It’s just another lawless week in Victoria.
The pick of this week’s action: A jewellery store in Waverley Gardens was robbed on Monday by a gang of axe wielding assailants. This was followed up by a 2nd jewellery store heist, this time in Malvern East. It also seems the jewellery store trend has spread to Perth. A woman was also tied up and bashed in broad daylight in Hillside for her car.
There was also a shooting outside Crown Casino and a home invasion in Tarneit when one person was shot, and three others bashed. An armed robbery in Dandenong was outdone by a gun point armed robbery in St Kilda.
Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Robert Hill took to 3AW with Neil Mitchell on Friday morning to re-assure the public to “be compliant when confronted with these situations” and that they were looking at “increasing security in the jewellery industry similar to what the banking industry experienced” after the 17th robbery in 12 months. However, Avi Yemini succinctly pointed out that this is a ridiculous proposition for small business owners given the contrasting budgets of banks and jewellery stores; and that now jewellery store owners are seeking out illegal firearms to protect their businesses. Not to mention the increase in insurance premiums making the businesses untenable.
Hill compared the current situation to the banking industry 30 years ago, but failed to mention that it was common place 30 years ago for many cash carriers and banks to have firearms on site to protect themselves. This is the same Victoria Police that just a few weeks prior proclaimed that they’d “broken the gangs.”
It also makes one wonder that if crime in Victoria is being allowed to escalate on purpose for the objective of further restricting freedoms of the public via draconian legislation – a tactic of totalitarian governments worldwide. The same old problem – reaction – solution. A theory, but I do digress.
The pinnacle of the week however, was an 8 person home invasion in the suburb of Rockbank narrowly beating out a 6 person home invasion in Brookfield. Channel 7 News reported that the home owners “fought back” by giving them the keys to a different car after being beaten with a wooden plank. Apparently, their definition of “fighting back” differs greatly from ours.
So, more of the same. When these events occur, a glance of social media generally brings about three generic responses:
While Victoria has a distinct problem with violent crime from African gangs (which the media does and doesn’t acknowledge) this isn’t a full spectrum solution. While being firmly of the view that immigrants that commit violent offences should be deported, the problem is that this is moot when the offenders are Australian citizens. Further, it is a self-defeating prophecy when we return violent criminals but then maintain the highest immigration rate (and absurdly high at that) in the OECD. Essentially, for every violent offender we deport we potentially import two or three more. Australia’s immigration program needs a serious overhaul on all fronts but that is not our domain or paygrade.
Yes, there is a problem with our judiciary – it’s far too lenient and the justices/magistrates unaccountable. The bail laws are a disaster. However, often it is also not practical to gaol some offenders purely because there’s nowhere to put them. You also have the added problem of throngs of ambulance chasing lawyers painting repeat offenders out to be perpetual victims. As the saying goes, welcome to Australia: where criminals are victims and victims are criminals.
Police are reactionary only. Victims are the first responders to violent crime. We’ve discussed this already at length.
Essentially, all of these responses say the same thing: “someone else needs to do something because I don’t want the responsibility.” In my opinion, this attitude has become endemic across Australian society. Well, no. Your security is your responsibility.
However, here’s one for you that is getting more of a run in the public consciousness – “Self Defence”
As these incidents continue a glance of the comments sections of social media also sees more and more people realising that the government cannot protect them – this is a good thing. The Lindt Café inquiry results also shall prove interesting. However, populist comments for likes on social media are completely different to tangible action. That energy for comments must be redirected.
So why haven’t many other Australians taken the red pill on self-defence? #1 fear and #2 indoctrination. There are still people out there that think no defence is a good defence and that it is a morally superior alternative to be beaten to disability or worse than to fight back with an appropriate force equalizer. This has essentially been the by-product of 20+ years of one way, trauma based indoctrination of the public regarding firearms and all things self-defence related, with Port Arthur being used as boogeyman #1 and the USA being used as boogeyman #2, when both are nonsense excuses. Here’s 50 pages of examples that prove self-defence is a legitimate reason to own a firearm.
Further, let’s contrast the 8 person home invasion in Rockbank with a 5 person home invasion stopped by a woman with a shotgun in Tennessee last week without a shot being fired. The deterrent effect was enough.
As we’ve stated before, Australia needs to get real about self-defence. The Castle Doctrine and non-lethal self-defence items are a good start. Those that are licenced should be able to use their firearms in practical defence of their homes. Calling the Police also doesn’t unbash, unrape, untraumatize or un-murder the victim(s).
The real question is how much more are Australians willing to tolerate before someone is killed in a home invasion? Or worse, a home owner kills a home invader and spends two years and his life savings trying to prove his innocence?
Only time will tell.