New Zealand's Wacky PM bans sale of semi-automatic rifles, institutes mandatory buyback program

[Billy_Kinetta]

The 2A has absolutely nothing to do with hunting or sports. Also, it does not indicate any authority of the federal government to decide which arms citizens may bear.

You didn't answer the question. Too, the federal government does decide which arms citizens may bear.

There is not one legal federal law in the United States regarding citizen firearms possession. All are unconstitutional.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

They understand it fine. They choose to ignore it, and will until they're slapped down.

You could always hold your breath in the face of reality.

Please make sense so that I can respond.

 

[Pilot1]

What this means is people who obey the law won't have guns.

Ffs. How is it US gun freaks can't understand one, 1, category of firearms has been banned to standard licence holders? Why do they squawk lobbyist provided talking points in unison?

Later on, it will be another category, until there are none.

Guaranteed.

Exactly. Next will be handguns, then bolt action rifles, shotguns, and single shot firearms. You will need a special reason, and license to own any type of hunting firearm. The natural, human right of self defense with a weapon by the law abiding will be gradually removed just like the UK.

 

[Dragonlady]

No country which has the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the first world, is safe or free.

Now you know that is not part of the narrative.

Yes it is THE narrative of the 21st century.

If you have to be armed and trained in the use of a gun in order to be “safe” in your own home, you have neither safety nor security.

Every study ever done had shown that gun ownership decreases personal safety. Those who own guns are 7 times more likely to have that gun used on them or a member of their family, than they are in it being used for self-defence.

The safest countries, are the ones with the fewest guns. Americans refuse to believe any of this because they don’t want to. They want their guns and 35,000 people dying every year, is the blood price they’re willing to pay for them.

But if one illegal immigrant kills one American, even in a car accident, that’s a bridge too far.

Your country has lost its mind.

 

[Anathema]

Following in our foot steps would unite you more.

No it wouldn’t. It would start a war between the Government and gun owners. American gun owners will not be disarmed easily or cheaply. The cost will be paid in blood and caskets on both sides.

 

[Anathema]

How is it US gun freaks can't understand one, 1, category of firearms has been banned to standard licence holders? Why do they squawk lobbyist provided talking points in unison?

We’ve seen what this leads to in other countries. Germany, Iraq, the USSR, etc... at the worst and England, Australia, etc... more recently. Small steps leading to the disarmament of the people and removal of the most basic right of self defense from enemies, civilian AND Governmental.

 

[Anathema]

.Your country has lost its mind.

Then feel free to stay in your country and keep your opinions about ours to yourself.

NZ had been on my very short list of countries I wanted to potentially visit someday. That’s no longer an interest of nine, and I’m sure they’re very happy about that.

 

[hunarcy]

Well, you don't need an AR-type weapon with 30 bullet cartridges to protect yourself. Not all guns were banned. Read the post that outlines the changes.

What does outlawing an "AR-type weapon" do when you allow more powerful weapons to continue to be available to the general population? Why is an "AR-type weapon" so much more intrinsically bad or dangerous than a .308? And, how is one 30 round magazine worse than four 10 round magazines?

You have to break off your attack, switch out the empty magazine, then re-acquire your target.

LOL! Or, you switch out the magazine and acquire a new target. In the Luby's massacre in Killeen Texas back in 1991, the shooter reloaded at least three times before police arrived. Having to switch magazines didn't save any of the 23 people killed or 27 wounded that day.

A Texas Massacre

Perhaps it meant 23 was not 30?

Less time shooting is better than more time shooting....agreed?

I'm sure it was a great comfort to the 23 that changing magazines slowed him so much. IF you know anything about the incident, you know that Suzanna Gratia Hupp is convinced that if she had been carrying her pistol (that was out in her car), she could have stopped the shooting. THAT would have been much more comforting to the victims.

 

[hunarcy]

What does outlawing an "AR-type weapon" do when you allow more powerful weapons to continue to be available to the general population? Why is an "AR-type weapon" so much more intrinsically bad or dangerous than a .308? And, how is one 30 round magazine worse than four 10 round magazines?

You have to break off your attack, switch out the empty magazine, then re-acquire your target.

You can stay on target when doing a mag change.

Most cannot. Especially if you’re being fired at while doing it.

Anyway, a criminal with a bag full of revolvers can do just was much damage as someone with an AR-15, especially in a gun free zone that Liberals have created. They should just call them designated victim zones. Morons.

