BREAKING: New Zealand Bans All ‘Assault Weapons’ Immediately

New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, speaks to students during a high school visit in Christchurch, New Zealand, Wednesday, March 20, 2019. (AP Photo/Vincent Thian)

And it’s now official. As if there were any doubt. From the AP . . .

CHRISTCHURCH, New Zealand (AP) — The Latest on the mosque attacks in New Zealand (all times local):

3 p.m.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says New Zealand is immediately banning assault rifles, high-capacity magazines and “military style semi-automatic rifles” like the weapons used in last Friday’s attacks on two Christchurch mosques.

Ardern announced the ban Thursday and said it would be followed by legislation to be introduced next month.

She said the man arrested in the attacks had purchased his weapons legally and enhanced their capacity by using 30-round magazines “done easily through a simple online purchase.”

___

11:30 a.m.

An imam says he’s expecting thousands of people at an emotional Friday prayer service a week after an attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

Six more funerals were being held Thursday for the 50 people killed last Friday.

Iman Gamal Fouda says he’s been discussing plans for the prayer service with city officials and lawmakers and expects it will take place in a park across from Al Noor mosque, where at least 42 were killed.

Fouda expects 3,000 to 4,000 people, including many from abroad. He said members of the Linwood mosque, where the gunman killed seven people, also would attend the joint prayer.

He says mosque workers have been feverishly working to repair the destruction from the attack. They will bury the blood-soaked carpet.

comments

  1. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Buy your PVC now. Godspeed guys.

    1. avatar Hands dead cold says:

      I keep a couple junk ARs and GI 30 rounders handy along with some crappy tactical AR accessories to make an AR unnecessarily “scary.”

      They are fully functional decoys just in case I have to play the law abiding citizen…err subject.

      “Here ya go officer. I guess it’s for the better. Thanks for your service.“

    2. avatar StLPro2A says:

      Why didn’t they just pass a law….”Thou Shalt Not Kill.”????
      Oh, wait God already did that.
      Well, then, pass several man made laws…..ie Murder 1, Murder 2, Manslaughter,…
      That’ll surely do the trick.
      Oh, wait already did that.
      Well, here goes again……one more law will do it.
      All military style guns are banned. There. Got it now. That’ll stop these mass murders.
      Insanity – doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome. Let’s punish the good guys and take away their ability to stop the bad guys. That’s the solution!!!
      “Killing is a matter of will, not weapons.
      You cannot control the act itself
      by passing laws about the means employed.”
      The late Col Jeff Cooper, 1958,
      Handgun expert and founder of Gunsite Academy
      A politician with a law never stops a bad guy with a gun. He only controls the good guys which is his true agenda.
      Let’s turn KIWIland into a barrel and throw the citizens in as the fish. That will stop the bad guy from shooting fish in a barrel. The KIWI national anthem will now go something like this….”Run, Hide, Die….a fish in a barrel am I…..Run, Hide, Die….”
      Now, if the NZ Prime Minister would just pass a law that she’s not ugly…….all will be good in KIWI land.

    3. avatar StLPro2A says:

      The NZ shooter came right and stated in his manifesto…..”I could have chosen anything….TCTP, fertilizer, gas,…. Only chose AR to cause more division in the US…..” Well, NZ PM looks like you have become an accomplice in helping the shooter reach his goal. The dead weren’t his goal, division in the US and abolition of US Second Amendment. Maybe, she should be arrested for aiding and abetting attacks on the US Constitution.

    4. avatar Ing says:

      If it’s time to bury them, it’s past time to start shooting them…at carefully chosen targets.

  2. avatar jim says:

    will there be a granfather claues

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      Probably not.

      They’re a thing in the US because our Constitution forbids ex post facto laws.

      It seems unlikely that New Zealand has something similar.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        It ain’t got nothing to do with ex post facto laws. Ex post facto is prosecuting past behavior based on a new law. For example, if you drank a beer today and next week they make it illegal to drink beer, you cannot be prosecuted for drinking beer when it was still legal to do so.

        What it DOES have to do with is that the government cannot take private property for a public use without paying just compensation. An example is a new law passed in California that banned all 10+ round mags, even the ones legally purchased prior to 2000. Owners of legal mags were given the choice of turning them in for destruction, destroying them, selling them out of state, or being prosecuted for possessing them if caught. A lawsuit challenging the law will go to trial before summer. In the interim there is an injunction in place preventing the state from enforcing the law until the decision in the court is final based in part that the new law constitutes a “taking.”

        1. avatar Bill Gray says:

          No government entity can take any property of a citizen as long as that property was purchased prior to any law imposed afterward… Anyone who complies with a immediate total ban has surrendered his rights to a dictatorial regime that has zero concern for any of their rights.. Americans will stand up and fight for our Constitutional freedoms and rights.. We die for the rights of the citizens of other countries and by God if the time ever arises where we have to fight for our own, there will be hell to pay for those who dare attempt to…

        2. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

          That’s a nice theory. Meanwhile, $100,000,000 worth in bump stocks will be illegal to own in the US in 3 days without any compensation. So far, the courts seem to agree with the government on this (except for one Utah case). I am also not seeing anyone willing to die over their bump stock.

          By the way, ex post facto legally applies to the prior purchase and prior possession, not to the continuing possession. It is irrelevant in this discussion. Instead, due process and private property be taken for public use without just compensation are the issue, if anyone, for some reason, thinks that the 2nd Amendment isn’t the core issue here.

        3. avatar StLPro2A says:

          They aren’t attempting it….they are doing it daily!!! Coming to a jurisdiction near you soon.

