New Zealanders hand in 50,000 guns after 'assault weapon' ban

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

the child would accidentally kill himself with it.

A gun is an inanimate object that does not discharge by itself. It may be handled out of ignorance or irresponsibility, but it never fires by accident. Any gun I possess, and thereby have responsibility for, cannot be accessed by any child who hasn’t been trained in proper gun safety.

Can you guarantee that every single gun owner is as conscientious as you?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

There is no need of a reason to hold them. They are a constitutionally protected right. Rights require no explanation.

Thankfully, New Zealand has no such nonsense in their constitution.

 

[Sarcelle]

If only other adults were as responsible as you.

I hear horror stories of children bringing guns to school because the parents couldn’t be bothered to safeguard the gun.

 

[JonNC]

This is up to the people of New Zealand. It does not affect you and judging by the number of gun deaths per capita in the US I don’t think any other nation is beholden to Americans for any advice on gun laws.

Well, some here seem to think we should beholden to NZ on the matter. I couldn’t care less what they think. I do say bravo to New Zealanders who have chosen not to comply.

 

[JonNC]

Thankfully, New Zealand has no such nonsense in their constitution.

Thankfully, America does.

And there were zero deaths from kids finding their parents’ fire insurance policy.

Cool. Good for fire insurance.

 

[JonNC]

Can you guarantee that every single gun owner is as conscientious as you?

Can you guarantee that all drivers won’t drink and drive? that all swimming pools are safe?
Can you guarantee that no government will ever again oppress its people?
Can you guarantee that no criminal will ever again acquire an illegal firearm and use it to commit a crime?

 

[niceatheist]

So you’re chief worry is that dangerous Kiwi ideas end up in the States

 

[JonNC]

So you’re chief worry is that dangerous Kiwi ideas end up in the States

Nope. Don’t care what they think. My chief worry is American progressive authoritarians undermining this and other constitutionally protected individual rights.

 

[Feanor2]

Well that’s rather virile.

 

[niceatheist]

So New Zealand should adopt your views on firearms otherwise progressive American authorities will take a page out of their book

 

[Feanor2]

upant:

that is the point, they won with small arms used effectively in guerrilla warfare.

they would have been stupid to try,

So which is it?

this country has a lot of room to support a group going off-grid.

Not for long, I’m afraid. 7 million people in Tennessee alone could extinct Appalachia of large mammals (like deer and dogs) in short order. The 6 million in Colorado alone would quickly do the same for the Rockys. You’d be down to rats and varmints in no time.

Fact is, the vast majority would go hungry mere weeks after your rebellion launched and the federal government stopped interstate commerce to the Walmarts and other mass food vendors in your area.

and again the taliban survived against 2 superpowers. who did the powers nuke?

The point there was that the foreign help you desperately need much more than your own personal arms won’t show up under threat of nuclear war.

It sounds very romantic though doesn’t it?

 

[JonNC]

So New Zealand should adopt your views on firearms otherwise progressive American authorities will take a page out of their book

Actually they should defer he individual right to keep and beat arms to the greatest extent possible. American progressive authoritarians don’t need the example of NZ. They have their own anti-rights views.

 

[Sarcelle]

Kind of reminds me of the Rambo movies.

A lone wolf against the armed might of the government.

Very American movies.

 

[niceatheist]

You understand, I trust, that NZ has no equivalent to the Second Amendment.

 

[JonNC]

The point there was that the foreign help you desperately need much more than your own personal arms won’t show up under threat of nuclear war.

It is interesting to see people continue in the Swalwell mold of threatening nuclear weapons in order to confiscate individual rights.

 

[niceatheist]

If the combined might of the Confederacy couldn’t topple the Union a century and a half ago, why would anyone imagine all th gun owners in America could take on the might of the armed forces of the United States.

 

[JonNC]

You understand, I trust, that NZ has no equivalent to the Second Amendment.

Sad…

 

[niceatheist]

Never the less, that’s the facts. No one is obliged to adopt American thinking, that the solution to gun violence is more guns, or that guns are some fetishistic sign of liberty.

 

[JonNC]

If the combined might of the Confederacy couldn’t topple the Union a century and a half ago, why would anyone imagine all th gun owners in America could take on the might of the armed forces of the United States.

This ongoing straw man. Who here is promoting armed conflict, other than those who recommend nukes in order to impose confiscation of individual rights?
Further, why would you assume that Americans in the military would defend tyranny?
Let’s say that the fantasy of the left, Trump seized power, actually happens. Do you actually believe the delusion that the military would turn their weapons on their own people in order to defend it?

 

[JonNC]

Never the less, that’s the facts. No one is obliged to adopt American thinking,

America has an obligation to defend constitutionally protected individual rights, including the right protected by 2a.

that the solution to gun violence is more guns,

Another straw man. Guns in the hands of the law abiding do not add to gun violence. And, gun violence is on the decline.

or that guns are some fetishistic sign of liberty.

I’ll leave the fetishistic, or is it fascistic, ideas to the progressive movement.