• Nobody Trusts Nicole McKee

    From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 7 06:45:20 2024
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the Government’s attitude <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sat Sep 7 07:24:16 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >Government’s attitude ><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.
    Political rhetoric, nothing more. And a profoundly stupid header to your post.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Sep 7 08:09:09 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another meeting >>elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sat Sep 7 07:59:03 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:24:16 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    Another issue is the threat of the same thing
    happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has a long
    connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince anybody she
    can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another meeting >elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?
    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above? Perhaps not?
    People make shit up don't you know?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Sep 7 07:39:20 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:24:16 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    Another issue is the threat of the same thing
    happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has a long
    connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince anybody she
    can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sat Sep 7 21:20:24 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>>mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another meeting >>>elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.
    Did he produce evidence?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Sep 7 22:47:37 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>>>mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another >>>>meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Did he produce evidence?

    You mean, did he secretly record the meeting?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Sep 7 23:52:53 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the
    community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>>> mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another
    meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Let’s see: on one side, you have a politician with known connections to a completely unscrupulous, ruthless and well-funded lobby organization. On
    the other side, you have a well-regarded leader of the local community.

    Draw your own conclusions.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sat Sep 7 23:33:41 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>>>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>>>>mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another >>>>>meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Did he produce evidence?

    You mean, did he secretly record the meeting?
    I mean what I wrote, you should try it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Sep 7 23:51:07 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 23:33:41 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>>>>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she >>>>>>was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to >>>>>>another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Did he produce evidence?

    You mean, did he secretly record the meeting?

    I mean what I wrote ...

    So did I.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sun Sep 8 02:26:56 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 23:33:41 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>>>>>community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she >>>>>>>was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to >>>>>>>another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Did he produce evidence?

    You mean, did he secretly record the meeting?

    I mean what I wrote ...

    So did I.
    No. you assumed that you know what I meant - and you don't. Period.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BR@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sun Sep 8 18:07:11 2024
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 06:45:20 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >Government�s attitude ><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    STICK TO YOUR GUNS.

    In their hasty response to the act of multiple murder that took place
    in Christchurch in March 2019, the government decided, by decree, that
    all semi automatic "military style" weapons were to be confiscated. No
    process, no consultation, nothing. The gun grabbing had started even
    before the bodies had been buried.

    Nowhere in the mainstream media was it even hinted that there maybe a
    problem with this. The crime that took place in Christchurch that day
    was always going to happen in this country because NZ is among the
    softest of targets. Multiple murderers always target areas where
    people are defenceless.

    Whenever these brutal killings are carried out, the mainstream media
    can't shut up about it for days, weeks and even months afterwards,
    labouring their own talking points to the exclusion of all others and
    giving the perpetrator what he so desperately craves; publicity.

    If the government believes that disarming the people will discourage
    further incidents of multiple murder, they are sadly mistaken. The
    greatest number of people killed by a terrorist with a gun was 69 (as
    far as I know), by Anders Brevik in liberal Norway (plus another eight
    with a fertilizer bomb). That is fewer than the Nice attack in France
    in which 86 people were killed without involving firearms. The 9/11
    terrorists killed almost 3000 people without a single shot being
    fired. The Oklahoma bomber murdered 168 people, also without a gun.

    It is therefore quite plain that if someone is determined to to murder
    as many people as possible, guns and ammo would not be the first items
    on the shopping list.

    What the media never reports is those incidents when some lunatic bent
    on mass murder is stopped by a good guy with a gun. The mainstream
    media will not be diverted from their own narrative in which they
    would have everyone believe that fewer guns make for a safer society.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Gun confiscation works only on compliant, law abiding people. Taking
    guns away from good citizens won't make a damn bit of difference.
    Criminals will not be surrendering their guns to the authorities, with
    the result that only the bad guys and the government will be packing
    heat.

    "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
    state, the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be
    infringed".

    So reads the second amendment of the US Constitution. The
    constitution, being binding on the government, essentially codifies
    the principle that self defence is a fundamental human right and that
    the government has no business violating that right.

    Self defence is not the only reason for the second amendment. In fact
    it is not even the main reason. The constitutional right to keep and
    bear arms was primarily contrived to enable the people to defend
    themselves against their own government. The framers understood that a
    well armed citizenry would serve as a significant deterrent to any
    potential tyrant.