      2. avatar JAlan says:

        This is a common misconception. The grandfather clause in the original AWB and the ’86 MG ban existed as compromises. True, ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, but banning the continued possession of an item is not in an of itself a prosecution for something that wasn’t illegal. It simply means that the future and continued possession of such items are illegal. The US Government, for example, didn’t have to compensate those possessing cocaine when it was made illegal, nor did they have to prove that the cocaine wasn’t possessed before the law was passed. Simple possession of the item in question is in violation of the law.
        Now, what in the hell does this mean for us? It means that even if you have the “Fuck you, I’ve got mine” attitude, it’s in your best interest to defend against any and all attempted bans. Your weapons being grandfathered is not a given, and never has been.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          The US never “banned” cocaine. They initially required a tax stamp for it. My buddy still has the framed one his grandfather had on the wall in his pharmacy.

          Later it was changed to the modern “scheduling” of drugs and it was classified as something requiring a license to possess and an Rx for those in the non-medical profession.

          It’s still used quite commonly in nasal surgery because it’s an excellent local anesthetic.

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “It’s still used quite commonly in nasal surgery because it’s an excellent local anesthetic.”

          In liquid form for eye surgery, as well.

          When I bounced of that woman’s windshield a few months back, I got Fentanyl as an initial analgesic. *Highly* recommended. I can see why it’s in demand for junkies, my dose hit me hard and fast, and was wearing off after about 1 hour. (It was Morphine after that until surgery…)

        3. avatar Aaron Walker says:

          …And having cocaine was never a constitutional right…unlike the enumerated 2nd amendment= “Shall not be infringed…”

      3. avatar Ted says:

        They’re a thing in the US because our Constitution forbids ex post facto laws.
        It seems unlikely that New Zealand has something similar.

        New Zealand has an ex post facto prohibition as well.

        Ex post fact doesn’t whatsoever stand in the way of the US banning and criminalizing possession of certain firearms.

        In the US, if all semi auto were banned on Jan 1, 2020, you could not be criminally charged for having had possessed one in 2019. But you sure as heck cold be criminally charged with possessing one in 2022 based on that 2020 law — even if you already owned it before 2020.

        You are absolute right to note NZ has less, in fact way less, constitutional protections in general. So to Germany and every EU country, the UK, Japan, etc etc.

        Like Australia, with NZ warrants are easier for police to obtain. items not included on warrants are a lot more admissible. So a warrant to look for drugs requires less thresholds to obtain, and even if only drugs are on the warrant, if they find a bunch of stolen bikes not connected to to the supposed drugs, the stolen bikes are admissible in NZ, and not in the US.

      4. avatar Charlie Foxtrot says:

        FYI: $100,000,000 worth in bump stocks will be illegal to own in the US in 5 days without any compensation. Don’t say this can’t happen here.

    2. avatar ollie says:

      Unlikely NZ does not have a bill of rights, it has subjects, not citizens.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Got to ;ove that “royalty” BS. Lawless.

        That PM is one homely bimbo.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “That PM is one homely bimbo.”

          Just saying that in New Zealand can get your ass in legal hot water over there.

          Al the more reason to *Love* America, warts and all…

        2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

          Have you looked at some of our Commicrat hags,namely a couple of glaring instances come to mind,Hillary,Nancy.

        3. avatar DDay says:

          she’s only 37. When I first saw her I figured 50 ish. She’s very unattractive.

          Since that loser used a shotgun for a lot of the shooting, I guess those are “banned” too.

      2. avatar Rms1911 says:

        BINGO!!!!

  3. avatar Omer says:

    Way to capitulate to the killers.

    1. avatar Ross says:

      Yep, total sheep, sad to see it, glad I was able to get out and make it here to the US.

      1. avatar DesertDave says:

        Don’t they have more sheep in NZ than people?

        “As of 2007, New Zealand had approximately 39 million sheep, nearly 10 sheep for every person in the country (the 2006 population was 4,027,947), placed in sixth position among the most populous sheep farming countries of the world. In June 2015, sheep numbers were at 29.1 million.”

        Now all they have is sheep and no people. Very sad, but that’s what you get when you have no rights and are a subject or slave to the government.

    2. avatar Von says:

      Punish a nation for the acts of a killer.
      Knee jerk reaction, they’ll make it legal later.

    3. avatar Kyle says:

      It has nothing whatsoever to do with the incident at the mosque. Its an excuse.

      Governments, all governments, want their citizens disarmed. This gives them the excuse.

      sad thing is, the killer knew this. They are doing exactly what he wanted, and dont care.

  4. avatar RCC says:

    Spoke to people in NZ on Monday. Gun shop up the road sold out over the weekend. Can’t imagine they are going to buy one week and surrender the next.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      I hope they paid in cash because using credit or debit cards are immediately traceable.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        It’s going to be real interesting to see if the numbers turned in will even remotely match the gross numbers imported over the years. They have that data.

        Do you suspect they will respond roughly as the folks in ‘Oz’ did when ordered to surrender them? Fairly large numbers of them simply ‘disappearing’ ?

        And can the citizens demand the actual numbers of how many were surrendered? Or will it be too embarrassing and they just cover up how few were turned in?

        1. avatar Ted says:

          Huge numbers, certainly the vast majority of prohibited firearms were surrendered in Australia. and people who did not surrender theirs can’t take them to the range. And since anything found on a search in Australia, including in the home, is admissible in prosecution having one is a high risk activity.

