New Zealand gun lobby backs gun ban (Look at that US...)

Spiritual_Chaos

my2hands said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

JT167846 said:

The big thing is America, like NZ and the rest of the world, is run by human beings. Who on occasion have a tendency to do things absolutely arseways at times. We're all different so our idiosyncrasies get made fun of by the rest of the world. Though since the US is the most powerful country in the world and its media the most pervasive the rest of the world are way more aware of American foibles than the other way around. Hell we had only one NZ stereotype in this thread (the usual suspects being LOTR, sheep and thinking rugby is far more important than it actually is (though the national team is the best team in world sport so I get it coming from a small place-we're ok with being insignificant but goodness help the person who mocks or screws up one of the few reasons we are known around the world).

As for the law itself, well we're giving change a go. Think that rankles with people who want action taken in America but nothing seems to get done as shootings still happen. I'd like to see action taken from all angles, so that every one has their pet reason why they're one side or the other compromised for the greater good. And if we're not happy with it down the track, we can change it. One of the benefits of not having a written constitution. But either way we're in the public eye for once, and I can't help but be impressed with our conduct and swift action regardless of whether or not I agree with every part of the law changes.

You were presented with a crisis. You tackled the crisis. You didn't deflect from the crisis. You made meaningful changes with the best intentions. You displayed your national values. Your country can feel good getting behind such changes that it knew it had to make.

We are all very impressed with your eagerness to be progressive. In a day when so many countries are almost reverting... it's refreshing.

Now try it with 350,000,000 people

The same stupid responses always crop up from some people on here. If it's not "B-b-but the greatest country on earth is tooo biiiig" it's "B-b-but the greatest country on earth is toooo diverseeee".

"B-b-but the greatest on country has tooo many players to choose from to beat Sweden in hockey"

benjs

my2hands said:

I'm not an expert of states gun laws but several states have taken action over the years on gun law reform and some are pretty strict... i don't think that gets discussed enough here because of the focus on national laws ..... much like federally marijuana is considered an illegal substance, many states have been able to pass their own laws and legalize.... the people that dismiss the notion that its much harder to make sweeping law changes for 350,000,000 as opposed to much smaller populations like NZ are being naive...... the proof for this is that states, including a few with more people than NZ but much smaller than the 3rd largest country on the planet, have been able to pass good legislation banning certain types of guns, large capacity magazines, background requirements, training requirements, registration requirements, etc........ Connecticut after Sandy Hook is a good example i believe, and their laws were challenged at the SCOTUS and held up

Shortly after the NZ shooting, Democracy Now did a good interview discussing the Tasmanian shooting in 1996, and the Australian and New Zealand responses at the time (https://www.democracynow.org/2019/3/18/after_deadly_1996_massacre_australia_overhauled)

From that conversation, my understanding is that after the Tasmanian shooting in Australia, the Australasian police force (the body which governs police affairs in both New Zealand and Australia) and lawmakers from both countries got together to propose new gun laws. The laws proposed were accepted almost immediately by Australia, but not by New Zealand. The reason suggested is not the fact that they had a varied set of gun laws per state (which both they and Australia did), nor the outdoor gun culture (which both they and Australia have), nor the vastness of the country and question of buybacks from rural areas. 

Maybe I missed something, and I'm not trying to say this with sass, but what's your point about the ease of reform in the States vs NZ? Seems to me a country whose lobby has apparently remained strong, whose gun laws are every bit as polarizing and fragmented as those in the States, and whose people are apparently quite fond of their firearms, was just able to overcome many of the largest hurdles in gun reform just by frankly deciding what matters. Is that not 'progress' that people in the US should take note of? If I misinterpreted the message you're trying to share, I'm all ears.

jeffbr

my2hands said:

I'm not an expert of states gun laws but several states have taken action over the years on gun law reform and some are pretty strict... i don't think that gets discussed enough here because of the focus on national laws ..... much like federally marijuana is considered an illegal substance, many states have been able to pass their own laws and legalize.... the people that dismiss the notion that its much harder to make sweeping law changes for 350,000,000 as opposed to much smaller populations like NZ are being naive...... the proof for this is that states, including a few with more people than NZ but much smaller than the 3rd largest country on the planet, have been able to pass good legislation banning certain types of guns, large capacity magazines, background requirements, training requirements, registration requirements, etc........ Connecticut after Sandy Hook is a good example i believe, and their laws were challenged at the SCOTUS and held up

