War is Death but Profanity can be Profitable

Now, we have been at war with the Middle East for osme time now. My split mind sees it is the needed fight to allow world peace treaties to have meaning. But what is getting on my nerve is that the whole of Australia has to stop for every soldier who dies at war. We knew the consciquences of sending our troops to the war zone, and we knew it could be any one of them that gets killed. So why is it when one soldier dies, nothing is more front-page worthy than that. I'm sorry they die, I wish they didn't die, it is unfortunate, but their death is no reason to plaster it all over the television.
Now, recently, in two weeks, we have lost 3-4 soldiers, and it seems to be all any news deliverer can talk about without setting their own ehads on fire. Seriously, get over it. Say it once, I shoulodn't have to hear it every ten minutes.

Next, this whole idea of police being able to fine you for profanity. Does anybody else see the problem with this? Police officers can fine you +$240 for asking 'Can I bum a fag?" should they find the word 'fag' offensive. Now, some officers, I'm sure, will be fair about this, and target those being threatening and rude. Others are going to be on your back and probably fine you 1/3 of the way through constable. Take my advice, if you see a police officer, refer to them only as officer, reguardless of rank. It will save you a few dollars.
My next problem with this silly system is that I don't really feel this is going to help anything. The rules are vewry unclear and if you consider the reputation of some policemen, they could fine someone for using 'bum'. But the government has found another way to sap money out of us, so who cares? I can see futurised episodes of Blue Heelers, where they look up someone on leap and find that they have been charged for drunk and disorderly, criminal damage and fined three seperate times for use of prfanity in public.
So if we can't swear in public, where can we swear? The iron fist of our polititians grips a little tighter. In 50 years we will have pocketbooks of what is/n't fineable sentances, words, etc that can be used in public.

Lastly, I have seen a lot of things in my life, from painful to disgusting to humorous, but I didn't think I'd honestly see anything this low. Maybe it is because I'm charitable at heart, or because I feel everyone deserves a chance, I'm not sure, but when watching CCTV photage of people stealing from charity bins (repedatively) I want to dash their heads through the bins. ACA set a cute little trap leaving some very nice pieces of furniture and nic nacs outside a theft hotspot charity bin. People came and took, and they didn't have any guilt. I was disgusted. I'd bet they'd be upset if someone broke into their place and stole their couch/tv/furniture for their own use, and they'd probably go begging to the charity's they stole from.
I will admit that I am guilty of taking a few items from charity pi8les; A drawing doll and some books. However, I have given money to charity every time I see a tin (well, amost) and every month I give $75 split between two charities, so I don't feel that these things have been lost. I have given a lot to charity and purchased from their charity shops, so I have contributed a lot to make up for one theft. Some of these people are makign a profeit off of their theift, teaching their kids how to get into the bins and all on camera.
Hey government, here's a radical idea. Instead of fining us for what we say, how about taking the evidence that people steal from charity and fine them instead. Police are presently powerless to do anything, so write some laws to protect charity instead of trying to get us to watch our language in our 'freedom of speech' society.
Now that I'm done ranting, I might just find somewhere to launch this idea. Wish me luck,
Perry