The bushfires, and the arson myth.

[Caesar]

In my opinion,Big Footy is pretty good because it allows people from the left, the right and everywhere in between to express their opinions and their thoughts and allows us to debate, converse and to challenge other people's thoughts and things they bring up as facts and people can challenge us in the same way.

It allows everyone and anyone to try and bring people around to their way of thinking through the disclosure of things that maybe some of us weren't aware of and of course, it allows people to debunk myths and false information.

Nobody has time or energy to debunk all the easily-falsifiable garbage that gets posted on these boards, much of it from bad-faith operators.

Far from adding balance, in many cases it distracts from, obscures or delegitimises nuanced discussion of valid perspectives that run counter to the board's prevailing sentiment.

Anyone who feels censored for being unable to post something that can be dismissed with five minutes of personal research is probably not the sort of person it is worth having a discussion with in the first place.

 

[Navyblues09]

In the end, little to no land, lives, or property was lost to deliberately lit fires.

The "reporting" to the contrary at the time by breathless pearl-clutching global warming deniers stands in stark relief to the facts.

To be pedantic, deliberately lit bushfires.

Unfortunately too many lost to deliberately lit fires.

 

[Chief]

To be pedantic, deliberately lit bushfires.

Unfortunately too many lost to deliberately lit fires.

How many deliberately lit fires were there?

 

[Northalives]

Nobody has time or energy to debunk all the easily-falsifiable garbage that gets posted on these boards, much of it from bad-faith operators.

Far from adding balance, in many cases it distracts from, obscures or delegitimises nuanced discussion of valid perspectives that run counter to the board's prevailing sentiment.

Anyone who feels censored for being unable to post something that can be dismissed with five minutes of personal research is probably not the sort of person it is worth having a discussion with in the first place.

Caesar, I understand where you are coming from but if Big Footy ends up only allowing people that it deems to be the "right type of people" coming on here to post, it really counteracts what open discussion is all about. We end up being like the Hillary Clinton sheila appearing on shows her entourage of beautiful people run - Big Footy ends up being elitist.

Yeah, there are some on here, myself included, whose views aren't very popular at times and yes, there are those who peddle bullshit but I would argue that debunking the conspiracy crap and the straight out lies is a good thing. It is educational Caesar for some of us. Some of us aren't across everything nor do we have the time to spend countless hours on Big Footy and when we do get a chance to have a bit of a look around on these boards, it can be quite instructive.

I would rather know what type of s**t lurks in the shadows and what kind of addled thinking is becoming "trendy" for some of the paranoid, stupefied and unhinged groups and individuals so as to be armed, metaphorically speaking because you can bet your bottom dollar, if it surfaces around here, it's doing the rounds in our society somewhere.

I am not suggesting that some of the easily-falsifiable garbage that makes it's way on here adds balance; no, no way but it does show us how f***ed some of the thinking in our society is and there is absolutely no compulsion for anyone to have a conversation with any of these bad-faith operators.

I just don't think that censorship is the way to go unless it's used to remove personal insults, vilification or inciting violence. What do we want to turn these boards into? hippie wonderland, Christian only, Jewish only, rabid unbridled capitalists only, anti-vaxers only ......? You either engage, put up with people or you put them on ignore.

That's my view.

 

[Northalives]

To be pedantic, deliberately lit bushfires.

Unfortunately too many lost to deliberately lit fires.

As noted by the Black Saturday Royal Commission, in a legal sense “arson” is an indictable offence that involves deliberate fire-setting resulting in criminal damage to property, including a structure, a house, a vehicle or vegetation.

Arson also involves the “requisite intention” to cause damage or have no regard for the damage that might result from a fire.

Many bushfires, for example, are the result of negligent or illegal behaviour by people ignoring total fire bans or throwing away lit cigarettes and matches. However, this type or behaviour generally does not meet the legal or technical definition of arson. Arson is when some **** deliberately goes out and starts a fire.

You and your anti-science brigade are just clutching at straws, trying to point the finger of blame everywhere except where it should be pointed, that is, at climate change and penny pinching, anti-science moronic governments who have for years, ignored the advice of professional firefighters.

The LNP Federal Governments are the chief, anti-science moronic governments and whilst you and others, (Sky News, The Australian, Fox News etc) keep trying to lay the blame on "firebugs" and keep telling us that the bushfires are "nothing out of the ordinary", lives and communities will keep getting burnt alive. Maybe you can just take off to Hawaii when the fires strike again and just plead ignorance.

 

[Chief]

How many deliberately lit fires were there?

Navyblues09 ?

 

[Navyblues09]

Navyblues09 ?

For the year ending March 2020 in Victoria

1,943 cases of criminal damage by fire
33 cases of intentionally causing a bushfire
26 cases of recklessly causing a bushfire

 

[Chief]

For the year ending March 2020 in Victoria

1,943 cases of criminal damage by fire
33 cases of intentionally causing a bushfire
26 cases of recklessly causing a bushfire

2000 bushfires?