So, this is in the interest of making us all "safe". Perhaps a short look back in history would be helpful.
Other government decisions that "make us safe".
Firearm Buy-Back - Howard Government.This catalyst for this change came about due to the Port Arthur incident in Tasmania.
The government instituted a buy-back scheme - where people would be compensated for the cost of their equipment. At the same time, various types of firearms became illegal for people to own. The 'logic' behind the scheme was to get these things out of people's homes. To cut a long story short... this idea cost the taxpayer $500 million.
Outcome: The government 'bought -back 125,000 firearms, which represented approximately 5% of what was believed to be in the community. In NSW alone, ownership of these things was guestimated to be around 3 million.... but no records of purchase existed prior to 1975.
Being involved in the sport at that time - I watched what was happening particularly closely. For a time there was an increase in break and enter complaints reported to the Police, particularly concerning firearms. Insurance claims were made against these losses.... while the items themselves were placed in safe places, and also taken off the registration lists. In effect, the changes pushed them underground. Incidentally, the funds from the buy-back were commonly invested in the purchase of new quality 'legal' hardware. Any law only impacts on law abiding people.
I wrote to PM John Howard at the time. The response I received back from him was that this matter was far bigger than simply firearm ownership. Between the lines - he simply wanted to establish himself in the pages of history.
Those who believed in the threat of the NWO saw this as a blatant attempt to disarm the population - inline with UN Charters.
Are you feeling safer yet? How about the
Anti-Biker Legislation?
The catalyst that provided the opportunity for government to introduce this 'thing' was the murder of a biker at Sydney airport. I'm sure many people here would remember the incident.
What we got from government was a piece of blanket legislation. It was not specific to bikers. The legislation gives the government an opportunity to effectively ban ANY particular group of people. All they need do is place the name of the target organisation into this legislation - and bang. Note particularly the fact that the government now has the ability to target a group - any group - that it doesn't like. Could be the Catholic Church - could be any group in the community. Public outrage certainly does provide good opportunities for governments. Effectively - we have crowd control... and it's enforceable!
And I forgot to mention..... Government do not have to give their reasons to anyone for these actions - and there is no appeals process.
“It also creates the risk that outlawed groups will consolidate, move further underground, and engage in more clandestine, more dangerous, and more violent operations," he said. http://www.uq.edu.au/news/index.html?article=19410Are you feeling any safer yet?And now - the government is further attempting to protect us all yet again - the catalyst here being Child porn. Dreadful stuff that certainly and justifiably creates public outrage. (
now isn't that coincidental! Yet another government opportunity!)It's certainly not the sort of stuff that I would want on my computer - but then, unlike Mr Conroy... I will deal with it if the need arises. But, again - even at the huge expense involved, as has been so widely reported, the net gain will be very little to nil. What it will do however, is dramatically affect the quality of net speed. It will also give government the opportunity to ban particular sites from being viewed in your home. people mention 'freedom of choice'. Well, that's something that is ceasing to exist.... but the government believes that it's in our best interests - that's why they are taking the decision on our part. Perhaps it's about making our trading partner, China, more sympathetic towards us? Perhaps it's about stifling the ability to communicate with others across the sea. Who knows? They do!
Surely, you're feeling safer by now..... aren't you?Tello shared some insight into the US fourth amendment recently - which related to search procedures. The criteria included 'probable cause' and the satisfying of a judge to gain this approval to enter someone's home / place of business. By coincidence - we used to have the same criteria here.... but no longer. Police now only have to satisfy a test of 'reasonable suspicion' to go it alone. So, the scrutiny of a magistrate has been removed. The catalyst for this change came from terrorism. Again, caused great public outrage and fear across the world. People wanted to feel safe - so government gain acted. Just how considerate are these people, I hear you ask!
Funny you know - I remember the words of gentleman who shared that when we change our lifestyles because of terrorism, the terrorist have achieved their goals.
Now surely, everyone should feel much safer. All of these good things have occurred with direct destruction of our fundamental rights.... but for our own good. It must be so - that's what the government tells me! And, what sort of ungrateful barsted would I be were I to question them while they offer me such great protection!Apologies for the length of this post people!
