Witnesses say many dead, injured in shooting at New Zealand mosque

wi.jpg
"No Gun For You!"

New Zealand outlines strict new gun controls | DW | 01.04.2019

The owners of most semi-automatic weapons in New Zealand will be required to surrender their weapons by September, according to details published on Monday.

The New Zealand government's swift decision to make dramatic changes to gun laws after the deadly Christchurch mosque attacks have received widespread praise, and some criticism.

What's in the gun bill?

· The ban applies to semi-automatic weapons and "military-style" semi-automatics (MSSAs).

· It prevents people from owning parts, magazines and ammunition that can be used to assemble prohibited weapons.

· It bans semi-automatic shotguns that can be fitted with detachable magazines, and pump-action shotguns that hold more than five rounds.

· The law wouldn't include weapons used by farmers and hunters, including semi-automatic .22 caliber or smaller guns that hold up to 10 rounds.

· There would be an amnesty for unlawful items to be handed in by the end of September this year, with a buyback scheme costing up to 200 million New Zealand dollars ($136 million, 135 million euros).

'A privilege not a right'

New Zealand Police Minister Stuart Nash said the law was aimed at ensuring that incidents like the Christchurch shootings did not happen again, ensuring that legal weapons could not be turned into illegal ones.

The changes will come into effect by April 12, less than four weeks after the attack by a suspected white supremacist, who opened fire on worshippers in two mosques.

"Every semi-automatic weapon used in the terrorist attack will be banned," the minister said. "Owning a gun is a privilege not a right. Too many people have legal access to semi-automatic firearms which are capable of causing significant harm."

"The legislation introduced today is not directed at law-abiding firearms owners who have legitimate uses for their guns. Our actions are instead directed at making sure this never happens again," Nash added.

Penalties and offenses

The bill encompasses offenses like using a firearm to resist arrest, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.

For possessing a firearm in a public place, an individual could be jailed for seven years.

Importing illegal weapons could mean a five-year sentence, while possessing newly-illegal hardware could result in a two-year sentence.

Some 200 firearms have already been handed over since Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced the new ban days after the attack. The speed of the government's action was widely praised.
 
Last edited:
Not surprising. So the Gov now completely controls speech and everyone is basically disarmed. I'm sure that will turn out great for everyone.

I enjoy waiting for the next shooting to see how they grab what little is left
 
The dumb ...."aunt" virtue signals this crap while taking away rights from it's citizens. The reality, all these idiot women in NZ wearing "hijab" would be stoned if they showed up in a sharia ruled area. This is not how hijab is worn.

Their PM is too f***ing stupid to do it right, to actually wear a hijab, this is a f***ing farce, just like the whole SJW movement don't go around ME country to push gay and women's right, just as calling it religion of peace because they cherry pick facts to suit their agenda.

f*** new cuckland, their virtue signaling dumb PM and the sheep she rode on.

ardern2.jpg



main-qimg-5587f56e8b2e29174940c956334df5cc.webp



main-qimg-32d800c167f7c0796e2c0a2abc556979


main-qimg-a6800cc7a7a53bd0390e393a10bec2fc



so comparison with Trump wearing a sombrero after a hypothetical attack in Mexico is not correct. It's more like Trump wearing speedos with Mexican flag:

41TFYRG%2BblL._SX425_.jpg

1i0jv1.jpg
 
I think it's safe to say that NOW might be that proverbial "GO" time for Cuck Island 2 that is so often discussed in hushed voices and behind VPNs.

Like, right now. This instant. Yesterday even.

Hypothetically speaking in Minecraft, of course. #nodrone
 
Boris, let's make sure we are not building New Zealand again in 2021!

View attachment 277545
Iran in 1960's

yes, Iran before Islamic revolution:

7e9600655c085d942c632072637b3f9f.jpg



so would any muslims go public about the hijab farce in NZ? ... hell no! Bide your time, then go full stone age.
 
I think it's safe to say that NOW might be that proverbial "GO" time for Cuck Island 2 that is so often discussed in hushed voices and behind VPNs.

Like, right now. This instant. Yesterday even.

Hypothetically speaking in Minecraft, of course. #nodrone

Who would go?

Their NRA AGREES!
Their Four Seasons in Woburn AGREE!
Their gun owners AGREE!

The only few who are opposing are some confused politicians because they would like to debate it and not sign it on April 11th already!
----------------
We should learn from this one very important thing: THE SPEED OF THE IMPLEMENTATION!

In MA we are all in the freezer already. We have our labels, we are fingerprinted, registered, updated, and we have informed authorities about our toys. The only thing they have to do now is to let us know in which dumpster we will have to deposit handguns and in which dumpster we should dump ammo. Knowing us, we will be having discussions here on our forum about recycling brass instead of wasting it in the dumpster.

