Schapelle Corby or "Bali Nine" (1 Viewer)

[Korn]

korn ur in favor of laxing our fire arm laws correct? im on ur side dude so stop giving me a hard time.

We should be aloud to have bullet proof vests though, i dont care if criminals will get there hands on them.

Under the universal declaration of human rights, we have a right to be protected.

Police cant really protect us, and thats all our governmetn offers to protect us.

Its fucking unacceptable.

We should be allowed to have bullet proof vests, the government should do all they can to allow decent law abiding citizens any means to protect themselves.


I told you before this dude carl williams - he got shot in the stomach, a few of his mates got killed and people put a contract out on his life who i think had mafia ties.

and now he is being charged with killing a couple of them?

The fact he was already shot and his freinds were murdered proved the police were incapable of providing adequade protection.

Dont you think thats unreasonable he is facing murder charges? Thats fucking self defence.

According to the law from what I van gather it isnt self defence, but retribution as it required planning for Carl Williams to get back at those ppl.
For example say Tony walks up to Billy and stabs him, if Billy then gets a brick to stop Tony stabbing him that is self-defence (Law students correct me if im wrong).
However if Tony stabs Billy and Tony runs away, then say 3 days later Billy gets a gun and finds Tony and shots him then that is retribution (Law students correct me if im wrong).

 

[Jonathan A]

jonathan, there are factors that can increase crime - yes.

but its polices job and responsibility to eliminate crime and keep people safe.

How are they to do that with attitudes like yours? You are being tautological. I believe I know more about Crime prevention to state that you are wrong. The only area apart from popular understandings that police have a responsibility to eliminate crime could be mildly the law. The same law you have contempt for. The same law also shifts liability and fault onto those who break the law. Better rethink your stance.

every crime, and particuarly unsolved crimes represents police not doing their job.

So they are still responsible.

Unsolved Crime - this is not a term. You have unsolved cases, and committed crimes. What if the crimes are not reported? How are police to solve them when there is no intelligence. A lot of crimes also require the proof of no consent, again police cannot persue a case if no one reports it.


Dont you think its a bit rediculous that if someone wants to killl you - that you are defenselesss.

You are not defenseless. Under your idea, everyone should have a gun, those few who don't will be victimised to serious violence. Eliminating a weapon altogether is a better option. This is a proven fact, I have said it before heaps of times, but you don't get it.

Sure the police can solve the case after your dead, but if someone broke into your house with a gun and an intention to killl you - you would be dead before the police arrived?

People generally don't have the intention to kill. THey have other motives and as many literatures will suggest use weapons as a means of force that they can overpower the victim. Rarely is murder on the cards. You will notice murder is a crime that stays constant because in society it cannot be affected by prevention measures other than that of psychological and biological. A lot of people are provoked into murder and many have a lot of reasons and surrounding stories.

 

[Jonathan A]

Under the universal declaration of human rights, we have a right to be protected.

International law does not apply if it conflicts with national law.

Police cant really protect us, and thats all our governmetn offers to protect us.

Wrong, it has means of redress through other avenues such as Federal Police, Intelligence Services, DoCS, A-G Department, Fair Trading bodies, ACCC and the like. Australia protects its citizens well.


I told you before this dude carl williams - he got shot in the stomach, a few of his mates got killed and people put a contract out on his life who i think had mafia ties.and now he is being charged with killing a couple of them?

Again, he was probably involved with this mafia organisation. Many of these groups get into the wrong hands and deal with the wrong people. The best thing to do is contact the police, they are very professional about these matters and at the same time will ensure protection where it is needed.


The fact he was already shot and his freinds were murdered proved the police were incapable of providing adequade protection.

Did they go to the police? Police can't act on nothing.

Dont you think thats unreasonable he is facing murder charges? Thats fucking self defence.

The charges do not take into consideration Self Defence, the arresting officer must have reasonable idea that the charges will stick. See to prove someone murdered another you need to prove act, intention and causation. Defending yourself is still an intention, but what the accussed will do is raise a defence where the court will decide if it was reasonable.

 

[Jonathan A]

According to the law from what I van gather it isnt self defence, but retribution as it required planning for Carl Williams to get back at those ppl.
For example say Tony walks up to Billy and stabs him, if Billy then gets a brick to stop Tony stabbing him that is self-defence (Law students correct me if im wrong).
However if Tony stabs Billy and Tony runs away, then say 3 days later Billy gets a gun and finds Tony and shots him then that is retribution (Law students correct me if im wrong).