    It is also worth noting that every brutal dictator who has ever
    bludgeoned his way to absolute power, kicked off the campaign of
    murder and torture by first promising to "help out the little guy" and
    then later taking steps to disarm the population. The gun confiscation legislation that the Ardern government enacted should not surprise
    anyone who is familiar with the behaviour of past dictators. All this
    happened with the approval of a weak and gutless opposition.

    DO NOT SURRENDER YOUR GUNS TO THE GOVERNMENT. YOUR FREEDOM MAY ONE DAY
    COME TO DEPEND ON THEM.

    Bill.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Sun Sep 8 23:09:32 2024
    On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 02:26:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss
    the community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; >>>>>> she was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to
    another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Let’s see: on one side, you have a politician with known connections to
    a completely unscrupulous, ruthless and well-funded lobby organization.
    On the other side, you have a well-regarded leader of the local
    community.

    Draw your own conclusions.

    And here she is again <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/08/officials-raise-alarm-after-mckee-makes-rapid-gun-law-change/>,
    making changes to gun laws via an “Order In Council” shortcut,
    bypassing the usual checks and balances. Sure, technically she has the
    power to do that, but her own officials were raising concern about the
    haste with which the law change was going through.

    Somehow the Minister believes these changes “do not impact on public safety”. But it’s not clear where she got this advice from --
    certainly not from her own officials. But if not them, then who?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Mon Sep 9 00:30:12 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 02:26:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss >>>>>>> the community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; >>>>>>> she was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to >>>>>>> another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Let’s see: on one side, you have a politician with known connections to >>> a completely unscrupulous, ruthless and well-funded lobby organization.
    On the other side, you have a well-regarded leader of the local
    community.

    Draw your own conclusions.

    And here she is again ><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/08/officials-raise-alarm-after-mckee-makes-rapid-gun-law-change/>,
    making changes to gun laws via an “Order In Council” shortcut,
    bypassing the usual checks and balances. Sure, technically she has the
    power to do that, but her own officials were raising concern about the
    haste with which the law change was going through.

    Somehow the Minister believes these changes “do not impact on public >safety”. But it’s not clear where she got this advice from --
    certainly not from her own officials. But if not them, then who?
    You certainly seem to have plenty of questions but little substance for your complaints against this minister, complaints that are one hundred percent politically motivated. How pathetic.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Sep 9 14:42:19 2024
    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 06:45:20 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>Government�s attitude >><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    STICK TO YOUR GUNS.

    In their hasty response to the act of multiple murder that took place
    in Christchurch in March 2019, the government decided, by decree, that
    all semi automatic "military style" weapons were to be confiscated. No >process, no consultation, nothing. The gun grabbing had started even
    before the bodies had been buried.

    Nowhere in the mainstream media was it even hinted that there maybe a
    problem with this. The crime that took place in Christchurch that day
    was always going to happen in this country because NZ is among the
    softest of targets. Multiple murderers always target areas where
    people are defenceless.

    Whenever these brutal killings are carried out, the mainstream media
    can't shut up about it for days, weeks and even months afterwards,
    labouring their own talking points to the exclusion of all others and
    giving the perpetrator what he so desperately craves; publicity.

    If the government believes that disarming the people will discourage
    further incidents of multiple murder, they are sadly mistaken. The
    greatest number of people killed by a terrorist with a gun was 69 (as
    far as I know), by Anders Brevik in liberal Norway (plus another eight
    with a fertilizer bomb). That is fewer than the Nice attack in France
    in which 86 people were killed without involving firearms. The 9/11 >terrorists killed almost 3000 people without a single shot being
    fired. The Oklahoma bomber murdered 168 people, also without a gun.

    It is therefore quite plain that if someone is determined to to murder
    as many people as possible, guns and ammo would not be the first items
    on the shopping list.

    What the media never reports is those incidents when some lunatic bent
    on mass murder is stopped by a good guy with a gun. The mainstream
    media will not be diverted from their own narrative in which they
    would have everyone believe that fewer guns make for a safer society.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Gun confiscation works only on compliant, law abiding people. Taking
    guns away from good citizens won't make a damn bit of difference.
    Criminals will not be surrendering their guns to the authorities, with
    the result that only the bad guys and the government will be packing
    heat.

    "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
    state, the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be
    infringed".

    So reads the second amendment of the US Constitution. The
    constitution, being binding on the government, essentially codifies
    the principle that self defence is a fundamental human right and that
    the government has no business violating that right.

    Self defence is not the only reason for the second amendment. In fact
    it is not even the main reason. The constitutional right to keep and
    bear arms was primarily contrived to enable the people to defend
    themselves against their own government. The framers understood that a
    well armed citizenry would serve as a significant deterrent to any
    potential tyrant.

