So the GCSB appear not to have known Kim Dotcom is a resident when everyone else did – they just acted on their own convenient self-assurance – and now Prime Minister Key is appalled and he has apologized to Dotcom and the nation – but what is the difference between that and Key’s own self-assurance over John Banks’ truthfulness.
One difference, of course, is Key’s willfulness in the Banks matter – whether the GCSB acted with willful ignorance may yet be revealed.
It was interesting to see the US announced the end of the Afghanistan 2009 surge in NEW ZEALAND as reported by various US media. But where is Obama? either out of his depth, doesn’t know what to do, has a secret agenda, or is simply trying to wait it out until Nov.
Do you really think that Whaleoil’s ‘black humour’ piece is going to encourage more people to keep shotguns in their bedrooms? If prospective home invaders do not like this sort of black humour that is their lookout – they just need not do home invasions – it is that simple.
It would assist the discourse Yvette if you read Neazor’s whitewash. Without advocating for GCSB, I note that the GCSB did seek assiurance from the Molesworth Street KGB that their target, Dotcom, was not a NZ citizen or permanent resident.
It seems to me that the Molesworth Street mouthful has a few questions to answer – probably in the on-going court proceedings.
* $6951 charged by Auckland Transport (costs case for resource consent, engineer and arborist’s fees plus travel charges)
* $2832.38 by Auckland Parks, Sports & Recreation (incurred costs $1294 plus budgeted removal costs $1538.38)
* $2516 for resource consent processing
* $12,299.38 total costs to date
And we wonder why our rates are so expensive.
NOTHING has actually happened yet.
Yvette (2,123) Says:
September 28th, 2012 at 8:04 am
The problem was not residency simpliciter. The problem was that there are different shades of residency, some of which would have made Dotcom immune and others which would not.
The Auckland Energy Consumer Trust refund is a scam. Firstly, if you have a power account for only a month or two you still get a full refund for that year. Secondly if power bills keep on rising, why does the refund stay at $320?
Yet I, without ever having looked at the GCSB Act before in my life, can find out the definition of “permanent resident” in about 2 minutes. Somehow I can figure it out where trained officers cannot.
Moreover, if we look at the previous version of the Act the definition of permanent resident is given as:
permanent resident means a person who is, or who is deemed to be, the holder of a residence permit under the Immigration Act 1987
So in actual fact, NOTHING CHANGED, when the Immigration Act was revised. The only thing that changed was the wording, it was always the case that the agency was prohibited from spying on residents. Indeed, under the Immigration Act 1987 there were those who had residence visas that would run out and those who had indefinite residents visas.
So to say that they got confused because the rules changed is a complete load of shite because the rules didn’t change. At the very least, management at the GCSB cannot read a simple legal document in plain language and must’ve issued a directive (if we are to believe the tale) that said the rules had changed since the Immigration Act was changed and now permanent residents didn’t mean all residents it just meant a subsection thereof. FFS, talk about gullible.
Now having read Nazor I note that Dotcom is either a German or Finnish citizen, and is in New Zealand having residency status under “having put $10 mill into Government Stock” basis. What business is he going to transact from here ?
I suspect that his chances of New Zealand Citizenship have deminished somewhat as no Government will want to go near him in the future in such matters (except the Greens perhaps).
Now let us assume that the US do not succeed in extraditing him – which seems lightly, as he has very expensive international lawyers (is he getting legal aid, as his personal funds worldwide have been effectively frozen ?)
So he will travel on a German or Finnish passport with a New Zealand entry stamp in one or both.
Where can he go ?
Wherever, it is possible that an arrest warrant awaits him, via extradition proceedings – he will have difficulty in say Germany in convincing the authorities that the German passport is effectively invalidated by a New Zealand stamp.
Of course the New Zealand Embassy will help as it is their duty, but they not be able to do much until an extradition hearing to the US has been heard.
Unlike you Whale Oil presumably seems to wants to be seen as a serious political commentator. Promoting irresponsible and illegal behaviour undermines that substantially. You won’t understand that, you haven’t got any credibility to undermine.
Having a loaded weapon in your house is not an answer it is a catastrophe waiting to happen.
Gun owners in NZ are lightly regulated and it is possible to own firearms for all reasonable uses for a very small cost. NZers on the whole do not shoot each other (tho a few people do top them selves with guns) and generally crims are not armed.
All that will change if people start arming themselves or police are armed 24/7.
Come on Muttonhead, you can say it, it’s been way more blatant than what the left-wing claimed Bush did. Either they lied to Rice before they sent her out to make a complete tool of herself on five Sunday talk shows, or she was lying as well.
No need to be an Obama shill all the way down here in NZ.
This says it all. One of Whales readers replies to PG. I think they’re on to you Pete. Doesn’t surprise me one little bit you would challenge a persons “right to defend their Castle”.
“CastleDoctrine • 2 hours ago• parent
Fuck off you sanctimonious prick”
I have absolutely no doubt after the animals had raped your wife, buggered you and then bashed everyone half to death you’d want to sit down for a cup of tea and talk about the sad up bringing they had and how many social services are available to them to get help.
Redbaiter (912) Says:
September 28th, 2012 at 10:11 am
The really annoying fact is that it is only as a result of the civil treason of criminal loving knuckle draggers like PG that weapons are now more needed in homes than they have ever been.
And as that need increases exponentially as every day goes by,
How about detailing this daily exponential increase? You can’t, because it exists nowhere except in your fevered imagination.
