New Zealand to change gun laws

[Roger A. Shrubber]

Ok. Now you say, people are sick. Yes, they are. You think this is a disease that people carry inherently. But my answer is that this sickness is created by constant threat of violence amongst other things, like lack of proper education, lack of true equality, lack of a classless society.. if these ideas can be completely implemented as a society, voluntarily, then we can see if people are really sick or not.

they can't be, that's the nature of the sickness...people have wanted those things since "civilization" has existed...and they still don't have them. why? you don't agree with my answer...let's hear yours. if people have been trying to achieve those goals for over 2000 years, why haven't they, yet?

 

[crimsonecho]

New Zealand arguably has one of the best examples of democracy in the world.

With that considered, why would putting heavier restrictions on firearms be a bad thing?

In a civil society, with a very civil majority. Why would the society as a whole, object to stricter gun laws after what happened?

Maybe i'll end up eating my words, but i really can see them successfully implementing positive changes. They are a great democracy after all.

The issue with your belief, is some people DO need guns, as a tool.
Also some people are just bad people, through and through. Nothing will change what some believe, but we can certainly make it harder for them to carry through with things like mass shootings.

Yeah no problem. Implement stricter laws and definitely try to make it harder the terrorists. But i don’t think thats a complete solution to the problem. We have been on the same subject for a long time now and i have never once said that stricter regulations shouldn’t be implemented. I’m just arguing that a truly civil world, no one should have access to tools designed for killing. This is only possible if the individuals in that society give up their guns in order to progress. Voluntary process.

 

[Aussieaceae]

Dude, this is a voluntary process. Tho it will not happen until people get equal, unbiased education. Most people you see around you are numb. They born into this system and see this system as the only way to be. The way i see it a better world can be constructed. This utopia does not sit at the end of a bayonet. Don’t worry, i am not imposing anything on you.

Also i find hunting an arcaic practice and i find the act of killing a despicable one. This is just my view.

Now when it comes to gun control. I think all should go. This is my view also. You just gotta learn to live with it.

That's the thing though man, that's how YOU feel. In an ideal world sure, i can absolutely agree with you. Your beliefs and mine, probably don't differ too much. Likely people as whole too.

But there's someone to ruin it all. Unfortunately some actually get a thrill out of doing horrible things. A utopian world in this case can never exist.

I don't agree with your ideals on hunting either. Most hunters i've known make a point of being far more resourceful with the animals killed than you may believe. Probably treated far more humanely than in any slaughterhouse too.

Yeah no problem. Implement stricter laws and definitely try to make it harder the terrorists. But i don’t think thats a complete solution to the problem. We have been on the same subject for a long time now and i have never once said that stricter regulations shouldn’t be implemented. I’m just arguing that a truly civil world, no one should have access to tools designed for killing. This is only possible if the individuals in that society give up their guns in order to progress. Voluntary process.

Fair enough.

Personally i believe having a rifle as a tool, is a very necessary thing for some. I did purposely use that word too.
A farmer for instance, should absolutely have the right to own a gun or two, as a tool on the farm.

Just one example of someone who does generally need, and regularly use one.

Banning guns all together is a little ignorant to suggest imvho.

 

[crimsonecho]

they can't be, that's the nature of the sickness...people have wanted those things since "civilization" has existed...and they still don't have them. why? you don't agree with my answer...let's hear yours. if people have been trying to achieve those goals for over 2000 years, why haven't they, yet?

People have never been truly free. When they created their flawed civilization, they took the ancient ways of living but shifted the power paradigm to some other people or group. In ancient times the strong had all the power. The muscle. In monarchy a person or a family had all the power. With the help of “god”. Divinity. Democracy, demagogue has all the power.

It doesn’t matter who has the power but what matters is power corrupts and creates inequality when gathered in hands of one person or a group. Most people see this as a civilized way of living but i don’t. People who gets affected by the decisions are not in the deciding mechanisms. Not really. There is always this threat of violence hanging above our heads. There is deep inequality in the society. People are not getting proper education because this civilized paradise needs soldiers and guns to implement its laws and to further its existence. We can list hundreds i’m sure.

I don’t see this system as civilized. This is a criminal organization, with a code of law, that threatens its citizens with violence and imprisonment if they fail to obey while not providing a better education or hope for the future. I don’t think this as a sustainable way of existing and the ones that are able to exist in it, gets sick like you said.

True equality and true civilization can only be achieved voluntarily. Not by threats of violence. Not by goverments not by any apparatuses. The thing you achieve with a violent methodology cannot be called civilization. Its a form of oppression. Oppressed people get “sick”.

