Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack in... NZ?

BobTheCoward said:
Shifting the burden of proof. I didn't come out and support a strategy. I'm asking what evidence there is for the strategy you support?
Click to expand...

...the burden of proof is on the authorities who made the decision, not random, anonymous internet posters.

If you really want evidence here is the official NZ police twitter account.

https://twitter.com/nzpolice

If your desire for evidence is so overwhelming please feel free to contact them, and when they let you know, please, by all means come back here and share what they said.
 
banquetbear said:
...the burden of proof is on the authorities who made the decision, not random, anonymous internet posters.

If you really want evidence here is the official NZ police twitter account.

https://twitter.com/nzpolice

If your desire for evidence is so overwhelming please feel free to contact them, and when they let you know, please, by all means come back here and share what they said.
Click to expand...

The burden of proof is on whoever makes a claim. Anonymous posters are making claims here and I am asking them about it
 
The Atheist said:
Holy crap, the country is virtually cancelled today, with all major events being put off, mainly at the behest of the cops, who want to have armed pigs at everything. Bryan Adams and Polyfest, 1000 km away, have been called off, along with any event featuring people.

Nothing like shutting the door far too late.

Trying to make up for their deficiencies in vetting the guy for a gun licence?
Click to expand...
Does your country still shut down every Sunday? Seems closing to mourn 49 people killed by a shooter isn't that much of a reach.
 
PhantomWolf said:
How I like my mashed potatoes isn't based on science either. Get over it. We don't based everything in our lives on science. Sometimes we just do things because they are sensible, even if there is no evidence that they need to happen. It's called taking precautions.
Click to expand...

What is the evidence it is a sensible decision?

Sensible definition I found is "(of a statement or course of action) chosen in accordance with wisdom or prudence; likely to be of benefit."

What leads you to conclude the actions today fit that?
 
BobTheCoward said:
It isn't about hunters. Under certain circumstances, it is just for a person to kill another person. A gun is for killing people. Semi automatic weapons are better at that task than some other weapons.
Click to expand...

Owning a gun for self defence is not a valid reason for owning a gun in Australia or New Zealand.

I should ignore trolling like this....
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Apologies if this got covered already, I just lost my mind over it...

Fox Analyst Decries NZ Attack, Calls Alleged Political Motive ‘Understandable’



Somehow he goes on to declare how the Arab and Muslim world need to do something about this.



Not to mention, ehhh, you just made a call to action, sir...

He then went on to tweet, blaming Iran for twisting his words and making him look bad.
Click to expand...

Louie Gohmert went the same route.

“The shootings at the New Zealand mosques are egregiously reprehensible. The shooters need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law along with anyone who knowingly aided their efforts in any way,” Gohmert said.

He continued: “There are courts, dispute resolutions, and legislatures to resolve controversies — there is no place for cold blooded murders. Though New Zealand does not have the death penalty, hopefully its people, through their justice system, will send the message loudly and clearly that such barbarity from anyone will not be tolerated.”

Gohmert did not specifically offer condolences to the victims or their families.
Click to expand...

Yeah, why didn't the terrorist just sue Muslims for existing instead? :boggled:
 
lionking said:
Owning a gun for self defence is not a valid reason for owning a gun in Australia or New Zealand.

I should ignore trolling like this....
Click to expand...

Reasons can be a valid reason regardless of legality. There is no magic that prevents governments from using violence to stop people from doing something for a valid reason.

I didn't claim it was a valid reason.
 
BobTheCoward said:
What is the evidence it is a sensible decision?

Sensible definition I found is "(of a statement or course of action) chosen in accordance with wisdom or prudence; likely to be of benefit."

What leads you to conclude the actions today fit that?
Click to expand...

Yesterday. Get it right.

I'd say avoiding the potential of a hijack of attack on a plane is indeed "likely to be of benefit" even if there is little evidence of those things occurring.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Reasons can be a valid reason regardless of legality. There is no magic that prevents governments from using violence to stop people from doing something for a valid reason.

I didn't claim it was a valid reason.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you claiming?

Self defence is listed as automatically ruling you out of getting a gun licence

You seem to have a lot of pointless argumentative questions and very little opinions to offer
 
Last edited:
lionking said:
Owning a gun for self defence is not a valid reason for owning a gun in Australia or New Zealand.

I should ignore trolling like this....
Click to expand...

In New Zealand saying you want to get a Gun Licence for self defense during the interview stage is actually one of the specified reasons that is given in the law for them NOT granting a licence.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Yesterday. Get it right.

I'd say avoiding the potential of a hijack of attack on a plane is indeed "likely to be of benefit" even if there is little evidence of those things occurring.
Click to expand...

The fact that there is little evidence of it occurring makes it difficult to assess if it is likely to be a benefit. This is getting into "Lisa I want to buy your rock" territory.
 
cullennz said:
What exactly are you claiming?

Self defence is listed as automatically ruling you out of getting a gun licence

You seem to have a lot of pointless argumentative questions and very little opinions to offer
Click to expand...

Just because the government declares it is not a valid reason does make it not valid. They are not the arbiter of validity. Philosophy is.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Strange you didn't find this part....
Click to expand...

I don't believe this is a derail because the airports were closed down after the shootings.

No screening of carry on luggage in planes under 90 pax? That is simply insane. Security checking carry-on adds all of five minutes to your time at the airport. It does not delay flights as this screening is done on entry to the terminal. Really backward.
 
BobTheCoward said:
The fact that there is little evidence of it occurring makes it difficult to assess if it is likely to be a benefit. This is getting into "Lisa I want to buy your rock" territory.
Click to expand...

What is it about taking precautions that you don't understand?
 
Puppycow said:
I'm almost more shocked that there were people watching this live on the internet and actually cheering it on. And all the while he was referring to far-right internet memes and in-jokes.
Click to expand...

I'm not shocked by this at all. This is what the young right-wing is.

And still, centrists think antifa is the problem.
 
William Parcher said:
New Zealand Herald: Police believe one man is responsible for yesterday’s Christchurch massacre - and allege he traveled between two packed mosques and killed at least 49 people. And within 36 minutes - it was all over. He was caught, dragged from a car by two police officers, and taken into custody.
Click to expand...

Good job NZ PD: the way one of them rammed the suspect's car leaving it pinned with the front wheel spinning up in the air.
 
lionking said:
I don't believe this is a derail because the airports were closed down after the shootings.

No screening of carry on luggage in planes under 90 pax? That is simply insane.
Click to expand...
Why is it insane?

Security checking carry-on adds all of five minutes to your time at the airport. It does not delay flights as this screening is done on entry to the terminal. Really backward.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with the time it takes, it has to do with how much it would cost to put in passenger screening into every regional airport in the country when there is little to no benefit to it.
 
Lambchops said:
I'm not shocked by this at all. This is what the young right-wing is.

And still, centrists think antifa is the problem.
Click to expand...

There's a handy flow chart for this problem.

picture.php
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom