Mass shooting New Zealand Mosque - MOD NOTE POST #1

batgoat

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Maybe like most people he doesn’t really care what kinda shirt the guy is wearing? He’s not their mother, the guy was a fan and came up for a photo this was pulled up before with JP when he took a photo with a couple of young fellas with a Pepe flag. He’s not responsible for the people he meets day to day, the fact he spends so much time meeting people who admire him to me says fairly positive things about the guy.

Pretty sure plenty would refuse to get a photo with that guy. In much the same way as they wouldn't appear in one where a person said they're a proud racist or anti semite.

Bannasidhe

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Banning books..... how stunning and brave, wonder where we saw that before.

You really believe a privately owned chain of book stores deciding to no longer stock a particular author is the same thing as what is happening in your Godwin photo?

Do you not think it is up to a private company to decide for themselves what stock they wish to sell?


May surprise to learn the Irish government has banned books.

batgoat

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You really believe a privately owned chain of book stores deciding to no longer stock a particular author is the same thing as what is happening in your Godwin photo?

Do you not think it is up to a private company to decide for themselves what stock they wish to sell?


May surprise to learn the Irish government has banned books.

Pretty sure the book will continue to be readily available on the likes of amazon. More a shop choosing to take an ethical stand. Places have done it for decades in one way or another for decades. They don't seem to get that.

Bannasidhe

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Maybe like most people he doesn’t really care what kinda shirt the guy is wearing? He’s not their mother, the guy was a fan and came up for a photo this was pulled up before with JP when he took a photo with a couple of young fellas with a Pepe flag. He’s not responsible for the people he meets day to day, the fact he spends so much time meeting people who admire him to me says fairly positive things about the guy.

So if a person, say an Iman who lives in Ireland, who had just given a talk was to have his photo taken next to Mustafa Proud ISISmember you would be just peachy about that?

Bannasidhe

batgoat wrote: »

Pretty sure the book will continue to be readily available on the likes of amazon. More a shop choosing to take an ethical stand. Places have done it for decades in one way or another for decades. They don't seem to get that.

Yup. The chain may be making a ethical stand or it may be thinking we are going to lose a truck load of regular customers if we stock this or a combination of both.

Still a far cry from the book being banned by the Gubbermint.

kunst nugget

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Banning books..... how stunning and brave, wonder where we saw that before.

That's a false equivalence as well you must know. One book retailer decides it's not going to stock Jordan Peterson's books - not a decision I agree with but that's neither here nor there - it's got nothing to do with the state itself.

Boggles

Zorya wrote: »

Gaybo chatted away to Sinead after she tore the picture on his show

Gaybo never hosted Saturday Night Live, As far as I am aware.

Bannasidhe

Zorya wrote: »

Yeah, maybe ill advised move if he had read the shirt in first place, should have said no probably. But stuff happens, Gaybo chatted away to Sinead after she tore the picture on his show, and I think he is still a national treasure, far as I know.

Didn't she do that on Saturday Night Live??

And it destroyed her career in the U.S - but as far as I am aware didn't encourage any one to open fire on any Popes...

Cienciano

Zorya wrote: »

As I've said, I ain't his fan, but anyone with a titter of wit knows what happened in that photo. He gave his lecture, stood in the promotion place or whatever and every 4 or 5 seconds someone steps up for the photo and couple of words. He has said it could be hundreds in an evening. Most likely that is the context of the evidence, your honour.

We know how the photo was taken, the link here is not the photo itself. It's that the sort of stuff the shooter was listening to was JP.

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Banning books..... how stunning and brave, wonder where we saw that before.

Just as well no books have been banned here.

Thrashssacre

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You really believe a privately owned chain of book stores deciding to no longer stock a particular author is the same thing as what is happening in your Godwin photo?

Do you not think it is up to a private company to decide for themselves what stock they wish to sell?


May surprise to learn the Irish government has banned books.