This was a lesson in a democracy. All what it takes is one paper and the democracy becomes a tyranny again.
 
Last edited:
Who would go?

Their NRA AGREES!
Their Four Seasons in Woburn AGREE!
Their gun owners AGREE!

The only few who are opposing are some confused politicians because they would like to debate it and not sign it on April 11th already!
----------------
We should learn from this one very important thing: THE SPEED OF THE IMPLEMENTATION!


That's really sad and pathetic. :(
 
That's really sad and pathetic. :(
Yes it is

The real question is who would GO here?

Because if Trump somehow loses the next election, there will be an executive order outlawing semi auto rifles and guns. There will.

Who will go?

And regardless of the outcome of the next election, there will come a day when there will be a president who signs an executive order.

What will you do that day?
 
Yes it is

The real question is who would GO here?

Because if Trump somehow loses the next election, there will be an executive order outlawing semi auto rifles and guns. There will.

Who will go?

And regardless of the outcome of the next election, there will come a day when there will be a president who signs an executive order.

What will you do that day?

Nothing! You will pack your bags and leave. That is exactly what I have done and I do not mind repeating it.
 
So where do you go? There really aren't many alternatives that remain.

You will go where they will need you again. You will go where nobody wants to go yet, and you will get few decades of a good life over there. Do not look for countries, they are all screwed up, look for areas where you can still make a difference. There are plenty of areas like that left in Spain, Eastern Europe, Austria, Portugal......I am not a hero who plans on fighting stupids over here.
 
You will go where they will need you again. You will go where nobody wants to go yet, and you will get few decades of a good life over there. Do not look for countries, they are all screwed up, look for areas where you can still make a difference. There are plenty of areas like that left in Spain, Eastern Europe, Austria, Portugal......I am not a hero who plans on fighting stupids over here.
The countries that you mentioned are not gun-friendly at all. Expect red tape, required licenses that are difficult to obtain and inspections by police, restrictions on carrying, restrictions on caliber, etc. For example, Spain prohibits semiauto military-caliber rifles, so no .308 or .223. Portugal limits handgun calibers to .32 ACP or smaller. Be careful about trading the frying pan for the fire.
 
The countries that you mentioned are not gun-friendly at all. Expect red tape, required licenses that are difficult to obtain and inspections by police, restrictions on carrying, restrictions on caliber, etc. For example, Spain prohibits semiauto military-caliber rifles, so no .308 or .223. Portugal limits handgun calibers to .32 ACP or smaller. Be careful about trading the frying pan for the fire.

You have misunderstood my post. There are no gun friendly countries anymore. That is the fact. But, as I said, there are areas where you can still live according to YOUR OWN RULES and you will be left alone. That is what I am after. One area just like that used to be New Hampshire.

When commies will take over Americas playing by rules will become collaboration. I never played by commie rules.
 

This needed repeating.


No, we don't!

Americans don't have children just because they want to play video games and wear pussy hats on the weekends. They simply can't afford them!

... Instead of reaching them we keep making them richer to keep them from revolting. Nobody wants yellow vests in MA! Nice pussy hats with possibly zero children or maybe just one gender confused kid. That is where it is all going!

How many of you know the welfare recipient who is traveling back to home country sometimes with his/her entire family? We can't possibly violate their rights by cutting their benefits! No! We will STFU and bitch on internet where nobody knows us. Try to report them and watch your state representative in action. Snails move faster under the sea!

So, you want somebody else to come here and work hard? Well, I have news for you, they have arrived and they will implement their own laws and their own rules!

How about making it better for Americans? Instead of wasting money in Syria or giving gifts to Taliban we will give gifts to Americans! Don't we have shi$$y infrastructure? Who said that we need to sit in cubicles in overtime just because we need to pay schools for kids and mortgages? Don't we have desire to live better?

I want Americans to cut immediately all foreign help. It is not needed. I want Americans to pull out of all "hot areas". Bring our men and women in uniforms home! We do not need UN, NATO or any other crap which is just more seats for politicians with pretty bad ideas. We need people who will do concrete tasks. Fix roads, build walls, build safe borders, make great products here! ...

So much truth here! We had two kids, and wanted more, but decided that was all we could afford. Little did we know we could have as many as we want, and just let everyone else pay for them. I am saddened thinking I could have a nice family of 4 kids but opted not to, though realizing I am blessed to have such awesome kids.


Those who do not agree are silent because in the current climate if you open your mouth you will be immediately fired, ostracized, tarred and feathered.

It should be the EXACT 180* of that! Who will go first? The sheriffs in Colorado?
 