Still, one as stupid as you has a right to always be afraid of being bested by his betters, and violence is always the ONLY answer idiots have when confronted with facts.
Just remember the names of those who sold our society down the river.
Russell Fletcher. Cameron Slater. Hekia Parata. Paula Benefit. Shon Key.
The story is finally coming to light. The U.S knew within 24 hours of the attack in Egypt that it was terrorism, but lied, saying it was because of some youtube video.
Eli Lake let loose a bombshell yesterday: “Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya.”
Obviously the report, if true, suggests that the White House lied to the American people by insisting for over a week that this was a spontaneous attack. It is one thing for the president to be so benighted as to think a video sets off multiple attacks on Sept. 11. It is quite another to send out his advisers, including his own spokesman, to mislead voters. …
And finally, now is the time when we see if reporters and pundits are more than shills for the president. The incompetency, and perhaps mendacity, of thee White House here is severe. The media’s glaring unwillingness to hold the president accountable for his actions can be at least partially remedied if they pursue the story vigorously. Even though Bush in good faith believed his intelligence community’s take on weapons of mass destruction, the left-leaning elites hollered, “Bush lied, people died!” But here we have dead Americans and an cover story in shreds. Why is there not, at a bare minimum, a call for answers? Isn’t this a top-of-the-fold issue? Well, my guess is that pundits and reporters alike in the mainstream media will do their best to soften and downplay the story.
More from Eli –
The intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast did so anonymously because they weren’t authorized to speak to the press. They said U.S. intelligence agencies developed leads on four of the participants of the attacks within 24 hours of the fire fight that took place mainly at an annex near the Benghazi consulate. For one of those individuals, the U.S. agencies were able to find his location after his use of social media. “We had two kinds of intelligence on one guy,” this official said. “We believe we had enough to target him.”
Another U.S. intelligence official said, “There was very good information on this in the first 24 hours. These guys have a return address. There are camps of people and a wide variety of things we could do.”
A spokesman for the National Security Council declined to comment for the story. But another U.S. intelligence official said, “I can’t get into specific numbers but soon after the attack we had a pretty good bead on some individuals involved in the attack.”
It’s unclear whether any of these suspected attackers have been targeted or arrested, and intelligence experts caution that these are still early days in a complex investigation.
The question of what the White House knew, and when they knew it, will be of keen interest to members of Congress in the election year. Last Thursday, the Obama administration formally briefed House and Senate members on the attack. Those briefings however failed to satisfy many members, particularly Republicans. “That is the most useless, worthless briefing I have attended in a long time,” Sen. Bob Corker, a Tennessee Republican, was quoted as saying.
wtfunz – you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about again. Whale was talking about shooting burglars, there was no mention of any sort of assault.
The fact is he is jeopardising his firearms license. I think it’s wise to keep my thoughts on family protection to myself, but I suggest you don’t visit in the middle of the night and threaten. All I’ll say is I’m aware of the responsibilities that come with my firearms license.
And I’d be as sympathetic to mongrel burglars as I am to bitches of blogs like you.
ps, don’t believe all the polls you hear about saying that Obama is in the lead.
Liberal media are skewing the polls by oversampling of Democrats in the hope of disheartening Conservatives.
The real polls show a different story though – Romney is neck-and-neck with Obama, if not ahead of him.
“TODAY! Friday 28 September 2012 (from 11.30am)
Lincoln Green, 159 Lincoln Rd, Henderson
Auckland Action Against Poverty is calling supporters to participate in a picket of an upcoming charity lunch that John Key will be attending. The lunch aims to raise money for a new children’s ward at Waitakere hospital.
We think it is highly ironic that John Key is raising money for kids when Govt welfare changes will play a huge factor in creating even more child poverty, ill health and homelessness.
This picket will be child/family friendly.
For more information you can get in touch at;
it’s possible to speak against crap without blustering.
I presume you read Whaleoil’s links? Frankly I’m amazed that a British judge made that very common-sense assessment, because for decades now British people who fought back against their attackers inside their homes are the ones who have been hauled over the coals by the police and the courts. They’ve been made victims twice over – and all in the name of making an example of people who disobey the instructions of the state, which is to sit on your ass, take the beatings and wait for the state to rescue you.
It has been disgusting and if you were actually anywhere near as decent and compassionate a person as you undoubtedly hold yourself to be when looking in the mirror, you’d have actually questioned whether a society has any moral right to tell people to do nothing in those situations when it’s so incapable of doing anything itself.
Even if I were to ignore the immorality of that argument and look at the usual, dreary, “pragmatic” argument – that enforcing such an approach leads to lower rates of murder and violent crime, thereby rendering acceptable the numbers of beaten, murdered and frightened homeowners – it still does not work. Your rules (and they are yours PG) actually have not actually led to a less violent society in the UK. For all the screams about the US murder rate it’s a less well-known fact that the UK (and a number of other Western countries) suffer much higher rates of violence, which I linked to in the Batman shooting thread some time ago:
The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations. Twenty-six percent of English citizens — roughly one-quarter of the population — have been victimized by violent crime. Australia led the list with more than 30 percent of its population victimized. The United States didn’t even make the “top 10″ list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime.
As the saying goes: when seconds count, the police are just minutes away.