It’s the wrong way to approach this tragedy, it plays into the idea a lot of the alt right guys have of the whole globalist world being against them. They’ll point to the books being banned, call to prayer being played on Friday and assault weapons being banned as reason for them being treated differently when they “fight back”. We’re giving them all the ammunition they need to justify their beliefs. When the attacks in France were done there so no books banned, no individual philosopher or YouTube figures blamed for legitimizing the sort of people who did this shooting. This is playing right into their hands.

Thrashssacre

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So if a person, say an Iman who lives in Ireland, who had just given a talk was to have his photo taken next to Mustafa Proud ISISmember you would be just peachy about that?

I’d have no problem with the photo, I wouldn’t be calling for the iman to be shamed or banned from speaking I would however hope the police arrested the man who was a member of an international terrorist organization.

Bannasidhe

Thrashssacre wrote: »

It’s the wrong way to approach this tragedy, it plays into the idea a lot of the alt right guys have of the whole globalist world being against them. They’ll point to the books being banned, call to prayer being played on Friday and assault weapons being banned as reason for them being treated differently when they “fight back”. We’re giving them all the ammunition they need to justify their beliefs. When the attacks in France were done there so no books banned, no individual philosopher or YouTube figures blamed for legitimizing the sort of people who did this shooting. This is playing right into their hands.

I think they already have enough ammunition to fuel their fantasies already.

A book chain decided not to stock a book. Big deal. They will have decided to not stock many many books on many many topics by many many authors.

It has not been banned.

Danzy

Thrashssacre wrote: »

It’s the wrong way to approach this tragedy, it plays into the idea a lot of the alt right guys have of the whole globalist world being against them. They’ll point to the books being banned, call to prayer being played on Friday and assault weapons being banned as reason for them being treated differently when they “fight back”. We’re giving them all the ammunition they need to justify their beliefs. When the attacks in France were done there so no books banned, no individual philosopher or YouTube figures blamed for legitimizing the sort of people who did this shooting. This is playing right into their hands.

The shooter knew that the establishment/Left would react that way.

That doesn't make him analytical, it was obvious they would react differently.

Thrashssacre

Danzy wrote: »

The shooter knew that the establishment/Left would react that way.

That doesn't make him analytical, it was obvious they would react differently.

He wrote that they would but that he hopes that would angry other like him into action, so far he’s been proven 100% correct.

Call Me Jimmy

Cienciano wrote: »

We know how the photo was taken, the link here is not the photo itself. It's that the sort of stuff the shooter was listening to was JP.


Just as well no books have been banned here.

It's scary that jordan peterson has more of a link to terrorism than the quran in the eyes of this book store. Just listening to 'the sort of stuff' that JP talks about is enough to stop stocking his book. But quoting the quran or using it as justification for terrorism is far enough removed to keep it in stock. Just sounds a bit mad.

Zorya

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Didn't she do that on Saturday Night Live??

And it destroyed her career in the U.S - but as far as I am aware didn't encourage any one to open fire on any Popes...

Whoops wrong show

Boggles

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

It's scary that jordan peterson has more of a link to terrorism than the quran in the eyes of this book store. Just listening to 'the sort of stuff' that JP talks about is enough to stop stocking his book. But quoting the quran or using it as justification for terrorism is far enough removed to keep it in stock. Just sounds a bit mad.

How do you know they stock the Quran?

Which book store is it?

Call Me Jimmy

Boggles wrote: »

How do you know they stock the Quran?

Which book store is it?

I assumed

edit: https://www.whitcoulls.co.nz/product/the-koran-978019953732737934

Bannasidhe

Boggles wrote: »

How do you know they stock the Quran?

Which book store is it?

Whitcoulls.

They do stock the Quran - they also stock the Bible which obviously should be banned has it encouraged mass killings through out the centuries as people violently disagreed with the meaning of parts of it.

AND it fuels Christian extremists such as those Christians in Uganda who wanted to bring a law making homosexuality a capital offence.

Call Me Jimmy

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Whitcoulls.

