The middle class generally fluctuates between being able to afford a lovely holiday once a year to pay off a credit card. The poor can vary between paying bills and being out on the street. Between 20 and 30 percent of working-age people on welfare benefits are a possible outcome as Australia struggles to regain economic stability during the world-wide recession that may become a depression?
Amid rising unemployment and loss of jobs and businesses, finding employment will be difficult for all, in particular for aging adults.
Financial instability can be a breeding ground for chaos, violence, and civil unrest.
There is the individual, and there is the community— the poor need to feel secure; the rich can pay for gated communities and security guards, and the politicians and their gated compounds have paramilitary Police.
Non-Profit Security Firms (the young and the older wiser)
The Bill aims to create a Commonwealth statute authority called Preservation of Life – Community Protection Australia. A function of POL-CPA is to create a non-profit security standard. The intent is to endorsed and subsidise firms that meet or exceed the standard who are willing to provide specific security and consultation services on a pro-bono basis. Pro bono “publico” is a Latin phrase for professional work undertaken voluntarily and without full payment. Unlike traditional volunteering, it uses the specific skills of professionals to provide services to those who are unable to afford them
Non-security firms comprising of young men and women mostly between the ages of 21 to 35 years working under the direction of older and wiser professionals from our aging adults in our community. Directors of firms comprised of retired police officers, military officers, security consultants, and others that possess specialist skills and knowledge essential to preserving life and protecting the community. A good example of how this works is the arrangement between SES and the Australian Metropolitan and Rural Fire Service Departments of the Government.
Some of the services that will be provided by POL-CPA endorsed security firms include:
- consultation services to prevent domestic homicide;
- secure transit services to prevent domestic homicide;
- safe area patrol services for the homeless;
- call-by security patrol services for the elderly;
- call-in coded mobiles for vulnerable persons;
- social clubs (at risk terrorism targets) discrete protective services; and
- churches, mosques, and other places of worship (at risk terrorism targets) open protective services.
Open protective service for places of worship performed by persons that have achieved creedalism. Uniform security officers from non-denominational firms blended. The development of strategies that are preventive and protective. Terrorism has no religion but the religion of violence itself.
See also, June, 2020 – Counter terrorism raids across Sydney uncover cache of illegal military style weapons >>
Non-profit security officers and consultants work together and become a group of like-minded professionals. POL-CPA provides training annually, and the ongoing in-service education allows officers and consultants to respond and assess a wide range of security situations.
Hostile situations that these professionals may face incidentally as a result of their routine activities are no different from the police. However, the chance is less than that of the police because they are not triple 0 responders. Therefore some of the training and education provided by POL-CPA is similar to police. However, non-profit security professionals may become specialists in areas that the police do not provide services.
POL-CPA training courses include:
THE INDIVIDUAL (explicit individual rights)
The questions, are we a society with a hidden layer of violence that permeates and pervades life to such an extent that we require paramilitary police and Napoleonic laws to protect us? Have those that advocate for authoritarianism chipped away at and eroded the pillars of Australian’s democracy? Has it made people afraid of doing much more than conforming, submitting, and surrendering?
Restoring Confidence in the Criminal Justice System
Public confidence is fundamental to the operation of the criminal justice system. The system depends on the participation of victims and members of the public who participate as witnesses and jurors. Low levels of public confidence also lead to disrespect and dissatisfaction with those responsible for administering the system. The political debate surrounding dissatisfaction has become well established over the past decade. Given the centrality of public confidence, it is not surprising there has been intense interest […]. Cite: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 387. Read more, Australian Institute of Criminology >>
The story of the toy seller:
Games of Conflict Played Fairly Results in Courageous people, not Fierce People. Do you wish to live in a society comprised of courageous people or fierce people?
Take for example the demonising of Brad Towner a seller of harmless colourful toy guns that are an alternative to the Nerf brand toys.
Brad Towner has built a successful business over several years, in full view of the NSW Police, selling colourful plastic toy guns that shoot a harmless gel ball at harmless speeds. These toys are an alternative to the well-known Nerf brand. Brad was recently charged for unlicensed firearms dealing and is facing serious penalties, including prison time if a court convicts him. Brad’s case represents one battle in the cultural war being waged by many government agencies and politicians against anything that looks like a firearm and anyone who takes an interest in them.
In an interview with a journalist, Brad Towner said, “Most definitely not firearms. Under the law, these are certainly toys and from their previous investigations, the Firearm Registry also determined them as such. Prior to the serving warrant to seize my toys by Penrith LAC Police, the last time was by the Major Crimes and Firearm Dept of Parramatta. My customers use the toys purely for playing or collecting and cosplaying as I mentioned above. Lots of parents buy for themselves and their children to encourage outside play and exercise.”
The public debate about the case of Brad Towner and others who have been the victims of ridiculous laws that make criminals out of non-criminals has to lead to a lack of confidence in the legal system.
The cultural war being waged by many government agencies and politicians against anything that looks like a firearm and anyone who takes an interest in them erodes public confidence in the legal system.
Why is there polar viewpoints? The fight-or-flight response is an emotional reaction that occurs in response to a perceived threat is called hyperarousal. A flight response is to deprive a future attacker, and the flight response is to enable the next protector, the individual. People are divided, and the subject matter is not one-sided. Will they ever agree, probably not. See also evolution and religion >>
So it comes down to who has the power to change things to their ways of thinking. Democracy for who?
