Then considering a bushfire is an act of murder, how come people are rejecting the fact most murders have motives behind them?
When i think of motives behind starting a bushfire, I think about who gains the most out of it in the end? Does anyone know what happens to peoples land once their property’s are burned down? Do they sell and those who buy it off them, are they major developers?
Say big development companies buy masses of bush burnt land in the end, then how come they are not considered as possible suspects?
I would just like to add another Yahoo Answer person MuddlePuddle stated that in Greece it was proven developers started the fires in order to get the land.
So how can it not also be a possiblity the same thing is happening here? Just do your research after all this has happened and see who is buying up all that land being sold.
ES: That is another intersting concept I had not thought of. I guess however I was just thinking, there has to be other suspects than the usual stereotyped ‘delinquents’, and what happened in Greece a few years back with their fires was actually proven to be done by developers who wanted the land