The UK approach has been a moral failure in terms of the individual vs. the state, and a practical failure in terms of levels of societal violence as well. Perhaps this judge’s decision represents a turning point – but given the increasingly Orwellian qualities of Britain I would not bet on it.
Sorry Penny – but if the Govt is doing more to get unemployed sacks of shit off the bene and back to work, and if that means that Waitakere Hospital can have a new children’s ward, then I think that’s a GOOD thing!
Presumably a vote for Penny Bright is a vote for indolent, idle sacks of shit getting paid MORE money by the government/taxpayer for sitting at home on their chuffs doing five eighths of fuck all..??
Privately owned firearms – involved in the commissioning of FAR MORE crimes than they have ever prevented or defended against, since ages ago.
It might help to have some links on that, not just for NZ but for several Western countries. It certainly goes against my readings which are that the overwhelming proportion of gun crimes are committed with illegally owned weapons – or were they being counted in your “privately owned firearms” classification?
So Penny, Sue Bradford, et al are so blinded by their irrational hatred of John Key, that they are prepared to picket a charity lunch that aims to raise money for a new children’s ward at Waitakere hospital. solely to make a point about John Key.
Looking back at that “Batman shooting” thread I realised that I had a quote in there which was a very appropriate counter to RRM’s assertion:
In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent).
Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
Perhaps NZ really is that different, even compared to our nearest and most similar neighbour?
Redbaiter (915) Says:
September 28th, 2012 at 10:57 am
Totalitarians (Adolf Hitler being the most stark example) have always wanted governments to be the only “rightful” owners of firearms.
In Hitler’s case, it made it so easy for him to put the Jews into the concentration camps.
No amount of guns would have saved the Jews when almost the entire German Christian population was against them. Hitler simply took the centuries of Christian denigration of Jews to the next level, with the acceptance and acquiescence of Germans, as well as Poles, Lithuanians, Estonians, and so on.
Britain, America, Australia and many other nations refused to offer sanctuary to Jews.
you left out the Arabs of the Palestine Mandate there.
they rose in revolt against the British allowing large numbers of Jews to resettle in Palestine,forcing the British to cut back and to reassess their relationship with the Jewish and Arab worlds.
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem,one of the instigators and eventual leader of the revolt was of course a guest of Hitler’s in Berlin during the war.
But then before the war no one knew the Nazis were truely intent on genocide.
But these same people cannot conceive of how anyone can discern Mitt Romney’s flaws, which I’ve chronicled in the course of the campaign, and still not vote for Obama.
Don’t they see that Obama’s transgressions are worse than any I’ve mentioned?
I don’t see how anyone who confronts Obama’s record with clear eyes can enthusiastically support him. I do understand how they might concluded that he is the lesser of two evils, and back him reluctantly, but I’d have thought more people on the left would regard a sustained assault on civil liberties and the ongoing, needless killing of innocent kids as deal-breakers.
There are actually other left-wingers on this site who have got stuck into Obambi’s various transgressions and thereby kept faith with their own principles. You could be one too, but I’m willing to bet that – after screaming your guts out for years about a lying, war-mongering US President who terrorises innocent children – you’ll remain with your online persona here as an Official Obama Downunder Shill and Troll.
New Zealand has a ralitivly high gun ownership rate
Our laws are effective in making it difficult to purchase guns for the wrong reasons yet still allow hunting and target sports to flourish
Cam is putting his licence at risk with his attitude and should be a more responsible
Most illegally owned weapons were legally purchased. That’s the problem.
Did you actually read the whole link? I ask because it makes a big deal about confronting the myth that most criminals guns are acquired by stealing legal guns. As your link points out, that source is only about 10-15%, but right at the end we get this:
However a key finding is that “the illegal market is the most likely source” for these people to obtain a gun. “In fact, more than half the arrestees say it is easy to obtain guns illegally,” the report states. Responding to a question of how they obtained their most recent handgun, the arrestees answered as follows: 56% said they paid cash; 15% said it was a gift; 10% said they borrowed it; 8% said they traded for it; while 5% only said that they stole it.
I’ve highlighted the words illegal market in bold, just in case you miss it.
In any case, the points I made (just in case you insist on arguing other points), were:
- going even more Stasi on people who legally own guns is focusing on the wrong (but easier) target and hence,
- “gun control” does not appear to have any impact on gun crime.
To all those bleeding heart wankers who want a totally unarmed citizenry.
If you stopped being totally & absolutely selfish you might relax the death grip on your cocks for long enough to consider that not everyone resides in the shadow of their local police station. I live well out in the country & my nearest neighbour is about a kilometre away. A few years ago there was a serious incident in the area…..the first police car arrived a little over 25 minutes after the first 111 call had been made.
By the time they arrived the offenders had well gone but what if they hadn’t? Are we supposed to die so your precious criminal mates can wander around safely?
Which only goes to show that citizens packin’ heat DOESN’T do much/anything to deter crime!!!!!
I’d say that assertion is increasingly being tested and found wanting – but I accept that it’s probably very difficult to “prove” the opposite with the studies to date, yet!
What I think we can say is that the garden variety myth – that having increasing numbers of armed citizens in a Western society (no endless, tiresome cracks about Somalia thank you) will lead to increasing levels of gun violence – has been proved wrong, despite it appealing to “common sense”.
In the US gun control measures are weaker now than they have been in decades and legal gun ownership (especially with women) has spread far and fast in the last twenty years and faster in the last ten, while violent crime in general and gun crime specifically has dropped. And from the other end of the causality argument countries like Australia and the UK, that have tightened up on legal gun control, have either not seen any change in gun crime levels or seen them increase.