          Australia gun control failed to reduce crime and failed to reduce overall suicide, that is it s failure. But the confiscation worked in the sense it did result in the majority of prohibited firearms being turned in, and made the rest high risk. Lots of people in Australia undergoing just your basic bad divorce have gone to prison when a prohibited gun is mentioned in divorce proceedings.

        2. avatar Kyle says:

          They never do.

        3. avatar DesertDave says:

          NZ is a small country surrounded by a lot of water. I foresee a lot of unfortunate boating accidents in their future.

    2. avatar Ted says:

      Spoke to people in NZ on Monday. Gun shop up the road sold out over the weekend. Can’t imagine they are going to buy one week and surrender the next.
      z
      There is a record of every sale in NZ – – equivalent to a federal record. Guns are not licences, you get a permit to buy, but not a licence for each weapon. but purchases ARE all recorded in in NZ and submitted to the government. It is not like the US where the FFL keeps the book and has to give information only in in certain trace cases when a given gun is used in a crime . In NZ all purchases are already recorded and sent to the government.

      NZ probably has a very low inventory of guns in gun stores. The rush on the handful of stores is probably 1) people buying guns that are not going to be banned simply because there is likely to be a shortage of even those for a long time, and people buying ones that may be banned in the hope they will not be be banned or if banned grandfathered.

      Both of those are rational acts by gun buyers even if there will be a broad ban since even under worse case no grandfather confiscation (forced buy-back) models you tend to get retail price on new purchase returned to you so there is little downside to buying now.

      Take each type of purchase and look at possible worst case downside and possible upside. The only downside worst case is some paperwok in turning it in

      1) Of possible ban items:
      Buy a revolver/semi auto rifle or s/a shotgun and it doesn’t get banned: not much downside
      Buy a revolver/semi auto rifle or s/a shotgun and it get banned and forced buyback, loss of a bit of time and paperwork
      Buy a revolver/semi auto rifle or s/a shotgun and it gets banned and grandfathered — huge win, value probably doubles

      2) of possible newly controlled items. EG ammo purchases restricted to a low number per time, and low number per year. Buying now probably means you are buying at lower prices than when controls go in. You may not even be able to get ammo there soon in a shortage driven by others intelligently buying right now.

      3) of items that are likely not going to be banned, say pump shotgun, you are also better off buying now. If the public can’t buy a mini 14 or s/a shotgun, prospective buyers will be forced to buy pump and bolt, and there may well be a mid duration shortage, and a premium value created by gun control.

      Australia had a rush as well before their 1990’s gun control. Very little downside to the people who bought in that rush since the buyback was compensated. We don’t know what will actually pass the NZ legislature yet.

  5. avatar Johnny Bullets says:

    These are the things lesser countries do.

    1. avatar SoCalJack says:

      The soft targets becomes softer. Someone can make a lot of money selling body armor, asumming it’s legal for civilans to own?

      1. avatar Ross says:

        Not sure about NZ but I had to get a license in Australia for body armor.

      2. avatar strych9 says:

        Interesting question. I looked it up, there are no laws against possession or wearing of body armo(u)r in NZ.

        Unless you’re committing another crime “aided” by the armor such as a bank robbery or something. In those cases wearing armor can be a sentencing enhancer. The last attempt to strengthen the body armor regs was in 2005 as part of a larger package of “arms control”.

        1. avatar Ross says:

          I’m sure that “issue” will be addressed with the coming Legislation, this is what Australia did with their 96 ban, they rolled a bunch of other stuff into the ban.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Could be. The AP is overstating the case here. There is no “ban” on guns in NZ yet. It does in fact have to pass parliament. They’re expecting a vote on the 11th of next month but the proposed legislation isn’t even written yet.

    2. avatar HP says:

      These are the things progressives have planned for America.

      1. avatar Jack Blade says:

        If they try that in America it’s Civil War vs sheep in NZ.

  6. avatar Mark says:

    I was thinking about buying this in honor of the demise of NZ: https://lmtdefense.com/firearms/nz-mars-l

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      That’s an awful lot to pay for a dated design (pic quad rails, etc.)

      You could put together an AR-15 with top-shelf components, or a pretty good AR-308, for about half the price.

      1. avatar Mark says:

        This rifle has some tricks up its sleeve that others do not. The quick change barrel feature for one and the overall quality of the BCG. Complete ambi lower, nice irons, Warcomp flash hider, and overall LMT quality. As for the quad rails, they are still the strongest rails out there. But more importantly, this is a collector’s rifle worth of being in one’s collection. And that’s just the MSRP. The street price is around 2K. And like all rifles such as this, the resale (if you had to sell!) is much better than a Frankenbuild.

        1. avatar No one of consequence says:

          To each his own. Granted the things you point out about the capabilities, I’d venture that 90% of owners will use the barrel change capability once, to see how it works. 🙂

          As for the rest, LMT is a good mfgr, agreed. I, personally, just never saw the attraction to own X as a tribute to an entity that sees no benefit from my ownership thereof.

        2. avatar Mark says:

          To be honest my original post was meant to have some irony which I didn’t do a good job conveying. Here we have a fine rifle that the NZ army has adopted and the NZ sheep can’t even have the semi-auto version anymore. However, I have found a resurgence in my love for 1913 quad rails. I can’t really explain it. I love how they look and they are strong. I love MLOK as well, but I’ve been buying up old school AR15s lately like the Daniel Defense V9, M4A1, and MK12 as well as some quad rail RECCEs from BCM. I’m not sure I’ll buy this LMT as I have my eye on their L129-A1 reference rifle.