    It is also worth noting that every brutal dictator who has ever
    bludgeoned his way to absolute power, kicked off the campaign of
    murder and torture by first promising to "help out the little guy" and
    then later taking steps to disarm the population. The gun confiscation >legislation that the Ardern government enacted should not surprise
    anyone who is familiar with the behaviour of past dictators. All this >happened with the approval of a weak and gutless opposition.

    DO NOT SURRENDER YOUR GUNS TO THE GOVERNMENT. YOUR FREEDOM MAY ONE DAY
    COME TO DEPEND ON THEM.

    Bill.
    We have a well regulated militia, Bill - it is our Defence forces.

    Why would you want private armies? - or deranged individuals having
    access to semi-automatic firearms?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Sep 9 04:37:29 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 06:45:20 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >><[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have >>>joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>>Government�s attitude >>><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same >>>thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye.

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    STICK TO YOUR GUNS.

    In their hasty response to the act of multiple murder that took place
    in Christchurch in March 2019, the government decided, by decree, that
    all semi automatic "military style" weapons were to be confiscated. No >>process, no consultation, nothing. The gun grabbing had started even
    before the bodies had been buried.

    Nowhere in the mainstream media was it even hinted that there maybe a >>problem with this. The crime that took place in Christchurch that day
    was always going to happen in this country because NZ is among the
    softest of targets. Multiple murderers always target areas where
    people are defenceless.

    Whenever these brutal killings are carried out, the mainstream media
    can't shut up about it for days, weeks and even months afterwards, >>labouring their own talking points to the exclusion of all others and >>giving the perpetrator what he so desperately craves; publicity.

    If the government believes that disarming the people will discourage >>further incidents of multiple murder, they are sadly mistaken. The
    greatest number of people killed by a terrorist with a gun was 69 (as
    far as I know), by Anders Brevik in liberal Norway (plus another eight
    with a fertilizer bomb). That is fewer than the Nice attack in France
    in which 86 people were killed without involving firearms. The 9/11 >>terrorists killed almost 3000 people without a single shot being
    fired. The Oklahoma bomber murdered 168 people, also without a gun.

    It is therefore quite plain that if someone is determined to to murder
    as many people as possible, guns and ammo would not be the first items
    on the shopping list.

    What the media never reports is those incidents when some lunatic bent
    on mass murder is stopped by a good guy with a gun. The mainstream
    media will not be diverted from their own narrative in which they
    would have everyone believe that fewer guns make for a safer society.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Gun confiscation works only on compliant, law abiding people. Taking
    guns away from good citizens won't make a damn bit of difference.
    Criminals will not be surrendering their guns to the authorities, with
    the result that only the bad guys and the government will be packing
    heat.

    "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
    state, the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be >>infringed".

    So reads the second amendment of the US Constitution. The
    constitution, being binding on the government, essentially codifies
    the principle that self defence is a fundamental human right and that
    the government has no business violating that right.

    Self defence is not the only reason for the second amendment. In fact
    it is not even the main reason. The constitutional right to keep and
    bear arms was primarily contrived to enable the people to defend
    themselves against their own government. The framers understood that a
    well armed citizenry would serve as a significant deterrent to any >>potential tyrant.

    It is also worth noting that every brutal dictator who has ever
    bludgeoned his way to absolute power, kicked off the campaign of
    murder and torture by first promising to "help out the little guy" and
    then later taking steps to disarm the population. The gun confiscation >>legislation that the Ardern government enacted should not surprise
    anyone who is familiar with the behaviour of past dictators. All this >>happened with the approval of a weak and gutless opposition.

    DO NOT SURRENDER YOUR GUNS TO THE GOVERNMENT. YOUR FREEDOM MAY ONE DAY
    COME TO DEPEND ON THEM.

    Bill.
    We have a well regulated militia, Bill - it is our Defence forces.

    Why would you want private armies? - or deranged individuals having
    access to semi-automatic firearms?
    Geez you are thick. Can you ever actually respond to another post without puking all over it? Or was it just more sarcasm? In either event, attrocious behaviour.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Mon Sep 9 05:19:31 2024
    On 2024-09-07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss the >>>>> community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; she was >>>>> mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to another
    meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Let’s see: on one side, you have a politician with known connections to a completely unscrupulous, ruthless and well-funded lobby organization. On
    the other side, you have a well-regarded leader of the local community.