Last edited:
We had two kids, and wanted more, but decided that was all we could afford. Little did we know we could have as many as we want, and just let everyone else pay for them. I am saddened thinking I could have a nice family of 4 kids but opted not to, though realizing I am blessed to have such awesome kids.

Dems will be chasing Trump to the grave instead of providing solutions. Maybe we do not want them to provide solutions like Green New Turd, but if I would be them, I would ask how come families on welfare tend to have more kids supported by government than families not on welfare. This disparity will eventually tax any system. Thinking that they are getting more voters out of the sheep on welfare is misleading because these people do not know what are elections and they have a tough time to get to their own appointments.
 
Thats why many social welfare programs include voter awareness and even transportation if nessessary. Not much different than a trip to Social Security or a med provider...
 
Probably, but I get what he meant now anyhow.
Well, it's how I chose to interpret the ambiguity, anyhow.
(But it's a good thing to consider even if he meant something different).
Been battling a wicked cold since Saturday. I think it is one step short of the flu.
It sucks to be interested in an issue,
but distracted by something (illness, work, life, ...).
Get well soon.
 
How many of you know the welfare recipient who is traveling back to home country sometimes with his/her entire family? We can't possibly violate their rights by cutting their benefits! No! We will STFU and bitch on internet where nobody knows us. Try to report them and watch your state representative in action. Snails move faster under the sea!
!

I watched my ex mother in law and other family members do this for years (she's dead now): She'd stay here the requisite 180 something days in order to maintain their green card and go back to the home country for the remainder of the year while her benefits were deposited electronically. She collected SSDI as well as EBT and had medicare/medicaid. She'd come back to the US when she had a doctor appointment. She died of cancer, zero out of pocket expense for a couple of surgeries, chemo plus end of life care (all at an Ivy League teaching hospital). I had cancer two years ago and maxed my out of pocket expenses a couple of years in a row, to the tune of around $18k plus time out of work and other expenses. The thing is, there was nothing to report her for because it was legal, that's the problem. She got her citizenship a couple of years before her death and when there were immigration protests on TV a few years back with people waving Mexican flags she would yell at the TV about how they were degenerates, how dare they. An uglier soul, I have never encountered.
 
Welcome to Australian Soviet Union:
FAQ: Australia’s new ‘abhorrent violent material’ laws
The new laws create two offences. The first one applies to Internet service providers and providers of a hosting service or content service. It creates an obligation to report ‘abhorrent violent material’ (or material reasonably believed to be abhorrent violent material) to the Australian Federal Police if that service can be used to access the material, and the conduct involved is taking place (or took place) in Australia.
The material must be reported to the AFP within “within a reasonable time after becoming aware of the existence of the material”. A “reasonable time” depends on the circumstances, according to the government. Attorney-General Christian Porter today said that it was unacceptable that the Christchurch attack footage was available on Facebook “for well over an hour without them taking any action whatsoever”.
The second offence relates to a failure to remove or cease hosting abhorrent violent material. It applies to content and hosting service providers. A content service provider is guilty of an offence if they fail to remove access to abhorrent violent material in an “expeditious” manner, if that material is “reasonably capable” of being accessed within Australia. A hosting provider is guilty of an offence if they fail remove abhorrent violent material from their service (again in an “expeditious” manner and if the material is capable of being accessed in Australia).
In these cases it does not matter whether or not the hosting or content service is based in Australia or not, nor whether the material depicts violent conduct in Australia.

This is what happens when nation elects idiots to destroy what was built for centuries.

New Australian Law Targets Social Media Companies Showing Violent Content

According to the law, which passed overwhelmingly Thursday, social media companies would be fined 10 percent of their global annual turnover if material deemed "abhorrent violent material" is not taken down quickly, and its executives could face as much as three years in prison. Abhorrent violent material is defined as acts of murder, terrorism, torture or rape.

The legislation was drafted in response to the March 15 shooting deaths of 50 worshippers at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, which the suspected gunman, Australian white supremacist Brenton Harris Tarrant, livestreamed over Facebook. The footage was widely shared over the popular U.S.-based platform before it was taken down. Facebook said it removed as many as 1.5 million videos of the attacks in the first 24 hours afterward.

The new law was drafted and passed in the final days of the parliamentary session, prompting criticism by some lawmakers and digital advocates that it was rushed without proper hearings. Sunita Bose, the director of the Digital Industry Group, which represents Facebook, Google and Twitter, issued a statement saying the issue "is a highly complex problem that requires discussion" with technology and legal experts.

Arthur Moses, the head of the Australian Law Council, the nation's top lawyers' group, said the law could lead to some "unintended consequences," including media censorship and muzzling people from calling attention to various wrongdoing.

friend.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom