The Sydney cafe siege has ended and two hostages have died. The gunman was out on bail for many other offences and had a history of violence. I can see why other countries have a more heavy handed approach to these situations. I was surprised to see the siege go on for as long as it did. Really feel sorry for the victims and I can only hope things like this don’t happen again. To be radicalised itself is a form of violence that isolates communities because to be radicalised is to choose violence as a way of getting what you want and trying to gain control of the larger community to achieve this. That just won’t work in a democratic society and that is why we are fighting Islamic state. This is also why we have been fighting terrorist groups and the Taliban. This is also why we should be more vigilant on radicalised people, it is easy to see why the authorities let this guy out on bail, he is simply a nutcase who probably couldn’t organise a raffle. But they were wrong, he managed to bring the city to a standstill and kill two people.
It is difficult because you should be able to have crazy ideas and still be part of the community. This guy wasn’t particularly popular in his own community most people don’t want anything to do with these kind of violent types. Violence though as we all know is sanctioned by the state to achieve goals such as the destruction of Islamic state but this is to protect values that the state itself stands for and this type of violence is part of life. But within a state the use of terrorism to undermine the values of the state creates many problems because how do you deal with the battle within? Within the state all forms of violence are not acceptable and thats how we can define laws that protect individuals and state values as embodied within parts and the whole. The application of assessing the possible or known supplication of these violent actions is difficult but personally I am not phased if guys like this particular gunman are kept incarcerated for periods of assessment. It isn’t as though the law was fully dealt to this individual as he got bail. Laws that limit freedom are not popular but they were not even applied though they exist to deal with radicalised individuals.
It goes to show you can have many laws but it depends on how they are applied and to who they are applied. The correct procedures could save lives and we can all agree that all forms of violence are unacceptable and radicalisation is simply impending violence or the opposite of what we find acceptable. Laws don’t need to be draconian but they need to be skilfully applied and there is no more pressing time than after this tragic occurrence.