They do stock the Quran - they also stock the Bible which obviously should be banned has it encouraged mass killings through out the centuries as people violently disagreed with the meaning of parts of it.

AND it fuels Christian extremists such as those Christians in Uganda who wanted to bring a law making homosexuality a capital offence.

Yes to be credible they will have to remove a lot of books from their shelves.

Bannasidhe

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Yes to be credible they will have to remove a lot of books from their shelves.

Or as a private company decide for themselves which books they wish to stock... kinda like how people argue what message cake makers should be allowed to write on the cakes they make.

Call Me Jimmy

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Or as a private company decide for themselves which books they wish to stock... kinda like how people argue what message cake makers should be allowed to write on the cakes they make.

tell me where I said they couldn't?

Bannasidhe

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

tell me where I said they couldn't?

Never said you did.

Snickers Man

Manic Moran wrote: »

you know the way most people on Boards scoff at the idea common in America that there is safety in more people carrying guns?

And we will continue to do so. Keep American exceptionalism exceptional. Especially on this topic.

Manic Moran wrote: »

The President of the Czech Republic two years ago, shortly after the Paris attack, urged those with permits to carry, and for others to arm themselves, as a defense system against terrorist attack. There are a quarter million carry permit holders in the population of ten million.

I think there are only two "normal democracies" (outside of the US) that give wide latitude to their citizens to bear loaded firearms in public: Czech Republic and Israel. (Assuming you can describe as "normal" a country whose very existence is questioned, to say the least, by a large minority of people living in its jurisdiction, but let's not disappear down that rabbit hole)

So apart from a paranoid confessional state in a permanent state of military readiness, you have the Czech Republic as the only non American democracy (to the best of my knowledge) that allows people to walk around tooled up with loaded firearms. Even Switzerland, long held up as the poster boy of respectable, restrained, militarily prepared "gun enthusiasts", doesn't permit that.

Just one! And I believe it has restrictions, the like of which would have many NRA loyalists in the US up in arms if introduced state side.

I don't know of ANY normal democracy that has an outright ban on its citizens owning firearms. Even Britain permits reasonable gun ownership. In that, you can own a gun for sporting, hunting or vermin-control purposes but there are almost NO circumstances in which you can actually shoot someone with it.

That's the basic premise of firearm ownership in this country, with which I have no problem. By Irish standards, I am a gun-rights advocate, even though I don't own one; in the US I would be a hard-left freedom-hating progressive who only "politicizes" the issue after the latest instance of gun carnage instead of offering the tried and trusted, but provenly useless "Thoughts and Prayers" to the victims.

Incidentally, any mods who are uneasy about gun-rights being discussed in this forum, despite the relevance of the NZ prime minister's prompt action on the matter, might like to consider who first raised this matter, albeit tentatively and subtly, in Post number 10.

Danzy

Chelsea Clinton is getting it in the neck from the totalitarian Left as well, told she was responsible for Christchurch.

The finger snapping is very creepy.

For many of us who are economically on the Left, the decent in to cultist thinking and actions in a large section of the modern Left and progressive movements is frightening.

Cienciano

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

It's scary that jordan peterson has more of a link to terrorism than the quran in the eyes of this book store. Just listening to 'the sort of stuff' that JP talks about is enough to stop stocking his book. But quoting the quran or using it as justification for terrorism is far enough removed to keep it in stock. Just sounds a bit mad.

I'll tell you what's even more mad. You searching what books a privately owned shop on the other side of the world stock and worrying about their credibility

Call Me Jimmy

Cienciano wrote: »

I'll tell you what's even more mad. You searching what books a privately owned shop on the other side of the world stock and worrying about their credibility

You don't discuss things? You don't check things relevant to posts? Sometimes even... trivial things?

Bannasidhe

Danzy wrote: »

Chelsea Clinton is getting it in the neck from the totalitarian Left as well, told she was responsible for Christchurch.

The finger snapping is very creepy.

For many of us who are economically on the Left, the decent in to cultist thinking and actions in a large section of the modern Left and progressive movements is frightening.