    Draw your own conclusions.

    Been done long ago.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Mon Sep 9 05:27:38 2024
    On 2024-09-08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sun, 8 Sep 2024 02:26:01 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 21:20:24 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sat, 7 Sep 2024 07:59:03 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    The Imam relates being at a meeting with the Minister to discuss >>>>>>> the community’s concerns. She didn’t seem to have time to listen; >>>>>>> she was mainly there to make her statements, and then rush off to >>>>>>> another meeting elsewhere.

    Stakeholders deserve more respect than that, don’t you think?

    Perhaps you could provide evidence of the above?

    It’s in the Imam’s own words.

    Let’s see: on one side, you have a politician with known connections to >>> a completely unscrupulous, ruthless and well-funded lobby organization.
    On the other side, you have a well-regarded leader of the local
    community.

    Draw your own conclusions.

    And here she is again
    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/08/officials-raise-alarm-after-mckee-makes-rapid-gun-law-change/>,
    making changes to gun laws via an “Order In Council” shortcut,
    bypassing the usual checks and balances. Sure, technically she has the
    power to do that, but her own officials were raising concern about the
    haste with which the law change was going through.

    Somehow the Minister believes these changes “do not impact on public safety”. But it’s not clear where she got this advice from --
    certainly not from her own officials. But if not them, then who?

    My question is why the rush to alter the existing situation. Due process
    which is set in our Democracy process.

    Ignoring this is a slippery slope to dictatorship and there is enough of
    this going on.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BR@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 9 17:30:06 2024
    On Mon, 09 Sep 2024 14:42:19 +1200, Rich80105 <[email protected]>
    wrote:


    We have a well regulated militia, Bill - it is our Defence forces.

    What if the government turns feral?

    Why would you want private armies? -

    I made no mention of private armies.

    or deranged individuals having acess to semi-automatic firearms?

    They already have access to them. It's just a shame their victims
    didn't.

    Bill.

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
    https://www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Mon Sep 9 21:46:15 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    But then, there’s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >them.
    No right wingers here old chum, just you neo-marxist fools.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 9 21:18:40 2024
    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    But then, there’s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting
    the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against them.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Tue Sep 10 00:22:19 2024
    On 2024-09-09, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    But then, there’s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against them.

    Sorry but that is the Left which does this.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BR@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 17:09:23 2024
    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting
    the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
    https://www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 17:18:10 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >>the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >>them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first
    post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the Government�s attitude <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. __________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in
    council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 10 05:28:03 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR wrote:

    What are the facts?

    Fact: Australia has proven that gun control can be made to work, and makes everybody safer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 07:22:15 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly
    after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >>>the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >>>them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first
    post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >Government�s attitude ><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. >__________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in
    council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .
    As did Ardern. more than once.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BR@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 11 05:11:58 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 05:28:03 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR wrote:

    What are the facts?

    Fact: Australia has proven that gun control can be made to work, and makes >everybody safer.

    What rubbish.

    Criminals never give up their guns just because the government tells
    them to. Only law abiding people do that. The Christchurch mosque was
    gun free in March 2019. How did that work out for them?

    Bill.

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
    https://www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 21:02:56 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:22:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >>><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly >>>>> after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >>>>the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >>>>them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first
    post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have
    joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>Government�s attitude >><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same
    thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. >>__________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in
    council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .
    As did Ardern. more than once.

    What examples do you have, Tony?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 11 07:17:49 2024
    On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 05:11:58 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 05:28:03 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro ><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR wrote:

    What are the facts?

    Fact: Australia has proven that gun control can be made to work, and makes >>everybody safer.

    What rubbish.

    Criminals never give up their guns just because the government tells
    them to. Only law abiding people do that. The Christchurch mosque was
    gun free in March 2019. How did that work out for them?

    Bill.
    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them?
    Should people attending a church or mosque be safe from being shot,
    Bill? What sort of a world do you want our children to live in? Do you
    normally carry a firearm? Do you think you should?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 19:46:12 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 05:11:58 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 05:28:03 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR wrote:

    What are the facts?

    Fact: Australia has proven that gun control can be made to work, and makes >>>everybody safer.

    What rubbish.

    Criminals never give up their guns just because the government tells
    them to. Only law abiding people do that. The Christchurch mosque was
    gun free in March 2019. How did that work out for them?

