislike what the Muslims teach. AM I allowed to throw things at their teachers .

 

spacesailor

I agree with you, Spacey. I understand that his comments would bring anguish and psychological damage to the relatives and vitims of those affected by the attacks, but it well demonises Muslims, which gives the veil of affirmation to these nut-heads.. But where does one draw the line on free speech? I am not sure, but are there not vilifcation laws in Aus (will find out next semester).

 

 

[facthunter]

There's free speech and HATE speech and most honest people can tell the difference. A guy shows, on line, a video of himself killing considerable numbers of innocent people on a pre set up Go pro camera,. as a good thing to do. This is a new low or at least on a par with the worst. Anning is suggesting violent murder is OK, (for Muslims not attacking anyone) but can't take an egg being busted on his head without losing his cool. and getting violent...The court of public opinion is with the young bloke.so far, by a large margin..

 

This "free speech" thing is advocated most by those who wish to vilify, stereotype and spread hate the most. When the situation s reversed and someone suggests "they" are somewhat lacking in something like ethics and a fair go, they squeal like stuck pigs.. Dish it out but can't take it, I would suggest is at play here..Nev

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Australia does have anti-vilification laws, but according to this article, they are pretty toothless. Until this is fixed up, people like Fraser Anning and other nutters (I believed pictured in the article) will keep on prattling on.

 

BTW, and for the record, I wasn't condoning what was said by Anning. I was protecting free speech but saying (just like when self defence moves from that to a crime of battery), a line is crossed - where that line sits, I am not sure. As an example (and I haven't heard all of Anning;s diatribe), if all he said was the reason for this atrocity is because of mass immigations of Muslims to Australia (and acknowledging the idiot is off his rocker), is that vilification? Or is it suggesting something for which a robust debate on facts can be had (after all, it is not unknown for expressions on this forum to questioin the logic behind immigration - and in some cases singling out muslim immigration)? If of course, he said it does justify such henous act, then one is certainly sailing close to the line (or over it - mistake in metaphor intended).

 

The problem is if you set the bar too low, one does stifle debate; if one sets the bar too high, you end up with this carp.

 

 

[spacesailor]

I also looked at the video, & if my EYE doesn't deceive me, After the first Blow to the young man, I see His Arm (with phone) coming up towards the speaker (MP), them the quick second Punch !.

 

My Retaliatory question was Not answered.

 

If an Australian MP had egged a Muslim cleric, would the perpetrator get charged ?.

 

Double standards,

 

spacesailor

 

 

[spacesailor]

In my previous comment I said "Hundreds dead in third world country".

 

I appears that continent is Africa, and it's reported that the total could run to THOUSANDS dead.

 

Any one see it on the TV, I had to google it, to find which area it was, & it's three or four adjacent countries hit be a tornado.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[octave]

I also looked at the video, & if my EYE doesn't deceive me, After the first Blow to the young man, I see His Arm (with phone) coming up towards the speaker (MP), them the quick second Punch !.My Retaliatory question was Not answered.

 

If an Australian MP had egged a Muslim cleric, would the perpetrator get charged ?.

 

Double standards,

 

spacesailor

Anning could press charges if he wished. Anning was not injured. The citizen's arrest" was way over the top.

 

Why do you seem to have so much concern and sympathy over a man who may have been injured but wasn't' rather than for 50 people shot dead and as many more injured and some such as the 4-year old girl fighting for life? seems pretty callous to me.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I don't think it's fair to draw a conclusion that Spacey is more concerned with Anning than the 50 people killed because he is drawing our attention to an apparent anomaly in due process and enforcement of the law. After all, does someone have to echo the sentiments that have already been expressed to ensure they have requisite compassion for the real victims in this very sorry saga?

 

And I do agree with Spacey (although my sympathies towards Anning are somewhat dilute). Egg boy walked up and, seemily without direct provocation, smashed an egg on the head of Fraser Anning in what can only be construed a deliberate act. Therefore he seems to have had the necessary ingredients of a cime of battery (not aggravated, as an egg will not qualify as a weapon unless Aussie laws imply that particular egg was a weapon as it was carried with intent to commit a battery): intent and the actual act.

