When should police do entries rather than endure perimeter containment, until better equipped and trained forces are used?
Police were there after about 30 seconds..... and remained in charge the whole time.
I got one don't think that was appropriate.
But such a dissection on such a one off event will lead to changes that will inadvertently make what they do more dangerous. We need to think large scale mass murder with multiple attackers, heavily armed and war like settings. Containment was involved in this scenario as that is what the prick chose to do.
Here's a novel thought, train every front line police officer in assault rifles and have them armed with the weapon in every patrol car, similar to the U.S. This would mean 100's of officers appropriately equipped and ready to engage and eliminate people who are actively killing in this way.
The alternative is a handful of 'specialist' members who may or may not make it to you in time. We can't save everyone in these scenarios but limiting the loses is the ultimate aim. Do I want several patrol cars on scene actively trying to save me in 30sec to 1min or wait 10-15 min for a specialist unit to arrive that may have 3-4 officers? What do they do if there is 4, 5 or 6 attackers at 3-6 different locations?
Frontline policing needs to change, whether they do this pre-emptively or be forced into it by a mass killing will be seen overtime. It is clear though that relying on 'specialist' teams is unrealistic.
But such a dissection on such a one off event will lead to changes that will inadvertently make what they do more dangerous. We need to think large scale mass murder with multiple attackers, heavily armed and war like settings. Containment was involved in this scenario as that is what the prick chose to do.
Here's a novel thought, train every front line police officer in assault rifles and have them armed with the weapon in every patrol car, similar to the U.S. This would mean 100's of officers appropriately equipped and ready to engage and eliminate people who are actively killing in this way.
The alternative is a handful of 'specialist' members who may or may not make it to you in time. We can't save everyone in these scenarios but limiting the loses is the ultimate aim. Do I want several patrol cars on scene actively trying to save me in 30sec to 1min or wait 10-15 min for a specialist unit to arrive that may have 3-4 officers? What do they do if there is 4, 5 or 6 attackers at 3-6 different locations?
Frontline policing needs to change, whether they do this pre-emptively or be forced into it by a mass killing will be seen overtime. It is clear though that relying on 'specialist' teams is unrealistic.
How is what went down, in any way a clear example that using specialist teams is unrealistic?
The police service might call the squad that went in specialists, but they weren't.
16 blokes tripping over themselves and throwing thunder flashes under their own feet while entering a classic cross fire situation isn't all that special.
Is it?
Having lesser trained officers trotting around armed with semi/auto milspecs as an alternative is a scary thought.
Don't think I'll sleep well tonight after that.
Thanks for that.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE! Share a cot with Milton?
How is what went down, in any way a clear example that using specialist teams is unrealistic?
The police service might call the squad that went in specialists, but they weren't.
16 blokes tripping over themselves and throwing thunder flashes under their own feet while entering a classic cross fire situation isn't all that special.
Is it?
Having lesser trained officers trotting around armed with semi/auto milspecs as an alternative is a scary thought.
Don't think I'll sleep well tonight after that.
Thanks for that.
Again you have taken an isolated incident involving a poorly planned, poorly executed attempt at hostage taking and used it to define what terrorism will be in the future, this is exactly what I'm talking about. This is what led to 100's of people dying in Paris the tunnel vision naive view that we change when change is forced upon us.
U.S. And Africa and Indonesia have all been resolved with heavily armed patrol officers arriving on scene first and engaging the terrorists before other help can arrive. Like Paris our police forces can't do that because they are ill equiped themselves to be effective to at least suppress the killing until help arrives. Watch this and you'll understand what advantage an assault rifle gives over a handgun
As for your 'lesser' trained officers what do you mean by that? In terrorist attacks in Canada, U.S., Africa to name a few it was patrol officers or first responders that engaged and killed all offenders effectively eliminating the threat immediately. They did this with not one recorded incident of cross fire or accidental civilian casualty.
Training is training, I'm sure their are many very capable patrol officers that can effectively engage with a terrorist if armed with the right equipment. If there's a choice though you wait for your 'commandos' and those 'poorly' trained officers can come save me and mine.
Again you have taken an isolated incident involving a poorly planned, poorly executed attempt at hostage taking and used it to define what terrorism will be in the future, this is exactly what I'm talking about. This is what led to 100's of people dying in Paris the tunnel vision naive view that we change when change is forced upon us.
U.S. And Africa and Indonesia have all been resolved with heavily armed patrol officers arriving on scene first and engaging the terrorists before other help can arrive. Like Paris our police forces can't do that because they are ill equiped themselves to be effective to at least suppress the killing until help arrives. Watch this and you'll understand what advantage an assault rifle gives over a handgun
As for your 'lesser' trained officers what do you mean by that? In terrorist attacks in Canada, U.S., Africa to name a few it was patrol officers or first responders that engaged and killed all offenders effectively eliminating the threat immediately. They did this with not one recorded incident of cross fire or accidental civilian casualty.
Training is training, I'm sure their are many very capable patrol officers that can effectively engage with a terrorist if armed with the right equipment. If there's a choice though you wait for your 'commandos' and those 'poorly' trained officers can come save me and mine.
No I have taken an isolated incident involving a poorly planned, poorly executed attempt at resolving a hostage scenario, and used it to question what will happen in the future.
Imagine what would occur if they had come up against a reasonably trained coordinated force, rather than a lone nutter with a stereo speaker strapped to his back and one short range fire arm.