  7. avatar Brodirt says:

    Except for those protecting her.

  8. avatar Michael says:

    I thank the Good Lord that I’m a citizen and not a subject. -30-

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      When this happens in your country: “Ardern announced the ban Thursday and said it would be followed by legislation to be introduced next month.” …. that’s a pretty clear indication you are the subject of autocratic rule. “Orders will be handed down to from me, your benevolent sovereign. Later, at some unknown unspecified date, your “representatives” will vote on my law. But, we all know they won’t vote against me, so why wait?” …. the very definition of tyranny. It’s a shame some piece of crap of nutbag had to murder a bunch of innocent people to expose it.

  9. avatar cgray says:

    Her pasty white socialist ass will continue to be protected by the finest weaponry known to man.

    1. avatar Ross says:

      Trust me it’s a couple plainclothes officers with Glock 17’s

  10. avatar Henry Denzler says:

    So then if it is the fault of the firearm…and the government had not previously banned the firearm leaving the population open to assaults…. then it would seem logical to initiate a lawsuit against the government for failing to protect the populace and the prime minister in particular for allowing this atrocity to occur ! Then the discussion would immediately change from the object used to the evil individual who perpetrated the crime which of course, is where the attention should be directed !!!

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Or maybe they should start blaming assassinations on the guns, not the perpetrators as well. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and these politicians would see their subjects murdered without any chance to fight back. Loss of semi-autos is THE line; without them effective resistance is no longer possible, and at that point the people are utterly at the mercy of a government that just demonstrated a willingness & ability to keep them first ignorant/blind, and now helpless. We’ve seen this story play out too many times already, and NZ is on the fast track to a full-on dictatorship if they don’t nip these uppity officials in the bud.

      1. avatar Ted says:

        No country developed country on earth, except for the US, even comes close to grounding “allowing” firearm ownership on the basis of stopping, impeding or deterring a government act or actions.

        And bringing up assassinations or “full on dictatorship” tends to be a leftist “meat puppet” talking point.

        The simple fact is the rest of the developed world has less First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment type rights. They do not value their civil liberties to anywhere near the same degree.

  11. avatar Brewski says:

    Those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Those that don’t ignore history are doomed by those who do. Every time.

  12. avatar strych9 says:

    So, it’s not immediate. It’s next month and that’s if parliament passes it.

    One has to wonder why they’re waiting. Conventional wisdom would be to ram this through ASAP, not wait a few weeks for people to contact their MPs with objections. Then again, maybe Labour is getting smarter.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Read it again. The ban goes into effect NOW. Now why the PM has the authority to “enact” a new “law” without parliamentary approval beats me, but it is now illegal to sell an AR style weapon in the country. Although I suspect no possessor can be prosecuted for possession until a law is passed, do ya think that will stop the police from confiscating everyone that they can get their dirty little mitts on? Now to tell you the truth, I don’t remember right off, but doesn’t NZ have a gun registration law?

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “No”

          Yet.

          FIFY.

          It will be interesting to see how they structure the law, if it will mirror what the Leftists would like to see here…

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        She doesn’t have that authority. The AP wrote this either poorly or to advance an agenda.

        Other sources, surprisingly Fox included, explain the comments further. She’s proposing a new law, similar to a package that was defeated in 2005, but which is not yet “fully” written. They expect to have that package written and before parliament early next month. They hope for a vote by the 11th.

        There is no immediate ban.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          Oh, and no, NZ doesn’t have registration. That’s been introduced in parliment a few times since 1992 and defeated repeatedly.

          They do have a licensing program though, and to acquire a semi-auto like an AR requires an “E” endorsement which is for “MSSA” (Military Style Semi Automatics).

          So, theoretically if you have an E endorsement, for which you paid $200NZD, then it would not mean you have an MSSA but it would suggest that you do because otherwise why would you have paid for the endorsement?

        2. avatar Ted says:

          NZ government already has regulatory power to put in a temporarily ban on semi auto sales immediately.
          The full possession ban and confiscation plan will need a vote, but they easily have the voted in parliament to do so and that will come in the next two to four weeks.

  13. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    So they are doing the exact thing the nutjob wanted them to do in the manifesto? Brilliant! Give him more power and the feeling he won!

    *slow 80s movie clap *

    1. avatar warfab says:

      To add insult to injury, the sicko is still alive and probably smiling in his jail cell as he watches all of this happen.

    2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Pretty much.

      Is going to be interesting trial (show) as he is now representing himself.

  14. avatar Wally1 says:

    Let this be a lesson for citizens in the U.S. This is exactly what starts revolutions. like I give any F*cks about New Zealand If they start to attempt this in the U.S. this is the start of civil war. It’s that simple. There are some things in life worth dying for. Bring it.

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      …that’s one of the things the shooter was hoping for. Pushing the left into an overreach- such as firearm confiscation- and that the right would fight back with force. It’s all in the manifesto.

      A depressing number of people are following his script.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        And on both sides, too. Remember, patriotic gun owners, the purpose of the civil war is to drive out the inferior races, per that nutbag’s script, so be sure to play your part & terrorize all the non-whites you can…or something.

        1. avatar Ted says:

          Half the US owns guns, more than 2/3 and growing see it as an individual guaranteed right meaning the left lost the culture war and supposed “close split” in Heller.

          And the purpose of the Second Amendment is not ‘civil war” but the deterrence of it with broad individual gun owners deterring tyrannical impulses all governments in human history have exhibited.

          As far as race the evidence is despite the European empires importing racism to the new world and making it systemic, that racial divisions are decreasing (much to the consternation of the left).

