Thread: Cahill vs McKie

It's just nice to finally see a proper debate being had in good faith, something we have never had.

I'm glad that Cahill has thrown his toys out of the cot and Nicole has been cool as a cucumber.
Enough so the the media is even giving a non-biased take on things.

I've meet Nicole and she is such a down to earth person I think it'll be hard for anyone to get the "gun lobby" label to stick.

Cahill on the other hand, well he's shown people who he really is, and as Nicole pointed out with his performance during the pay negotiations, he really should be focusing on other things right now (like doing his job).

One news tonight had a different slant on this but she still came across well. Only time will tell.

Quite funny how different people view this debate. I saw an article about illegal firearm imports while having lunch at work yesterday and mentioned to a colleague that this is why the registry will never be accurate. He then started spouting on about "that ACT woman" being on TV and how she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.
Him being English and I don't think has ever handled a firearm was then given an education by me about who Nicole is and what she has done in her life in regard to firearm use, safety, law and that she is probably one of the most knowledgeable people in NZ to cover these issues. He didn't have anything to say after that.

Originally Posted by RUMPY

Quite funny how different people view this debate. I saw an article about illegal firearm imports while having lunch at work yesterday and mentioned to a colleague that this is why the registry will never be accurate. He then started spouting on about "that ACT woman" being on TV and how she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.
Him being English and I don't think has ever handled a firearm was then given an education by me about who Nicole is and what she has done in her life in regard to firearm use, safety, law and that she is probably one of the most knowledgeable people in NZ to cover these issues. He didn't have anything to say after that.

Some people will always have strong opinion on things they know nothing about.
Or will think a certain way as that’s what they’ve always thought/the culture they’ve been bought up in.
Unfortunately nothing can ever been done about that, other than just ignoring them.

The hate farmers get from certain parts of the population beggars belief as an example of this.

Good on you mate.

I’m not so sure the mainstream media are that non biased.

They are being a bit more subtle, but there is definitely element of spin in the balance of their articles.

Hopefully the discourse is allowed to run without too much bias such that the general public get to hear all sides of the story.
Time will tell I guess if the average kiwi is still able to think for themselves

Originally Posted by Boner

I’m not so sure the mainstream media are that non biased.

They are being a bit more subtle, but there is definitely element of spin in the balance of their articles.

Hopefully the discourse is allowed to run without too much bias such that the general public get to hear all sides of the story.
Time will tell I guess if the average kiwi is still able to think for themselves

Well if TV1 news coverage tonight is anything to go by then media bias is a clear & present danger. They interviewed that curly headed slapped from GunControl NZ for several minutes, never questioned or challenged the crap she was spewing out. And no attempt to include an alternate view from Colfo or similar. Very biased & lazy journalism.

I think most Kiwis think for themselves - its just that many , many of them are too afraid to voice an opinion for fear of ridicule or shaming or outright attacks from those who have differing opinions.

Ultimately , being offended doesnt make you right - it just means you disagree.

Originally Posted by Fee Knicks

I think most Kiwis think for themselves - its just that many , many of them are too afraid to voice an opinion for fear of ridicule or shaming or outright attacks from those who have differing opinions.

Ultimately , being offended doesnt make you right - it just means you disagree.

Unfortunately I think you give most people too much credit. I have yet to meet a non gun person that didn't swallow the media spin hook, line & sinker. Most that know me (including close family) know that I have/enjoy firearms but the only comments I hear on the subject are negative ranging from "murder tools" to "they'll all be gone soon".
I do try to educate/inform them of the other side but with most of them they've got both feet well and truly in the other camp without even realizing it.

Originally Posted by No good names left

Unfortunately I think you give most people too much credit. I have yet to meet a non gun person that didn't swallow the media spin hook, line & sinker. Most that know me (including close family) know that I have/enjoy firearms but the only comments I hear on the subject are negative ranging from "murder tools" to "they'll all be gone soon".
I do try to educate/inform them of the other side but with most of them they've got both feet well and truly in the other camp without even realizing it.

That is the problem and would probably apply to a majority of the population in New Zealand, they have been feed the lies from the media and that is what they believe.
The media have shaped the opinions of New Zealanders for a prolonged time and are like the police they will never admit to being wrong.

Apparently there are approx 250000 firearms owners in nz.
If we can't make our voices count together we are in trouble.
Kiwis typically don't care until it affects them directly.
Then it's to late.

Sent from my SM-A556E using Tapatalk

This recent issue with Cahill needed a bit of anti gun spin
.
He was firmly placed back in his box by Mckie but now is in a difficult position. If NZPHQ speaks in support of him,they show he is their mouthpiece, if they stay silent the public think NZPHQ don't support him.

In which case he is speaking gor the 51% of the Police who voted for him. Or was the position uncontested again?

The media talking to the loonies helps muddy the waters a bit ,but it dose come down to who Cahill is actually representing.

Cahill is doing his utmost to distract from his disaster after he caved to the Govt on the pay deal to the detriment of his Union Membership, which begs the question, whose interest is Cahill working for. Methinks he is working at the behest of Police National HQ for the simple reason an in depth Review is going to show their complete and utter incompetence in all things Firearms related and that is in spite of evidence proving that salient point being buried for 50 years post - 2019/20. The obvious question is Who has the most to lose ???. Answer = PNHQ and Chris Cahill in that order.

I don't think you can say Cahill caved on the pay deal - I doubt in this environment that there was ever anything more coming. The PA held out as long as they could for their membership, but in the end the legal process of compulsory and binding arbitration made the deal for all parties and the arbitrator (a well respected employment lawyer) basically agreed with the Government. Effectively if Cahill failed in anything in representing the serving Police Officers it's not concluding the deal under the previous Govt, but they were not willing to play to his tune either.

As far as the firearms end, that was really a 'last ditch' level action from him. If it doesn't work and get his wishes accepted, then his position becomes 'fringe group' and virtually sidelined going forwards. That's the way it looks like it's going too! The GCNZ woman (Yasbek?) never interviews well, the guy who's part of that 4-person outfit speaks a lot more articulacy than she does. They have a point if you purely look from the 'societal safety' viewpoint in that anything that could be used as a weapon can harm the 'fabric of society', but that includes groups such as hers being weaponised to serve a purpose of others!

I got quite angry with Newstalk ZB on Tuesday. The wgtn morning show with nick (dunno has last name), he kept calling Nicole McKee a lobbyist - comparing her with people from the tobacco industry. The current head of COLFO rung in a very eloquently put him in his place, however Nick doubled down and wouldn't admit he'd got it wrong.