Lindt siege: Mass exodus from Tactical Operations Unit blamed on low morale
June 16, 2016 Daily Terrorgraph LAURA BANKS and MARK MORRI
"THE elite police squad responsible for storming the Lindt Cafe amid the 2014 siege has lost a quarter of its highly trained officers because of low morale, senior sources say... Of the 75 positions in the unit, only 54 are filled, with six of those senior officers “and a few more are transferring from that”, a senior police source told The Daily Telegraph..... “One bloke put in for a transfer last week and he has only just finished the course,” a senior police source said....
Lindt siege: Mass exodus from Tactical Operations Unit blamed on low morale
June 16, 2016 Daily Terrorgraph LAURA BANKS and MARK MORRI
"THE elite police squad responsible for storming the Lindt Cafe amid the 2014 siege has lost a quarter of its highly trained officers because of low morale, senior sources say... Of the 75 positions in the unit, only 54 are filled, with six of those senior officers “and a few more are transferring from that”, a senior police source told The Daily Telegraph..... “One bloke put in for a transfer last week and he has only just finished the course,” a senior police source said....
Seems the Police Commissioners didn't make any decisions (they are insisting they didn't ffs) and were probably off in Redfern in the bunker, having their hands held by an equally impotent Premier!
What a Fn mess!
Will post the Coreners inquest report when it is available.
Some problems highlighted:
"NEGOTIATORS WERE ILL-EQUIPPED
The state’s only negotiation truck that was equipped with everything police negotiators needed to operate, was unavailable during the siege.
The inquest heard it was never replaced after it fell into disrepair in 2011....."
"DESPERATE CALLS FROM HOSTAGES TO POLICE WENT UNANSWERED
Desperate calls from hostages to negotiators went unanswered in the final hours of the siege because police didn’t have access to adequate resources including multiple phone lines, the inquest heard..."
"MISSED CHANCES TO BARGAIN WITH THE GUNMAN
Police negotiators never made direct contact with Monis. All communications were done through a third party — the hostages...."
"SLAIN HOSTAGE’S WARNING OVERLOOKED The inquest also heard that Mr Jenkins did not know Mr Johnson had earlier sent text messages about the gunman’s worsening behaviour to family members who immediately passed them onto police...."
"FAILURE TO ACTIVATE AN ‘EMERGENCY RESPONSE’
Counsel for Tori Johnson’s family, Gabrielle Bashir, SC argued that police should have acted after Monis fired his first shots — and missed — at escaping hostages, just 10 minutes before he executed Mr Johnson...."
" SNIPER’S WARNING WENT UNHEARD
Monis fired the first shot at 2.03am as six hostages escaped, shattering the glass above their heads. One of the three snipers positioned in the Westpac building was alarmed when, just three minutes later, he saw Mr Johnson move to his knees and place his hands above his head. The sniper called over the police radio and warned that an execution looked imminent. No one responded...."
"FAULTY POLICE RADIOS
Problems with the radio system prevented police from receiving reports that Monis had fired a second shot at 2.09am, the former officer confirmed.
The forward command post never received word that Mr Johnson had been seen on his knees at 2.06am because of the radio issues. The sniper saw Mr Johnson fall forward at 2.13am.
As police made the critical call to storm the Lindt cafe after Monis executed Mr Johnson, their radios failed......"
"POLICE COMMISSIONER ACCUSED OF ‘INTERFERING'
A phone call between Mr Jenkins and Mr Scipione at 10.57pm on December 15, some three hours before the siege reached its deadly conclusion, emerged at the inquest as one of the most critical areas in trying to determine whether or not the police commissioner inappropriately interfered in the siege.
A scribe alongside Mr Jenkins on the night recorded of their conversation: “DA to occur as last resort — COP (Commissioner of Police)”.
The letters DA referred to a deliberate action, which was produced but never approved during the siege. The plan would have seen police storm the cafe at a time of their choosing...."
A telecommunications provider was directed to track down deleted text messages Ms Burn sent during and soon after the deadly Martin Place stand-off but the inquest this week heard the search had “not yet yielded fruit”.
Ms Burn told the inquest she deleted texts received during the siege because she was told she wasn’t an “involved officer.”
She also insisted she “did not need to know the detail” of the siege.
“That was not my job,” she told NSW Coroner Michael Barnes..."
I'll reiterate some of my observations from within this thread:
Should have handed over to SAS.
Should have pissed off about 60% of the cops aimlessly wandering around, and blocking all the roads with their idle vehicles.
Should have used emergency department at Sydney eye Hospital 100m from the Lindt Cafe.
Hopefully, the cops will never think again that they can handle an operation like this.
This is the shit Scipione and Burns would have us believe was indicative of their involvement in the seige.
"“I’ve had a quick chance to talk to the SSG (Special Services Group) team that were forward tonight and it’s apparent we should prepare a fresh bid for any new equipment that is necessary.
“Can you please get advice from Mal as to any electronic imaging /audio intelligence gathering equipment we may need for the future … I will need this soon in order to make sure we are appropriately prepared for the future. I’m happy to discuss in the morning.
“Thanks for your hard work today, see you bright and early in the morning, regards Andrew.”
("lost" Text message from Commissioner to his (Counter terrorism) Deputy Commissioner).
Is this what happens when you employ people to primarily be media risk managers?
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy