Quantcast
Terrorist shooting in Australia

Forums - Politics Discussion - Terrorist shooting in Australia

This news story seems to have been glossed over but there was a shooting in Australia this past week where 2 people including a police officer were shot dead by an Islamist extremist.

Below is a summary of the events:

http://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/story/3399726/parramatta-shooting-how-it-unfolded/



Around the Network

No not another one, when will these terrorists just give it a rest.



This is a terrible tragedy, lone wolf whackos like this only display how easy it is for people to be radicalised online (though it appears that the preachers at his mosque may have been involved in this...) Luckily, the extremist nutjob only managed to kill one before the other police in the area took him down.



Yes, in a country with 24 million people, of which about half a million are Muslims, there has been a total of ONE shooting reported to have anything to do with Islam since the start of the year. But hey, "not another one", right?

Total people killed in Australia by terrorism in 2015? Two.

Incidentally, it wasn't a police officer. It was a police finance worker. It's a minor distinction, but getting your facts straight should always be a primary concern. And truth be told, we have such a low gun-crime rate in Australia that a single case like this gets major news coverage.

Meanwhile, in America, on any given day, typically more than 30 people will be shot and killed. And as a result, the only time the news about it breaks out of the "local" level is when it's a mass shootings... of which there have been almost one per day this year. And that's why Americans probably won't have heard about a non-mass shooting in Australia.

Lawlight, nobody has "glossed over" this shooting. The PM gave a speech about it, spent long times on the phone with people high in the Muslim community discussing strategies to prevent radicalisation, and sparked a more extensive discussion of the situation. Want to see how much coverage it has gotten? Go to news.google.com.au, and do a search for "Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar", which was the name of the teen perpetrator. You'll immediately get hit with a variety of news source links, from SMH, The Australian, ABC, The Australian Financial Review, and a long list of other major news sites. There's 893 articles (at this moment) in the first batch alone. And that's articles reaching back three days to the day it happened - that's right, it has been talked about for THREE days, pretty much constantly, in the media.

Food for thought, anyway.



Aielyn said:
Yes, in a country with 24 million people, of which about half a million are Muslims, there has been a total of ONE shooting reported to have anything to do with Islam since the start of the year. But hey, "not another one", right?

Total people killed in Australia by terrorism in 2015? Two.

Incidentally, it wasn't a police officer. It was a police finance worker. It's a minor distinction, but getting your facts straight should always be a primary concern. And truth be told, we have such a low gun-crime rate in Australia that a single case like this gets major news coverage.

Meanwhile, in America, on any given day, typically more than 30 people will be shot and killed. And as a result, the only time the news about it breaks out of the "local" level is when it's a mass shootings... of which there have been almost one per day this year. And that's why Americans probably won't have heard about a non-mass shooting in Australia.

Lawlight, nobody has "glossed over" this shooting. The PM gave a speech about it, spent long times on the phone with people high in the Muslim community discussing strategies to prevent radicalisation, and sparked a more extensive discussion of the situation. Want to see how much coverage it has gotten? Go to news.google.com.au, and do a search for "Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar", which was the name of the teen perpetrator. You'll immediately get hit with a variety of news source links, from SMH, The Australian, ABC, The Australian Financial Review, and a long list of other major news sites. There's 893 articles (at this moment) in the first batch alone. And that's articles reaching back three days to the day it happened - that's right, it has been talked about for THREE days, pretty much constantly, in the media.

Food for thought, anyway.


We're not talking about America here. And nice of you to downplay the death of an innocent person.

Also, just because there's only been one attack this year doesn't mean it's not an issue that involves more than 1 person. Last year 2 police officers were stabbed, 17 people taken hostages (2 of whom died) and now this 1 person died.

Also, let's not forget this either:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-02/teenager-jailed-for-at-least-five-years-over-anzac-day-plot/6824752

Who knows how many would have died In Melbourne this year if he wasn't stopped. There's also been several arrests since September 2014 in relation to terrorist plots.

This shooting has had coverage in Australia but not much elsewhere.