Possibly true.

But still, while you’re reloading or reaching into the bag of revolvers…YOU’RE NOT SHOOTING ANYONE!!!!

Let me guess…we’re now going to have a discussion about how the bag of revolvers will mount themselves into the hands of the assailant…

I swear…the mentality of the 9/11 truthers and the gun nuts on this board are almost just alike.

"most cannot."

Not true. Sorry.

Ridiculous

I agree that the idea that most cannot stay on target when changing magazines is ridiculous and betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the issue.

 

[hunarcy]

Federal, State and Local governments have been allowed by corrupt, activist courts to pass Unconstitutional, (illegal) laws regarding guns. What do they not understand about NOT TO BE INFRINGED.

Well regulated militias being necessary to a free state...

The right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Notice it does not say the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. So, you're militia argument fails, unless you want to try to convince us they suddenly forgot how to spell militia.

 

[hunarcy]

Only the cops and the thugs can have them in NZ now.

Sad.

The libs think that this is a victory.....dead Muslims....and a gun ban.

Conservatives think mass killing weapons keep them safe. It’s not working. You have the highest rates of murder, gun crime, and mass shootings in the free world.

You need to re-jigger your charts and graphs on that, Lady. New Zealand isn't part of the free world anymore.

It’s much freer than the USA. What she did means no one else can get hands on a semi-automatic weapon. That makes everyone on her island freer.

The freest countries are the ones where the citizens are safe and secure. No country which allows private individuals to own A15’s and buy guns without background checks is safe or secure. No country which has the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the first world, is safe or free.

And yet, here I sit in the center of the United States, safe and secure with literally thousands of firearms around me. I have no fear, nor do I feel limited in anything I want to do. The only thing I fear is that if enough people grow up in ignorance, they might someday ratify an amendment that would overturn the Second Amendment...but I don't see that happening in my lifetime.

 

[hunarcy]

No country which has the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the first world, is safe or free.

Now you know that is not part of the narrative.

Yes it is THE narrative of the 21st century.

If you have to be armed and trained in the use of a gun in order to be “safe” in your own home, you have neither safety nor security.

Every study ever done had shown that gun ownership decreases personal safety. Those who own guns are 7 times more likely to have that gun used on them or a member of their family, than they are in it being used for self-defence.

The safest countries, are the ones with the fewest guns. Americans refuse to believe any of this because they don’t want to. They want their guns and 35,000 people dying every year, is the blood price they’re willing to pay for them.

But if one illegal immigrant kills one American, even in a car accident, that’s a bridge too far.

Your country has lost its mind.

The sign that our nation has lost its mind is that we allow foreign trolls like you to interject your opinions about our choices.

 

[Pilot1]

The narrative of the 21st Century is to disarm the law abiding while criminals and the insane can still acquire firearms make bombs, etc. and cause violence and mayhem at will. The populace must rely on government for protection which they've admitted they can not do, nor are they responsible to do.

 

[Vastator]

The narrative of the 21st Century is to disarm the law abiding while criminals and the insane can still acquire firearms make bombs, etc. and cause violence and mayhem at will. The populace must rely on government for protection which they've admitted they can not do, nor are they responsible to do.

The age old tactic of “create the need; become the solution.”

 

[candycorn]

What does outlawing an "AR-type weapon" do when you allow more powerful weapons to continue to be available to the general population? Why is an "AR-type weapon" so much more intrinsically bad or dangerous than a .308? And, how is one 30 round magazine worse than four 10 round magazines?

You have to break off your attack, switch out the empty magazine, then re-acquire your target.

LOL! Or, you switch out the magazine and acquire a new target. In the Luby's massacre in Killeen Texas back in 1991, the shooter reloaded at least three times before police arrived. Having to switch magazines didn't save any of the 23 people killed or 27 wounded that day.

A Texas Massacre

Perhaps it meant 23 was not 30?

Less time shooting is better than more time shooting....agreed?

I'm sure it was a great comfort to the 23 that changing magazines slowed him so much.

For the seven who were not killed during the changes; I’m sure it is of great comfort to them.

Had the Luby’s been in most other developed nations, there wouldn’t have been a shooting in the first place….

IF you know anything about the incident, you know that Suzanna Gratia Hupp is convinced that if she had been carrying her pistol (that was out in her car), she could have stopped the shooting. THAT would have been much more comforting to the victims.