So what laws should be reviewed and which ones repealed?
Are laws that lock up toy shop owners necessary for our protection, or are they the creation of an immature and fearful mind? Don B. Kates Jr., in a paper that analysed Freud’s work said, “A fear of weapons is a sign of emotional maturity.” Ironically, the case that has received so much public attention involves toys. How does a young person learn to be courageous, not fierce in a world dominated by those that hold up weapons as the instrument of power to solve conflicts. The purpose of make-believe and play is to prepare young minds for the adult world by providing a safe place for fair outcomes. Australians are renowned for their fair game, even in warfare. They are people that can be trusted.
Stop Demonising Non-Criminals
Farmers, sporting shooters, and sellers of toy firearms are not criminals, and they contribute to our society in so many positive ways.
When you read raid the sporting shooters; the farmer disarmed; there was a crackdown; that person is a gun nut, is stock-piling, has an arsenal, we are backsliding, what is the inference? You’re dealing with someone who will say anything to win an argument, you shouldn’t keep arguing with them. For every this or that statement is a canned statement in response, it is a paradox, and everyone has a different setting that defines their response. See also the paradox of violence >>
Demonising and criminalising have only one difference; one is not yet a criminal, and the other is they are declared criminals. The former is a justification emotion, and the latter when based on mala-prohibitum, is witch hunt legislation.
If you read the words of researchers and journalists, you can identify specific characteristics. When data is prepared for your consideration, we all need to be aware that usually only data that serves the viewpoint of the presenter is provided. We are all guilty of this, and only the most disciplined scientist and mathematician may be immune from this human flaw by applying the rule, the results must be repeatable by another, their peer, in particular someone holding a different view.
We live in a period of extreme concern about how we are perceived by others; social psychologists are charting a steady increase in narcissism.
The Psychology of Insults by “Psychology Today” helps understand why people insult others. In their article titled, “The desire to put others down may be as old as…chickens” they write: The insult can be interpreted as an attempt to reduce the social status of the recipient and raise the relative status of the insulter. If that logic is correct, we can assume that insults are often motivated by anger surrounding issues of emotional insecurity. Another way of taking a person down is by questioning their intelligence or general mental competence; for insult purposes, recipients are invariably “stupid” or “crazy.” e.g. your nuts. The Saturday Paper online newspaper’s motto is our journalism is based on trust and independence”. The story titled, “The Gun Nuts in our Parliament” by a journalist was about an Australian Senator and other respected politicians that had a view different from that of the journalist. The Senator and others believe that the lawful right of self-defence is not a right if the capacity to exercise it is prohibited. Referring to the Senator and others as “Gun Nuts” is a pejorative stereotype cast upon them as a means of implying that they are fanatical, exhibit abnormal behavior, or are a threat to the safety of others.
Farmers and sporting shooters are not the problem, they may be part of the solution?
Are farmers and sporting shooters the problem? Not according to the figures provided above.
See also the farmer’s story, protecting his family from a knifeman intruder >>
Malum prohibitum is a Latin phrase used in law to refer to conduct that constitutes an unlawful act only by statute, as opposed to doing that is evil in and of itself. A witchhunt law is a crime that does not contain criminal intent as an element of an offence. Brad Towner was charged under witchhunt legislation designed to make criminals out of non-criminals. Granted that firearms now look like toys with their plastics and sci-fi looking accessories may be a problem if misused. The ease that a firearm can be replicated by a 3D printer used by a criminal for an illegal purpose overshadows this case. The toy seller provides society with the positive of fair play that involves pretending to fight against evildoers. Fear-based laws have no place in a rational society. Courageous people, not fierce people is the outcome of this not guilty verdict.
Brad Towner found not guilty >>. Extract: Sensibly a Jury of 12, within 26 minutes of deliberation found the toy seller NOT GUILTY. Comment from Mr. Towner, “NSWPOL (the police) are still attempting to discredit and treat my products as illegal” and “the best and worst $100,000 I ever spent”. It is sincerely hoped that the police have not destroyed the business future of this courageous individual.
The Senator is accurate in saying that the lawful right of self-defence is not a right if the capacity to exercise it does not exist.
The real problem is ghost-gun. This is because of evolved desk top and garage manufacturing technologies, and the advent of the internet the ghost gun has rendered gun control legislation obsolete because criminals and the terrorists can make any firearm they want. The percentage of ghost guns is increasing exponentially as the cost of manufacturing reduces, now less than $800 AUD for a basic semi-auto blow-back handgun with no serial number. Sadly the next mass murder is likely to be a terrorist attack using ghost guns. This garage technology has rendered gun-control legislation obsolete.
No amount of book-burning legislation or mala-prohibitum is going to make a difference.
What will make a difference in limiting violent crime? Begin by stopping the demonisation of non-criminal groups such as farmers and sport shooters and remove their names from the crim-watch database. Secondly, if someone has an interest in firearms encourage them to join a club where the mechanisms of fellowship and sport can influence that person. Thirdly, identifying strategies that improve public confidence in the legal system? Lastly, review all crimes where criminal intent is not an element of an offence. Make violence the crime, because prohibition has no history of success.
Thank you for reading the explanatory notes of the Preservation of Life – Community Protection Bill.