Where does violence come from? A few ideas

The second problem is the number of issues of violence caused by those with mental problems. Many mental institutions were closed so those with problems were allowed to roam the streets, many becoming homeless which is clearly evident in every city. While some of these types of facilities may have had an unsavoury reputation among the upper echelons of society, they were a place of safety both for those within and society outside. Although it costs money for these facilities to operate, so perhaps that is the problem. For a democratic society to exist there must be laws that we all have to obey. That starts not only in the home, but school, and in later life as well.

A RECENT editorial ("X injunction decision disappointing", Opinion 17/5) described a number of issues in social media that were, I believe, incorrect.

For example, suggesting that social media be held "to the same standard as other "publishers" "such as ACM and TV stations is impractical. Publishers such as ACM have complete editorial control over what is published on their platform. Social media would come to a halt if they had to editorialise every one of the millions of posts on their sites.

Elon Musk only refused to take down footage of the stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel from global access. He did block it from Australian access. Expecting global censorship of news events because Australia doesn't like it is parochial arrogance. Complaining of Twitter (X), that "Musk has allowed the platform to degenerate into an uglier public space where anonymous trolls try to outdo each other with hate speech, ad hominem attacks and lies" is a bizarre anachronism. That's exactly how Twitter was before Musk took it over and had been for years. He has simply allowed it to continue as before but without the political bias and prejudice that had skewed its viewpoints in particular directions. He has allowed political viewpoints, of whatever persuasion, to be posted - it's called free-speech.

Finally, complaining that Musk "cares little for the rights or freedoms of others" seems hypocritical when governments, media and others appear to be scrambling to see what stuff they can stop us reading, viewing or knowing about because they consider it "revolting or abhorrent or misinformation". Who cares for our "rights and freedoms"?

EVEN more hilarious Greg Hunt ("Of course they all make mistakes", Letters 20/5) is the suggestion the former government only made one mistake.

Was it being front of the line to get the COVID vax then declaring it's not a race, black mugs to celebrate the in the black budget that didn't happen, $1 trillion debt, announcing cash for bushfire victims and not delivering? Any of these things ring a bell? I could go on.

The Albanese government has copped so much criticism over the referendum on the Voice, but it was promised prior to the election. Albanese promised it and delivered. The result wasn't what he desired, but he did deliver on the promise, something the other mob have a history of not doing, like no cuts to health or education; again, I could go on.

As a closing point though, the fellow refugee involved in that horrible assault that was released was on the head of the government of the day and not the result of a court order.

A BIAS in the way methane emissions are measured makes it almost impossible to determine the impact on the environment of the gas when it leaks.

In the past it has been quoted that one tonne of methane is equivalent to 28-36 tonnes of carbon dioxide, but more recent information shows the initial impact has at least three times that effect on global warming in its early life, but does not last as long in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. It is still equivalent to 28-36 tonnes of carbon dioxide after 100 years, while carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for many centuries.

The 100-year figures comply fully with Australian reporting rules, and are standard in company disclosures, effectively making a nonsense of the process. Couple the above information with the recent win in court by methane-emitting companies on the basis the current environment laws do not allow the environment minister to consider emissions on the environment, and federal Labor's proposed gas led energy plan looks decidedly reckless.

WHY is it that each state in the nation has different laws in relation to domestic violence and bail? Is it not about time that all the laws throughout Australia were the same? After all, we are a nomadic race and regularly cross state borders in our travels.

EVERYONE is complaining about the budget to help living and rental costs, but can someone tell me where all the rich people spending millions of dollars on homes get their money? Surely the wages are not that big after all those years of fighting poverty after two world wars.

THE editorial ("Renewables are gaining momentum" Opinion, 21/5) summarised the exciting news of the Hunter renewable energy revolution. The claim that the "roll-out of renewables is haphazard on account of politics, planning, economics and supply chain issues" is where the role of the federal opposition comes in. The revolution has started. The Hunter projects are worth more than $100 billion and will provide survival for its towns and communities with new industries and jobs after coal is gone. The LNP either needs to get on board or get out of the way. The future of the Hunter is too important than to suffer Dutton's divisive political games of delay and sabotage.

MITCHELL Hudson ("Parents can't pass the buck on social media", Letters, 23/5), extremely well put. It all comes down to parenting; ask any teacher.

ANDREW Whitbread-Brown ("Sink your teeth into finding our national dish", Letters, 20/5), our national dish is tripe with a side of propaganda. We are force fed this every day by the Muppet Show chef who leads the country.