      2. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        What’s fascinating is how he explicitly provided an excuse for the Left to be the aggressors. (An action that is a choice, meaning they had the option to not act.) Meanwhile, he counted on the fact that the Right would have no choice, but be forced to defend ourselves. What’s unstated is that the Right (as a rule) is not looking to be the aggressors—just the Left—therefore he didn’t have any leverage to induce the Right to start the conflict.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      This makes for a hell of an argument for the 80% lower.

      1. avatar Ted says:

        No. NZ doesn’t have the same type of long standing regulatory views on lower being the only controlled part.

        And you can bet buying an AR upper, an AR stock, an AR barrel, rail, bolt, bolt carrier etc will put you on a list to trigger a warrant, if not be outright illegal to posses as well.

    3. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      “It is no longer enough to be willing to fight and die to preserve our rights, one must be willing to kill for them, too”. IST

    4. avatar Aaron Walker says:

      ” + 2.5 Million👍👍👍👍👍👍👍 up !!!”

  15. avatar ANG Pilot says:

    New Zealand’s police minister Stuart Nash said of the development: “I want to remind that it is a privilege and not a right to own a firearm in New Zealand.”

    An example of the difference between a citizen and a subject.

    1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

      Looks like the.people of NZ NEED to provide the NZ Police Minster with a “We The People of NZ” version of OUR Declaration Of Independence…Let that sink into the police minster ( Sheriff of Nottingham), whatever the F*K he calls him/her/itself.

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        That assumes that the people of NZ preserve the spirit of liberty. From where I sit, that sadly does not appear to be the case.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      The exercise has become a privilege in the United States as well. The right remains (as it does for any human anywhere), backed by the Constitution’s “shall not be infringed.” However, the actual practice of that right is subject to any number of infringements by government. The difference is of degrees.

  16. avatar Ross says:

    Unfortunately they will go quietly into the night, there will be no resistance.

    1. avatar jram01 says:

      Ross-3/20 / 24 and 7;
      When will the people ever learn.

      1. avatar Kyle says:

        They never do. Every nation goes the way of Venezuela sooner or later.

  17. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    It’s like they have no idea how many people you can kill with diesel fuel and fertilizer.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Of this they are quite well aware. It’s a rural country with a heavy reliance on agriculture.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        And likely strict regulation on said fertilizer just like we do, for the obvious reasons. I’m actually somewhat thankful for that sort of restriction, since bombs are truly indiscriminate weapons of terror, and lord knows how many we/everyone would be getting hit with, daily, were it unrestricted (just like in 3rd world countries, where such bombings commonplace, just like in the 1960s & earlier in America). An important distinction between ordnance & arms that doubtless was considered when selecting the language of the second amendment.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          I honestly can’t speak to what restrictions they have on fertilizer. It never occurred to me to ask when I lived there or at any time since.

          On the one hand what you say makes sense, OTOH, for a long time they had no restrictions on certain pesticides that were already heavily regulated in the US (odd for a country so “green”) until some guy on a rural farm dropped a tool into a drum of pesticide, reached into to grab the tool without PPE, got wet up to his shoulder and died from it. Kind of odd in those regards.

        2. avatar Gadsden says:

          It’s fertilizer. You can make it quite easily.

        3. avatar barnbwt says:

          It’s difficult enough that you generally don’t see nitrated-explosive bombings in areas where they control those chemicals; it requires some also-dangerous and controlled/monitored strong acids & other chemicals to generate them. There’s obviously always alternatives that will always wreck havoc, but nitrates are by far the easiest path (which is why they’re used in military/construction/demolition, and why they are the first choice of terrorists the world over when they are available).

          And though the instinct to resist government regulation/restriction is good and well-supported, in this case the restriction really & truly doesn’t trample any particular individual right the way gun control does. Farmers & construction guys still get what they need without onerous requirements, and the control of readily available means of (actual) mass destruction is maintained fairly well & this is supported by evidence. Guns are both finely controlled/focused in their usage compared to explosives, and are of course at least a couple rungs down the ladder on power level. They have a number of legitimate uses (self defense, common defense, sporting, competition, recreation), none of which besides recreation really apply to explosives. So the tradeoff is a loss of recreational explosives & some licensing expenses, in exchange for demonstrably reduced indiscriminate bombings overall; that’s the sort of justified “balancing of rights” under strict scrutiny that should be taking place with regards to restrictions on gun rights.

  18. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    She didn’t read the murderers manifesto. She gave him exactly what he wanted. Good luck to the Subjects of the Crown in kiwi land.

  19. avatar possum says:

    The tail on my cat is so pretty, it looks like a feather, I think I will eat it. Who says yah can’t have tail and eat it too?

    1. avatar possum says:

      This comment was relevant to guns, I shot the cats tail off.

  20. avatar tdiinva says:

    They don’t have registration in New Zealand. They have no idea who has what. Good luck with compliance.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “They have no idea who has what.”

      They will have the raw data on how many were imported legally over the years.

      I bet they will never publicly announce how unsuccessful their seizure rate was…

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        think it’s a case of “out of sight…out of mind”…..they’re not going to make it easy nor render it impossible that place is not as urbanized as australia…..

  21. avatar Kiwinews says:

    The law is as bad as it can be.

    It is in fact immediate. But there will be a “transition period” while they hammer out the exceptions to the law, however all new sales are now banned. After the grace period to voluntarily turn them in is over, the government will then prosecute anyone who still has one.

    Police Commissioner: “The first step is to do it voluntarily, we’ll then be working to ascertain if they haven’t complied and those people will be in all likelihood prosecuted,” Mr Bush said.

    What’s legal still:
    -.22 rimfire with a maximum 10 round magazine.
    -Semi-auto and pump shotguns with tube magazines that hold max 5 rounds.

    What’s newly illegal:
    -All semi auto firearms capable of being used with a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds
    -All semi-auto shotguns capable of being used with a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds.

    Kiwis can do the following:
    -Voluntarily surrender
    -complete an online form on the police website and arrange for the gun to be collected and stored until the- -buyback details are finalized
    -sell the firearm to someone with an E class license

    There are only 7500 E class licenses in all of NZ and 13.500 existing E class firearms.

    In addition on March 25 they will:
    -Tighten firearms licensing and penalties
    -Impose greater controls over a range of ammunition
    -future proof the Arms Act to respond to developments in technology

    Expected cost of the buyback is 100 to 200 million dollars

    Basically, the only way it could be any worse is if they refused to compensate anyone for their property. Other than that. Jesus H Christ what shithole country.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Would converting your AR to a bolt action help at all? If you have a low profile gas block, literally all you need do is pull the gas block, remove the gas tube, and reinstall the block rotated 90 deg to block the barrel’s gas port. (If you have a pinned gas block or a gas block / front sight combo, it might be easier to just buy a new barrel, free float handguard and cheap low-pro block.) The only way to cycle it is via the charging handle, aka bolt action.

      1. avatar SoCalJack says:

        Hey, I believe that’s an option for people in CA that want to build an AR pistol now a days. Imagine having a bolt AR pistol. Why?

    2. avatar SoCalJack says:

      IMHO, enforcement wont be the focus. The gun ban on semi autos is like a bandaid. NZ lacks the ability to quickly detect and respond to threats. The need a mulifaceted approach and it will require a lot of funding. Like many here have said, “they will regret this (giving up their guns)”, just give it time.

      1. avatar kiwinews says:

        They’re already arresting people and denying bail just for sharing the video online. (Max 14 years in prison for that.) They’ve banned 100+ websites, they’ve banned books. Even Sky News NZ banned Sky News Australia.

        Given the political climate in NZ, I don’t see anything changing anytime soon. Australia hasn’t moved the needle at all despite their massive crime wave after banning guns.

        Agreed they lack ability. That’s because NZ cops don’t have shit to do generally. Cruising around rounding up firearms from perfectly fine upstanding citizens sounds right up their alley. I absolutely think they will go out of their way to hunt people down.

  22. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    The People of NZ NEED to change THEIR government! Then they can stick their previous PM., Globalist Politicians, and Police Minster in a GITMO prison for Leftist A$$#@!€$…Maybe even float a few down some of NZs beautiful waterways!

  23. avatar B says:

    “And it’s now official. As if there were any doubt. From the AP . . .”

    No kidding! Just like we predicted from knee-jerk, ignorant feely politicians. And it will pass parliament. No doubt. Guaranteed.

    So in their infinite wisdom, this will solve the problem. SO, their law enforcement won’t need them either, then.

    Oh, so NZ will disarm all the commoners of “military style semi-automatic weapons”? WTF does that mean? When I was in the infantry, our longguns were FULL-Auto. Only our handguns were SEMI.

    I don’t expect them to even care to know the difference, because they don’t give a damn. I do expect however, that this is only the beginning of their warp speed agenda.

    There’s more coming, and our U.S. numbnuts will embrace this crap and push it to further their national agenda and beyond to the World Order agenda. You watch.

    This crap fed right into what the NZ psychopath’s plan. And who’s behind him? This stuff makes you wonder who the puppetmaster is. This isn’t lone wolf stuff. Manchurian candidate op? I wanna know what’s behind the curtain. I wanna see the Wizard. This asswipe is just a puppet.

    In the meantime, another mass of subjects lose their freedoms in pursuit of utopian horseshit as the devil laughs.

    1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

      I’d like to see all the Globalists rounded up an tossed into a GITMO for Leftist @$$#@!€$…Retake America, reclaim our constitutional!

      1. avatar No one of consequence says:

        You’d need a bigger island.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          And a bigger boat.

  24. avatar Geoff PR says:

    This is a relevant update –

    “After Multiple Reports About New Zealanders Turning In Guns, Guess How Many Actually Did It?”

    “Out of an estimated 1.2 million registered guns, New Zealand police report that as of Tuesday night, 37 firearms have been surrendered nationwide, according to BuzzFeed.”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-20/after-multiple-reports-about-new-zealanders-turning-guns-guess-how-many-actually

    So far, kinda like NY State when they banned theirs…

    1. avatar kiwinews says:

      That number was from yesterday before they passed the law, just voluntary virtue signaling cucks.

      Of course they run and tweet about it, too. Here’s a good, pathetic example.

      https://i0.wp.com/magaimg.net/img/7jae.jpg

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      so non-compliance has gone international?….not surprising,..it’s rapidly becoming the preferred method of resistance…reminiscent of booze in the 20’s…..

    3. avatar Wiregrass says:

      I wouldn’t get my hopes up too much for mass noncompliance. Was just reading a FB post from a Kiwi in a Grendel group about turning his in. They do not have the same solidarity among gun owners that we have here. The Fudds down there have already thrown the semi automatic people under the bus. They are not getting much support.

