Minimum force being used.....the more things change the more they stay the same...

[Blurock]

Can someone please explain to me why we are having 6 days of national mourning?
If those who have been killed were murderous would be killers, why would they deserve to be mourned?
Right there the State is caught in the trap of its own lies.
Fact are very awkward things!

The state, by this action may be trying to make up for their incompetence. Sadly, it is not only the state and the police who are to blame. Here we are calling each other names and emotionally defending our own points of view. The reality is that the system has failed. There is blame not only on two sides, the police and the strikers, but on the system that allows for a dispute to escalate to this level and then to be resolved by violence.

Let’s start with the mine management. What did they do to resolve the dispute? Are their HR policies correct? Did they put profits before their workers? Did they exploit the workers? What are the working conditions? What does management earn in relation to the workers? Did they engage with the workers (unions) or did they just send in the HR guys? Is there a faceless management that hide behind HR and PR people and who are not prepared to face the problem other that discuss it in the boardroom? If that is so, we will see a new CEO and top management within the next month.

What did the unions do to resolve the problem? The violent reaction of Cosatu to a peaceful DA march on their offices is still clear in our memory. Did they escalate the problem due to their rivalry and canvassing for members? Did they fuel the militancy? Have they done enough by engaging with management to prevent this situation from starting in the first place? It is reported that NUM (who is closely aligned with the ANC) has lost members from 66% - 49% to AMCU. There was an illegal six week mineworker’s strike that occurred in January 2012, when workers rioted, looted and burned property, resulting in three deaths. Prior to the massacre, there was killing and looting and open aggression and barbarism displayed by the strikers. They clearly did not want to negotiate, but was ready to fight and to kill. (How many of these people are South African citizens?)

The police were instructed by their top management to use maximum force. This is in keeping with the ongoing stance by their leaders who advocated to fight fire with fire and that the police will shoot to kill. Obviously the police officers have not been sufficiently trained in conflict resolution and crowd control. Why did the police have to fire on its own people to protect the interests of a mining group? To resort to violence in my book is the solution of a coward.

It all boils down to incompetence and lack of leadership in all areas. Now the politicians are climbing on the band wagon to score political points. Finger pointing by Mal enema, Holomisa, the DA, prayers by the ACDC, 6 days of mourning by Zuma, commissions of enquiry…

This is something that should never have happened in a free democracy with opportunities for every citizen. Where life is precious and people’s rights are respected. Maybe we are not a democracy and maybe we are not free…

[Dave A]

Chris asks that his points are argued. So let's have a look:

a) the police are not in formation to meet a charge by rioters; (charging is pretty standard for rioters)

Their formation was one of the things that struck me. They were in a very tight formation.

Tight formations are fine for unarmed rioters, but I'd suggest they were too tightly formed up to meet an armed assault.

Why was that group there?
Why were they formed up that way?
Bearing in mind that this was just one part of the total deployment, what was the overall strategic plan?

c) in particular they are NOT equipped with anti-riot shields, absolutely essential for dealing with armed rioters;

Anti-riot shields are not bullet proof.

d) when the rioters charge it is met instantly with "deadly force";
e) e.g, the first volley of gun fire should have been directed ahead of the rioters so as to force them to desist;
f) even when the rioters where fired on a question arises as to whether or not fire was directed so as to wound, and not kill, i.e, directed at lower parts of the body?

If you look closely, there is a heck of a lot of fire going to the ground before the charging rioters. Possibly even the majority of fire. The bad news is bullets don't just stop when they hit the ground at that sort of shallow angle.

It is pertinent to point out that the police had already fatally disadvantaged themselves when a policy decision was taken before, NOT to use rubber bullets.

Apparently the first shots fired by the police were rubber bullets, so some portion of the line was armed with rubber bullets. What I find extraordinary was just how few were armed with rubber bullets - quite clearly the vast majority of the police line was armed with sharp point ammunition.

What happened is the culmination of a long saga of incompetence and very bad macro management culture.

On that you'll get no argument from me - provided you're prepared to look beyond just the police force in saying that.

My current view is:

When it comes to the police action, while it's safe to say things went wrong (one sincerely hopes the police did not intend a massacre) and probably should have been done better, I suggest it's far too early to point fingers as to what exactly went wrong. Viewed in total isolation and without context, if you go on the original first video evidence I'd even suggest the only conclusion you could come to was justifiable self defence!

Of course the incident did not happen in isolation - it is absolutely loaded with context.

We just haven't seen all the evidence and at this point we should be asking questions, lots and lots of questions - not leaping to premature conclusions.

[wynn]

Other questions that are also unanswered

Where was the minister of mines and mineral affairs? there was more than a week of violence before Thursday, why did she not ask questions? it is not enough to say we had meetings behind closed doors, it should have been way out in front in public.

Where were the national intelligence services? this is what they are supposed to do, they should have been on the ground months before as soon as the breakaway union started operating, reporting on NUM and AMACU and evaluating the threat, reporting to affected government departments. They should have had more agents deployed a week previously anticipating the reaction. no excuses about top positions being vacant the top brass don't gather information or digest and distribute it. I ask were they too busy playing politics? spying on other politicians and not keeping their eye on the ball?

Where was police intelligence? were they, like Mdluli, also playing politics and as a result completely missed the ball? they should have known months before that this would escalate. Of course Mdluli's relatives would not know of impending violence if it rose up and bit them, they would also be saying 'What the hell was that about'

Where was the minister of labor? intervention should have happened starting months before, the department should have received reports from national intelligence and police intelligence, at the very least started asking questions a lot earlier before the violence, also no excuse there had been violence on another platinum mine a short while ago, or was that another missed heads up.

This is not the last, it is going to happen again soon, what are the various departments doing about it, are they going to miss further clues? or do they want to shoot a thousand next time?

[vieome]

True Dave sometimes we have a picture of something and that picture is never clear, so we tend to put blame based on our emotions or past experience , and sometimes while a picture is not that clear if one stares at the small black mark and then looks at the white space next to it the picture becomes clearer. Who is to blame here no one knows and we will never know.

I think this is a subject that we have to agree that disagreement is inevitable, but it was a good debate while it lasted.

[ians]

Dave just for the record, it no longer regarded as the police force, it is the police services.

The old apartheid goverment had a police force.

The new goverment offers a police service.

[Dave A]

Dave just for the record, it no longer regarded as the police force, it is the police services.

I stand corrected

[Blurock]

I think in summary we can say; "Some people make things happen. Some people just watch things happening. ...and others don't know what the hell had happened!

[Petrichor]

New evidence shows miners shot first...

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-cour...irst-1.1366853

This will still be debated for a while as I believe we have only just seen but a small portion of all that transpired.

[Citizen X]

In recent times we've being heraing more and more of fellow South African's saying that they'll make certain areas such as Cape Town ungovernable! Now, I'm sure that if these same characters were to say that they intend to make the USA ungovernable, the States will respond in kind, they will treat that as an act of war!!! How can you even think about making your very own country ungovernable!!!
Section 49 of the criminal procedure act regulates the use of force, it must not only be reasonably necessary and proportional but all circumstances under which police force is used must be considered.

[ChrisNG53]

Dave just for the record, it no longer regarded as the police force, it is the police services.

The old apartheid goverment had a police force.

The new goverment offers a police service.

And Lekota has just pointed out, very hard hitting and eloquently, with detailed reasons, in a special debate on the massacre, that the
Police Service" was made to revert to a "Police Force" through an admixture of incompetence and arrogance, including their"militarization" and "shoot to kill" culture.