Just recently flew from Dubai to US, at Dubai airport the female screener, asked me if i have coins in my carry on luggage, after it went through X-ray, i offered, to show her my stack but she refused
often bring silver maples in tubes in my carry on. The security always want to check it, then, when they see it's silver coins, they are fine with it. they all ask questions about why I have them and 90% of them ask where they can buy some. with a gold coin, I once just put it in my pocket with my loose change. nobody asked anything about the 1oz gold coin, the silver tube was way more interesting to them. successful in both Canadian and the US airports.
I fly domestically every week, sometimes more, and internationally 5 or 6 times per year. There is NO consitency in Australia when it comes to the security screeners, and not a lot of intelligence either! I have had my RM Williams belt set off machines in Perth , but not at most of the country terminals? I has a roll of cellotape confiscated becuase it could be used to 'bind someone' never mind it had been in my computer bag for about 2 years, and obviously forgetting the spare bootlaces in the same backpack pocket next to the cellotape? I have walked through wearing a set of cargos that had lots of heavy duty zips & nothing happened, the last time i was scanned at international they wanted to check what was in the back pockets of my jeans, which were empty? I had a 1/2 oz PM button in my pocket once, and nothing. I have set the sniffer off once, they took to me to a private room, read my bussiness card, didn't ask for any other ID or details, and released me in about 60 seconds? I find the security staff to be 50% pleasant people and 50% power tripping halfwits with attitudes like night club bouncers with roid rage! and to be honest I have found the most beligerent, rude and incompetant fools manning the equpment are NOT the Anglo Saxons .
They have vending machines in Dubai airport that sell gold & silver coins right up to 5kilo bars, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw it
That is interesting, I have found the opposite to be true at Melbourne. The staff in country areas are typically much nicer.
RANT. One in particular at Melbourne going through to International from Domestic. The most ignorent , self opiniated pig I have ever come across. All 61/2 ft of knuckleheaded brawn who thinks his sh$t does not stink. Now I think he looks for me(paranoid) 3 times i have had to deal with this rude, thicksculled dickhead . came close to sticking one on him but thought better of it. Had had my cool pill. END RANT.
Complain to the insurance company that covers his employment. It can't just be that you don't like him, it must be something of substance. Effectively, most insurance companies have a three (3) strikes and your out policy ie they will refuse to insure that person - no insurance = no work! This is also applicable to ALL government departments including the POLICE.
To be honest, I have never tried. However, I wouldn't think that it would be that hard and there are a few possibilities as follows: 1. Contact the relevant department direct and ask. It may be prudent to feign an interest for a university assignment etc. 2. End of year financial records may list the underwriter. 3. Contact other underwriters and ask who handles the coverage for the relevant company/department etc. It's amazing the help that a simple telephone call can extract. 4. If a government department, ie police, transport, air safety etc contact your local MP, and ask. As an aside, I understand that this avenue of the people vs the state is gaining quite a bit of momentum in QLD against the judges and police.
Are you suggesting that if a police officer gets complaints he will lose his job? The average cop at Victoria Police gets 1 complaint per year. We would have no police left!
In your dreams. If you're covered by a public service employment Act then nobody is going to be fired regardless of any complaints to any insurer.
It is a condition of most, if not all government departments, that employees must be covered under the relevant insurance provisions. If an insurance underwriter refuses to insure a person, then that person cannot work unless the government agrees to cover him/her. I am not aware of any government departments carrying their own insurance provisions.
It is my understanding, that it is actually happening in QLD. The key to the matter, is that the complaint bypasses the police complaints section, and goes directly to the insurance underwriters who have a black and white approach to their bottom line, and minimal charity. Fortunately for the police, most of the public are unaware of this method of complaint. It is almost complaint by stealth.
It would depend upon the type of Anarchist society you yearn. Anarchy is not synonymous with lawlessness or disorder, it also refers to a society without a publicly enforced government. Obviously if there were no cops then it would most likely be lawlessness - but it would not necessarily be Anarchist.
Interesting. Is it is the officer is sued? And therefore the state/insurer has to pick up the bill? I can't see why a complaint would increase the cost liability of the police officer otherwise.
The more complaints against a certain individual could mean that the person is unsuited to the job and potentially a risk to him/herself, colleagues and others. A loose cannon ready to go off if you like. It must be remembered that typically they are taught self defense measures, carry tazers and guns. On a different note, front line Qantas employees are dismissed if two (2) complaints are made against them by the public. Either way insurance underwriters are adverse to having unacceptable risk if they can mitigate it.
