He lived country so easier to do

Commissioner Blanch said the man lived with his parents and alleged he had been radicalised online

On Friday afternoon, police released images of the weapons they seized from the property Mr Michaels lived at, including more than 40 knives, multiple axes, pistols, boxes of ammunition, a slingshot and guns with long barrels.

Have to question what were the parents thinking while he was collecting all this :\

It's the same here. The driver is literally in control of the car. I cracked the shits at an american girl who put a lit cigarette butt out the window which is a massive no-no in Australia.

If you would allow to transfer the fines, that would imply everyone in the car is personally responsible, and I'm not sure that's a good thing, I think it's better that the driver bears all responsibility, and thus also the authority about what goes on in the vehicle. If someone gets in my car and refuses to put the seatbelt, I'm not driving off, simple as.

I'll just leave this video here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud8kFCmalgg

At least here in Sweden there is a large emphasis during driving school that you as the driver is responsible for the car that you are driving, including passengers.

You as the driver has the option to simply refuse to drive until everyone is strapped in.

You have the option to find a place to stop if someone removes the safety belt while you are driving.

The crypto development has the smell of scams and black market trading all over it. Could it even be a good money earner* for bikies?

^launderer ;p^

Something happened there. I noticed its odd placement the other day. But things had settled down, so i thought I'd just leave it.

That is correct, someone went off on another user for not saying something perfectly enough. My reply is showing as a top level comment now?

I think, not 100% sure, the comment you're replying to was supposed to be within the feisty and at times not respectful thread in this comment section. I think its a response to something the other user said, not what the article said.

A City of Perth spokesperson said the devices were installed in response to "ongoing reports" of antisocial and criminal behaviour in the area. They said the devices were not intended to target or deter people experiencing homelessness…

If you believe that “antisocial and criminal behaviour” is actually distinct from “homeless person existing” in the eyes of some people, especially the PTA, then you might be in for a shock.

Oh... um.. nooooo...

^How embarrassing^

Did you mean to make the post title the URL?

They could have made it a conversation if they disagreed at all but instead they jumped you for no reason.

Just wanted to say these replies in my absence were appreciated, cheers.

Given the comment chain, I’m sure this isn’t a productive use of my time but just to be clear that is not at all what my comment implies. In Perth, where the article is based for example, there are homeless shelters. My point remains that most if not all of them have rules (hint: especially the ones with Saint in their name or vaguely religious sounding), that some are not able to comply with due to the issues they face. Nor do I think “the homeless do this In every city”, or all of them in any given city for that matter, hence my use of “subset”, “a good portion of” and other specifying terms.

but people like you with this viewpoint aren’t going to let them get the help they need.

Your misinterpretation of my comment aside I could probably wager I’ve spent more time with the homeless and around them than most. While they can always use more services and facilities, the group Im referring to (and that the article/OP references) the problem is largely one of rights i.e. involuntary psychiatric detention or outpatient rehab. The former doesn’t happen until they present an immediate threat to others or themselves and once they get released, they disappear and learn to avoid areas (e.g. shelters) where they’re likely to be sectioned by the police again. The belligerent/trouble making group Im referring to (and I’ll reiterate, used the term subset) have generally fallen through the cracks and have absconded from facilities. Or genuinely do not want to attend them due to not wanting “rules”, knowing they’ll be evicted or in the case of violence, knowing they’re no longer welcome there. A more complex approach is required beyond just “building shelters” as the comment I replied to stated.

Small L liberals never letting a tragedy, and an opportunity to placate the ruling class, go to waste...

What's so fucking stupid about all these laws in various states is that hate speech is already illegal. These laws in various states are about clamping down on speech they don't like.

Just you wait, pro-palestine rallies will be ruled "hateful", and when they go ahead anyway, will be brutalised like they were in Sydney.

We are witnessing a decline in Australian democracy, and we best be showing up to fight against it.

You have to think about property values! Won't anybody think of the poor investors!

No one at any point said that the homeless were the problem..what are you talking about?

[Edit] apparently this somehow got moved to a top level comment but it was a reply to someone accusing someone else of saying the unhoused were the problem, not the lack of services

Theres an ad campaign just waiting to be built around this play on words 😄

Yeah so why do you think they're throwing bottles? The police will arrest them, great, but does that help the underlying cause? Not at all. Cops protect property, not people.

Maybe fix the homelessness with home-MORE-ness.

Govt: Nah! We need to push them out of sight with a loud sound, fences and "no homeless signs".

Nice job with the fallacies and putting words in my mouth.

Police would be for the carts and bottle throwing.

Hospitals and shelters deal with mental health issues. I’ve never seen a homeless shelter without counselors, but I do suppose places would operate that way in other places.

Why are you even suggesting the police would deal with mental health issues? This is the stigmatizing I’m talking about. And it would be no different between a homeless person or a non-homeless in these situations. So thanks for proving my point again.

And it’s not unhoused, are they called unhoused shelters and societies? No, because you’re being facetious and attacking points I didn’t bring up because you didn’t like being clumped into the group stigmatizing homeless.

It's hilarious that you're suggesting the police would help someone with mental health issues while pretending to know more than anyone in this thread. I'm not up for a dick measuring contest here but I'd wager I've got a lot more experience - good AND bad - based on your replies.

I didn't prove your point. You're being needlessly pedantic and getting pissed for no reason. And if you actually were as morally-superior as you pretend to be, you'd know the proper term is "unhoused"

Shelters solve the problem for many but don't do anything to help the type of person causing trouble. That's all they're saying.

That isn’t true at all. If there’s shelters, the other issues would be dealt with by the police, like non-homeless. The fact that people are making a distinction at all is entirely the issue, and what I’ve pointed out. And thank you for proving my point by being one of those people.

I’m attacking the fact that they’re stigmatizing homeless like they’re any different than non-homeless. That bias and prejudice is what’s causing these issues. Treat homeless like they are human and they won’t act out anymore than nonhomeless. Shocking eh?