With that causality stuffed it will be interesting to see research on whether the counter-intuitive is true – that increased legal gun ownership actually reduces crime in general and gun crime specifically.
I’m certainly not asking for an unarmed citizenry, I’m a frequent firearms user. But:
a) If you use firearms you have to be very aware of laws relating to them
b) It’s stupid to brag about being trigger happy online
I wouldn’t rule out ever shooting anyone but have never come close, fortunately. I simply have no idea what I would do if I had an intruder, but I hope (and think) I’d carefully consider the situation and what an appropriate response would be.
I simply have no idea what I would do if I had an intruder, but I hope (and think) I’d carefully consider the situation and what an appropriate response would be.
Translated as “I’ll hug the poor soul who broke into my home, talk to him about his life and unfortunate upbringing, hold his hand, offered him a couple of herbal tea and drive him to the next WINZ office.”
The Trust chairman said children attending state secular schools were subjected to an educational environment which pressured them to adopt values which were contradictory to religious values, such as evolution theory, sexual relations outside of marriage and drinking.
PG – congrat’s – you have just been elevated to “Master Plonker” status. This actually takes some effort.
My view, and that of many contributors here, is crystal clear – People must have a right to defend their homes, and themselves, against your love-child mongrels.
I do apologize for the delay in reply however but I have only just managed to get off the floor laughing at you thinking people invading your home, when you there, isn’t home invasion. Your stance – Oh, its ok darling they’re only here to rob us!! Wake up to yourself you head in the clouds dreamer. You simply caren’t get it that if they invade his house, they deserve to get shot by Whale.
Why don’t you compose a list of people killed, nearly beaten to death or terrified in the homes and businesses by your so called “burglars” in the last 10 years in this country. My guess is those people, especially the dead ones, now wish they had a gun and laws that support their right to defend themselves at home (and this is really what Whale is talking about).
Again Pete – you don’t, and never do, provide us a solution. Reason – you are full of hot air and shiite.
Talking about ‘firearms’ is clouding the issue a bit. Look at it this way – the burglers that Whale is talking about were injured, not killed. So ask yourself this, Pete – would you thump a burgler? Kick, punch, throw something heavy at them, slam a door on their fingers, anything to stop them?
PG has a valid point in that anyone who holds a firearms license is begging for trouble by threatening or expressing any intent to use guns other than for ‘sporting’ purposes. As such it is better to keep the discussion ‘hypothetical’.
What, however, most of us are backing is a law change to give us back the right to protect our own homes & families….something the police with all the best intentions in the world are unable to do in too many cases. As ‘tom hunter’ has well argued & instanced it is time to admit that the disarming of the citizenry has been a mistake.
If you fire a shotgun at close quarters at a person its a fluke if they are only wounded. Say is 12 gauge and No 6 shot. That is around 700 lil steel balls flying around 1200 feet per sec.
One large hole at 10 feet.
I’ve highlighted the words illegal market in bold, just in case you miss it.
Gee thanks. Not sure what point you’re making. Fact is, guns are too easily obtained legally if most of the illegal trade deals in legally obtained guns. And I’m merely advocating greater host responsibility/culpability – if you don’t take due care to secure your firearm then it is somewhat analogous to owning a vicious dog and letting it roam free.
As it happens, I do not consider ‘packing heat’ to be adequate gun security.
graham – I would possibly try and thump or kick or throw something at a burglar, but it would depend entirely on the situation, the perceived risk, and the availability of something to throw. I’d do whatever I thought necessary and reasonable.
I’m happy for laws to remain as they are, I think they’re about right. If I ever ended up in a situation where I injured or killed someone with a firearm I think some sort of legal examination of any rights or wrongs of that would be reasonable.
I’m not keen on giving the likes of those commenting on Whale Oil a green light to ‘defend their castle’ however they see fit.
I haven’t researched the figures but for the sake of argument let’s presume they’re spot on. Two points:
1) The population of the UK is such that no one would live far from a police station. In this case an unarmed citizen is not at such a disadvantage. In NZ rural residents are effectively helpless. If they shoot or defend themselves they are prosecuted vigorously…..if they don’t they are likely to be killed or assaulted.
2) If you take out US ‘ghetto’ shootings committed largely by criminal gang members whose records would prevent them legally owning guns the death rate is far closer to that of NZ or the UK. I am happy to confirm that I care not if criminals kill each other & I’m more than happy to pay taxes to gaol the survivors.
If they shoot or defend themselves they are prosecuted vigorously…..if they don’t they are likely to be killed or assaulted.
How often does that happen? And how many non-crim v. crim home invasions?
When you take away suicides, crim v. crim, accidental hunting deaths and accidental deaths in homes there’s very few firearms deaths in New Zealand. It’s far more likely you’ll be maimed or killed by road thugs. Should every car have someone riding shotgun?
I wouldn’t be too concerned….there’s many the keyboard warrior who would curl up in the corner & call for Mum before they would pull the trigger on anyone or anything. Conversely there are mild mannered respectable people who would kill without hesitation if their families were threatened.
I doubt that many would know with any certainty how they would react until the circumstances presented themselves. This doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have the legal right to do what they need to do.
I keep a loaded weapon with me at all times.
its self aiming and fitted with a seek and destroy function.
