The police deliberately created an opportunity for a crime to be committed, had they not created that situation the crime would not have been committed. It is a textbook case of entrapment. You may think it's valid, but it is entrapment.
Dr Monterosso said it was difficult to find statistics to show whether this method of proactive policing reduced crime.
In order for it to be plausible that it would reduce crime the police would need to be open about the fact that they are using this tactic. The only reason more than a handful of people actually know about this is the sound journalism by Mya Kordic
It may be legal but it is thoroughly immoral and one suspects if it was a white kid with wealthy parents it would've been chucked out.
Its absurd to think that traffic fines are any substantial part of the budget but here you go, I did 2-3 minutes of research for you.
In the 2023-24 financial year, fines issued from road safety cameras amounted to $473 million. This figure represents a fraction of the overall cost of speed and distracted driving and seatbelt-related crashes. Link
The total state budget is 111.7 billion. Link
ie. Around half of 1%
I used victoria just because when i typed "traffic camera revenue" into DDG it was the second result.
I wondered about this also, FWIW my solution would be self reporting verified at the time of vehicle sale or end of vehicle life. I believe some states require periodic roadworthy checks which would also be an opportunity for verification.
Real time vehicle tracking is obviously unacceptable.
Governments have never been dependent on speeding fine revenue. This is a myth perpetuated by people who are indignant that they can't drive recklessly without consequence.
Hmmm, the fact that Rudd tried and failed to carry out a difficult but fundamentally positive reform is not a very strong case against pursuing it again in the future, for better or worse political progress is almost always multiple failed attempts punctuated by small iterative steps forward.
The idea that Murdoch's influence is down to the consumers is pretty naive. The Murdoch media is so dominant that it has the capacity to poison every narrative, while one can seek alternative sources those sources struggle financially and can't market themselves to compete effectively. Added to this is the fact that their dominance means that nearly all incidental news exposure will be Murdoch, they are the papers on the stands, they are the news breaks after sports matches, they are favoured by social media algorithms. Not everyone has the time or inclination to put in the substantial daily work to combat this, Murdoch media dominance is a systemic problem, not one of individual choice.
As the article points out, the fuel excise tax does not pay for roads, it goes into general revenue and does not collect enough to pay for the damage done by air pollution. The argument is that roads should be paid for by a tax on vehicle weight and distance travelled whether ICE or EV in addition to the fuel excise tax.
I read the first book and I think it is the first time in decades that I have encountered actual sci-fi concepts that weren't a reworking of ideas that have been around for decades.
It's not a character driven novel but the characters are fine, mostly they're not that likeable - which in my opinion is not a reason to dislike a story - and I think they probably lose something in translation. When I was a teenager I devoured Asimov, Phillip K Dick, Heinlein etc for the concepts, compared to them the characters in 3 Body are masterfully written.
I haven't yet read the second book as I found the first few chapters a bit of a slog but I plan to pick it up again once I've finished rereading some Ursula K LeGuin
Doesn't this risk creating a slum-like situation that works for no one?
I have very little time for this argument, although I acknowledge that it is one sentence in a longer more nuanced post.
The fact is that these people need to be housed and housing near to public transport, employment and services is going to result in fewer "problematic" neighbours than housing them out in the middle of bum-f**k nowhere.
The vast majority of public housing residents will be fine neighbours, even if inner city folks wouldn't necessarily invite them around for a barbecue. The people who make genuine problems for the neighbours need to be somewhere, I see no reason that burden should be placed on other poor people in preference to the wealthy.
Edit: Whoops, didn't realise this was a month old...
Private schools add literally no value to society. Study after study have shown absolutely no correlation between private schooling and eventual income/self reported happiness/career satisfaction/tertiary education success (after controlling for parental income and education level).
What private schools do is reduce social cohesion by segregating children by income and religion. Funny how conservatives are always in favoir of social cohesion when they are using it as a racist dog whistle but not where it actually matters.
I don't know if I'd go so far as banning private schools(some Montessori or Bush Schools etc may actually add value) but I certainly don't think these class exclusionary bohemoths should be getting any public grants or tax concessions.
There are ways of doing this without entrapment. If they want to catch bike and scooter thieves they can stake out the bike racks. I suspect no sane person leaves their bike unlocked there so they have to contrive an artificial situation to entice someone to commit a crime. How is this valuable policing? Had the police not bought a scooter and left it unlocked no crime would've been committed.
I have no illusions that the young fellow in question is an upstanding citizen but how is public interest served here? One kid gets a fine and arguably may hesitate before doing the same thing again but the problem is not this one kid, it is systemic and were it not for this news article no-one would even know about it meaning it is useless even for deterrence.
It is a waste of everyone's time, drags a kid who likely already has a shit life through the courts further alienating him, and did not even protect the property of a real person.