If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
UK: Man arrested for “malicious” social media post about New Zealand shootings
A man has been arrested in the UK on suspicion of making a malicious social media post about the attacks that killed 49 people at mosques in New Zealand.
Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said the post was “making reference and support for the terrible events”.
The arrested man is a 24-year old from Oldham.
GMP said where “people cross the line, we will take robust action, which may include arrest and prosecution”.
UK: Man arrested for “malicious” social media post about New Zealand shootings
You couldn't be suggesting that he might be coached in what to say so that it fits the narrative they want to create could you? Why government would never do such a thing!I do expect that the person who was able to write a manifesto is now going to be able to memorize some lengthy testimony under the direct supervision.
Al Jazeera hot takes!
Erdogan says New Zealand mosque attacks suspect targeted Turkey
Sick and twisted
You couldn't be suggesting that he might be coached in what to say so that it fits the narrative they want to create could you? Why government would never do such a thing!
The police is investigating the shooting at the #24oktoberplein in Utrecht this morning. An possible terrorist motif is part of the investigation.
— Politie Utrecht (@PolitieUtrecht) March 18, 2019
Thank you PM of NZ- is this what you and your police thugs wanted- well, Enjoy!!
What's an offensive weapon? How can they be distinguished from defensive weapons?
Hunting and home defense. Yup, can't think of anything else that anybody had in mind when they were writing up the constitution.
I do not remember them introducing common sense licensing requirements for bows and arrows either.
Keeping any weapon at your bedside or near a door could be considered as having it with intent to use it as a weapon against intruders and that would be illegal even if you didn't use it. You're only allowed to defend yourself with a 'weapon of opportunity' and you can't aim to harm anyone who isn't threatening you.
I guess it seems fair, as I'm sure the intruders are limited to weapons of opportunity as well.
They both eventually transition into IT:
View attachment 275024
Just the simple fact that you have IT prevents others to f around with ya! If you do get rid of IT, you will pay for your stupidity just like Ukraine did. Fight not to become Ukraine!
I quickly googled bow and arrow laws in the UK and stumbled upon this blurb about weapons generally:
I guess it seems fair, as I'm sure the intruders are limited to weapons of opportunity as well.
"Keeping any weapon at your bedside or near a door could be considered as having it with intent to use it as a weapon against intruders and that would be illegal even if you didn't use it. You're only allowed to defend yourself with a 'weapon of opportunity' and you can't aim to harm anyone who isn't threatening you." Criminal intruders must be loving that law.
Someone breaks into your house, thats a threat. What is that persons intent? is it to help bake a cake? do the dishes? Do I wait for them to harm me, and or my family then say please stop. People have a right to be secure and safe in their own home. People do NOT have a right to break the law and cause harm, harm is not just physical.
Government has no right to tell people how to do that. They do have an obligation to prosecute the criminals and not the innocent person in his own home.
Shows how one f***head can screw it for everyone. Hungerford (UK gun owners lost their semiauto rifles and shotguns), Dunblane (UK gun owners lost their handguns), Montreal (Canadian gun owners lost their semiauto rifles and shotguns) and Tasmania (Australian gun owners lost all semiauto long guns plus all pump shotguns). Now this in New Zealand. Even gun-friendly Texas severely restricted the private possession of full-auto weapons in 1933, one year before the National Firearms Act of 1934 was signed into law. Texas gun owners can thank one of their own, Hyman S. Lebman, for that law. He provided custom-made automatic weapons to gangsters, who used them to kill FBI agents and other LEOs. The fact that Lebman did not pull the trigger himself is irrelevant. His negligence help get more anti-gun laws passed at both the state and federal levels.“Speaking after her weekly cabinet meeting Monday evening local time, Ardern told reporters that ministers had agreed "in principle" to reform gun laws.
"Within 10 days of this horrific act of terrorism we will have announced reforms which will, I believe, make our community safer," she said.
While acknowledging that "for a short period" the planned amendments might create uncertainty for some gun owners, Ardern said: "I strongly believe that the vast majority of gun owners in New Zealand will agree with the sentiment that change needs to occur."
“Uncertainty” for gun owners means do they turn them in or become felons subject to warrentless home entry, arrest, seizure and heavy fines & jail time?
NZ has the gov’t means to act as did AUS and impose radical laws within the weeks where public sentiment is high. Precisely why our Founders constructed the US form of gov’t - to avoid such sudden usurpations.
Shows how one f***head can screw it for everyone. Hungerford (UK gun owners lost their semiauto rifles and shotguns), Dunblane (UK gun owners lost their handguns), Montreal ( Canadian gun owners lost their semiauto rifles and shotguns) and Tasmania (Australian gun owners lost all semiauto long guns plus all pump shotguns). Now this in New Zealand. Even gun-friendly Texas severely restricted the private possession of full-auto weapons in 1933, one year before the National Firearms Act of 1934 was signed into law. Texas gun owners can thank one of their own, Hyman S. Lebman, for that law. He provided custom-made automatic weapons to gangsters, who used them to kill FBI agents and other LEOs. The fact that Lehman himself did not pull the trigger himself is irrelevant. His negligence help get more anti-gun laws passed at both the state and federal levels.
What's an offensive weapon? How can they be distinguished from defensive weapons?
I think they are worried about Muslim retaliation. Much like Charlie Hebdo. Why else would they pull it? As others have said they show way worse stuff, mostly innocents too.
It makes sense that it takes that long to respond. Based on their SOP, their battons and OC spray are locked in a highly secured safe. The safe code is partially split between two higher ups that also have one key each and both have to be present to open it.
Also keep in mind that the higher ups need to get an encrypted fax from NZ PM before they can initiate their SOP during an event.
I suppose we can poke fun , but wasn't a guy arrested for making a movie as false flag cover for Bengazi ?
Ukrainians are getting smahter ... because of the missile treaty going down the drain and Ukraine making rocket engines (always had that engineering base since Soviet times, even supply them to US now) they are looking into short and midrange missiles now.
The nuke treaty was signed under a commie leader, the same who allowed KGB archives evacuated to Moscow. They won't develop nukes until they need Euro support to fight Russia in the East, later ... who knows. By that time China may be taking over (legally) Russian far east.
"Keeping any weapon at your bedside or near a door could be considered as having it with intent to use it as a weapon against intruders and that would be illegal even if you didn't use it. You're only allowed to defend yourself with a 'weapon of opportunity' and you can't aim to harm anyone who isn't threatening you." Criminal intruders must be loving that law.
Someone breaks into your house, thats a threat. What is that persons intent? is it to help bake a cake? do the dishes? Do I wait for them to harm me, and or my family then say please stop. People have a right to be secure and safe in their own home. People do NOT have a right to break the law and cause harm, harm is not just physical.
Government has no right to tell people how to do that. They do have an obligation to prosecute the criminals and not the innocent person in his own home.