 

[crimsonecho]

That's the thing though man, that's how YOU feel. In an ideal world sure, i can absolutely agree with you. Your beliefs and mine, probably don't differ too much. Likely people as whole too.

But there's someone to ruin it all. Unfortunately some actually get a thrill out of doing horrible things. A utopian world in this case can never exist.

I don't agree with your ideals on hunting either. Most hunters i've known make a point of being far more resourceful with the animals killed than you may believe. Probably treated far more humanely than in any slaughterhouse too.



Fair enough.

Personally i believe having a rifle as a tool, is a very necessary thing for some. I did purposely use that word too.
A farmer for instance, should absolutely have the right to own a gun or two, as a tool on the farm.

Just one example of someone who does generally need, and regularly use one.

Banning guns all together is a little ignorant to suggest imvho.

Oh lets not go into industrial shit and slaughter houses. Thats just abysmal.

I actually am a “farm boy”. I have spent much time on the mountains. Never needed a gun. Not once. Dogs got the job done for us. But you are entitled to your opinion of course.

As for utopias. They are nice to have. Better than the dystopia we are in.

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Oh lets not go into industrial shit and slaughter houses. Thats just abysmal.

I actually am a “farm boy”. I have spent much time on the mountains. Never needed a gun. Not once. Dogs got the job done for us. But you are entitled to your opinion of course.

As for utopias. They are nice to have. Better than the dystopia we are in.

Have you gotten a date yet?

 

[Unclebaldrick]

People have never been truly free. When they created their flawed civilization, they took the ancient ways of living but shifted the power paradigm to some other people or group. In ancient times the strong had all the power. The muscle. In monarchy a person or a family had all the power. With the help of “god”. Divinity. Democracy, demagogue has all the power.

It doesn’t matter who has the power but what matters is power corrupts and creates inequality when gathered in hands of one person or a group. Most people see this as a civilized way of living but i don’t. People who gets affected by the decisions are not in the deciding mechanisms. Not really. There is always this threat of violence hanging above our heads. There is deep inequality in the society. People are not getting proper education because this civilized paradise needs soldiers and guns to implement its laws and to further its existence. We can list hundreds i’m sure.

I don’t see this system as civilized. This is a criminal organization, with a code of law, that threatens its citizens with violence and imprisonment if they fail to obey while not providing a better education or hope for the future. I don’t think this as a sustainable way of existing and the ones that are able to exist in it, gets sick like you said.

True equality and true civilization can only be achieved voluntarily. Not by threats of violence. Not by goverments not by any apparatuses. The thing you achieve with a violent methodology cannot be called civilization. Its a form of oppression. Oppressed people get “sick”.

No, of course you haven't. What was I thinking?

 

[Aussieaceae]

Oh lets not go into industrial shit and slaughter houses. Thats just abysmal.

I actually am a “farm boy”. I have spent much time on the mountains. Never needed a gun. Not once. Dogs got the job done for us. But you are entitled to your opinion of course.

As for utopias. They are nice to have. Better than the dystopia we are in.

Dunno mate, setting dogs loose on an animal you may need to kill, vs a quick bullet to the brain, just seems less humane to me.

I know i'd take a bullet, over being mauled by dogs.

See that's where you and i differ. While i certainly wouldn't call it a utopia. It's certainly far, far, far from a dystopia.
You'd have to admit things could be a hell of a lot worse. Especially in NZ's case.

Nothing in this world is perfect, and perfection is only what the individual perceives it to be.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Seems like kind of a stupid idea...

You know, considering the shooter said he chose guns for that specific political reason.

 

[crimsonecho]

Dunno mate, setting dogs loose on an animal you may need to kill, vs a quick bullet to the brain, just seems less humane to me.

I know i'd take a bullet, over being mauled by dogs.

See that's where you and i differ. While i certainly wouldn't call it a utopia. It's certainly far, far, far from a dystopia
You'd have to admit things could be a hell of a lot worse. Especially in NZ's case.

Nothing in this world is perfect, and perfection is only what the individual perceives it to be.

With dogs you don’t need to actually kill anything. They keep the predators away. Not many predators will risk that. And the ones that risks it usually turns away when it sees a couple of caucasian shepherds or anatolian shepherds. They are scary dogs.

No its not far away from a dystopia but again i respect your opinion and this is mine on the subject.

