Thread: Another Aramoana???

Originally Posted by Savage1

I know in detail what happened there, no cops shot each other.

So the bad guy did shoot them all?
I fucking hate our media.
Is there any public information about what actually happened or just "first person accounts"?
I'd love to have a read.

Originally Posted by Kscott

Fantastic documentary on this on Al Jazerra here :
Deadly Force: Arming America's Police - Al Jazeera English

A very bias documentary which ignores some really basic facts. It didn't have a single decent argument presented and the incidents portrayed were portrayed in a very bias manner and the points made by the family and lawyers are most often very easily explained.

If you don't like the term 'military style' wrongly used then avoid this documentary.

I thought it hit the spot a few times tbh, the militarization of the US Police force has been ongoing for a while and highlites the problems it creates.

Closer to home the Lindt Cafe siege in Sydney in 2014 the militarization was pretty remarkable, along with the sad consequences of theory, training vs reality.

Originally Posted by Jexla

So the bad guy did shoot them all?
I fucking hate our media.
Is there any public information about what actually happened or just "first person accounts"?
I'd love to have a read.

There is no public information released by the Police at this stage. It will come out in the trial.

Originally Posted by Tussock

We have presently, as mentioned in the four Horseman of the Apocalypse, the largest transferral of wealth in human history. Financial manipulation is being used to transfer and apocalyptic amount of wealth out of peoples pockets.

No one has noticed yet.

When they do, police will have to keep a vice like grip on order to protect all that stolen loot. Its all been obtained legally using laws that were passed when no one was looking.

Cops will need to intimidate a lot of people.

Trully feee societies can't have terrorism as they just don't scare and interfere with them at uout peril.

Middle aged state sponsored school children can be terrorised with abandoned backpacks and popping baloons.

Will you stop teasing me about the apocalypse. Everytime I get my hopes up it's just same ol' same ol'

Originally Posted by Kscott

I thought it hit the spot a few times tbh, the militarization of the US Police force has been ongoing for a while and highlites the problems it creates.

Closer to home the Lindt Cafe siege in Sydney in 2014 the militarization was pretty remarkable, along with the sad consequences of theory, training vs reality.

You may call it militarization however they're just adapting their tactics and progressing to more practical and effective equipment, as they should. just because they're operating in the civilian environment doesn't mean they aren't in danger, just look how many shootings and cops that are killed in the USA every year. I wish the NZ police had more practical uniform for the frontline officers rather than dress pants and silly hats.

I may be wrong but if it was done in a military type of way they'd be using frag grenades, overwhelming fire etc.

What's the alternative? Unarmed cops in suit and tie? No distraction devices? No overwhelming tactics? No chest rigs because they look too much like the military?

Some of the stories in that doco didn't add up.

Originally Posted by keneff

I see O'Connor and Gillespie (Waikato University fuckwit) http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/(agendae?) have been flapping their chops again, trying to demonise firearms and firearms owners. O'Connor wants to be a politician, God help us!! and Gillespie wants to think his opinion matters. Both are media whores who will give an opinion at the drop of a shutter button. But opinions are like arseholes - everyone has one, and my opinion of this pair is not fit for publication. Apropos of this, it seems the cops in the USA are killing a lot of people, mostly those of a darker complexion. And politicians are screaming "Gun Control!" Jeeeez I despair of this world, particularly our little part of it. Things like O'Connor and Gillespie should have compulsory muzzles. Fear-mongering shitheads that they are. And of course the media lap it up.

The academic should be following academic rigour, ie proving with evidence what he is proposing will make a difference and the extra cost would be worthwhile. He is on the face of it failing miserably in this, except I dont think this is his total agenda. What I think is going on is he/they are looking for justification to curb ALL firearms. One way is to frighten the voters and do like OZ and limit a licence holder to just a few guns as "who needs so many?"

As an aside some comments on the Canadian fiasco,

"Former Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino opposed the gun registry, stating in a press release in 2003:

We have an ongoing gun crisis including firearms-related homicides lately in Toronto, and a law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered, although we believe that more than half of them were smuggled into Canada from the United States. The firearms registry is long on philosophy and short on practical results considering the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi...earms_Registry

So we would probably waste millions doing it and actually achieve little if not zlich, as this quote points out,

"On September 8, 2014 an appeal by the Barbra Schlifer Clinic to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to rule that the withdrawal of the Long Gun Registry was unconstitutional was denied. The applicants sought to show that the removal of the Registry denied women their rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to: "life, liberty and security of the person". In its judgment the court ruled that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that the Registry had been of any measurable benefit to women and that statistically rates of firearms-related violence had been following a trend downward before the Registry and had not changed after the Registry had been withdrawn"

Originally Posted by Savage1

I may be wrong but if it was done in a military type of way they'd be using frag grenades, overwhelming fire etc.

You mean like when they C4'd the guy stuck in the parking complex?

Oh and to add some icing,

NZ's firearm homicide rate drops - National - NZ Herald News

"Gun killings in New Zealand have declined the most in an international comparison - even though this country has less strict licensing laws than Canada and Australia."

and in fact,

"The study suggests unemployment rates and the availability of heroin are more significant factors in firearm homicides than gun control."

So spend the Millions on dealing with these 2 is more likely to have a positive effect than a registry.

Originally Posted by steven

Oh and to add some icing,

NZ's firearm homicide rate drops - National - NZ Herald News

"Gun killings in New Zealand have declined the most in an international comparison - even though this country has less strict licensing laws than Canada and Australia."

and in fact,

"The study suggests unemployment rates and the availability of heroin are more significant factors in firearm homicides than gun control."

So spend the Millions on dealing with these 2 is more likely to have a positive effect than a registry.

Isn't it funny to see this though?

"Police Association president Greg O'Connor, who advocates arming police officers, said the decline in firearm homicides showed New Zealand had well-balanced gun licensing."

"I would be very disappointed if as a result of the actions of criminals in New Zealand, there was an encroachment against lawful gun-owning people."

Originally Posted by Savage1

You may call it militarization however they're just adapting their tactics and progressing to more practical and effective equipment, as they should. just because they're operating in the civilian environment doesn't mean they aren't in danger, just look how many shootings and cops that are killed in the USA every year. I wish the NZ police had more practical uniform for the frontline officers rather than dress pants and silly hats.

I may be wrong but if it was done in a military type of way they'd be using frag grenades, overwhelming fire etc.

What's the alternative? Unarmed cops in suit and tie? No distraction devices? No overwhelming tactics? No chest rigs because they look too much like the military?

Some of the stories in that doco didn't add up.

All good points. Esp the silly hat

Originally Posted by Savage1

You may call it militarization however they're just adapting their tactics and progressing to more practical .

I suppose this is just simply adapting & being practical then?

Originally Posted by Beavis

I would be ok with police carrying firearms if they demonstrated some trust towards the public and our own firearms usage.

@Beavis "Safer communities together".

This kind crap just accumulates a momentum of its own. All of a sudden the law makers are busy protecting us from a declining threat (with so much enthusiasm). I'm just glad that Greg o connar came around before doing anymore damage to our "privellages".

Originally Posted by Dead is better

This kind crap just accumulates a momentum of its own. All of a sudden the law makers are busy protecting us from a declining threat (with so much enthusiasm). I'm just glad that Greg o connar came around before doing anymore damage to our "privellages".

He didn't, that was quotes from the 2010 article above.