Meh. That's been there since the beginning.
Spanish Civil War was a masterclass in people trying to out-left each other.

Manic Moran

I would observe that California has had a ban on semi-automatic rifles capable of using a detachable magazine since Jan 2000. I moved there in Feb 2000. Have you seen my AK-74, FAL, Steyer AUG, Tavor X95 or SiG 556? Pictured on the shooting forum.

Again, the problem is people who generally do not understand the mechanics behind the thing they don’t like trying to write technical legislation which doesn’t do what they want...

MrFresh

Well done on successfully turning a thread about a white nationalist murdering fifty Muslims into an anti-left thread. Quite the accomplishment. Shameful, but still impressive.

Danzy

MrFresh wrote: »

Well done on successfully turning a thread about a white nationalist murdering fifty Muslims into an anti-left thread. Quite the accomplishment. Shameful, but still impressive.

He was as left as much as he was right.

Strongly opposed to the free market, to globalization, believed in the State as the dominant force in business.

Wibbs

Danzy wrote: »

He was as left as much as he was right.

Strongly opposed to the free market, to globalization, believed in the State as the dominant force in business.

Just going on the snippets that have been reported of what he was coming out with(now admittedly I haven't read his "manifesto"), my overriding impression of him and how I would describe him - and this may sound odd - is that he's a troll. Coming from a similar basic start point as any forum/twitter troll(with murder on top of course). The "manifesto" for a start, the 4/8chan stuff, the wildly different and contrasting opinions, deflection, appeals to populism and appeals to different "friendly" groups, name dropping pretty random "influencers" and even dropping the name of the youtube "star" guy just before he went off to murder innocent people. Like it was like some sort of disconnect single player game. His travels and subsequent crime are like some horrific trolling trajectory too and his court appearance with the "nazi" symbolism stuff. If a poster came out with that kinda thing in text here I'd be immediately thinking wind up merchant and troll. I dunno if I'm explaining my thinking on this well though.

Maybe... OK think of the biggest oddball troll you've encountered in your time online, now imagine that same troll with that extra garnish on top of inhumanity and murderous intent(though I'd bet he reckons he's both humane and not murderous, which backs up that he's neither). I reckon what you'd end up with might this prick.

Cookie_Monster

Wibbs wrote: »

A non semiautomatic rifle type, that can carry 8 rounds of various calibers in their fixed magazines and capable of very accurate rapid fire, not far off a semiautomatic, reloading being the bottleneck there. The legislation doesn't cover them and they're also quite the popular firearm. Revolvers aren't in the mix either.

So the legislation is not perfect, so what? It's a first step towards trying to actually do something rather than the continued fingers in ears approach of the past. It'll never keep everyone happy but we live in a democracy and the majority want guns further restricted.

The next step to follow will be individual gun registration and probably ammunition tracking as well, mentioned on the radio this morning that they will take more time to consider the exact implementation of this step 2. There was a further step 3 as well but I missed what that was going to be.

mvl

1. omg, this thread really went south today ...

   Zorya wrote: »

   brain helplessly freezes

2. ArrBee wrote: »

   interestingly, Australia has made a show of sending "bad New Zealanders" back to NZ in recent years.
   Any reciprocal action by NZ could be based on the same "understanding".

   ---> since I also asked about this few days/pages ago ...

   mvl wrote: »

Another point - having in mind that Australia and NZ PMs have had some (recent) escalations related to Australia criminal deportations habits, assume there is almost zero chance NZ would deport this one until he's served his sentence ... anyone heard differently ?
... did you hear anything recent on this (is deportation an option, if yes, it would be done at what stage of the sentence ? )

Wibbs

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

So the legislation is not perfect, so what? It's a first step towards trying to actually do something rather than the continued fingers in ears approach of the past. It'll never keep everyone happy but we live in a democracy and the majority want guns restricted.

