Sunday, September 15, 2013
ABC & Mikiverse Law Updated September 15, 2013
New South Wales Premier Barry O'Farrell has proposed new laws –read statutes– which will give police greater powers to search people for guns without a warrant.
The changes are to be introduced to Parliament this week and mean police would not need a warrant to search people who have been banned from owning weapons.
Their cars, homes and outlaw motorcycle gang club houses will also be able to be searched without a warrant.
Mr O'Farrell also plans to increase the prison term for anyone convicted of possessing or supplying guns to try to crack down on crime in Sydney.
Here is the propaganda right here. If this happens three times in a year and this actions lowers the count to twice a year then it has 'cracked down on crime'. Of course, in order to really make a difference then this would need to be occurring regularly enough so that removing it would make a noticeable difference despite the fact that it would not be affecting any summary crime and most indictable ones.
This is about training people to accept that it is appropriate for the police to search them without a warrant.
The jail term will increase from 10 to 14 years.
The Government says there are about 60 people who have been issued with firearm bans and he predicts the number will rise as police place a greater focus on gun crime.
So what were the police focusing on before that they considered more important than gun crime?
And, how does searching up to sixty people without warrants cause O' Farrell to predict a rise in the number of people who will be "issued with firearm bans". This is Orwellian doublespeak & i hope that you all can appreciate this and how this is employed by fear activists to drown out logic as well as to help expand the reach of the violent Agent Smith's of the government.
"Police will be able to stop and search them in their cars, in their homes, in their workplace, frankly there'll be no place for them to hide," he said.
Why do innocent people need to be hiding? Because of the greater invasions of people's liberties by government?
"Clearly –clear as mud, which is the point of his lie– these laws –read statutes– are about dealing with gun crime across Sydney, police are concerned –so what? why would we care about the opinions of a functionary body? This is more programming, having the police labelled as an 'authority figure' so you will accept their words as being authoritative as opposed to what they actually are, which is self-serving– about the activities of outlaw –are all motor cycle gangs "outlaw"s? motor cycle gangs and others and these laws will ensure that disorderly houses –the employment of the word disorderly is more programming– or crime dens can also be searched."
Labor has put forward similar proposals in the past, which suggests there could bipartisan support for the changes.
Well they are both essentially the same, despite the bleatings since tweedle dum beat tweedle dee in last weeks elections. Bad news for you if you were expecting change.
But civil libertarians have condemned the idea, arguing it erodes police accountability.
It does.
New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties president Cameron Murphy says a warrant provides legitimacy.
"What a search warrant does is confines the police's activities, so we know why they're searching, and ensures there's a legitimate reason for them to do so," he said.
In theory, this is correct, in practice generally not, but if you can handle your own affairs you'd be really surprised what you can achieve.
"By removing that level of accountability, all we do is set up the scene in the future for perhaps police corruption, because there's no accountability over their actions."
Well said.
In summation, this is what we call fear porn because it seeks to scare you with bullshit before providing a remedy that suits them and not you. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance said Jefferson, but, he wasn't competing against the idiot box for people's attentions.
And lets not forget that any story on guns in the media is trying to program you to the logic that guns are violent and people should never have them. This programming works so well that i saw a man who identifies as being 'left-wing' belittle a man for supporting gun ownership by the people even though it was a violent, conniving murderous RIGHT WING politician that removed guns from the Australian population.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/newshome/18935014/nsw-premier-barry-ofarrell-proposes-tougher-gun-search-powers/
Saturday, September 14, 2013
MIKIVERSE LAW SEPTEMBER 14, 2013
This is an exercise at looking at aspects of the Mental Health Act 1986 so we might enjoy a better understanding of an act whose purpose is apparently to reform the Mental Health laws....
Did you know that the definition of the word "Involuntary Patient" as defined for the Victorian Mental Health Act 1986 has had its definition changed in 1991, 1995, 1996, 2003 & 2005?
Why does the meaning of a word change SIX times in 27 years? Are both the Liberal & Labor party incompetent at defining words? Given the fact that someone could be seriously harmed by a wrongful diagnosis, how much faith can we have in the definition of any word that is changed every 4 and 1/2 years?
This is an exercise at looking at aspects of the Mental Health Act 1986 so we might enjoy a better understanding of an act whose purpose is apparently to reform the Mental Health laws....
Did you know that the definition of the word "Involuntary Patient" as defined for the Victorian Mental Health Act 1986 has had its definition changed in 1991, 1995, 1996, 2003 & 2005?
Why does the meaning of a word change SIX times in 27 years? Are both the Liberal & Labor party incompetent at defining words? Given the fact that someone could be seriously harmed by a wrongful diagnosis, how much faith can we have in the definition of any word that is changed every 4 and 1/2 years?
Further to the last question, we see here that the word "security patient" has been defined SEVEN times in twenty seven years. Another way of looking at this is that two words that convey power to the state over the man, and to limit the freedoms of a man, has been changed THIRTEEN times in twenty seven years, or on average, every thirteen months or so, one of these definitions have changed.
If these people are so incompetent, why are we putting up with it?
Is it because incompetency is one of their smoke screens, designed to hide the truth which is that they do as they want believing that you will deal with the effects of the statutes rather than the causes that give rise to them in the first place?
Isn't it interesting how a body of words can convince men that to be violent against their fellow men?
Friday, September 13, 2013
Wed, September 11 2013: World Freeman Society Director Rob Menard talks about what his group stands for and how it plans to proceed with “spiritual libertarianism” ideals.
http://globalnews.ca/video/832893/interview-with-world-freeman-society-director-rob-menard
http://globalnews.ca/video/832893/interview-with-world-freeman-society-director-rob-menard
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
