allthegearandnoidea wrote:This response is to be expected
He’s talking about tweaking the national firearms database- which if my experience transferring reg from interstate is anything to go by needs an overhaul
nurofen wrote:https://www.9news.com.au/national/queensland-shooting-queensland-police-union-calls-for-weapons-licensing-system-review-after-tragic-shooting/2599f84e-2554-4cb7-ae72-38a34b7e628d
Oldbloke wrote:Yes, and cops are not Happy they had a security system that they used for surveillance. Lol.
A police requirement in Vic if you have more than 15 firearms.
Honestly what wankers.
bladeracer wrote:Oldbloke wrote:Yes, and cops are not Happy they had a security system that they used for surveillance. Lol.
A police requirement in Vic if you have more than 15 firearms.
Honestly what wankers.
I have cameras but only the actual alarm system is a requirement.
If their surveillance system was recording then it should be a great assist in the investigation I would think.
Oldbloke wrote:bladeracer wrote:Oldbloke wrote:Yes, and cops are not Happy they had a security system that they used for surveillance. Lol.
A police requirement in Vic if you have more than 15 firearms.
Honestly what wankers.
I have cameras but only the actual alarm system is a requirement.
If their surveillance system was recording then it should be a great assist in the investigation I would think.
The inference was that surveillance systems were bad. Does my head in.
If it helps catch a crim it's good.
If used against cops, it's bad, ban it. Wankers.
JohnV wrote:But not calling for better Policing of the manufacture , distribution and use of illegal drugs which I bet is the true underlying cause of this whole thing . While authorities refuse to focus on the real reasons for things like this , it will only get worse and worse.
Lazarus wrote:JohnV wrote:But not calling for better Policing of the manufacture , distribution and use of illegal drugs which I bet is the true underlying cause of this whole thing . While authorities refuse to focus on the real reasons for things like this , it will only get worse and worse.
John, FFS, there has been NO evidence that the three vermin involed were on drugs mate.
None
That is purely your own personal supposition.
They were fundamentalist baptists John, one was a pastor, not your average meth smokers.
Fundamentalism, extremism, conspiracy and lunacy were to blame.
Please show us even ONE verified police report stating that they were drug users, because in fairness to your opinion on this I have tried and failed to find any.
JohnV wrote:If I want to have the opinion that drugs are involved then it's my choice to have that opinion .
Who made you people the thought Police ?
What don't you get about the phrase , " I bet " . Is English your second language .
Oldbloke wrote:John is just expressing a view that drugs are likely involved. No evidence but given their prevalence in crime not a unreasonable assumption.
Lazarus wrote:Oldbloke wrote:John is just expressing a view that drugs are likely involved. No evidence but given their prevalence in crime not a unreasonable assumption.
I understand that OB.
That's not my point. It's that all evidence points in a different direction and that there's absolutely NO evidence that the vermin were drug users.
The police hate drug users as much as John appears to, and the vermin would have been tox screened during post mortem.
If that had shown drugs present the police would have been very loud about it as a contributor, would they not?
Lazarus wrote:You're right OB.
I too have hobby-horses I can tend to push, but I find evidence based assumptions are more often proven.
That disappearance case is a bizarre one indeed.
Oldbloke wrote:Lazarus wrote:You're right OB.
I too have hobby-horses I can tend to push, but I find evidence based assumptions are more often proven.
That disappearance case is a bizarre one indeed.
Mate,,, I'm always right. Just ask Mrs OB.
Oldbloke wrote:John is just expressing a view that drugs are likely involved. No evidence but given their prevalence in crime not a unreasonable assumption.