We seem to be moving to the far left when it comes to our attitude to public demonstrations. Few would argue that the public have a right to protest against government decisions of which they disagree. The problem is just what degree of violence is acceptable !
The nation of Greece has seen it's youth take to the streets, smashing business houses and committing arson. In one incident a youth throwing a " Molotov cocktail " was shot by police and killed.
As a result, the police involved have been arrested. A minister has stood down from his post - and an enraged mob is roaming the streets causing more damage.
Many here would be reminded of a similar riot at Redfern several years ago. In that instance poor police leadership saw police without body armour face a drunken mob of Aboriginals who assaulted them with " Molotov cocktails ". No shots were fired, but the police were criticised for defending themselves with batons.
It is reasonable to question whether a demonstrator has the right to try and inflict grievous bodily harm - or even death - on a police officer and expect to get away with it without deadly force being used in defence.
The only reason people resort to such tactics is the certain knowledge that deadly force will not be employed.
The attitude of the public is fickle. If a police officer is badly injured in such a riot the public tends to shrug their shoulders and look the other way.
If a demonstrator is similarly injured the outpouring of rage knows no bounds - and of course - the defensive action of the police is condemned.
There would be few instances of extreme violence in demonstrations if the sure and certain outcome would be the use of deadly force in return.
When demonstrators burn cars and buildings, assault citizens opposed to their view - and try to kill police they are surely no better than terrorists.
It is time the " softly - softly " approach was abandoned - and force was met with force !
No comments:
Post a Comment