    Bill.
    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them?
    Should people attending a church or mosque be safe from being shot,
    Bill? What sort of a world do you want our children to live in? Do you >normally carry a firearm? Do you think you should?
    Don't be so pathetically stupid. Bill is not saying that. Jeez you are nasty.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 10 21:11:30 2024
    On Mon, 09 Sep 2024 17:30:06 +1200, BR wrote:

    What if the government turns feral?

    What if it does? Look at the USA. The Government has more, and bigger,
    guns, than anything private citizens have access to, even under their
    infamous “Second Amendment”. It has already reached the situation where opposition groups regularly accuse the party in power of “trying to
    destroy America”. If that’s not the point at which to raise arms and “fight to regain our freedom” (or substitute alternative suitable content- free polemic), what is?

    But that doesn’t work. And we get a daily demonstration in the USA of why
    it doesn’t work, because people raise arms against agents of the
    Government every day. They immediately get shot and killed as “violent criminals”, and nobody gives them a second thought.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Tue Sep 10 21:14:23 2024
    On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 05:11:58 +1200, BR wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 05:28:03 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR wrote:

    What are the facts?

    Fact: Australia has proven that gun control can be made to work, and
    makes everybody safer.

    What rubbish.

    Criminals never give up their guns just because the government tells
    them to.

    And yet, that’s exactly what they did in Australia. The figures on the decline in shooting crimes since then speak for themselves.

    Another thing the figures make clear, particularly in the USA, is that
    most of the guns used in crimes are obtained legally. So you do need to
    look carefully at legal purchases.

    See what I mean about right-wingers clinging to their ideology in defiance
    of the facts?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Sep 10 19:47:43 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:22:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >>>><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly >>>>>> after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >>>>>the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against >>>>>them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first >>>post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have >>>joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>>Government�s attitude >>><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the
    2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same >>>thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has
    a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince
    anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. >>>__________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in
    council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .
    As did Ardern. more than once.

    What examples do you have, Tony?
    Gun law changes after the Christchurch shootings. Covid mandates and more.
    Not sure of the process but there was zero consultation so it is the same behaviour. Eh?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 11 19:27:43 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:47:43 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:22:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >>>>><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly >>>>>>> after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep spouting >>>>>>the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up against
    them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first >>>>post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have >>>>joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>>>Government�s attitude >>>><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the >>>>2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same >>>>thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has >>>>a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince >>>>anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. >>>>__________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in
    council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .
    As did Ardern. more than once.

    What examples do you have, Tony?
    Gun law changes after the Christchurch shootings. Covid mandates and more. >Not sure of the process but there was zero consultation so it is the same >behaviour. Eh?
    So you are not sure of even your own examples. For gun laws, there
    had been considerable discussion about following Australia's actions
    after a bad mass shooting there - they had taken actions very similar
    to those adopted here in New Zealand - it had been a Liberal / Country government that made the changes there. The use of that type of
    firearm here brought home the reason why banning them made sense - the
    change was not immediate but there was plenty of consultation.

    Covid mandates were a government decision to allow some employers to
    insist on vaccination for employees; I suspect one of the first would
    have been the government itself for defence forces and some nurses.
    There was no blanket mandate; I know a construction firm that had
    about 5% that did not get vaccinated; they were restricted in their
    contacts but not required to vaccinate.

    There was in fact considerable public support for the actions the
    previous government took during the Covid time, and also in relation
    to the Mosque shootings - there is little support for McKee's
    policies.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 11 19:25:54 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:47:43 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 07:22:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:09:23 +1200, BR <[email protected]> wrote:

    On Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro >>>>>><[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Sun, 08 Sep 2024 18:07:11 +1200, BR wrote:

    Now seems like a good time to post something that was posted shortly >>>>>>>> after after the Christchurch massacre.

    By whom, I wonder? What a load of content-free hot air.

    Does it matter?

    But then, there�s nothing right-wingers like better than to keep >>>>>>>spouting
    the same old tired ideology, no matter how much the facts stack up >>>>>>>against
    them.

    What are the facts?

    Bill.
    One fact is that this thread has diverged significantly from the first >>>>>post :
    __________________________
    The Christchurch Muslim community has become so riled up, they have >>>>>joined Christians in a church to make their feelings known about the >>>>>Government�s attitude >>>>><https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/07/govt-turning-its-back-on-victims-of-march-15-attack-imam-says/>.