Good for Ms. Hupp I suppose.

We were in a MacAllisters Deli the other day and there was a guy carrying his Glock on his hip. On his chest was the shirt from the local AT&T store. Somehow, I didn’t feel much safer with Wyatt Earp there having his ham sandwich. LOL

 

[candycorn]

You have to break off your attack, switch out the empty magazine, then re-acquire your target.

You can stay on target when doing a mag change.

Most cannot. Especially if you’re being fired at while doing it.

Anyway, a criminal with a bag full of revolvers can do just was much damage as someone with an AR-15, especially in a gun free zone that Liberals have created. They should just call them designated victim zones. Morons.

Possibly true.

But still, while you’re reloading or reaching into the bag of revolvers…YOU’RE NOT SHOOTING ANYONE!!!!

Let me guess…we’re now going to have a discussion about how the bag of revolvers will mount themselves into the hands of the assailant…

I swear…the mentality of the 9/11 truthers and the gun nuts on this board are almost just alike.

"most cannot."

Not true. Sorry.

Ridiculous

I agree that the idea that most cannot stay on target when changing magazines is ridiculous and betrays a fundamental lack of understanding of the issue.

Its pretty much common sense. Especially if those trying to change the magazine are being shot at in return.
But continue with the fantasy.

It’s like trying to convince a 9/11 truther there were actually terrorists on board the 4 hijacked aircraft…they just keep on saying “nun-huh”…..

Sad.

 

[Vastator]

You have to break off your attack, switch out the empty magazine, then re-acquire your target.

LOL! Or, you switch out the magazine and acquire a new target. In the Luby's massacre in Killeen Texas back in 1991, the shooter reloaded at least three times before police arrived. Having to switch magazines didn't save any of the 23 people killed or 27 wounded that day.

A Texas Massacre

Perhaps it meant 23 was not 30?

Less time shooting is better than more time shooting....agreed?

I'm sure it was a great comfort to the 23 that changing magazines slowed him so much.

For the seven who were not killed during the changes; I’m sure it is of great comfort to them.

Had the Luby’s been in most other developed nations, there wouldn’t have been a shooting in the first place….

IF you know anything about the incident, you know that Suzanna Gratia Hupp is convinced that if she had been carrying her pistol (that was out in her car), she could have stopped the shooting. THAT would have been much more comforting to the victims.

Good for Ms. Hupp I suppose.

We were in a MacAllisters Deli the other day and there was a guy carrying his Glock on his hip. On his chest was the shirt from the local AT&T store. Somehow, I didn’t feel much safer with Wyatt Earp there having his ham sandwich. LOL

I bet he did...

 

[Dragonlady]

How is it US gun freaks can't understand one, 1, category of firearms has been banned to standard licence holders? Why do they squawk lobbyist provided talking points in unison?

We’ve seen what this leads to in other countries. Germany, Iraq, the USSR, etc... at the worst and England, Australia, etc... more recently. Small steps leading to the disarmament of the people and removal of the most basic right of self defense from enemies, civilian AND Governmental.

Do you honestly think that ANY civilian group could defend itself against the US government? If you do, you’re even dumber than you seem.

Branch Davidians, armed to the teeth, were dead in under 2 hours. Get real.

 

[Vastator]

How is it US gun freaks can't understand one, 1, category of firearms has been banned to standard licence holders? Why do they squawk lobbyist provided talking points in unison?

We’ve seen what this leads to in other countries. Germany, Iraq, the USSR, etc... at the worst and England, Australia, etc... more recently. Small steps leading to the disarmament of the people and removal of the most basic right of self defense from enemies, civilian AND Governmental.

Do you honestly think that ANY civilian group could defend itself against the US government? If you do, you’re even dumber than you seem.

Branch Davidians, armed to the teeth, were dead in under 2 hours. Get real.

The Bundy ranchers et al did... Recently too...

 

[Anathema]

Do you honestly think that ANY civilian group could defend itself against the US government? If you do, you’re even dumber than you seem.

Branch Davidians, armed to the teeth, were dead in under 2 hours. Get real.

I’m not talking one group. I’m talking about millions of gun owners who are not simply going to come forward and give up our guns without a fight.

Whether we win or lose Is immaterial. Standing up for our Rights is the real win. Besides, if some FBI goon shoots me, I’ve got a reasonable chance of going to Valhalla