GojiraSteve wrote:In defence of the run-of-the-mill employees sure. But you could argue that the fact that they're perpetually understaffed contributed greatly to John Edwards slipping through the cracks.
And the management team "solved" that problem by LOWERING staffing levels!? Seems counter intuitive to me.
I won't argue about perpetually being understaffed. I agree with it. I'm in favor for it being mostly automated.
Computers will generally give a faster and more consistent outcome, leaving employees to spend more time assessing the people the computer doesn't like.
As for John Edwards, I don't know much about how he actually got issued a firearm. From what I've read, he was initially refused based on a AVO put on him 10 years prier. He then requested a commissioners permit to bypass the restriction. Due to AVO being a decade old, they decided he wasn't a risk. Was it the right decision? i think it's too easy to say "obviously not!" But these decisions aren't always easy and we don't have all the facts.
I find it hard to believe anyone emotionally motivated to commit murder would wait half a year to buy a gun when they could achieve the same devastation in a more discreet manner with a knife. I could be totally wrong, but my gut is telling me that he actually just wanted to shoot a gun, and it was that simple.
But after he had the gun, it became convenience...
Perhaps based off his historical AVO they should have got in contact with people who know him, to better asses his mental state. Or maybe they already did ? I'd doubt it, highly doubt it. But as i said, we don't know all the facts. And if he hadn't had an AVO from 10 years ago, he wouldn't have had any trouble in getting a gun in the first place and most likely would have committed the crime anyway.
From what I've been told, the reduction in staff was more voluntary rather than sackings. I've been told this in good faith so i don't want to say too much. But the lack of staff doesn't seem to have been anything intentional. As far as i last heard, there currently isn't a verdict about how things happened, or any planned penalty (such as deliberate delays) to applicants.