Retribution is more a motive. The defence raised could be duress or to a lesser extent dminished responsibility.

 

[Korn]

How are they to do that with attitudes like yours? You are being tautological. I believe I know more about Crime prevention to state that you are wrong. The only area apart from popular understandings that police have a responsibility to eliminate crime could be mildly the law. The same law you have contempt for. The same law also shifts liability and fault onto those who break the law. Better rethink your stance.

every crime, and particuarly unsolved crimes represents police not doing their job.

So they are still responsible.

Unsolved Crime - this is not a term. You have unsolved cases, and committed crimes. What if the crimes are not reported? How are police to solve them when there is no intelligence. A lot of crimes also require the proof of no consent, again police cannot persue a case if no one reports it.


Dont you think its a bit rediculous that if someone wants to killl you - that you are defenselesss.

You are not defenseless. Under your idea, everyone should have a gun, those few who don't will be victimised to serious violence. Eliminating a weapon altogether is a better option. This is a proven fact, I have said it before heaps of times, but you don't get it.

Sure the police can solve the case after your dead, but if someone broke into your house with a gun and an intention to killl you - you would be dead before the police arrived?

People generally don't have the intention to kill. THey have other motives and as many literatures will suggest use weapons as a means of force that they can overpower the victim. Rarely is murder on the cards. You will notice murder is a crime that stays constant because in society it cannot be affected by prevention measures other than that of psychological and biological. A lot of people are provoked into murder and many have a lot of reasons and surrounding stories.

John, im going to have to chastise you, Tattooedguy asked you not to use big words that he cant understand, so that means nothing more then 2 syllables, ok. so these are going to be a big concern to him and he will need them defined:
tautological
psychological
biological
literatures

On another point, you do realise aslong as there isnt 100% inspections on all containership there are going to be weapons in society regardless of what laws are in place. As criminal most of the time dont have registered guns, and you cannot buy a gun legally without registering it and having a license. Also would you care to find some statistics to backup your view on guns also try and find statistics on the calibre, barrel length and action of firearms used in gun related crime.

 

[tattoodguy]

jonathan, in relation to carl williams.

In melbourne im pretty sure there was a guy in protective custody or something givin some protection or something, he was a witness or an informer etc, and he wound up dead.


Under the law, i dont think carl williams case qualifies as self defence.

But, i dont think given the circumstances its even reasonable to ask him to rely on the police, the threat was tooo significant. There should be special circumstance self defence.


That in its self isnt fair, if you have beeen shot already that proves the police are not doing their job properly. Why should you have to give them a second chance.


Your a smart guy alledgedly, find the figures regarding how many people who have taken out an avo have been killled by that person?

How many take out an avo end up bashed etc?

 

[tattoodguy]

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1134515.htm

in this case both people are charged with conspiracy to murder the other.

Shouldnt it be up to the individuals to say, i want that person charged.

Im confident both parties are happy to shake hands and forget about the whole thing.

why should they both be in jail, if someone is trying to kill you, you should have the right to try and killl them.

i dont think either of the intended victims would want the other charged.

If the police did their job, maybe neither of them would of had to have taken matters into their own hands.


also carl williams is in solitary confinement because of his profile, his conditions are appauling - and all he has beeen found guilty of is some drug dealing charge.

why is he being treated like shit - he is being treated unfairly, he deserves to be treated like anyone else. The courts, police and government have a vandetta against him because the media has made him rather infamous so he is being treated very harshly - thats total injustice.

I think a cop alledgedly stole money from him or his dad, if the police steal from you - how can you expect anyone to trust the police.

I think i read a policeman alledgedly threatened him as well.

The crimes and screw ups by the police/governemnt in relation to this guy is rediculous. Jonathan - you should look into it - u might learn a thing or 2 about the police and there abuses of power.

 

[tattoodguy]

jonathan, looking over some of the cases against carl williams.

i read somethinga bout an informant getting a private trial or something like a secret trial.

also, there are characters called mr x and mr y etc.

how does that work - you can testify against someone and ur name is supressed etc? wouldnt it be difficult to do back ground checks on these types of witnesss if there names are kept secret etc ?

How does all that work mr jonathan?