Because there may be some who would misconstrue what you said as the "good- guy- with- a- gun" argument.I am sure that you and I agree that there is no place for that in this country. So it is good to make that explicit.
by all means available.
Where available=legal I assume.What I mean by that is , up to , but not including, taking the law into your own hands.
I applaud your final sentence. A corollary might be that there is no synthesis to be had when the explicit aim of one view is the proscription of the other.
Ben all I am saying is that the weapon itself is terror,regardless of how it is brought about.
I accept that there are at least five people committed to carrying out further "events", but they are not my friends.
Their weapon of choice for their psy-ops is terror. They have multiple options.
I think that you are being encouraged to believe that "it's all sorted".
I doubt that.
I was just stating what is glaringly obvious. Terrorist "events" don't require semi-automatic guns with more than five shots.
I think you probably knew that.
I am saying that NZers are no safer as a result of law changes, than they were last Friday, either from mass murders or terrorist psy-ops.
If you are asking for empirical evidence of my assertion re choice of ordinance then you could obtain that evidence yourself. I am not linking to it.
Look for a one minute firing of a WW2 Lee Enfield .303(of which there are thousands in NZ).
Count the shots. Imagine five snipers firing for one minute.
" how fast we have been able to change our gun laws"
.If you are thinking that there has been a change in our gun laws that would protect us from all terrorist "productions " in the future, then I can only suggest that you do a little research.
I see now that you had already made the point, somewhat more succinctly :-)
I consider it plausible that mentally unstable people can be triggered by hate speech. Tell me I have nothing to fear, that they will realise it was not serious( if that is the case). Just jokes right?
“Life- long incarceration is too good for climate deniers”
It isn’t funny.
I thought we might agree that it is dangerous to spray this sort of invective. Maybe I should HTFU.