It responds instantly with two simple words “whos that”and is always fully loaded and ready to deploy.
I have only fired twice in anger both times the thieving maoris aimed at ran away very quickly
If you are that worried about self defence get a well trained dog.
Conversely there are mild mannered respectable people who would kill without hesitation if their families were threatened.
I put myself in that category, depending on the level of threat and available options. I’m certain I’d step up and protect family if need be.
I doubt that many would know with any certainty how they would react until the circumstances presented themselves.
No one can know how they would react, because there are some many variables. You can think what might happen and what you might do, I do (I live semi-rural), but it’s rare to be threatened so impossible to know many things in advance.
This doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t have the legal right to do what they need to do.
What additional legal rights do you think are required? I think we have to keep in mind that aditional ‘rights’ may increase risks.
Don’t most burglars try and avoid detection and confrontation?
….”If you are that worried about self defence get a well trained dog.”….
I took that advice on board last time we had intruders on the property. As well as the working dogs, who make enough noise to deter most, there’s now 43kg of Bull Mastiff on duty at all times. She’s a sook but she looks the part & there’s always the possibility that the next intruder might trip over her & break a leg.
1. Can you tell me when the last time was that someone (in NZ) in an unpoliced township or rural locality was prosecuted for shooting someone while in fear of life and limb?
2. If we are going to have thugs kill each other I say we lock them in a large ring like structure, lets call it a colloseum for fun, and give them bats and sticks and shields and release some lions.
I want a good seat on half way and a supply of cold beer We can even let one survivor go free!
No kow tow pg is right it is illegal to have a fire arm in New Zealand for self defence Farmers have them for pest control
Cams attitude and posts on the subject could get him in trouble. He is not a fit and proper person to have a firearms licence if he intends using one for property defence. PG is not talking of change in the present law just noting that Cam is in violation of the present arms act by his statements.
nasska my boxer is a softy but with the two words whos that he is not
Down south a mate who I pig hunt with had a problem with his boots getting flogged off the porch. He is a farmer in the boonies and wears $1000 La Sportiva hi top climbing boots coz he has fucked ankles from pig hunting injuries while at work. Anyways on night a neighbour phones and says they have seen a darkie intruder walking down the private road. He releases the pig dogs. Intruder is left up a tree all night until police get him in moring. Waihopai valley in winter, musta been chilly
The changes I would like to see would allow a person to be armed at all times on their own property (at least). This would include side arms but I’d stop short of the American custom of including sub machine guns in a home arsenal.
But most of all I would like to see the law tweaked to allow vigorous self defence, armed or otherwise, without the guarantee of being bankrupted & put through the stress of a trial for injuring/killing some arsehole who decided that crime was preferable to work.
1) Regrettably I can’t but it will have happened. Police policy seems to be to prosecute in all cases & let the courts sort it out. All very good & proper but good QCs don’t come cheap! Someone else may recall instances.
kowtow/Manolo – discussions tend to evolve and move on. I stand by everything I’ve said from the start. I still think it’s nuts to comment – on potentially permanent public record – about how tough you might be with a shotgun.
I remember a few years ago when someone on KB was mouthing off about what they would do with something like a side by side pump action shotgun. They shut up when someone pointed out the absurdity.
pistol pete started off with , I’m not a fence sitter, look I’m in trouble over at WO and don’t promote irresponsible violence on the internet and then as the tide went out on him “evolved” (like Obbie ) into don’t lose your license…..
nasska – I sympathise with what you’re getting at, I’ve lived a lot in the country, but I don’t think we can allow ‘protection and self defence’ to go open slather and unexamined by the legal process. Far too easily abused and overused.
How do you envisage it, allowing a ‘shoot on sight’ endorsement on firearm licenses? Or anyone and anything is fair game? If the latter then we’d have to accept that as well as many good and sensible people there are plenty of thugs and would be thugs if they got half a chance.
“And when you got your six pieces, you gotta get rid of them, because it’s no good leaving it in the deep freeze for your mum to discover, now is it? Then I hear the best thing to do is feed them to pigs. You got to starve the pigs for a few days, then the sight of a chopped-up body will look like curry to a pisshead. You gotta shave the heads of your victims, and pull the teeth out for the sake of the piggies’ digestion. You could do this afterwards, of course, but you don’t want to go sievin’ through pig shit, now do you? They will go through bone like butter. You need at least sixteen pigs to finish the job in one sitting, so be wary of any man who keeps a pig farm. They will go through a body that weighs 200 pounds in about eight minutes. That means that a single pig can consume two pounds of uncooked flesh every minute. Hence the expression, “as greedy as a pig”.
Interesting points but like anything, if there were changes made there would be ample opportunity to cover loopholes. The thing to remember is that self defense is allowed now…..it is the stress, uncertainty & expense required to prove it that I have objections to.
Don’t neglect the fact that ‘violence’ short of actually killing an offender will drop a homeowner into hot water too. The law effectively ties the hands of a victim of crime & turns an innocent resident otherwise going about their own business into a criminal until a court decides otherwise.
My sympathies lie totally with the person who didn’t invite trouble but is potentially in deep shit by reacting instinctively.
Rather than just abusing me, why not just attempt to address the question ?
Haha, funny again. You dived into the discussion at 3.09 with all guns blazing and no attempt to address the topic. And then you throw a wee hissy when I share a joke, after you asked me to have a sense of humour.
beweal, have a think about the whole conversation.