    One issue is the seeming rolling back of support services since the >>>>>2019 Ides of March massacre. Another issue is the threat of the same >>>>>thing happening to gun laws. The Minister concerned, Nicole McKee, has >>>>>a long connection with the gun lobby, and she has yet to convince >>>>>anybody she can consider the issue with an unbiased eye. >>>>>__________________________

    Now we have seen McKee make changes to the law through order in >>>>>council - no consultation, no expert advice . . . .
    As did Ardern. more than once.

    What examples do you have, Tony?
    Gun law changes after the Christchurch shootings. Covid mandates and more. >>Not sure of the process but there was zero consultation so it is the same >>behaviour. Eh?
    So you are not sure of even your own examples.
    Oh don't be such a prissy little twerp. Can't you just debate?
    For gun laws, there
    had been considerable discussion about following Australia's actions
    after a bad mass shooting there - they had taken actions very similar
    to those adopted here in New Zealand - it had been a Liberal / Country >government that made the changes there. The use of that type of
    firearm here brought home the reason why banning them made sense - the
    change was not immediate but there was plenty of consultation.
    Off topic.

    Covid mandates were a government decision to allow some employers to
    insist on vaccination for employees; I suspect one of the first would
    have been the government itself for defence forces and some nurses.
    There was no blanket mandate; I know a construction firm that had
    about 5% that did not get vaccinated; they were restricted in their
    contacts but not required to vaccinate.
    Off topic.

    There was in fact considerable public support for the actions the
    previous government took during the Covid time, and also in relation
    to the Mosque shootings - there is little support for McKee's
    policies.
    Off topic.
    Now keep on topic and show how any of the examples I gave were consulted with the public or with parliament.
    Go on, do try to be honest for once.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 16 06:46:53 2024
    Just when you thought she couldn’t be any more slippery ...

    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/16/firearms-minister-wont-rule-out-trying-to-bring-back-banned-guns/>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Mon Sep 16 07:57:05 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    Just when you thought she couldn’t be any more slippery ...

    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/09/16/firearms-minister-wont-rule-out-trying-to-bring-back-banned-guns/>
    No context to your post - pointless waste of bandwidth.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Tue Sep 17 01:30:08 2024
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them?

    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more
    guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the NRA
    in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA convention
    was itself a gun-free zone!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Tue Sep 17 01:50:37 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them?

    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more
    guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the NRA
    in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA convention
    was itself a gun-free zone!
    Another p;ost with no useful context.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to Tony on Tue Sep 17 23:56:03 2024
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them?

    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the
    NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA
    convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing
    to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like you can’t win.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Wed Sep 18 00:44:53 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the
    NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing >to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like you >can’t win.
    I didn't post what you replied to, you have caught Rich's disease.
    Additionally I have not at any time made comment in this thread about the USA and their guns. Do try to keep up with simple conversations and reply to the correct person.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 18 16:23:46 2024
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:44:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the >>>>NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing >>to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like you >>can’t win.
    I didn't post what you replied to, you have caught Rich's disease. >Additionally I have not at any time made comment in this thread about the USA >and their guns. Do try to keep up with simple conversations and reply to the >correct person.
    You really do love the little rules you make up, don't you Tony.
    nz.general is a group discussion forum, available to anyone that cares
    to connect. Many responses are general comments, just as would happen
    in a verbal discussion - they may relate to the previous post but they
    do not need to - some people just believe they have a worthwhile
    contribution to make. others of course seek a hierarchy in everything (preferably with themselves at the top - which they seldom deserve).

    Now to leave you to your ruminations and addressing the subject of the
    thread: Lawrence is correct that the USA, by taking an extreme
    position regarding private ownership and use of firearms is a world
    outlier - and that country does indeed provide a salutary lesson to
    the rest of the world of how dysfunctional politics in the USA can
    leave the population worse off. McKee is breaking a lot of conventions
    in your mad rush to force her extreme views on others, and while not
    trusting her is near universal, it casts an additional pall over those
    that purport to lead the government - clearly McKee is immune to any
    form of control from Cabinet or the current Prime Minister.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From BR@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 18 17:34:04 2024
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 23:56:03 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the
    NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It�s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing
    to the US as an example every time. It�s an argument that people like you >can�t win.

    Not true.

    The murder capital of the US is Chicago. A democrat controlled city
    with the arguably the most stringent gun controls in America.

    Bill.

    --
    This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
    https://www.avg.com

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 18 07:17:22 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:44:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the >>>>>NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing >>>to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like you >>>can’t win.
    I didn't post what you replied to, you have caught Rich's disease. >>Additionally I have not at any time made comment in this thread about the USA >>and their guns. Do try to keep up with simple conversations and reply to the >>correct person.
    Removed abusive and terrible English comment.
    nz.general is a group discussion forum, available to anyone that cares
    to connect. Many responses are general comments, just as would happen
    in a verbal discussion - they may relate to the previous post but they
    do not need to - some people just believe they have a worthwhile
    contribution to make. others of course seek a hierarchy in everything >(preferably with themselves at the top - which they seldom deserve).
    You are simply stupid. Lawrence clearly addressed me, not the group. He was wrong to do so and you are wrong to support him. There is no justification for that. You are both wrong. And you are a coward because you use that technique to deliberately hide.

    Off topic crap gone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 18 19:38:28 2024
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 07:17:22 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:44:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>>>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the >>>>>>NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>>>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by pointing >>>>to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like you >>>>can’t win.
    I didn't post what you replied to, you have caught Rich's disease. >>>Additionally I have not at any time made comment in this thread about the USA
    and their guns. Do try to keep up with simple conversations and reply to the >>>correct person.
    Removed abusive and terrible English comment.

    It is still there, do you really think it cannot be seen because you
    delete it, Tony?

    Here it is again, just for you:
    You really do love the little rules you make up, don't you Tony.
    nz.general is a group discussion forum, available to anyone that cares
    to connect. Many responses are general comments, just as would happen
    in a verbal discussion - they may relate to the previous post but they
    do not need to - some people just believe they have a worthwhile
    contribution to make. others of course seek a hierarchy in everything (preferably with themselves at the top - which they seldom deserve).

    Now to leave you to your ruminations and addressing the subject of the
    thread: Lawrence is correct that the USA, by taking an extreme
    position regarding private ownership and use of firearms is a world
    outlier - and that country does indeed provide a salutary lesson to
    the rest of the world of how dysfunctional politics in the USA can
    leave the population worse off. McKee is breaking a lot of conventions
    in your mad rush to force her extreme views on others, and while not
    trusting her is near universal, it casts an additional pall over those
    that purport to lead the government - clearly McKee is immune to any
    form of control from Cabinet or the current Prime Minister.


    nz.general is a group discussion forum, available to anyone that cares
    to connect. Many responses are general comments, just as would happen
    in a verbal discussion - they may relate to the previous post but they
    do not need to - some people just believe they have a worthwhile >>contribution to make. others of course seek a hierarchy in everything >>(preferably with themselves at the top - which they seldom deserve).
    You are simply stupid. Lawrence clearly addressed me, not the group. He was >wrong to do so and you are wrong to support him. There is no justification for >that. You are both wrong. And you are a coward because you use that technique >to deliberately hide.

    You are addressing me rather than the group, Tony, having just said
    that to address an individual is wrong - you really are very confused.


    Off topic crap gone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Wed Sep 18 08:31:13 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 07:17:22 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 00:44:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    On Tue, 17 Sep 2024 01:50:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:

    On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:

    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:

    So are you advocating that everyone should carry a firearm with them? >>>>>>>>>
    Don't be so pathetically stupid.

    A lot of pro-gun fanatics do say exactly that--they say that having more >>>>>>>guns around somehow makes people safer. Remember Trump addressing the >>>>>>>NRA in 2016, promising to abolish gun-free zones? Except the NRA >>>>>>>convention was itself a gun-free zone!

    It’s just too easy to completely destroy the pro-gun position by >>>>>pointing
    to the US as an example every time. It’s an argument that people like >>>>>you
    can’t win.
    I didn't post what you replied to, you have caught Rich's disease. >>>>Additionally I have not at any time made comment in this thread about the >>>>USA
    and their guns. Do try to keep up with simple conversations and reply to >>>>the
    correct person.
    Removed abusive and terrible English comment.


    nz.general is a group discussion forum, available to anyone that cares
    to connect. Many responses are general comments, just as would happen
    in a verbal discussion - they may relate to the previous post but they
    do not need to - some people just believe they have a worthwhile >>>contribution to make. others of course seek a hierarchy in everything >>>(preferably with themselves at the top - which they seldom deserve).
    You are simply stupid. Lawrence clearly addressed me, not the group. He was >>wrong to do so and you are wrong to support him. There is no justification >>for
    that. You are both wrong. And you are a coward because you use that technique >>to deliberately hide.

    You are addressing me rather than the group, Tony, having just said
    that to address an individual is wrong
    You poor little queer, I said nothing of the sort.
    - you really are very confused.