  25. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    Just another example of The Globalist movement marching forward toward EU-NWO through Global Civilian Disarmament…Meanwhile in the USA, The Demo-Authoritarians and a few GOP RINO Globalists are busy trying to “redefine” the US Constitution/Bill of Rights by attempting to manpulate and adjudicate what “Due process ” is to the individual…How sidestep the 2nd Amendment and all other amendments that protect the people…

    1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

      ..Under “Red Flag Laws…”

  26. avatar billy joel says:

    What a bunch of tards. When tyranny comes they will all hollow in a corner. This is why they are not americans.

  27. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    This is what happens to rights when the people surrender all authority to the government. Never trust a politician, and the further left they are the less trustworthy they are.

  28. avatar Arizona Free says:

    NZ is the new France of the southern hemisphere. All looks and no backbone. Remember they did ban all nukes from their ports. This is what happens when your PM is still nursing.

    1. avatar warfab says:

      Meanwhile, France is on like week 18 of the yellow vest protests and riots.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      they like to think of themselves as a little isle of serenity in a sea of insanity…a special place apart from it all…viewed in that context none of this is surprising nor unexpected…

  29. avatar Karl says:

    If a miracle happens where enough kiwis want to be free so they get together and cook up a good olde fashioned revolution over this, Far Cry 5 already wrote them an anthem.

    https://youtu.be/v0sdR-UdYzg

  30. avatar JohnnyL says:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Let that sink in for a moment !!

    1. avatar Detent says:

      There is a comma after the word “Arms.”

      Let that sink in for a moment!!

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        Yes, there is a comma (though not in every original copy). And…?

  31. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    New Zealand is such an inspiration. All Americans should turn over their guns to the trustworthy and all knowing government authorities right now! I know I would turn mine in….oh, that pesky boating accident…

  32. avatar Greg says:

    That’s why they are subjects with privileges. And we are citizens with rights.

  33. avatar Tex Secular says:

    So glad to see my thoughts and prayers worked this time…….

    1. avatar Ted says:

      One of the most craven and idiotic claims by the US gun ban lobby is that basic statements of condolence, by anyone, are somehow inappropriate.

      I guess they think that unless one suggest ending the Fourth and Fifth Amendment when a warrant requirement or other Fourth or Fifth Amendment right impeded a criminal investigation (cause of way more violent crime and murder than guns) you can’t make a statement of condolence.

      Once again the media, politicians and gun control pushers have abetted a mass murder, and given motive to the next mass murder — by giving the mass murderer exactly what they wanted. This despite peer reviewed studies showing this is exactly what motivates mass murderers.

  34. avatar Marcus says:

    Thank God we didn’t ban all handguns after a crazed foreigner killed 32 at VT 12 years ago.

  35. avatar OneIfByLand says:

    Knee-jerk much?

    He also drove a car to the mosque…why aren’t they outlawing that killing machine?

    “Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves.”

    ~D.H. Lawrence

  36. avatar Miner49er says:

    The problem isn’t the guns, it’s the gun culture.

    “The alleged gunman who authorities said killed 50 worshippers and wounded dozens more at two mosques in New Zealand apparently took target practice at a gun range that a military veteran claimed he reported to police after overhearing members speaking of “zombie apocalypses” and “homicidal fantasies.”

    We’ve all seen these people at the gun shops, gun ranges, or every day life. They have adolescent fantasies about using their guns in some delusional apocalyptic wasteland, and they’re just praying for an excuse to kill.

    1. avatar Ted says:

      Actually the data show that you are more likely to find murderers at a Democrat Party event. Over 80% of all US murder occurs in the half the US counties that are Democrat people and run.

      And what is this?:
      We’ve all seen these people at the gun shops, gun ranges, or every day life. They have adolescent fantasies about using their guns in some delusional apocalyptic wasteland, and they’re just praying for an excuse to kill.

      I am an evidence based person. The evidence shows US legal gun owners (and that is who goes to ranges) commit violent crime at profoundly lower rates than the general population.

      In fact Bloombergs “Mayors against Guns” had in its membership, a HIGHER felony rate than the general US population. My guess is Everytown, Moms need Action, etc all do as well.

      1. avatar Binder says:

        “US legal gun owners”. Love this, of course is you exclude everyone who is a criminal you will always get much lower crime rates. Funny how that works

      2. avatar Binder says:

        You know what would be a really scary study, look at murder rates among people who do not own a firearm AND who do not have a criminal record vs “legal gun owners”. I don’t think we are going to like the results.

      3. avatar DesertDave says:

        We all know that modern liberalism is a mental disorder. It is redundant to compare crime rates in locations that are populated by and governed by the insane vs locations that are generally more sane and governed by generally more sane government.

        The fact appears to be that when the rulers are above the law and show this to be the case it tends to drive the population nuts. If the population is already to the left of nutty, they tip over the edge and one of the effects is they start killing people. With the fact that over the past administrations tenure the feds have to a large degree gone into the lawless regions of reality, it is no wonder you have more crazy people getting crazier.

        Fact is that a stable, run by the books government maintains a saner population.

      4. avatar pwrserge says:

        Fun fact Comrade Binder, you’re still wrong. A person who is not a criminal and owns guns is LESS likely to commit a homicide than a person who is not a criminal and does NOT own guns. Now please get in line, we need to start boarding for our first round of free helicopter tours.

  37. avatar GunnyGene says:

    It’s good to be King. Or Queen in this case.

  38. avatar Anon says:

    History repeats itself:
    In WWII, we sent civilians firearms to Britain as they had no guns, civilian disarmament ( for the most part) from hundreds of years ago.
    NZ has a small army, the Chinese will walk right in.
    Japanese admiral Yamamoto told the Japanese Army that invading the US before WWII would not be a good choice as behind every blade of grass would be an American with a gun.