 

Given the public profile of events and the fact that a victim of crime doesn't have to "press charges" (an American concept - I have always wondered how murdered people press charges), I think it is incumbant on the law enforcement authorities to treat it as a criminal investigation and make public the outcome; after all, and I can't remember the lord justice that said it, but "justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done".

 

Of course the outcome may be, "Yeah - he did, on the surface, commit a battery; it was a misdemeanour and as he has been perfectly behaved before now and it was an elongated brain fart, we are letting him off with a warning, but have cautioned him that if he does the same again, then we will throw the book at him". It doesn't matter, but no-one is above the law (or shouldn't be) regardless of who they are or the policial motivation. Of course, Anning and his thugs should also be investigated for exceeding their licence of self defence and citizens arrest.

 

BTW - Spacey, given the brute force they used on the boy, couldn't his reaction to try and hit them (to get them off him) also be a self-defence given the circumstances?

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Of course, the egg came from a battery hen.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Of course, the egg came from a battery hen.

 

That was very good (as a former keeper of rescued battery hens)

 

 

[octave]

I don't think it's fair to draw a conclusion that Spacey is more concerned with Anning than the 50 people killed because he is drawing our attention to an apparent anomaly in due process and enforcement of the law. After all, does someone have to echo the sentiments that have already been epxressed to ensure they have requisite compassion for the real victims in this very sorry saga.

And I do agree with Spacey (although my sympathies towards Anning are somewhat dilute). Egg boy walked up and, seemily without direct provocation, smashed an egg on the head of Fraser Anning in what can only be construed a deliberate act. Therefore he seems to have had the necessary ingredients of a cime of battery (not aggravated, as an egg will not qualify as a weapon unless Aussie laws imply that particular egg was a weapon as it was carried with intent to commit a battery): intent and the actual act.

 

Given the public profile of events and the fact that a victim of crime doesn't have to "press charges" (an American concept - I have always wondered how murdered people press charges), I think it is incumbant on the law enforcement authorities to treat it as a criminal investigation and make public the outcome; after all, and I can't remember the lord justice that said it, but "justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done".

 

Of course the outcome may be, "Yeah - he did, on the surface, commit a battery; it was a misdemeanour and as he has been perfectly behaved before now and ot was an elongated brain fart, we are letting him off with a warning, but have cautioned him that if he does the same again, then we will throw the book at him". It doesn't matter, but no-one is above the law (or shouldn't be) regardless of who they are or the policial motivation. Of course, Anning and his thugs should also be investigated for exceeding their licence of self defence and citizens arrest.

 

BTW - Spacey, given the brute force they used on the boy, couldn't his reaction to try and hit them (to get them off him) also be a self-defence given the circumstances?

The topic is Australian Terrorism which seems to have become secondary to minor events around this. Normally after a terrorist event, there would be many posters expressing outrage. The changing nature of terroism seems a worthy subject and although law and order issue re eggs and assault is interesting, perhaps it deserves its their own thread.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Quite possibly deserves its own thread, although one of the great things about threads is that they are often like discussions amongst friends.. They start on a topic, but meander through different, related subjects; sometimes unrelated, and often come back to original topic - but not always. I would hate to see a regimented approach where in response to a thread title, everyone stays rigidly to it and splinters new threads that could be totally out of context, stand alone.

 

For the record, I am not in anyway defending or condoning Fraser Anning (who, to me is more like the expletive that would come to mind if we put an "F" in front of his surname - and I haven't even uttered that word in quite some time). It is rhetoric like his, like Trump and like Farage (to name a few) that give the demented the confirmation they need that what they are doing is right. As an example, and to go slightly off topic, the successful Brexit vote ended up in hate crime that resulted in may Poles (of the Polish variety) batteried and one murdered - despite the Polish beiung instrumental in helping the UK win the Battle of Britain by skilfully flying Spitfires and Hurricanes into battle, and as I understand, achieving more enemy kills per sortie than any British pilot. The Pittsburgh Synagogue massacre, the recent race riots in the US and now this were smoudering, but controlled wildfires that have lit up and got out of hand thanks to the ilk of those named fanning the flames.

