Shoot to Kill ‘red herring’ gets too much oxygen

Shoot to kill is an emotive issue after the UK Police killed an innocent man acting guilty subsequent to the London bombings. Todays Australian lists the arguements

“We are not giving police the right to kill somebody who is escaping preventative detention,” Mr Howard said. “We are merely saying that if there is a risk to somebody else’s life or bodily injury and there is no other way, they can use deadly force.” The Prime Minister said the changes were important in allowing police to be certain about their legal osition.

But state premiers and other critics of John Howard’s draft anti-terror legislation yesterday said the Prime Minister was wrong to say it merely replicated these existing “shoot-to-kill” powers. The debate boils down to whether police will be allowed to use lethal force against individuals who, although not suspected of criminal offences, are still sought for preventative detention under the anti-terror laws.

Law Council president John North said Mr Howard’s laws created “a new class of person” who police would be able to detain without sufficient evidence to charge with an offence.

That is irelevant. It doesn’t matter what the person is being detained for or whether the police have any evidence. What does matter is whether he draws a gun and decide to shoot it out. Let’s face it, ordinary crims have been known to draw weapons and kill police while being questioned over trivial traffic offences. Are terrorists going to act any different? There is a chance they wont. The Australian editorial has some advice… Terrorism, not police powers, is the issue that matters

OPPONENTS of the proposed anti-terror legislation should get a grip, because the debate on how to protect Australia against attack is being lost in hyperbole and hysteria.

….and highlights the ABC’s political stance.

On Wednesday night on ABC TV’s Lateline program, host Tony Jones tried to enlist Steve Bracks and Peter Beattie as opponents of the proposed laws, particularly the possibility of police shooting to kill terror suspects.

Not surprised I note that SBS are screening a “Look how wonderfull and inventive Muslims are” show soon and was reminded of a post by Zoe Brain who linked to a website extolling Islam’s virtues. She headlined the post” The Heyday of Islamic Science Appears to have ended in the 13th Century“. What is SBS’s agenda in this issue? Some balance is fine but Zoe’s comments are relevant. Progress halted in the Middle East when the Mullahs gained supremacy and while they marked time the West advanced. The luvvies who watch SBS and believe everything will walk away from the lounge all imbued with wonder for the Islamic world. I bet that at no time will the show highlight the dearth of science that has troubled the Middle East for several hundred years.