    I guess our schools teach SWJ crap instead of history.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      This is such a stupid line. How in the world would the Japanese ever have invaded CONUS? Half the army was in China, they had to worry about the Russians. And something call the Pacific was in the way.

      And please find me when the quote came from (Primary Source)

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        Mr. Binder needs to read more history books.

      2. avatar DesertDave says:

        The fact that they originated that quote would make one think they at least considered it. They must have had this on their mind as, if they had not had that inclination, they would not have attacked us at Pearl Harbor. They must have known that we would not stand for that attack in the long run. So there must have been some plan to at least invade the west coast.

        They were pretty cocky bastards until they poked the bear and got slapped down hard.

      3. avatar Ing says:

        That quote is apocryphal. There’s no record that it was ever uttered by the Japanese regarding the US, let alone by Yamamoto.

        It is true, however, that Yamamoto was not on board with any attempt to directly attack the US. The famous line about awakening a sleeping giant is an accurate quote — and prescient.

  39. avatar James T Matters says:

    So, to prevent mass murders, the masses are now prohibited from defending themselves.
    Smart move, dumbazzez.

  40. avatar former water walker says:

    Whatever…another commonwealth country goes full retard. A tiny one at that. Golly they must be “safe ” now. I guess the next mass murderer in NZ (probably not a white boy) won’t use a truck,explosives or poison😩😢😏

  41. avatar GS650G says:

    NZ was an outspoken critic and non participant in the OZ gun ban and for 20 + years it’s worked. Amazing how fast that ended. Now the question is what country is going to ban all firearms next?

  42. avatar John Galt says:

    NZ about to be totally disarmed except for a laughable token military force.

    Wonder who will own it next?

    Who will the people of NZ be begging for food? The whole country looks like a future Chinese comfort woman warehouse and airstrip to me.

    Only took one guy to get every person in the country to surrender.

    1. avatar James W Crawford says:

      Malaysia or Indonesia.

  43. avatar Ark says:

    The cheers from Americans are absolutely sickening. Never forget, you share this country with millions of fascists who get hard at the idea of the government being able to kneejerk trample your rights in retaliation for news events that hurt their feelz.

  44. avatar Warren Neville says:

    All because of a bunch of muslims.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      You’ve got your causes backwards, moron.

  45. avatar James W Crawford says:

    Given the portions of the video that have not yet been scrubbed from the internet, itwould appear that the terrorist did most if not all of his killing with a Mossberg 930 shotgun and a Remington 870 shotgun.

    Why ban rifles?

    Is the PM such a stupid bitch that she doesnt know the difference?

    1. avatar Mark says:

      The video I saw took place at the first mosque and was 16 minutes. He started with a semi auto shotgun and then the rest of the killing was done with an AR. He shot the pump gun a couple times when driving but unclear if he hit anything. He took his own car’s window and windshield out though. I wonder if he was wearing ear protection.

      I’m not aware of any video when he’s at the second mosque where he killed 7 people. The majority of the killing was done at the first mosque.

      1. avatar James W Crawford says:

        I was not eager to view the entire video and by the time I wanted to verify the facts, it hadbeen banned. So much for the First Amendment.

        Given mass shootings such as Columbine, Washington Navy Yard, Anapolis Nwesroom and Sante Fe Texas that were perpetrated primarily with shotguns, it seems absurd to claim that semiautomatic rifles are the problem.

        May be New Zealand should ban Australians?

  46. avatar Jack Blade says:

    So when the next nut uses petrol or a vehicle, I fully expect an outright ban on those items as well. Especially big black trucks with large tires meant for smashing people and that scary high octane petrol designed to burn people faster! Right…

  47. avatar Jack Blade says:

    Organized crime salutes NZ! Another market opens up! 😂

  48. The loss of life is tragic but not nearly as tragic as the loss of New Zealand’s Natural Right to defend themselves and their families. This Natural Right included the right to bear arms. Because New Zealand, was settled by the British, every “free Englishman” immigrating to New Zealand before 1920 (when the UK started to trample the right to bear arms) arrived having the inalienable, Natural Right to bear arms. That can’t be morally taken away by a government and can’t legally be done except by despotic governments.

    Meanwhile, the media totally ignores the 90,000 Christians who are martyred for their faith each year (see Johnson, Todd & Zurlo, Gina & Hickman, Albert & F. Crossing, Peter. (2017). Christianity 2018: More African Christians and Counting Martyrs. International Bulletin of Mission Research. 42. 239693931773983. 10.1177/2396939317739833. On-line:
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320788300_Christianity_2018_More_African_Christians_and_Counting_Martyrs

    That’s an average of 246 Christians murdered worldwide each day. This takes place worldwide but is particularly bad in: North Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Iraq, Egypt, Nigeria, Peoples Republic of China and India, to name a few.

    If these Christians and others persecuted for their fair had firearms, it would be a different story. As former Chief Judge Alex Kozinski wrote:

    “All too many of the other great tragedies of history — Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few — were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations.

    Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. See Kleinfeld Dissent at 578-579. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

    My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.

    Fortunately, the Framers were wise enough to entrench the right of the people to keep and bear arms within our constitutional structure. The purpose and importance of that right was still fresh in their minds, and they spelled it out clearly so it would not be forgotten. Despite the panel’s mighty struggle to erase these words, they remain, and the people themselves can read what they say plainly enough”:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 569, 570 (9th Cir. 2003) (Kozinski, J., dissenting)

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email