 

[Aussieaceae]

With dogs you don’t need to actually kill anything. They keep the predators away. Not many predators will risk that. And the ones that risks it usually turns away when it sees a couple of caucasian shepherds or anatolian shepherds. They are scary dogs.

No its not far away from a dystopia but again i respect your opinion and this is mine on the subject.

All i'm saying, is some people need to eat, and dogs need to eat too.

If you farm cattle or pig, then a gun is likely the most humane way to go.

Yes, exactly my point. Our opinions differ, as does everyone elses.
Everyone's idea of a perfect world is subjective.

Take it easy.

 

[crimsonecho]

All i'm saying, is some people need to eat, and dogs need to eat too.

If you farm cattle or pig, then a gun is likely the most humane way to go.

Yes, exactly my point. Our opinions differ, as does everyone elses.

Take it easy.

You too.

 

[bundee1]

Blaze's idiotic cartoon claimed that "liberal media" put all of its attention on the molehill of white terrorism while ignoring the mountains of Islamic terrorism. White crybabies bawl their heads off when the act of a white person is called what it is -- a terrorist act. They want to reserve that term for nonwhites. Justification for Trump's travel ban and all that.

Trump called the terrorist a "troubled person". Yeah,Trump is a white supremacist. To the bone.

Thank you. You set a lightbulb off for me. I knew he was a racist but he doesn't even have the common sense to show discretion with his word choices. The man is truly a racist idiot. And who says a person that employs minorities can't be racist? Ever hear a racist talk about "the good ones" from any race?

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

He condemns a whole nation of people over the actions of a few criminals yet never utters a cross word against any white criminals.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-no-mention-terrorism-new-zealand-mosque-shooting-tweet-2019-3

 

[Hydro4life]

Seeing were on the topic of New Zealand gun laws?? Haha. What do people think of Jacinda Arderns proposed buy back scheme?? Offering to buy back military style weapons for a very fair price?

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

Yeah no problem. Implement stricter laws and definitely try to make it harder the terrorists. But i don’t think thats a complete solution to the problem. We have been on the same subject for a long time now and i have never once said that stricter regulations shouldn’t be implemented. I’m just arguing that a truly civil world, no one should have access to tools designed for killing. This is only possible if the individuals in that society give up their guns in order to progress. Voluntary process.

well, except that that has been a complete and total abysmal failure...if that had an ice cubes chance in hell, we wouldn't be having this conversation...people would have already given up their weapon...they have absolutely no intention of doing so.

 

[Grandpapy]

Yeah no problem. Implement stricter laws and definitely try to make it harder the terrorists. But i don’t think thats a complete solution to the problem. We have been on the same subject for a long time now and i have never once said that stricter regulations shouldn’t be implemented. I’m just arguing that a truly civil world, no one should have access to tools designed for killing. This is only possible if the individuals in that society give up their guns in order to progress. Voluntary process.

Not really what one would call a proactive step. In a truly civilized world all tools would be available all, the notion of using it on your fellow man is the failing. Hatred and fear is a learned.

"mommy why are you talking to strangers?"

 

[TacoMac]

Seeing were on the topic of New Zealand gun laws?? Haha.

No, we are not. When are you EVER going to learn to read. The point of this thread is: New Zealand has changed it gun laws, do you think the U.S. will ever change its?

It's at the top of the page in BRIGHT GREEN TEXT.

 

[Rob Roy]

If a criminal chooses to point a weapon at a police officer or at other people then they deserve the end result they seek.

And laws are mostly self enforcing.

So you accept the idea that a statutory law is what makes an action "criminal", not the traits of the action itself?

For instance do you believe when it was legal to own slaves, it wasn't a wrongful or "criminal act" to own them and it only became wrong/criminal when the law changed to abolish
chattel slavery ?

 

[Rob Roy]

Seeing were on the topic of New Zealand gun laws?? Haha. What do people think of Jacinda Arderns proposed buy back scheme?? Offering to buy back military style weapons for a very fair price?

When you say "offer" is it an offer that can't be refused or is it an offer that the gun owner can consider and say "no thanks" without any
repercussions ?

If it's an offer that can't be refused, is "offer" the proper word to use to describe what's going on ?

 

[Hydro4life]

When you say "offer" is it an offer that can't be refused or is it an offer that the gun owner can consider and say "no thanks" without any
repercussions ?

If it's an offer that can't be refused, is "offer" the proper word to use to describe what's going on ?

The offer sounds to me like they will become illegal in New Zealand to have these firearms. We are OFFERING to buy them off you now before they become illegal. An offer is an option. Do you not agree?