 

 

[old man emu]

The offence of 'battery' doesn't exist in Australia. In this case, where any harm was done to the body of the victim, and that harm did not result in anything more than a transient hurt (such as the pain from a slap or hard contact not resulting in bruising) the appropriate charge would be Common Assault. It is usual for such a charge to be brought before the court by the Crown, usually by the allegation of a person performing the Office of Constable. It is, however, possible for any person to bring such an allegation before the Court as a private prosecution, but, given the work and cost involved, few people take this role away from Constables.

 

 

[octave]

OK I will play the Anning game. Why is it that Anning, a QLD senator is spending so much public money travelling to Vic, a state he does not represent?

 

Whilst it is not so clear whether Anning's reaction was proportional it seems pretty clear that his bogon army went way beyond the reasonble. I would suggest that if a the police were filmed performing an arrest in this manner they would certainly be investigated. One punch can kill and certainly that chokehold was extremly dangerous. I don't particlarly care whether egg boy is charged or not, it is just a distraction from much more serious problems.

 

There seems to a reluctance amongs some to accept the NZ event as terrorism.

 

Anning's statement suggest that this event was inevitable because of a growing fear in our society a fear and paranoia that they stoke. I am not fearful, Anning does not speak for me.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Of course, the egg came from a battery hen.

You beat me to it... (see what I did there?)

 

However given the kid obviously has a social conscience, I'd lay money on the egg being from a free range chook.

 

As far as Anning ("Fanning"? maybe they have different expletives in the UK) is concerned, he's a grubby little skidmark who hopefully will be ejected from the nation's collective cloaca come May.

 

The broader question is how his repulsive views can even be part of the national conversation, and I don't hesitate to lay the blame at both major parties' door, but particularly John Howard. His use of the Tampa event as a coldly calculated political stunt started the race to the bottom when it came to treatment of refugees. Once you have the highest offices in the land painting people from other cultures as dangerous and different, then it's only a matter of time before some brainless right-wing nut job picks up a rifle.

 

I hate to bring Trump into this, but unfortunately he's another causal factor. His constant depictions of Mexicans as "rapists" and "criminals", his attempted muslim ban, his tacit support for white supremacists ("There's good people on both sides...") - all encourage and inspire the type of twisted worldview held like by people like the cowardly sh*t who attacked the Kiwis. (I'm with Jacinda Adern - I will never say his name.)

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Thanks OME for correcting me on Battery... Over 'ere there is a distinction betwseen the application of unlawful force (battery) and the apprehension (or threat of) the application of unlawful force (assault). I figured as they are steeped in common law, they would have been historically transposed into Aussie law.

 

Marty - Drop the "ng" from Fanning (pronounce the trailing "i" as a "y") and substitute in the expletive version (similar to the shortened version of cannot).

 

Unfortunately, political parties of all colours cowtail somewhat to preserve or increase their vote; SfB (Sh!t for Brains) Cameron cowtailed, not to the Eurosceptics in his party, but to the gaining voter base of UKIP (Farage's party) to come up with a half-baked referendum to leave the EU. In or Out and was not quik to shut down public comments that were xenophobic.. I would not use the term encourage or inspire - these demented watermelons are already there and practice their hate in private - trust me on that one - I would say legitimacy (in their eyes).. They now believe they have a right to do it.

 

 

[red750]

Jerry, when you say cowtail, do you mean kowtow?

 

From Wiki,

 

Kowtow, which is borrowed from kau tau in Cantonese (ketou in Mandarin Chinese), is the act of deep respect shown by prostration, that is, kneeling and bowing so low as to have one's head touching the ground.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I do (I started it with a "C" and auto-correct fixed it for me)...