If we relaxed the laws on ‘defending one’s castle and wife’ and didn’t legally examine any incidences of shotgun or 4×2 inflicted injuries what’s to stop someone shooting on sight and claiming they feared for their property or safety?
It’s bloody difficult for people living in rural areas where thieves are active.
But it’s also very difficult to get a legal balance that allows reasonable self protection but adequately holds to account people who react unreasonably.
“By the time they arrived the offenders had well gone but what if they hadn’t? Are we supposed to die so your precious criminal mates can wander around safely?”
That’s the point Nasska. The ‘Civil Rights’ of criminal scum who would attack civilians in their own homes are far more important to loopy lefties than the rights of those homeowners not to be raped, murdered etc..
Have you ever attended a rape or serious assault?
Have you ever supported someone who is terrified of being alone or going out into public because of being traumatised by an assault or robbery or murder?
Have you ever had someone threaten you or shoot at you whilst in the commission of a crime?
Have you ever shot someone in the commission of a crime?
Have you ever spent a day with Garth McVicar when he is with victims of serious crime?
Please let me know that you can answer yes to one or more of my questions.
Apart from shaking his hand and saying hello, I have never spent a day with Garth McVicar, but would consider it an honour to do so, and I’d buy him lunch to boot.
The Swiss have about 170,000 military style rifles in their homes. perhaps having a relatively homogeneous population helps. Since by memory some chap went off and killed some body/persons they no longer keep ammo at home. respect for ones country and weapons in general comes with training. Prior to WWI NZ was considered the most militaristic country in the world,and but for the 1930′s depression we would have continued in that vein.
One thing Islamphobes seem unable to answer is: how come the west use Al-Qa-ida to further the ends in those ME states they decide to overthrow? I’ve asked the question before, but no-one seems to have an answer. I mean I thought the ‘war on terror’ was against Al-Qa-ida? Isn’t that what we’ve been told? Of course it is. Anyway, this is a good backgrounder to Syria, as it was some months ago.
is there any correspondent reading this blog today that would argue with the fact that Pete George
is a whining, two faced, pathetic apologist who tries to curry favour by appealing to both sides of
any given argument ?
This appologist even asks for consideration because he sits on both sides of every fence.
bereal, if you come on here with starting with abuse don’t whimper if a bit gets thrown back at you.
Why have you accused me of being dishonest? That seems like unsubstantiated abuse.
Don’t get precious about someone not jumping to your demands to answer your questions, you rarely seem to answer questions put to you.
If you had followed the thread you would known it’s related to one on Whale Oil. Have you read through that?
If there is an intruder, then there is a chance that they will harm me or my family no matter how innocent and ‘ only stealing ‘ they may look. Even if that chance is 1 in 1000 I would rather kill them than risk it. Attitudes like mineand otherson this blog are the only thing that stops criminals running even more rampant than they do
The last bit is the interesting bit. I don’t go wandering around at night in the country without a loaded weapon so it seems reasonable to me that other people do the same. If I come across someone on my property at night it thus follows that they are probably armed. Given I don’t know how many or how skilled they are I will take what ever opportunities arise to protect myself and my family.
There are people who think they should have the right to shoot in any circumstances.
And it seems to keep escaping you – the point I was actually making is that if we relaxed our laws so that there was no investigation of any private property shootings or assaults then it could effectively allow shooting on sight, and some people don’t seem to need much encouragement to do exactly that..
bereal at 6.22, it didn’t take you long to get back to your abuse persona, did it. You obviously don’t get the irony of ‘sitting on the fence’. It was a dig at people like you who accuse me of sitting on the fence when I’m prepared obviously to challenge the populist gungho bullshit that you seem to jump on board with. And then you proved my point.
Steve, I’m not the one who’s dug holes. Those publicly claiming a willingness to break firearm laws are the ones who’ve compromised themselves, as a number of people have pointed out. If the police identified any it would rule them ineligible to hold a firearm license. And if they ended up in court on assault or firearm charges it wouldn’t help their case to hear they are into loose fingered bravado.
…”if we relaxed our laws so that there was no investigation of any private property shootings or assaults then it could effectively allow shooting on sight,”….
I think you may be stretching a little there Pete. Doubtlessly there are some who type tough but when push comes to shove would they do it?
At the moment I would suggest that most consider the law to be out of step with commonsense. We are a long way off demanding legislation that would see the meter reader wearing body armour but we would like some sort of indemnity against automatic prosecution if some arsehole gets damaged while breaking into our homes or threatening our lives.
Just a reinterpretation of the present law would probably suffice at a pinch.
The “populist” message in this country is that anybody with a firearm is likely to be a “nutter”. As usual you’re not exactly facing down the crowd here.
Those publicly claiming a willingness to break firearm laws are the ones who’ve compromised themselves, as a number of people have pointed out. If the police identified any it would rule them ineligible to hold a firearm license. And if they ended up in court on assault or firearm charges it wouldn’t help their case to hear they are into loose fingered bravado.
Clap ……. clap ……. clap
Those have actually been people who’ve expressed – some with passion, some with calmness – the thought that they would shoot an intruder in their house if they judged the situation to be dangerous enough to warrant such an awful action. I think that may even include you, based on your statements.
And what is the result? That simply expressing such thoughts and arguments is enough to allow the Police to remove all firearms from their possession.