Around the Network
Lawlight said:
Aielyn said:
Yes, in a country with 24 million people, of which about half a million are Muslims, there has been a total of ONE shooting reported to have anything to do with Islam since the start of the year. But hey, "not another one", right?

Total people killed in Australia by terrorism in 2015? Two.

Incidentally, it wasn't a police officer. It was a police finance worker. It's a minor distinction, but getting your facts straight should always be a primary concern. And truth be told, we have such a low gun-crime rate in Australia that a single case like this gets major news coverage.

Meanwhile, in America, on any given day, typically more than 30 people will be shot and killed. And as a result, the only time the news about it breaks out of the "local" level is when it's a mass shootings... of which there have been almost one per day this year. And that's why Americans probably won't have heard about a non-mass shooting in Australia.

Lawlight, nobody has "glossed over" this shooting. The PM gave a speech about it, spent long times on the phone with people high in the Muslim community discussing strategies to prevent radicalisation, and sparked a more extensive discussion of the situation. Want to see how much coverage it has gotten? Go to news.google.com.au, and do a search for "Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar", which was the name of the teen perpetrator. You'll immediately get hit with a variety of news source links, from SMH, The Australian, ABC, The Australian Financial Review, and a long list of other major news sites. There's 893 articles (at this moment) in the first batch alone. And that's articles reaching back three days to the day it happened - that's right, it has been talked about for THREE days, pretty much constantly, in the media.

Food for thought, anyway.

 

This shooting has had coverage in Australia but not much elsewhere.


And realistically, why should it? Why should an incident involving 2 deaths be international news? An estimated 150,000 people die every single day. So these 2 deaths represented a little over 1 second of the deaths that occur every day. Someone shot someone, then ended up getting shot. Is it sad? Yes. Would it be better if these things didn't happen? Certainly. Is it in any way relevant to the rest of the world? No.



GreyianStorm said:
Lawlight said:

 

This shooting has had coverage in Australia but not much elsewhere.


And realistically, why should it? Why should an incident involving 2 deaths be international news? An estimated 150,000 people die every single day. So these 2 deaths represented a little over 1 second of the deaths that occur every day. Someone shot someone, then ended up getting shot. Is it sad? Yes. Would it be better if these things didn't happen? Certainly. Is it in any way relevant to the rest of the world? No.


Only 2 people died in the Sydney Siege. Only 12 people died in the Charlie Hebdo shooting. What's your logic there?



Lawlight said:
GreyianStorm said:


And realistically, why should it? Why should an incident involving 2 deaths be international news? An estimated 150,000 people die every single day. So these 2 deaths represented a little over 1 second of the deaths that occur every day. Someone shot someone, then ended up getting shot. Is it sad? Yes. Would it be better if these things didn't happen? Certainly. Is it in any way relevant to the rest of the world? No.


Only 2 people died in the Sydney Siege. Only 12 people died in the Charlie Hebdo shooting. What's your logic there?


I'd be of the opinion that both of those events got far more airtime than they truly deserved. Particularly the Sydney Siege, as there isn't even certainty regarding links to terrorism.



GreyianStorm said:
Lawlight said:

 

This shooting has had coverage in Australia but not much elsewhere.


And realistically, why should it? Why should an incident involving 2 deaths be international news? An estimated 150,000 people die every single day. So these 2 deaths represented a little over 1 second of the deaths that occur every day. Someone shot someone, then ended up getting shot. Is it sad? Yes. Would it be better if these things didn't happen? Certainly. Is it in any way relevant to the rest of the world? No.


By that logic 9-11 accounted for just under 30mins worth of dying in a single day. Never forget! I'm not sure I see the logic that you're getting at. It's still a terror related killing even if it is 1/1500th 9-11 it should still surely appear on international news? Just saying that I hadn't heard of this before this thread.

 

edited bad maths - It was 30 mins worth.



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

cant we just say "extremist" rather than tacking on islamist, by tacking on islamist you are basically peddling some of the blame to islam, when the blame should lay only with the asshole that carried out the actions.

 

And frankly, i neither buy into the religious scaremongering or approve of people using the actions of the few to condemn the many.