Yeah, some states aren't waiting around for the Feds (on any important issue). I know my state has passed numerous gun control laws over the last couple of years and there are more to come. We have a pretty strong gun control lobby here in the state, funded by the many billionaires who live here. So the NRA basically knows they can't compete with dollars and pretty much has given up anything more than grassroots encouragement here. We closed the gun show loopholes years ago, all sales and transfers to through an FFL, even if you're transferring to your cousin. Doesn't matter. Now you must be 21+ to purchase an AR-15. We have magazine capacity laws. Storage laws. Liability laws (crimes committed with firearms that weren't properly secured). We banned bump stocks prior to feds doing so, etc... So the states have the ability to do a lot of things within the bounds of the 2A without waiting for the Feds, since the Feds aren't able to do anything quickly or intelligently. We have legalized euthanasia, gay marriage, weed, etc... as well, without waiting for the Feds. 

my2hands

jeffbr said:

my2hands said:

I'm not an expert of states gun laws but several states have taken action over the years on gun law reform and some are pretty strict... i don't think that gets discussed enough here because of the focus on national laws ..... much like federally marijuana is considered an illegal substance, many states have been able to pass their own laws and legalize.... the people that dismiss the notion that its much harder to make sweeping law changes for 350,000,000 as opposed to much smaller populations like NZ are being naive...... the proof for this is that states, including a few with more people than NZ but much smaller than the 3rd largest country on the planet, have been able to pass good legislation banning certain types of guns, large capacity magazines, background requirements, training requirements, registration requirements, etc........ Connecticut after Sandy Hook is a good example i believe, and their laws were challenged at the SCOTUS and held up

Yeah, some states aren't waiting around for the Feds (on any important issue). I know my state has passed numerous gun control laws over the last couple of years and there are more to come. We have a pretty strong gun control lobby here in the state, funded by the many billionaires who live here. So the NRA basically knows they can't compete with dollars and pretty much has given up anything more than grassroots encouragement here. We closed the gun show loopholes years ago, all sales and transfers to through an FFL, even if you're transferring to your cousin. Doesn't matter. Now you must be 21+ to purchase an AR-15. We have magazine capacity laws. Storage laws. Liability laws (crimes committed with firearms that weren't properly secured). We banned bump stocks prior to feds doing so, etc... So the states have the ability to do a lot of things within the bounds of the 2A without waiting for the Feds, since the Feds aren't able to do anything quickly or intelligently. We have legalized euthanasia, gay marriage, weed, etc... as well, without waiting for the Feds. 

Exactly, many other states have done the same... i think a lot of people dont realize that and think all of the USA is the wild west or Alabama when it comes to these issues.

Why should Washington, or California, or New Jersey have to wait for Alabama and Texas to make what feel are progressive law changes. 

Do people realize America is the 3rd largest country on the planet with a wide array of cultures, diversity, opinions, and ways of life? This shit is fucking complicated, and difficult. I would love to see law changes at the federal level, but the truth is changes are happening and have been happening in states that want the change and where it is politically possible, your state of Washington being a great example. 

my2hands

Spiritual_Chaos said:

my2hands said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

JT167846 said:

The big thing is America, like NZ and the rest of the world, is run by human beings. Who on occasion have a tendency to do things absolutely arseways at times. We're all different so our idiosyncrasies get made fun of by the rest of the world. Though since the US is the most powerful country in the world and its media the most pervasive the rest of the world are way more aware of American foibles than the other way around. Hell we had only one NZ stereotype in this thread (the usual suspects being LOTR, sheep and thinking rugby is far more important than it actually is (though the national team is the best team in world sport so I get it coming from a small place-we're ok with being insignificant but goodness help the person who mocks or screws up one of the few reasons we are known around the world).