I have no doubt that you would very strongly reject the assertion that this makes you, and others who make such implied threats, a totalitarian, possibly a fascist. But the terrible truth is that that type of thinking is how those things got rolling among the populations – surely a “populist” threat worth worrying about.
I will leave you with this argument from an American woman lawyer about guns rights in the USA and what they increasingly mean to woman in that country – and what it will mean if the finely balanced 5-4 majorities on the Supreme Court are reversed. I will not argue that similar situations apply here, but her opening scene is a true and recent story:
“I’m here by myself with my infant baby,” the slight, 18-year-old widow told the 911 dispatcher. Two burly men, armed and dangerous, were breaking down the door to her remote rural home.
Sarah McKinley faced impossible odds. The police could not arrive in time to save her. One week earlier, her husband had died of cancer.
The violent intruders wanted McKinley’s leftover prescription drugs. One of them was a drug addict.
“It was either going to be him or my son,” McKinley later said. “And it wasn’t going to be my son.”
The men broke down the door, one of them brandishing a foot-long hunting knife.
McKinley fired, averting a tragic ending to a harrowing experience. The other intruder fled.
Guns make women safer. It’s an uncomfortable fact for opponents of the Second Amendment. Most violent offenders actually do not use firearms, which makes guns the great equalizer.
In the early days of the CIA world facts book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/nz.html
gave the armed force of New Zealand as the entire population many of us are well skilled in bush craft and we would make a formidable guerilla army with little extra training
our gun per capita is 22nd in the world at 22.6 per 100. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
Our laws have the balance between sporting ownership and criminal ownership about right look at the Iti and co trying to acquire guns their activity came to the notice of the law and they were unable to arm them selfs effectively within attracting notice.
Pg’s concern at cams attitude is justified there is not a large criminal fraternity going around shooting innocents in this country and we do not want to set of an escalating arms race between criminals the police and the public.
Reuters just came out with a story that General Motors (GM: 23.18, -0.21, -0.90%) is losing $49,000 per Volt sold. This is not overly surprising, as a new product often loses until scale is developed. However, this loss is well more than the car’s base price of $39,000.
One fine day in Ireland, a guy is out golfing and gets up to the 16th hole. He tees up and cranks one. Unfortunately, it goes into the woods on the side of the fairway.He goes looking for his ball and comes across this little guy with this huge knot on his head and the golf ball lying right beside him.
‘Goodness,’ says the golfer then proceeds to revive the poor little guy.
Upon awakening, the little guy says, ‘Well, you caught me fair and square. I am a leprechaun. I will grant you three wishes.’
The man says ‘I can’t take anything from you, I’m just glad I didn’t hurt you too badly,’ and walks away.
Watching the golfer depart, the leprechaun says ‘Well, he was a nice enough guy, and he did catch me, so I have to do something for him. I’ll give him the three things that I would want. I’ll give him unlimited money, a great golf game, and a great sex life.’
Well, a year goes past and the same golfer is out golfing on the same course at the 16th hole. He gets up and hits one into the same woods and goes off looking for his ball.
When he finds the ball he sees the same little guy and asks how he is doing. The leprechaun says, ‘I’m fine, and might I ask how’s your golf game?’
The golfer says, ‘It’s great! I hit under par every time.’
‘I did that for you,’ responds the leprechaun, ‘And might I ask how your money is holding out?’
‘Well, now that you mention it, every time I put my hand in my pocket, I pull out a hundred dollar bill’ he replied.
The leprechaun smiles and says, ‘I did that for you. And might I ask how is your sex life?’ Now the golfer looks at him a little shyly and says, ‘Well, maybe once or twice a week.’
Floored the leprechaun stammers, ‘Once or twice a week?’
The golfer looks at him sheepishly and says, ‘Well, that’s not too bad for a Catholic priest in a small parish.’
“Steve, I’m not the one who’s dug holes. Those publicly claiming a willingness to break firearm laws are the ones who’ve compromised themselves, as a number of people have pointed out. If the police identified any it would rule them ineligible to hold a firearm license. And if they ended up in court on assault or firearm charges it wouldn’t help their case to hear they are into loose fingered bravado.”
‘If the Police’
Come on Pete, you are behaving like the hall monitor. Those bravados who comment are winding people like you up. Hook, line sinker and your arm Pete.
Try and get away from the legal shit and think if you were in that situation with a deranged fuckwit calling the shots (sic)
As I was getting into bed the other night, my wife told me I had left the light on in the garage. She could see light coming through the bedroom window. As I got up to shut the curtain (rather than go outside to shut off the stupid light), I saw there were 2 guys taking things from my garage. I immediately called 111, but was told that they didn’t have anyone “in the area at this time,” but would send someone over as soon as possible. I said OK, hung up, and waited one minute. Then I called 111 again. I said, “I called you a minute ago because there was someone in my garage. Well, you don’t have to worry about that now because I just shot them.”
Within two minutes there were 3 copcars in front of my house, a AOS van
and the dog squad.
They immediately apprehended the burglars. However, the Inspector was
really mad & said “I thought you said you’d shot them!”
I replied, “I thought you said there was nobody available.”
Reid:One thing Islamphobes seem unable to answer is: how come the west use Al-Qa-ida to further the ends in those ME states they decide to overthrow? I’ve asked the question before, but no-one seems to have an answer. I mean I thought the ‘war on terror’ was against Al-Qa-ida?
The west isn’t using al-qaida. This is just conspiracy rubbish.
