The media really cracks me up sometimes. (Alternative title. Media has IQ of a potato)

It’s only a bail hearing, so they don’t have to get to the nitty gritty of evidence and proof. It’s merely to determine if the allegations are of such allegation, and the alleged offender’s circumstances are of such concern, they ought to keep him penned before his next appearance in Court.

There isn’t even an iq when it comes to the media🤣
I got suspended all the time from them on Facebook simply for copying and pasting links of their own previous stories that completely contradict the story they were running at the time :joy::joy::joy:

while media bias is also prevalent in this case, there isn’t too much wrong with the report. The guy held the unwitting person at ■■■ point. Who gives a damn that it is a gel blaster. To the victim it is an assault rifle. Irresponsible use of gel blasters like alleged in the article, (or air soft, ping pong ■■■■) whatever should be classed as serious armed offences. I actually think this is our ticket to have them legalised. Use them responsibly - go for it. Do something stupid and you will be slapped with real firearm charges. Every other country does it successfully.

1 Like

Maybe he has an ACA “exclusive” deal. :rofl::rofl::rofl:

As exclusive as a Tac Toys release.

You will find that a lot of that type of stuff is syndicated content or straight ripped off by less reputable tabloids like Daily Mail.

As for the YouTube links that have been highlighted, the “reveals” is a video dated 2015 while the other two are 2020. Entirely possible that Old Mate told Sky (or their NewsCorp affiliate) to go fuck themselves, especially since I can almost guarantee they wouldn’t have a crew there.

And yeah, as for the facts of the story, this seems pretty reasonable to me. Gel blaster or not, he pointed what could easily be construed as real weapon at a person in order to threaten them, and the story clearly highlights the mental issues at play. In fact, it’s probably to the industry’s benefit that gel blasters weren’t demonised in this story, even though that could have easily been done.

“Former soldier storms animal rescue with gel blaster”

1 Like

One of the biggest problems with employment structures is many people in management positions have psychopathic traits. Studies have shown they gravitate toward these jobs because they are efficient and like having power over people.

Agree.
News is a packaged commodity.
Syndication apart from cost cutting has ensured 1 version of any BS.

Anecdote:
Years ago, I was at ABC Vic helping with editing when a news service from the US called to ask about a local story. Naomi, the reporter who took the call was asked a question and her name. She was asked if she was okay with the article tagged with “from our reporter in Australia”, she would be paid. She did later receive a U$100 cheque in the mail. Thing is, phones ring on empty desks all the time and anyone in the newsroom could have picked up the phone, including me. :roll_eyes:

I think everyone will agree the guy was a nutter, and deserves punishment for his actions, and most of the story seems accurate, but the omission of the fact the fire-arm was a toy gel blaster, is without a doubt, misleading to all readers, and done intentionally by those journalists.

The judge said it was the “loaded fire-arm” as to why he could not be released on bail.

Even if we apply QLD’s rules, he DID point a loaded firearm at her. A gel blaster is a gel blaster until you do something wrong with it, then you get slapped with firearm charges.

Additionally, it could be loaded with gels, or he could have been a totally dickhead and loaded it with ball bearings or other projectiles.

Yes, if you use a gel blaster in a manner that makes it a real fire-arm (i.e threatening someone with it and making them believe it’s a real fire-arm) then you should be charged with that offense.

But, a judge to know all the evidence, and say someone can’t be out on bail because they have a loaded fire-arm is bit over the top. If it was for mental health or other risk factors, sure. To say it’s because he has a gel blaster is just ridiculous.

Think of an idiot that shot innocent people at a park with a gel blaster. They get arrested by cops, thrown in jail and denied bail, because they’re a serious risk to public safety? C’mon. You could stab someone and still be out on bail.

Nobody in their right mind would take a $5000 r*fle to rescue a $5.00 cat.

He deserves to be locked up for the fear he caused and tying up the person.

Now, the silly bastard is going to get a long holiday in a jail or mental institution over a toy and a fucking cat.

Reality is often stranger than fiction