Democracy is the best system we have so far, but it can often mean a) all the fools are on the same side and b) is all too easily hijacked by events and emotions and ignorance of what laws are being passed and what people think they want. QV Brexit/Trump et al.

Hell, look at New Zealand's understandable if a tad daft political and legal action over the last week. There's a muppet up in court for sharing the video, who is potentially facing ten years in prison according to their laws, yet when this new gun control act goes through possession of a banned firearm will be subject to a four grand fine or up to three years in prison. It's apparently worse to share a video of the crime than actually possess the type of weapon that might cause another such crime. Eh... wut?

Secondly just because one does something, doesn't mean that something will have the effect you think. It'll also be interesting to see how many New Zealand gun owners actually hand back their weapons.

BBFAN

Zorya wrote: »

As I've said, I ain't his fan, but anyone with a titter of wit knows what happened in that photo. He gave his lecture, stood in the promotion place or whatever and every 4 or 5 seconds someone steps up for the photo and couple of words. He has said it could be hundreds in an evening. Most likely that is the context of the evidence, your honour.

BS, you could easily spot that t-shirt in a couple of seconds and refuse to get in the photo. :rolleyes:

GinAndBitter

Wibbs wrote: »

Just going on the snippets that have been reported of what he was coming out with(now admittedly I haven't read his "manifesto"), my overriding impression of him and how I would describe him - and this may sound odd - is that he's a troll. Coming from a similar basic start point as any forum/twitter troll(with murder on top of course). The "manifesto" for a start, the 4/8chan stuff, the wildly different and contrasting opinions, deflection, appeals to populism and appeals to different "friendly" groups, name dropping pretty random "influencers" and even dropping the name of the youtube "star" guy just before he went off to murder innocent people. Like it was like some sort of disconnect single player game. His travels and subsequent crime are like some horrific trolling trajectory too and his court appearance with the "nazi" symbolism stuff. If a poster came out with that kinda thing in text here I'd be immediately thinking wind up merchant and troll. I dunno if I'm explaining my thinking on this well though.

Maybe... OK think of the biggest oddball troll you've encountered in your time online, now imagine that same troll with that extra garnish on top of inhumanity and murderous intent(though I'd bet he reckons he's both humane and not murderous, which backs up that he's neither). I reckon what you'd end up with might this prick.

You're spot on, I read maybe 5 pages of it. The whole thing is trolling, I'd find some of it funny if it wasn't written by a mass murderer.

Cookie_Monster

Wibbs wrote: »

Secondly just because one does something, doesn't mean that something will have the effect you think. It'll also be interesting to see how many New Zealand gun owners actually hand back their weapons.

It may or it may not, who knows for now. At least something is being tried instead of doing nothing until the mythical perfect solution becomes available.

Laws can be reversed or amended if needed if they don't work out...

batgoat

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

It may or it may not, who knows for now. At least something is being tried instead of doing nothing until the mythical perfect solution becomes available.

Laws can be reversed or amended if needed if they don't work out...

Also as a nation who have created less than perfect laws in recent years as a result of tragedies, it did lead to the initial stages to pretty radical changes for our nation. In a positive sense.

Wibbs

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

It may or it may not, who knows for now. At least something is being tried instead of doing nothing until the mythical perfect solution becomes available.

I have found and history tends to show that when emotions are high it's best for those in charge to step back and consider with objectivity the next step, not just take one. In fairness human nature tends to the latter.

Laws can be reversed or amended if needed if they don't work out...

Depends entirely on the law. Most aren't and tend to be dug in like ticks, particularly ones that are set up against future possibilities while trying to prove a negative.

