23 2 mins 14 yrs

Shabangu_Susan.jpgSOUTH AFRICA’S deputy security minister has had enough. A murder rate 32 times that of the United Kingdom means that Something Must Be Done. Well Susan Shabangu, the happy looking girl on the left, aims to please. She’s just given a little pep talk to the SA police on how to deal with criminals, and the message is clear: kill the bastards.

You must kill the bastards if they threaten you or the community. I want to assure the police station commissioners and policemen and women that they have permission to kill these criminals. You must not worry about the regulations. That is my responsibility. Your responsibility is to serve and protect. I won’t tolerate any pathetic excuses for you not being able to deal with crime. You have been given guns, now use them. I want no warning shots. You have one shot and it must be a kill shot.

Let’s hope Mr Shabangu had her dinner ready on the table after that little lot. What I want to know is, does she fancy being the Mayor of London?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

23 thoughts on ““Kill The Bastards”

  1. Mahons –

    I don’t know what it is, just can’t quite put my finger on it. But I feel she has something to contribute.

  2. so much for the rule of law. I am sure the UN could find a position for this woman as the head of whatever dept they have that monitors police brutality…LOL

  3. Mayor of London? Why aim so low – I’d vote for her as Prime Minister, based on this.

  4. Be careful what you wish for. There isn’t a police force in the world that could be given license like that and not end up killing innocent people.

    Can we keep an eye on this experiment and see how bad things get in the hope that we better understand the need for presumption of innocence, fair trials and the rule of law.

  5. Henry94 –

    Quite. But let’s assume that Mrs Shabangu receives what she wishes for. Let’s say that over the next 12 months some innocents are killed by the police, but also a few thousand fewer innocents are murdered by criminals.

    In the following 12 months we have a few more innocents killed by the police, and again a couple of thousand fewer innocents are murdered by criminals.

    The … erm … robust policing is working and thousands are remaining unmurdered, but it’s at the expense of a few innocents who are occasionally popped off in the meantime. In this scenario, what do you do?

  6. I wonder what prompts the Telegraph to include a photo of two armed, white policemen, in a country where the police force is largely black.

    If some cabinet minister in the UK said that more police were to be armed, and then a photo appeared showing two black policemen carrying guns….?!

    What message would that convey? Makes yer fink.

  7. Pete

    it’s at the expense of a few innocents who are occasionally popped off in the meantime. In this scenario, what do you do?

    Let’s assume one of the innocent people killed by the police is the closest and dearest person to you.

    Is it still worth it? Of course it’s hard to get excited about faceless innocents dying in a far away country. But you want Shabangu as Mayor of London so you would be taking the risk.

    I know that when innocent people were murdered by the British State in Ireland the legitimacy of the state was gone in the eyes of many. The consequences were far-reaching.

  8. Henry,

    "I know that when innocent people were murdered by the British State in Ireland the legitimacy of the state was gone in the eyes of many. The consequences were far-reaching."

    As when innocent people were murdered by the IRA! – any sympathy one might have had for the cause of repulicanism, disappeared with the first bomb blast, at least the British State had the excuse that it was acting in self defence, – and yes! the consequences are far-reaching!…

  9. ‘But let’s assume that Mrs Shabangu receives what she wishes for. Let’s say that over the next 12 months some innocents are killed by the police’

    The first duty of any state is the protection of its own citizens. It is never right for even one innocent life to be taken by the state. The state is guilty of breaking this rule if it tries to do what Thatcher did, try to take the war to the terrorists.

    Once any arm of the state does that it becomes no more than a terrorist its self, that would be a chaotic situation

  10. Henry94 –

    If lived in SA I’d worry more about the 19,000 innocents murdered each year, and that my closest and dearest would be the victim of a carjacker.

    With the state adopting responsibility for law and order, yet also overseeing a murder 32 times that of Britain, what legitimacy does the state have at the moment? Of course it’s easy to criticize Mrs Shabangu or anyone who ever enters the ring, but then it’s hard to get excited about faceless innocents dying in a far away country.

  11. Pete

    There is no doubt about the seriousness of the problem. And let’s agree that doing nothing is not an option.

    But that doesn’t mean giving the police a licence to kill is the right choice or that it will have any impact on the crime figures. Indeed it may make them worse as whatever respect there is for the law now evaporates in the ensuing anarchy.

