slug.com slug.com

20 20

As a law abiding New Zealand citizen, also a firearms owner, I’m disappointed that my government is about confiscate my legally held and purchased property.
I, of course will comply with my country’s laws, but because of the actions of a deranged killer the rights of many will be trampled.
This in a week where Dr Peterson’s book has been removed from some shops, as I’ve mentioned, and all state owned broadcasters broadcast the “Call To Prayer” yesterday. Strange times indeed...
If anybody is interested, I’ll post some of these developments as they unfold as honestly as I can.

Bruck 4 Mar 23
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

20 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Never let a crises go to waste.

0

I am horrified on your behalf. Good luck sir!

2

There comes a point when you need to stand up to the government. When you surrender your fire arms you change from being a citizen to a slave.

If not a slave, at least a subject. Although, being a USA citizen is starting to look about the same.

0

It is interesting and I would love to see how this unfolds.

4

As a New Yorker, we have some very strict gun laws in the state level, however, upstate New Yorkers did not comply with those laws. Even the sheriffs refuse to enforce the NY safe act. Gun ranges upstate, western and central NY are full of AR15s. AK47s and many other firearms that are banned (they banned features). There are couple million firearm owners in NY state (not NYC) and last time i checked, only 40,000 had registered them. The rest of population gave a big FU to the NY government. So, it is my opinion that you do not surrender your firearm to that horseteeth PM. She seems ignorant in multiple levels.

0

They ban me from Facebook to cover my pen, as the shithouse poet strikes again!

2

My best advice to you is don't comply. Get like minded citizens and protest. Once the left has your guns, they have you as well. Since you own guns oh, you are already in their sights. As an American, I can tell you that when they come for our guns, they will have difficulty that they can't imagine.

0

I'd like to know when your next election is and do your feel the majority of the people agree with Ardern's agenda?

@Bruck I feel so sad for your entire country! What they are doing is terrible and I hope for only the best for you!

6

American expat also living in NZ for about 2 years now. One of the most insane, factual points that has been made over the past few weeks is that the Ardern administration is willing to make thousands of law abiding citizens instant criminals if they decide not to turn in their guns. This in a country where there were a total of 35 homicides last year, with more than half undertaken without a firearm. Surely they just believe people will willingly hand in their guns, to which I would say, absolutely do not do it. The prison infrastructure here could not support an immediate exponential increase in "criminals." I would call their bluff.

1

Why do you need assault weapons?

@Bruck because that’s what the Australian citizen used to slaughter 50 people in NZ. He travelled to NZ bc they’re banned in Australia.

@Bruck assault weapon = black and scary looking

The Government has real assaults weapons (those that do fire Full Auto ). The idea, in the USA, was to be able to defend you and yours from your government. I believe all people should have that right. Talk to those that haven't been able to defend themselves, throughout history.

1

Many prayers for the people of New Zealand.

4

If guns are the culprit, why has there never been a gun arrested for killings? Or bullets for that matter? Or is this a means of taking an inanimate object into custody? But if a car kills they arrest the driver. None of this makes sense and anyone that gives up their right to be armed is giving into the tyranny of an oppressive governing body that will eventually take advantage of an unarmed populace. The only good that can come of this is for craftsmen develop a creative means of self protection including but not limited to home manufacturer of untraceable arms. Best of luck New Zealanders, but I will NEVER relinquish control of my means of self defense.

1

Wouldn't it be terrible if someone broke into your home and stole your gun?

Wouldn't it be actually terrible, if criminals really did started stealing guns in New Zealand right now, knowing the police would fully investigate the victim first, and the real thief would be long gone before the police ever started looking for them?

it would be more terrible if someone broke into you home and killed your children because most robbers that use home invasion as a tactic aren’t looking for your tv

0

I feel honestly frustrated for anyone denied the freedom to do whatever they want if not harming others, but I feel that because of the reality of the mixed psychological bag any nation of humans encompasses, coupled with the more polarised times we are living in, some freedoms have to be restricted so that dangers they present can be mitigated when the weapons are in the wrong hands.

I would like to live in a world in which everyone is of stable mind, both ethically and rationally, and we could all go to the shooting range together. But the world we actually live in is populated not only with good people, but also with delusional, paranoid, antisocial, narcissistic, envious, stupid and just plain callous people. I don't think firearms helps, and I don't buy the classic US explanation that they can protect us from governments considering the tech at their disposal now. They could load nanobots into an unmanned drone, piloted from 1000 miles away, and fire nerve gas through our windows. Guns won't do much against that. Needless to say we don't want to give all those characters tech like that either.

I appreciate that this won't be a popular opinion around here, but then I as a Brit was never raised with the second amendment as an internalized axiom upon which I build my world view. But I do mourn anyone being denied their hobby, whatever it may be.

Sorry, my gun is not my hobby. I've carried it on me for over 14 years. I carry it not for fun. There is no fun and carrying a gun and those who think so should never carry one. I carry to protect myself, my family, and my property. Regarding protecting myself from my government. Just who do you think wears the uniform of the United States? I'll give you a hint. It's not the people who want power by disarming the populace.

@DAN_STL I don't claim it is everyone's hobby.

Its a vicious circle, you do need your gun to protect your family etc, but if everyone else didn't have guns that would be less necessary

@hariseldon I wish your premise was true. Since you are a Brit I understand your view of this. But evil people exist, we can't eliminate them. They are there. I'm aware of the increased use of knives in crimes in Britain. Many self-defense experts whom I have known and read have said that a knife is more dangerous than a gun.

In addition, firearms give an equal chance and an advantage to the disabled, elderly, and smaller human beings. I could give you a number of cute quotes that come out of the firearms forums but I won't.

