Thread: Anti-1080 protester has firearms licence revoked after delivering threatening letter

Originally Posted by Cordite

@timattalon

To re-quote Mel Aitken: "You ... indirectly threatened the [council] employees with lethal force in relation to their support or stance towards 1080 drops, citing said employees to be deemed as terrorists,".

"The mustbemoretothisstory" response is well and good but not as a knee jerk response. The quote of Mel Aitken clearly states what is the basis for her action: that calling someone's actions "terrorist actions" means (first logic jump) that you are "calling them terrorists" and that calling someone terrorists means [logic long jump here] that you "indirectly threaten" them [here's another long jump] "with lethal force" [when he himself only actually calls for an action on their part - that they "cease and desist"]. Mel Aitken may be acting ill advisedly, but I don't think she'd bother to do such mental gymnastics if it was a simple case of someone having made an actual threat of violence.


@Marty Henry

Re stashing his guns with a mate, he is not going to access his guns because he's a law abiding citizen. Also too busy enjoying dragging the cops to court, with reasonable expectation of getting his FAL back. I hope he has a good barrister - not a lot of money about on the West Coast, thanks in part to Twig & Tweet.

Boy you really over think things , you're not a " snowflake " I hope ? .