I just heard at my club this evening that Tatua Co op Dairy Co Ltd announced their 2012 payout. It is $7.50 compared to Fonterra’s $6.40.
My mate’s farm pumps through 280,000 kg of milksolids. He says;
“If, instead of being on the banks of the Maungakaumia Stream I was on the other side of the Waiharakeke Stream, just four kilometres away, my after tax income would be $200,000 per year higher.”
But, I said, you have ignored the significant tax free portion included in their 20th May 2012 payout. The difference would be higher!
Then I thought; what a huge difference it would make to our country’s prosperity if Auckland based Fonterra was run as efficiently as Morrinsville based Tatua.
Then I reminded my mate, Dave, that he has $1,265,600 in Fonterra shares, whereas if he had supplied Tatua he would only need $700,000 worth of shares. The after tax interest on that $565,000 tied up funds pays for a hell of a lot of fishing boat fuel.
Then I went home and scrutinised the N.Z. Herald. It had no mention whatsoever of yesterday’s Tatua announcement. I am not talking here about asparagus growers. I am talking about our nation’s biggest industry. And an announcement, which Kiwibloggers read about first on this site, was not deemed to be newsworthy. Un be fucking lievable!
Dai and Blodwyn were engaged to be married. Dai was sent by his company to London on a two-week sales training course. The course was fine but the evenings were boring and by the second week Dai was fed up with sitting around in his hotel bedroom and went down to the bar for a few drinks where he met a couple of girls of the night, who enticed him into spending his money.
On returning home Dai’s conscience got the better of him and he broke down and confessed to Blodwyn that he had been unfaithful to her twice.
Blodwyn said she was glad Dai had been so honest – she too had to confess that she had been unfaithful twice whilst Dai had been away… once with the Tredegar Male Voice Choir and once with the Ebbw Vale RFC first XV.
What do you get if you cross the Welsh Rugby Union with an OXO cube?
A laughing stock.
Have you heard about the festival celebrated by welsh Muslims?
It’s called Ramalamb.
I went to Cardiff last week and had a run in with the Taffia, the welsh branch of the Mafia;
They made me an offer I couldn’t understand…
An Englishman, welshman and west indian are in hospital, waiting for their wives to give birth. There is quite a bit of pacing up and down when the nurse comes out and happily announces that they are all fathers of bouncing baby boys.
“There’s just one problem,” she says. “Because they were all born at the same time, we got the tags mixed up and we don’t know which baby belongs to whom. Would you, as their fathers, mind coming to identify them?” The men agree and walk into the delivery room and look at the babies.
Immediately the Englishman stoops down and picks up the black baby. “Yes, this is definitely my baby,” he says confidently.
“Um, excuse me,” says the west indian, “but I think it’s fairly obvious that this is my son.”
The Englishman pulls him aside and says, “I see where you’re coming from, mate, but one of these babies is welsh and I’m not prepared to take the risk.”
longknives @ 5:21 “I’ve met Garth McVicar and he is a genuinely nice bloke with honest and good intentions.
It astounds me that the media and certain political parties give him such a tough ride…”
It is because they are all lefties and that means they have to be sympathetic to the poor people on the wront side of the law. Look it probably the policieman fault for picking on them anyway. One of the way around the “problem” that makes them all feel better is to let them off with a whack with a wet bus ticket. Garth McVicar is “bad” because he suggests the lawbreakers should actually serve a sentence relevant to the crime. And you cant do that because they are good boys really. They have only had 42 convictions and that isnt “really” bad is it? You do know its all because of colonisation dont you, so its not really their fault anyway.
Read @ 5:49 “Read it and weep, all you Islamaphobes”
Ok so instead of muslims raping and killing Chris Stevens because of a youtube video, the real story is that muslims raped and killed Chris Stevens because the video was shown in a movie theatre. And it was shown more than once. Oh the horror. Move than once.
That explains it all then. Islam is really the religion of peace and we should encourage more to move here so we can share in their innovative ideas about peace. How silly of me to doubt.
reid @ 6:19 – “I mean I thought the ‘war on terror’ was against Al-Qa-ida?”
Well you were wrong then. The war-on-terror was the name given to the level of response that was now deemed required to respond to terrorism. Alqaida is only one of the “enemies” in this war. There are others.
OneTrack is correct. The war these days is against “patterns of behaviour’. As we all have them, we are all in trouble. Listen for the drone, coming one day to the sky above you.
And all the while the coldly analytical POTUS slides his eyes each morning down a list of those posing an ‘imminent risk’ – even though they may have been an ‘imminent risk’ for months or even years- and points a finger at one…kaboom!
Meanwhile, Cartoon Bibi goes to town with a…cartoon image of a bomb! Poor Bibi, snookered by the Mad Mullahs, desperately casting about looking for support so he may once more indulge his lust for blood and being greeted with a deafening silence from the man who matters most.
Lucy would be pleased with this “victory” for socialism: The package aims to narrow France’s deficit to 3.0 percent of national output next year from 4.5 percent this year, bringing in 30 billion euros ($39 billion) for the treasury.
But the budget dismayed business by opting for tax hikes — including a 75 percent tax on those earning over one million euros a year — by holding public spending and not cutting government jobs.
WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — The Obama administration’s plan to transfer $450 million in cash to Egypt hit a roadblock Friday as a top House committee chairwoman blocked the move, saying it warrants further review.
That would seem the sensible thing to do.
Is Obama dumb or just reckless?