One statistic is true. Here in the United States there are from 9 to 10% of the "hot" burglaries which occur when the criminal invades a home with the residents present, compared to England. There is only one reason for this statistic, approximately one out of three homes in the United States contains a firearm.

@DAN_STL I use the evil people exist argument in favour of not arming anyone including them. You make good points about the elderly etc, and I don't claim this is a silver bullet (pun intended) to quell all crime. For sure there will be pros and cons to prohibition or keeping them legal. But I look at the world through a data lens, and I am not an expert so I am not asserting I am definitely right, but I would expect the weight of harm is greater having guns available to just about anyone.

Thinking with my gut, if I lived in a tough neighbourhood and wanted to protect my family, it would seem like a good idea to get a gun. But removing emotion from the equation, the data says that as soon as there is a gun in your house, you are more likely to die from it. Suicides increase, homicides increase, both carried out by the homeowner (perhaps a drunk guy loses it at his wife and a firearm is lying around) or by an intruder, who would have just taken your laptop but has now decided to shoot cos he sees your gun.

The data doesn't lie. You are less safe with a firearm in the house. And personally if a burglar did enter my home at night, there is no possession of mine, or even all of them put together, that I would risk my life to retain. I would sooner lock myself in my room and let them take everything in the living room than come out shooting. I wouldn't want to kill or be killed.

[academic.oup.com]

@hariseldon first of all oh, I'm enjoying our conversation. As far as the data lying, our Mark Twain once said, "there are three types of lies in this world. Lies. Damn lies. And statistics". I always remember that quote, is it was on the fly page of my college statistics book. I wouldn't bet it was on those books now. I happen to live in the 7th or 8th safest cities in the United States, from a number of sources. Why is that?

When the riots were happening in Paris, I made the comment that if the rioters were starting at the other end of my street I would not get out of my barcalounger. Why? Because my trusted neighbors, who by the way are armed to the teeth, would take care of the problem before it got down the street. Personally, I believe that study from Oxford University in England really has no relevance to the United States. I would suggest you read the works of John Lott. These counter statistics suggest that the presence of a firearm many times diffuses a potential life-threatening situation. I have two personal experiences which proved that. In neither one was I forced to reveal my weapon, but the person approaching me was dissuaded from moving closer. They recognized the fact that to continue with their actions would become detrimental.

One thing we experience here in the States, is the failure to report a good person with a weapon stopping a serious situation. Many of the mass shootings, of which you are no doubt aware, have been stopped by a civilian with a gun. That fact never gets reported, because it goes against our news media's bias.

I'll end this with a quote from one of my favorite writers Robert Heinlein.

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."

I wish it wasn't so. But it is.

@DAN_STL Firstly, The study I linked to was from the American journal of epidemiology, not Oxford, and it was based on USA data. While the quote about lies, damn lies and statistics may sound neat, it is in no way a valid empirical rebuttal of peer reviewed data. It would more fairly be applied to someone claiming everyone is against guns after having conducted a single poll on their facebook page full of leftist acquaintances. Some statistics are flawed, most especially those gathered without fair scientific data gathering methods, but those aren't likely to get published. My own sister is a PhD biologist, and has often peer reviewed papers, being randomly selected to do so, so I also make a claim that while there is the potential for bias in every individual, and while chosen angles of studies can be influenced by one's politics, the peer review process - to as large an extent as can be expected with flawed humans at the helm - guards against bias, helping to ensure few untrustworthy statistics get through the net.

And sure, I would expand on your point that a good person with a weapon stopping a serious situation rarely gets reported, to acknowledge that that is true of almost all good news. But I might remind you that the good guy stopping the mass shooting with a gun, wouldn't have had to stop the bad guy killing everyone with a gun, if guns weren't so widespread in the first place.

You are again correct that the rioters won't even get to your end of the street if householders between you and them are armed, but to counter that, such rioters wouldn't be as dangerous if they too were unarmed, and furthermore in my nearly 37 years of life I have only known two riots happen while I have been resident in any of the 6 countries I have lived in. And they were limited to very small areas, so for me the likelihood of this happening outside our house is so small. Additionally, it is far easier for armed police to subdue unarmed rioters, with less likelihood of shots being fired by understandably scared officers.

And for sure, an armed society is polite, that is certainly one benefit, but I don't feel it outweighs the fact that thousands of people die from gunshots who would more often escape with their lives from knife or unarmed attacks. Some would still get through the net of course, but you don't have to guarantee 100% eliminating a problem in order for attempts to limit carnage to be worthwhile - reducing deaths by any percentage is a worthy target. We have had I think one mass shooting in the UK since we banned most guns from most people about 30 years ago. Yet there is rarely a single month or even week I don't read in the news about a mass shooting in the US. Take that dude shooting at the festival in Vegas from his balcony. No chance of achieving that without guns.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Cheers

2

What if you didn't comply? What do you think the consequences would be?

Well for the 3 persons who got arrested for having a copy of either the video or manefesto of the gunman. 14 years ( rape gets 7, Killing 10-12). So I would suspect life behind bars.

Another Kiwi

that would depend on how many didn’t comply and how organized they were

3

Are the guns registered to you?
What if you lost one of them in a tragic boating accident and therefore can't turn it in?
(Old American joke).

0

Just for curiosity and perspective, do you own guns for sport shooting or hunting? And what are the carrying laws in NZ?

@Bruck Thanks for the info, to follow up, are they going to have police officers carrying at all times now as well?

@Bruck I heard about that. Still no carry for Police after what happened? You guys have some balls down there lol.

@Bruck That’s a very peaceful society you have there.

1

Def keep us posted freind

0

I would love to hear the buzz going on about this down there and what's being done to fight it.

1

Sure, keep us posted on that.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:24169
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.