  12. Henry94 –

    Sounds like respect for the law disappeared quite some time ago and Mrs Shabangu aims to restore it.

  13. Pete

    I don’t think she’ll do it that way. The people the police will kill by mistake will come from the very communities they need support from to fight crime.

    Even when they kill an actual criminal it will be disputed because they won’t be trusted. Eventually people will start killing policemen and the situation will just get worse.

    There is no short-term solution. South Africa is booming economically but is one of the most dangerous places in the world. It is hard to establish respect for the law when the state was itself for so long a criminal conspiracy against the majority.

    Time, education, employment, community, property. They are the basis for change and they will take time. Maybe a generation or two.

  14. Desperate times, require desperate measures. And that is the case in SA.

    Pussyfoot and pander and take the soft approach, and within a decade SA will be like Zimbabwe.

  15. Ernest

    Isn’t the problem in Zimbabwe that the state has turned on the people and that they have no rights. I believe that when governments head down that road it is a disaster for a country.

    any sympathy one might have had for the cause of repulicanism, disappeared with the first bomb blast

    Not where it mattered. The state became an enemy of the people and the self-styled people’s army won a lot of support. That is a fact. In the end violence failed for both sides. But a lot of people died before either side admitted that.

  16. Henry,

    "Not where it mattered. The state became an enemy of the people and the self-styled people’s army won a lot of support"

    It mattered over a far wider spectrum than you would imagine. It alientated many friends of Eire – and all for what, in hindsight, was no more than the self interest of a small majority.

    The British government only did what they were supposed to do, i.e. defend the population. No matter how often the IRA supporters bleat on about their treatment at the hands of the British,
    they really were bringing much of the grief on themselves.

    Sorry, but while the current administration continues to excuse and absolve all of the known murderers from punishment, I have little reason to change my opinion..

  17. Ernest

    The British government only did what they were supposed to do, i.e. defend the population.

    Your view of Britain’s war in Ireland is naive and there is enough evidence for any objective observer to figure out what the reality was. If you choose not to know then that’s up to you.

    But if you support shoot to kill policies in South Africa you probably see nothing wrong with them in Ireland either.

    But they didn’t work and that is the key point. What worked in the end was negotiations and the north of Ireland will never go back to being the political slum it was under Orange rule. The pity is it took so long to get to the table.

  18. Henry,

    I don’t support the shoot to kill policy in SA, and yes, I dare say my viewpoint of NI is naive, I have never pretended otherwise, and have tried to avoid making too many comments on it.

    You see it your way, and I don’t condemn you for it, but, talking of ‘British murder’ wasn’t quite the way it seemed to us outsiders, now maybe if you saw, and admitted the barbarities of the IRA in a similar light, I might be more willing to change my opinion.

  19. Ernest

    now maybe if you saw, and admitted the barbarities of the IRA in a similar light

    No problem. The IRA campaign was a complete waste, a moral and military failure that brought no good whatsoever. If it is to have any benefit at all it can only be by ensuring the armed option is off the table forever for the cause of Irish nationalism.

    May we never again sink so low or harden our hearts so much. It is vital that Irish nationalism does not fall for the story of the war as told by Sinn Fein for fear we would miss the lesson we need to learn.

    It may be less important for the British pysce that they understand what was done in their name in Ireland. But it is not unimportant.

  20. One or two statistics seem to have escaped the notice of the Minister!

    The first being the number of murders, shootings, crimes, robberies and rapes conducted by a mixture of on- and off-duty policemen is quite an eye-opener!

    The truth is that the South African fuzz are totally demoralised, and more often than not only arrive at the scene of a crime when the only thing making a noise is the blood dripping from the dead victim’s wounds.

    Shoot to kill? More like ‘Is it safe now the noise has stopped?’

  21. Henry,

    I am sure that we could continue this debate for a long time, – and I am sure it would be enlightening for us both. However, I think we will have to agree to disagree, if for no other reason than that we are are approaching the matter from such diametrically opposed positions.

    I feel it would be appropriate to close by saying that I can see your point-of-view, and I realise there is a lot of historical weight behind it, but I doubt that there is much that will get me to change my opinion, or you, yours. – so be it!

    Thank you for doing your best to explain in such a civilised way, – that doesn’t happen too often when discussing this particular topic…

Comments are closed.