There's a meme I can't post due to being on my phone, but it essentially trolls 'murica by saying "jeez, did they even try thoughts and prayers?" lol
Assault rifles and military-style semi-automatics have been banned in New Zealand
- Thread starter [FnG]magnolia
- Start date
Still won't really help you much unless you can convince a large portion of the military to join in
National armies are not particularly effective forces against soft, mobile, targets on home territory - hence why some of these middle east wars drag on despite the disparity in capabilities. In the event of a national uprising where manufacturing capabilities would be impacted and likely patchy control of the ground concentrated strategically cutting off some supplies you'd quickly run out of missiles, etc. if you were drone striking individual houses without great returns.
How is a widespread, broad reaching, knee jerk implementation of policy that will have a big effect on 1000s of legal gun owners not extreme?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,627
wow. i see they are doing exactly what the terrorist wanted them to do, what happened to not negotiating with terrorists? now they can just shoot people up and get laws made
The terrorist put in his manifesto that one of his aims was to get semi-automatic rifles banned in New Zealand?
I agree with him but perhaps from a different perspective in this case!
I think the main downside with reactionary legislation like this is that it comes a bit too late. Australia banned semi auto rifles a while ago (also reactionary). NZ could have banned them too then. I guess politicians like to wait for an excuse - perhaps a shooting in Australia isn’t a good enough reason for NZ MPs and so haven’t done it there until some people died in a massacre in NZ too.
I mean it does seem silly on one level, it is a risk that is known but we still want to see it happen once before doing anything about it.
“Yes people may die in a massacre, we’re aware of this but we’d like to have a massacre first, see it happen here too, have a few dozen innocents killed here before we bother doing anything.”
Fantastic news, well done Jacinda Ardern and NZ. No wonder she is getting global praise, the way Jacinda Ardern has handled this atrocity is exemplary.
Here is the excellent speech:
Here is the excellent speech:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,726
- Location
- Welling, London
While we have to suffer TM’s attempt at leadership
I've read this by various people so many times but it is stupid.....
The NZ population is not even 5 million (2017) compared to USA 325 million.
The US has 100s of years of gun ownership and its an ingrained part of their culture and very constitution.
A "military-style semi-automatic rifle" might look more edgy and dangerous but an old wooden m14 is just as, if not more dangerous.
No I dont have the answer and yes im SO in favour of what NZ has done but to say the USA should or even COULD do it is like comparing apples to Saturn 5 rockets.
He wanted NZ to put pressure on the USA to change her gun laws. Which is not going to happen.
now they can just shoot people up and get laws made
They can shoot people up and get laws made that make it more difficult to shoot people up. Do you think that's really what they want? How exactly does that work for them?
Last edited:
Absolute nonsense. In the entire history of the human species, there has not been one single case of an armed civilian uprising waging a successful civil war against the armed forces of its own government.
The German Peasants' War involved 300,000 peasants (and some mercenaries) against imperial forces numbering just 8,000. The peasants were utterly slaughtered; they lost ~100,000 people, and surrendered.
Wrong again. The wars in the Middle East drag on because they involve multiple combatants from different countries, with different aims, sponsored by more powerful nations for their own ends. These combatants are not civilians; they are either trained and well armed militia, or well trained and well armed government forces.
Completely different scenario.
Not a chance. The US war machine has total field dominance, and enough manpower and supplies to utterly devastate a civilian uprising within days.
What exactly is extreme about it? They're banning some semi-automatic weapons (but not all of them). Did you think it was 'extreme' when car seat belts became law?
perhaps NZ doesn't have a 2nd Amendment?
It does not.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,627
The right to keep and bear arms doesn't specify semi-automatic rifles does it?
Same as you can't buy a surface to air missile launcher...
Same as you can't buy a surface to air missile launcher...
The brilliant thing with amendments is that they're just that, amendments. They can be amended or repealed.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 1,403
- Location
- Blackburn - Glastonbury - Portsmouth
Key word being Amendment, so they can be and have been changed in the past.
Also very good points.
The whole 2nd amendment argument is BS. It doesn't specify which types of guns that should be allowed. When it was created the only guns around were old musket or flint lock jobs. They could easily just ban assault rifles and similar without completely stopping people from owning a different kind of gun instead
Impractical to ban guns from the US. Nearly 400million guns, an underground market would appear surely if guns were banned. Many businesses out of business. And all the believers in the 1st & 2nd amendments, small government, against tyranny etc.
The idealistic ways of the founders worked largely with small populations but now a large diverse population arguably has nullified parts of the constitution as need bigger government and central/state authority to control any problems such as gang violence, drugs, and other groups, look at the bikers for example.
The idealistic ways of the founders worked largely with small populations but now a large diverse population arguably has nullified parts of the constitution as need bigger government and central/state authority to control any problems such as gang violence, drugs, and other groups, look at the bikers for example.
Has a lot to do with New Zealand legislators & leaders not being owned by NRA and conservative mega-donors!
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 11,369
- Location
- Bucks
Correct but it does create an unusual political dynamic that other countries simply dont have to deal with. Its basically another layer of BS politicians have to somehow get through to change anything, whilst having to fight the other corner on the issue too. Its a big battle for even the best politicians.
What about wars/battles of revolution.
Obviously, a civilian population isn't going to theoretically beat a standing army on paper, but no government has that much real loyalty/control over their armed forces. They splinter off, rebel against their orders, or just damn right ignore them, Armies are built from civilians.