GinAndBitter wrote:

You're spot on, I read maybe 5 pages of it. The whole thing is trolling, I'd find some of it funny if it wasn't written by a mass murderer.

yeah, now like I say I've not read that guff, nor intend to do so, maybe years down the line as a historical curio, but from the reported stuff he struck me as very much of our time, our "west" too. Now Islamist terrorists use the interwebs, but it's for comms and usually painfully "unhip" propaganda vids, whereas this muppet was right "on trend" spouting all the right rhetoric and buzzwords and from not just one "side". I mean he visits Pakistan and Turkey, expresses how wonderful the culture is in the first place and how he respects Islam, then goes off and murders 50 people in an Islamic place of worship. His political stuff is at odds with itself and he's all over social and antisocial media and go pros the whole thing like a unboxing video of mass murder, name checking youtubers. He doesn't try to go out in a blaze of misplaced glory either. Oh no, surrender, now the video is over, like his go pro batteries died. Very fcuking surreal for me.

lbc2019

Boggles wrote: »

Gaybo never hosted Saturday Night Live, As far as I am aware.

I cant believe you missed that episode- he played Dev in a skit

Manic Moran

So as I am reading the new proposals for what is to be prohibited, and comparing with how we are doing things in California these days.

Other than the fact that California permits up to ten rounds in a semi-auto with non-detachable magazine and New Zealand says 7, the list of prohibited features is generally identical (pistol grips, flash hiders, bayonet lugs etc) I believe these will remain legal under a Category A license, the most basic type the New Zealanders issue.



Quite what the benefit is to banning those features I can’t say, but stupidity aside, it’s the law, so we work with it. Some such features can be home made and screwed on. Bayonet lugs, which cannot, don’t seem to have any practicable danger.

The magazines are not detachable. It used to be that California law defined “detachable” as “can be removed without use of a tool”, but when it was demonstrated that it was possible to use a tool in about a half second to do it, they changed the definition to “any ammunition feeding device which can be removed from the firearms without disassembly of the firing action”.

So now it adds an extra second or so. (And can easily be worked around back to normal configuration if someone with ill intent has a will to do it)

But, hey, everyone feels safer.

BBFAN

The amount of people in here trying to show off their knowledge of guns is disturbing.

I really don't want to know.

BBFAN

BBFAN wrote:

The amount of people in here trying to show off their knowledge of guns is disturbing.

BBFAN wrote:

I really don't want to know.

Why? Why would you not want to learn from people who have knowledge?

BBFAN

Deleted User wrote: »

Why? Why would you not want to learn from people who have knowledge?

Why would I want to learn about guns, their calibre, appearance etc.????

You're confused that not everyone needs to know this crap???

I along with probably 95% of the population will never touch a gun and will never have any need or want to do so.

This thread is about a mass murderer, how does that translate into a debate into the types of guns, appearance of guns, calibre, blah blah blah.

It's just a big bollix type of conversation to have which has nothing to do with the thread subject.

BBFAN

BBFAN wrote:

It's just a big bollix type of conversation to have which has nothing to do with the thread subject.

The new gun laws imposed in new Zealand have a lot to do with this thread. Many are lauding their government for their "quick action" but people who know more about the subject are highlighting that it seems like lip service and not an actual fix.

Kind of important if you ask me.

BBFAN

Deleted User wrote: »

The new gun laws imposed in new Zealand have a lot to do with this thread. Many are lauding their government for their "quick action" but people who know more about the subject are highlighting that it seems like lip service and not an actual fix.

Kind of important if you ask me.

"people who know more about the subject" in whose opinion???

BBFAN

BBFAN wrote:

"people who know more about the subject" in whose opinion???

People who own guns, people who know about calibres of guns...

You know, the very people who you asked to not talk about stuff they know because you feel it's not important.

Manic Moran

BBFAN wrote: »

The amount of people in here trying to show off their knowledge of guns is disturbing.

I really don't want to know.

Well, if you don't want to know, you obviously cannot comment on the legislation purported to fix the problem. As near as I can tell, the new proposed regulation, had it been in force before now, would have done basically nothing to stop this shooting, the man planned well in advance and converted his category A rifle to a category E rifle. It demonstrates a lack of knowledge of how modern firearms are constructed.

BBFAN

BBFAN wrote:

"people who know more about the subject" in whose opinion???

Having more knowledge isn't an opinion. It's measurable.