Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic >weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) for “sporting” >purposes.Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the government have said it is part of the discussion, not that they want it done. The difference is rather too subtle for some but not for those of us that listen with an open mind.
What kind of “sport” needs the ability to mow down lots of >victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Htargets in a single shooting spree?
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style
semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) >>>for “sporting”
purposes.
Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the
government have said it is part of the discussion ...
So which part of “talking about” would you say is the “lie”, here? Your meaning was clear and a lie - she was questioned, she said nothing was off the table. Your inference was a lie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style
semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre)
for “sporting”
purposes.
Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the
government have said it is part of the discussion ...
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic >>weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) for “sporting? >>purposes.Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the government have
said it is part of the discussion, not that they want it done. The difference >is rather too subtle for some but not for those of us that listen with an open >mind.
What kind of “sport? needs the ability to mow down lots of >>victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Htargets in a single shooting spree?
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:55:45 -0000 (UTC), TonyI am not biased - you are. And your analysis is garbage. Lawrence lied by infrenece.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:the table. Your inference was a lie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style >>>>>semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) >>>>>for “sporting?
purposes.
Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the
government have said it is part of the discussion ...
So which part of “talking about? would you say is the “lie?, here? >>Your meaning was clear and a lie - she was questioned, she said nothing was >>off
Most would read a statement that nothing is off the table as meaning
that an issue which she not only introduced and gave reasons for it
being concluded, but also included detail of other regulation to
follow such an inclusion was a clear indication that it was being
taken seriously - she did not for example say that any proposals she
raised may be taken off the table . . .
So no lie, Tony, just your bias in favour of more forearms in our
community. You are of course entitled to your opinion.
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic >>>weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) for “sporting? >>>purposes.Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the government >>have
said it is part of the discussion, not that they want it done. The difference >>is rather too subtle for some but not for those of us that listen with an >>open
mind.
From: >https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/28/semi-automatic-weapons-on-the-table-in-shake-up-of-gun-laws/
"Also on the table is allowing competitive shooters to use
semi-automatics for sport. The only current exemptions are pest
control and (disabled) collector's items.
"Over 5000 people, deemed to have a proper purpose, already have a
licence for centre-fire semi-automatic firearms. Under the rewrite of
the Arms Act, a person would still need a legitimate reason to have a >centre-fire semi-automatic firearm," McKee said.
"Meanwhile, higher security and storage requirement would be required
and large capacity magazines would continue to be unavailable to those >without the proper, vetted endorsement."
Lawmakers near-unanimously supported an amendment to ban
semi-automatics after the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings.
It was these restrictions that propelled McKee into politics and she
was now spearheading the complete rewrite of our gun laws.
"I'm hoping that we can find a middle ground where we ensure we have
good public safety but we also stop treating licensed firearms owners
like they're nothing more than common criminals."
McKee wants to roll back what she described as "rushed" and
"knee-jerk" legislation so regulations were less onerous on firearms
owners.
"Gun ownership is a normal way of life. Now, everyone thinks that it's
used just as a weapon, rather than as a sporting tool or a way to put
food on the table," she said."
________________
From that article, the summary saying "Nicole McKee is talking about >re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used
in the Ides of March massacre) for ''sporting'' purposes." seems
quite accurate - she did not just raise the issue, but suggested
changes to security and storage requirements, and proper vetting
processes. If there is a lie or cognitive failure it appears most
likely to be from Tony rather than Lawrence, but perhaps Tony was
speaking from memory of a verbal exchange and merely did not correctly
recall detail . . .. Of concern to others will be the statement "If
you think about what the Christchurch terrorist did five years ago, he
did that in about 17 minutes. He reached two locations, was able to
kill 51 people, bullet wound more than 40 and then impact all those
who were present for the rest of their lives." - and in that case I >understand he gained access to the semi-automatic firearms through
being a member of a gun club . . .
What kind of “sport? needs the ability to mow down lots of >>>victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Htargets in a single shooting spree?
There are very limited circumstances where they are currently
available - for professional pest control. Also from the article
above: "A scientific review of 130 studies in 10 countries showed
relaxing firearms restrictions typically led to increased gun deaths."
Not covered in the discussion so far are the number of firearms that
appear to not be registered, or to not be held by the owner recorded
by police. A review is needed - to ensure that every firearm has a
unique identifier; similar to a vehicle number plate in intent - so
that for insurance purposes, and proof of ownership every forearm can
be identified with an owner - there can then be a requirement for
reporting of transfer of ownership, and possession of a firearm other
than those registered to an individual should be a serious offence. Meaningless diversion.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:55:45 -0000 (UTC), TonyI am not biased - you are. And your analysis is garbage. Lawrence lied by >infrenece.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:the table. Your inference was a lie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style >>>>>>semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) >>>>>>for “sporting?
purposes.
Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the
government have said it is part of the discussion ...
So which part of “talking about? would you say is the “lie?, here? >>>Your meaning was clear and a lie - she was questioned, she said nothing was >>>off
Most would read a statement that nothing is off the table as meaning
that an issue which she not only introduced and gave reasons for it
being concluded, but also included detail of other regulation to
follow such an inclusion was a clear indication that it was being
taken seriously - she did not for example say that any proposals she >>raised may be taken off the table . . .
So no lie, Tony, just your bias in favour of more firearms in our >>community. You are of course entitled to your opinion.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic >>>>weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) for “sporting? >>>>purposes.Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the government >>>have
said it is part of the discussion, not that they want it done. The difference
is rather too subtle for some but not for those of us that listen with an >>>open
mind.
From: >>https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/28/semi-automatic-weapons-on-the-table-in-shake-up-of-gun-laws/
"Also on the table is allowing competitive shooters to use
semi-automatics for sport. The only current exemptions are pest
control and (disabled) collector's items.
"Over 5000 people, deemed to have a proper purpose, already have a
licence for centre-fire semi-automatic firearms. Under the rewrite of
the Arms Act, a person would still need a legitimate reason to have a >>centre-fire semi-automatic firearm," McKee said.
"Meanwhile, higher security and storage requirement would be required
and large capacity magazines would continue to be unavailable to those >>without the proper, vetted endorsement."
Lawmakers near-unanimously supported an amendment to ban
semi-automatics after the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings.
It was these restrictions that propelled McKee into politics and she
was now spearheading the complete rewrite of our gun laws.
"I'm hoping that we can find a middle ground where we ensure we have
good public safety but we also stop treating licensed firearms owners
like they're nothing more than common criminals."
McKee wants to roll back what she described as "rushed" and
"knee-jerk" legislation so regulations were less onerous on firearms >>owners.
"Gun ownership is a normal way of life. Now, everyone thinks that it's
used just as a weapon, rather than as a sporting tool or a way to put
food on the table," she said."
________________
From that article, the summary saying "Nicole McKee is talking about >>re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used
in the Ides of March massacre) for ''sporting'' purposes." seems
quite accurate - she did not just raise the issue, but suggested
changes to security and storage requirements, and proper vetting
processes. If there is a lie or cognitive failure it appears most
likely to be from Tony rather than Lawrence, but perhaps Tony was
speaking from memory of a verbal exchange and merely did not correctly >>recall detail . . .. Of concern to others will be the statement "If
you think about what the Christchurch terrorist did five years ago, he
did that in about 17 minutes. He reached two locations, was able to
kill 51 people, bullet wound more than 40 and then impact all those
who were present for the rest of their lives." - and in that case I >>understand he gained access to the semi-automatic firearms through
being a member of a gun club . . .
What kind of “sport? needs the ability to mow down lots of >>>>victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Htargets in a single shooting spree?
There are very limited circumstances where they are currently
available - for professional pest control. Also from the article
above: "A scientific review of 130 studies in 10 countries showed
relaxing firearms restrictions typically led to increased gun deaths."
Not covered in the discussion so far are the number of firearms that
appear to not be registered, or to not be held by the owner recorded
by police. A review is needed - to ensure that every firearm has a
unique identifier; similar to a vehicle number plate in intent - so
that for insurance purposes, and proof of ownership every forearm can
be identified with an owner - there can then be a requirement for
reporting of transfer of ownership, and possession of a firearm other
than those registered to an individual should be a serious offence. >Meaningless diversion.
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 19:00:13 -0000 (UTC), TonyMeaningless diversion.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic >>>>>weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) for >>>>>“sporting?Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the government >>>>have
purposes.
said it is part of the discussion, not that they want it done. The >>>>difference
is rather too subtle for some but not for those of us that listen with an >>>>open
mind.
From: >>>https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/02/28/semi-automatic-weapons-on-the-table-in-shake-up-of-gun-laws/
"Also on the table is allowing competitive shooters to use >>>semi-automatics for sport. The only current exemptions are pest
control and (disabled) collector's items.
"Over 5000 people, deemed to have a proper purpose, already have a >>>licence for centre-fire semi-automatic firearms. Under the rewrite of
the Arms Act, a person would still need a legitimate reason to have a >>>centre-fire semi-automatic firearm," McKee said.
"Meanwhile, higher security and storage requirement would be required
and large capacity magazines would continue to be unavailable to those >>>without the proper, vetted endorsement."
