Is New Zealand right to ban military style guns?

by ThomasCovenant 84 Replies latest jw friends

  • Thomasdam

    No, New Zealand's PM is an emotional bag of hormones. First off if New Zealanders let her get away with it they are foolish.

    Here in the US we have a Second Amendment held in the first 10 called the bill of rights. So we have that holding back the ban nuts.

    Next the NZPM shows she has no idea what she like most liberals is talking about on guns. There is no such thing as a military style assault rifle. The Assault rifle was first introduced in the 2nd world war by Germany with the Strumgewehr 44. It was a full battle round the 8mm shortened down to make it smaller. Understanding that most fire fights were under 300 yds they did not need a full powered round. So first off its not a High powered round. Its in fact reduced. Second it was select fire capable. That means you can turn a switch to make it fire semi auto or to fire full auto.

    No guns sold in NZ, or the US that the left call assault weapons are in fact assault weapons. The AR15 is a semi auto that fires the 223/5.56 which is not high powered. Its a 22 caliber. I have hunted deer with the AR15 and after using in deer sized animals know why my fellow hunters called it the chaseem gun. I switched to the former US battle rifle ctg. the 3006 and it would drop them where they stood one shot. That was a devastating round. It had much more energy than a 223/5.56 but the left does not care about facts.

    Next the AR15 does not work any different than any hunting semi auto. The Remington 7400, 742 Browning BAR ect. It works the same.

    Then is the argument that you don't need an AR15 for hunting. Well that may be an argument in NZ but in the US the 2nd Amendment is not for hunting it never was. It was for the citizen to have the same fire power as the military so that they could hold them to account if they went tyrannical.

    The second amendment in the US is not a collective right. None of the first 10 are. They are for the individual. This has been affirmed in the SCOTUS.

    As far as dangerous yes guns are dangerous, so is a semi in the hands of a Muslim Terrorist who is on a busy street.

    Those who say an armed citizen can not resist a military are historically stupid and ignorant. History is full of resistance. Look at all the resistance to Nazi Germany in France, The Netherlands to name but a few. At the time Nazi Germany had the most formidable military in the world.

    My own country the United States took a rag tag band of Rebels and fought the most formidable military in the world at that time. .

    Then you have the second Amendment was for the Militia not the individual. BS. A liberal will not look past a sound bite they like to understand what is and what is not. If you read the Federalist papers which is the founders thinking on many things. The militia was said to be all the people. We are all the Militia. There was no such thing as a National Gard in the time the Bill of Rights was written.

    The Second Amendment was for Muskets. True at the time, but it was for the people to have the same fire power of the Government. If the police and Military had muskets today then we would give up are AR15s and pick up a Brown Bess.

    The idea that you can stop criminals from getting guns is Total BS. The Gov. can not stop Cocaine or Heroin or sex trafficking so I know guns if banned would be run in and will be run into NZ an Australia.If you think bans work look at Chicago, LA and Baltimore, places where crime is sky high and guns much more restricted, but the crime is insane.

    Then they say Australia has stopped mass shootings. Australia had 2 in 10 years and now 0 in ten years which is statistically insignificant. Their crime rate has been falling the same rate as the USA in the same time frame.

    When seconds count, the police are only Minutes away

  • Incognigo Montoya
    Incognigo Montoya

    Please show me where police carry grenades. Flash bangs and smoke, maybe. But actual grenades? Show me.

    Do you understand that an "assault" rifle, more correctly termed a semi automatic, only fires as fast as you pull the trigger? Not to mention that you've got to aim.

    You realize that if the governments succeed in taking away all semiautomatic guns, cops, the military, and all terrorists, drug dealers, gang bangers, smugglers, thugs, and just general bad dudes will continue to have them, sell them, buy them, and use them, right? And in the event that bad guys cant get their hands on them, they'll resort to using other means, like pipe bombs, fertilizer bombs, vehicles, airplanes, poison gas, I mean the list goes on and on. You're focus is on the wrong part of the problem. Getting rid of guns, any gun, isnt going to stop a bad guy from killing people.

  • Thomasdam

    Montoya Liberals don't think they feel. This is OK if its your mom on you getting beat up at school but very bad for a leader. You can not stop people from killing. From Muslims using truck to run down people to using gas bombs those who want to kill can find ways to do it. You can not use facts or logic on a liberal. They are not able to get past emotion.

  • joey jojo
    joey jojo

    Thomas dam,

    You say that the 2nd amendment allows the citizen to have the same firepower as the government just in case the government needs to be brought back into line?

    Do you honestly believe that the U. S. government, or any other government would allow that situation to exist?

  • Bungi Bill
    Bungi Bill

    Without in any way demeaning the extreme bravery shown by individual members of resistance organisations, those occupied Western European countries were freed by the Allied armies - not by an armed insurrection on the part of the population.

  • frozen2018

    Maybe New Zealand should ban Australians. That may be a bit harsh. New Zealand should ban Australian males aged 18-35.

    Kidding aside, I spent quite a bit of time in New Zealand when I was younger, mostly on the South Island, and had many good times with my Kiwi friends. The news out of Christchurch hit me hard. Christchurch is a wonderful city.

    New Zealand will do what is right for New Zealand.

  • Thomasdam

    Bill your argument is flawed. No one country won over Germany. Without the help of the Soviets The USA and Canada and England could not have made a beach head in France. The resistance gave information, took out railroads and disrupted. So by your thinking if the US military alone could not have won there is no need for them. Its illogical and very sophomoric.

  • Thomasdam

    Joey, To bear arms, is the claws in the second amendment. Arms are weapons that can be shouldered. Usually rifles, hand guns. Not artillery. These are not arms. The US Military the greatest in the world at the time lost to a group of Asians who had small arms little to no armor and very limited artillery. So millions of people having arms yes they could put a serious hurt on a military. In open battle no but that is not how a war against tyranny is fought.

  • Thomasdam

    The NZ PM is an idiot.Read with stupid NZ accent.

  • Thomasdam

Share this