    Off topic crap gone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Fri Oct 4 07:26:24 2024
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 17:34:04 +1200, BR wrote:

    The murder capital of the US is Chicago.

    Ah, the hoary old Chicago example. Illinois has strong gun laws, why don’t they work?

    They never mention Massachusetts or Hawaii, do they? States with strong
    gun laws, that *do* work.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to All on Sun Oct 6 13:33:44 2024
    Under the previous National Government, McKee was hired to give advice
    to Police Minister Paula Bennett on a select committee report on
    illegal gun ownership in NZ. There was a loophole in the law at the
    time which was later exploited by Shooty McShootFace* to kill those 50
    people on the Ides of March.

    McKee keeps insisting that she recommended the Government close that
    loophole at the time, and that she made the recommendation at every
    available opportunity. Such a tightening never happened, and there is
    nothing to back up her claim -- her own written advice to the
    Government never mentioned it, and even Bennett has no recollection of receiving such advice from her.

    Apparently McKee’s job was as a “firearms safety specialist” ... as if “firearms safety” were not an oxymoron ...

    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/10/06/checking-the-record-on-firearms-ministers-qa-interview/>

    *Like Ardern, I won’t say his name either.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Lawrence D'Oliveiro on Sun Oct 6 18:53:12 2024
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    Under the previous National Government, McKee was hired to give advice
    to Police Minister Paula Bennett on a select committee report on
    illegal gun ownership in NZ. There was a loophole in the law at the
    time which was later exploited by Shooty McShootFace* to kill those 50
    people on the Ides of March.

    McKee keeps insisting that she recommended the Government close that
    loophole at the time, and that she made the recommendation at every
    available opportunity. Such a tightening never happened, and there is
    nothing to back up her claim -- her own written advice to the
    Government never mentioned it, and even Bennett has no recollection of >receiving such advice from her.
    And you have no evidence to support your statements. What a waste of bandwidth.

    Apparently McKee’s job was as a “firearms safety specialist” ... as if >“firearms safety” were not an oxymoron ...

    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/10/06/checking-the-record-on-firearms-ministers-qa-interview/>

    *Like Ardern, I won’t say his name either.
    That is not all you have in common with the liar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Oct 7 16:06:15 2024
    On Sun, 6 Oct 2024 18:53:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    Under the previous National Government, McKee was hired to give advice
    to Police Minister Paula Bennett on a select committee report on
    illegal gun ownership in NZ. There was a loophole in the law at the
    time which was later exploited by Shooty McShootFace* to kill those 50 >>people on the Ides of March.

    McKee keeps insisting that she recommended the Government close that >>loophole at the time, and that she made the recommendation at every >>available opportunity. Such a tightening never happened, and there is >>nothing to back up her claim -- her own written advice to the
    Government never mentioned it, and even Bennett has no recollection of >>receiving such advice from her.
    And you have no evidence to support your statements. What a waste of bandwidth.
    The link is given below, Tony. Try reading all of a post before
    getting it wrong . . .


    Apparently McKee’s job was as a “firearms safety specialist�? ... as if >>“firearms safety�? were not an oxymoron ...
    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/10/06/checking-the-record-on-firearms-ministers-qa-interview/>

    *Like Ardern, I won’t say his name either.
    That is not all you have in common with the liar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Oct 7 04:13:16 2024
    Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Sun, 6 Oct 2024 18:53:12 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[email protected]d> wrote:
    Under the previous National Government, McKee was hired to give advice
    to Police Minister Paula Bennett on a select committee report on
    illegal gun ownership in NZ. There was a loophole in the law at the
    time which was later exploited by Shooty McShootFace* to kill those 50 >>>people on the Ides of March.

    McKee keeps insisting that she recommended the Government close that >>>loophole at the time, and that she made the recommendation at every >>>available opportunity. Such a tightening never happened, and there is >>>nothing to back up her claim -- her own written advice to the
    Government never mentioned it, and even Bennett has no recollection of >>>receiving such advice from her.
    And you have no evidence to support your statements. What a waste of >>bandwidth.
    The link is given below, Tony. Try reading all of a post before
    getting it wrong . . .
    I did and there is no evidence. Try reading before you become stupidly hasty.


    Apparently McKee’s job was as a “firearms safety specialist�? ... as if >>>“firearms safety�? were not an oxymoron ...
    <https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/10/06/checking-the-record-on-firearms-ministers-qa-interview/>

    *Like Ardern, I won’t say his name either.
    That is not all you have in common with the liar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)