Posted on 03/21/2019 4:33:50 AM PDT by Carriage Hill
All military-style semi-automatic weapons, assault rifles and high-capacity magazines will be banned in New Zealand following the mass shootings at two Christchurch mosques that killed 50 people, New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced on Thursday.
"On 15 March our history changed forever. Now our laws will too. We are announcing action today on behalf of all New Zealanders to strengthen our gun laws and make our country a safer place," Ardern said at a press conference in the capital Wellington.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Total idiot.
The shooters broke off the engagment when someone armed had arrived.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/armed-man-chased-fired-on-new-zealand-mosque-shooter/
“One armed congregant pursued the gunmen who opened fire during Friday prayer at his mosque in the New Zealand city of Christchurch, firing two shots at them as they sped away, the New Zealand Herald reported.”
“The unnamed man went home to retrieve his gun when the shooting broke out before returning to the Linwood mosque to engage the shooter. He reportedly told the police he was acting in “self defense.””
So, how many would have been killed had someone not had a gun? Gun Control?? Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. Bureaucrap
Since I have my sights on eternity and see this world as little more than “the matrix” or a “reality video game”, it’s all good.
We are to learn from the hardships we face, learning to respond accordingly.
If I was not a Christian, I would be seriously depressed. Because I am, however, it is very exciting to see His work, every day, even in this mayhem. :)
I take a stab at answering your question.
Because we can’t help laughing at stupid things.
AOC is stupid, we laugh at her. Disarming law abiding citizens to protect them from armed criminals is stupid, so we laugh at that.
They just change laws by decree?
Wow.
Odds are good on that. AND....what about the Chinese elite who are looking for a really nice piece of land with decent existing infrastructure to populate after the pollution in the Mainland becomes unbearable for them? Send the influence agent Tarrant over to Chirstchurch to shoot up one of the Bellies of the Beast (a.k.a. “mosque”) and upload his live video feed to YouTube so the World can watch in collective (not 100% you understand) outrage and the result will be a voluntary disarmament of all the citizens the Chinese will need to displace to take over the island.
AOC is stupid, we laugh at her. Disarming law abiding citizens to protect them from armed criminals is stupid, so we laugh at that.
_________________
Yeah? Well it is a stupidity that has repeated itself over and over through the years. and killed millions.
Haha.
and since you are so stupid as to use Cortez’s initials which is acceding to leftist branding perhaps you need to laugh less and think more.
And what, exactly, makes a rifle an “assault” rifle?
It’s in the hands of a white person.
Leftists want to control you and they never let a disaster go to waste. They use the emotion of the useful idiots to execute and further their complete control over others using the monopoly on force and taxation that this thing called government has.
Leftists are your enemy, folks and anyone who wants to disarm you is by default, a leftist.
JoMa
So far, 37 people have turned in their firearms.
Assault rifles to be banned.
Preaching jihad will still be OK.
What does military style even mean?
It is time to buy that .308 with some ammo that I have been looking to buy.
JoMa
AOC is stupid, we laugh at her. Disarming law abiding citizens to protect them from armed criminals is stupid, so we laugh at that.
I told them, well, yeah, because we love a good laugh.
That is the difference between the right and the left. Heck, you can even see it in the MGTOW guys vs the radical feminists. The former laughs at the latter. It’s what they do. The latter is ANGRY! That’s the left. Always being angry and demanding things.
They’re so cute when they’re mad. :)
At most a few hundred people die in mass shootings globally each year.
Governments murdered 262,000,000 of their own citizens in the twentieth century alone, and disarmament of those citizen always preceded those democides.
Which is more dangerous to innocent citizens? Armed citizens or disarmed citizens and armed government?
Black Swan event.
Nailed it!
I can hear the proponents now: "After all, 'assault weapons' are used in so much violent crime..." Well actually no, so-called "assault weapons" are used in what is almost a statistically insignificant number of crimes. Granted, the few times they are used the incidents are given a disporportionately large amount of publicity - almost like someone had an agenda they were promoting... But the upshot is, even if you banned them, and your ban worked, it would be an insignificant blip in crime.
I can hear the proponents counter: "But if it can stop mass shooting events..." Well actually no. People who commit mass shootings are mentally disturbed, period. All of them. By definition someone has to be mentally disturbed to think walking into someplace and killing (or at least trying to kill) a bunch of innocent people is the answer, is the right thing to do. That's nuts. But occasionally whack-jobs do it. When they do, they commit multiple felonies, many with multiple counts. It is probably about the worst thing any one individual can do. Get drunk, drive your car into a busload of Nuns, set fire to a school, wipe 30,000 emails even after you've been ordered to preserve evidence...all bad things. But if your average Joe wants to rack up the felonies in a hurry, shooting up someplace full of innocent people is the way to go. The downside is, you're almost certainly not going to get away with it, and you're probably not going to survive it. Yet people still decide to do these things, the worst possible thing they can do, and something that will probably ultimately end their life. In that context, do you really think these whack-jobs give a rat's backside about pistol grips, magazine capacity, bayonet lugs, etc? No. If they are prepared to break dozens of laws and surrender their life, breaking one more law is not going to be any kind of deterrent.
I can still hear the proponents say "You don't know that, if 'assault weapons' were less available it might stop crime, might make us safer..." Well no, and that "no" is not a "might" or "maybe" it is a firm no, it would not. We tried that. We (the US) had an "assault weapons ban" for 10 years, from 1994 to 2004. Studies of crime statistics from the years before, during, and after the ban show no differences in violent crime rates attributable to the "assault weapon ban." No difference in violent crime. So when we say "an assault weapons ban will not work" we are not just adopting a political position - we are stating a known, verifiable fact.
Anglo Nation Immunodeficiency Syndrome, ANIS for short.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.