Lawmakers near-unanimously supported an amendment to ban
semi-automatics after the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings.
It was these restrictions that propelled McKee into politics and she
was now spearheading the complete rewrite of our gun laws.
"I'm hoping that we can find a middle ground where we ensure we have
good public safety but we also stop treating licensed firearms owners >>>like they're nothing more than common criminals."
McKee wants to roll back what she described as "rushed" and
"knee-jerk" legislation so regulations were less onerous on firearms >>>owners.
"Gun ownership is a normal way of life. Now, everyone thinks that it's >>>used just as a weapon, rather than as a sporting tool or a way to put >>>food on the table," she said."
________________
From that article, the summary saying "Nicole McKee is talking about >>>re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used
in the Ides of March massacre) for ''sporting'' purposes." seems
quite accurate - she did not just raise the issue, but suggested
changes to security and storage requirements, and proper vetting >>>processes. If there is a lie or cognitive failure it appears most
likely to be from Tony rather than Lawrence, but perhaps Tony was >>>speaking from memory of a verbal exchange and merely did not correctly >>>recall detail . . .. Of concern to others will be the statement "If
you think about what the Christchurch terrorist did five years ago, he >>>did that in about 17 minutes. He reached two locations, was able to
kill 51 people, bullet wound more than 40 and then impact all those
who were present for the rest of their lives." - and in that case I >>>understand he gained access to the semi-automatic firearms through
being a member of a gun club . . .
What kind of “sport? needs the ability to mow down lots of >>>>>victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Htargets in a single shooting spree?
There are very limited circumstances where they are currently
available - for professional pest control. Also from the article
above: "A scientific review of 130 studies in 10 countries showed >>>relaxing firearms restrictions typically led to increased gun deaths."
Not covered in the discussion so far are the number of firearms that >>>appear to not be registered, or to not be held by the owner recorded
by police. A review is needed - to ensure that every firearm has a
unique identifier; similar to a vehicle number plate in intent - so
that for insurance purposes, and proof of ownership every forearm can
be identified with an owner - there can then be a requirement for >>>reporting of transfer of ownership, and possession of a firearm other >>>than those registered to an individual should be a serious offence. >>Meaningless diversion.
The topic is related to whether very dangerous weapons should be able
to be owned by other than our military or professionals for purposes
such as pest control. Adequate controls on ownership, if allowed, are
a legitimate part of that discussion.
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 18:59:16 -0000 (UTC), TonyNo you are both absolutely wrong.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:55:45 -0000 (UTC), TonyI am not biased - you are. And your analysis is garbage. Lawrence lied by >>infrenece.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 06:10:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:the table. Your inference was a lie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
Nicole McKee is talking about re-legalizing military-style >>>>>>>semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used in the Ides of March massacre) >>>>>>>for “sporting?
purposes.
Hmm - that is a lie, talk about cognitive failure - she and the
government have said it is part of the discussion ...
So which part of “talking about? would you say is the “lie?, here? >>>>Your meaning was clear and a lie - she was questioned, she said nothing was >>>>off
Most would read a statement that nothing is off the table as meaning
that an issue which she not only introduced and gave reasons for it
being concluded, but also included detail of other regulation to
follow such an inclusion was a clear indication that it was being
taken seriously - she did not for example say that any proposals she >>>raised may be taken off the table . . .
So no lie, Tony, just your bias in favour of more firearms in our >>>community. You are of course entitled to your opinion.
No lies at all - McKee did not just raise the possibility of
re-legalizing military-style semi-automatic weapons (of the kind used
in the Ides of March massacre) for "sporting" purposes; she also gave
her thoughts on the conditions for such a license. That made it a
specific proposal, Tony, as well as part of the discussion. A
discussion does consistent of "talking about" things - so Lawrence was >absolutely correct, and you were trying to hide behind incorrect
semantics.
The coalition government has shown that they are prepared to push some >legislation through Parliament with as little discussion as possible;Off tolpic.
we should be grateful that in this case she appears to be prepared to
have some discussion before legislation is put to a vote.
Most New Zealanders would probably prefer to keep the ban on these >semi-automatic weapons, but if the government has the numbers theyBullshit as usual.
have shown that they will act. Suggestions have been made that among
the conditions for such weapons be that they be stored and used at gun
club premises only, only used under supervision to suitably
experienced users, and that there be heavy penalties for them not
being at those premises. Clearly that is not ideal, but it may be >sufficient for the three parties to agree. A majority of New
Zealanders may dislike the proposals, but at least she has been honest
about her abhorrent proposals, unlike you with your claim that she was
not.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 121:16:09 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,487 |