As for the law itself, well we're giving change a go. Think that rankles with people who want action taken in America but nothing seems to get done as shootings still happen. I'd like to see action taken from all angles, so that every one has their pet reason why they're one side or the other compromised for the greater good. And if we're not happy with it down the track, we can change it. One of the benefits of not having a written constitution. But either way we're in the public eye for once, and I can't help but be impressed with our conduct and swift action regardless of whether or not I agree with every part of the law changes.

You were presented with a crisis. You tackled the crisis. You didn't deflect from the crisis. You made meaningful changes with the best intentions. You displayed your national values. Your country can feel good getting behind such changes that it knew it had to make.

We are all very impressed with your eagerness to be progressive. In a day when so many countries are almost reverting... it's refreshing.

Now try it with 350,000,000 people

The same stupid responses always crop up from some people on here. If it's not "B-b-but the greatest country on earth is tooo biiiig" it's "B-b-but the greatest country on earth is toooo diverseeee".

"B-b-but the greatest on country has tooo many players to choose from to beat Sweden in hockey"

It's not a stupid response, it's fucking reality. And almost literally nobody on here has seriously said america is the greatest, so just stop.... if anything i think we've seem our non-american friends are the ones with the inflated opinions of themselves and their countries.... but thats another topic

PJ_Soul

It's all about the gun culture. It has nothing to do with the size of the population.

my2hands

PJ_Soul said:

It's all about the gun culture. It has nothing to do with the size of the population.

Again... with 350mm residents the culture varies widely in some cases, which makes it difficult to garner national consensus on almost any issue.... the "gun culture" of Washington vs Texas for example is very different, and therefore they have very different outlooks, and usually laws.... this all goes back to governing such a large diverse population, which makes changes like these difficult, and now almost impossible.... we have large parts of our society that have very different opinions on guns, as well as everything else... this really isnt that complicated in my opinion.... 

Weed is an excellent example of this.... there are large parts of this country that are opposed to legalization, there are large parts that favor it... makes it difficult to make sweeping federal changes under those circumstances, but much easier on a smaller scale in the states.... pretty simple concept really

Thinking America can just snap its fingers and ram through gun legislation is naive.... it's just too big and too diverse..... try running on a gun control platform in Alabama, South Dakota, Kansas, Arkansas, or Texas for example and you will not get elected, period, and your opponent who is pro gun will trounce you.... you think a senator or rep from Wyoming can vote for strict gun legislation and get re-elected? No shot, because that is not what the people of that state want...  now flip that to California, New York, Washington and the exact opposite applies.... and then there are moderates like Jon Tester, you think he would have any chance at re-election if he took an overt anti-2a stance in Montana? He would be toast

PJ_Soul

Literally nobody thinks America can just snap its fingers and ram through gun legislation... because the American gun culture makes that impossible. Not the size of the population. The number of people in the country is irrelevant. It would be the same with only 100M people, or 50M, since the same ratio of those fighting against regulation despite shitloads of evidence that would rationally encourage people from other countries to concede would still exist.

cincybearcat

PJ_Soul said:

Literally nobody thinks America can just snap its finger and ram through gun legislation... because the America gun culture makes that impossible. Not the size of the population. The number of people in the country is irrelevant. It would be the same with only 100M people, or 50M, since the same ratio of those fighting against regulation despite shitloads of evidence that would rationally encourage people from other countries to concede would still exist.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/14/us/politics/gun-control-laws.html

On a a smaller scale - State by state - there are changes. So yes the size as a country makes it more difficult. Tough to convince some rancher in Montana that gun laws are needed...they never see or have to live with the effects.

But I agree the gun culture is not healthy and is a deterrent to smart gun laws. 

Spiritual_Chaos

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

Literally nobody thinks America can just snap its finger and ram through gun legislation... because the America gun culture makes that impossible. Not the size of the population. The number of people in the country is irrelevant. It would be the same with only 100M people, or 50M, since the same ratio of those fighting against regulation despite shitloads of evidence that would rationally encourage people from other countries to concede would still exist.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/14/us/politics/gun-control-laws.html

On a a smaller scale - State by state - there are changes. So yes the size as a country makes it more difficult. Tough to convince some rancher in Montana that gun laws are needed...they never see or have to live with the effects.

But I agree the gun culture is not healthy and is a deterrent to smart gun laws. 

Swedes up north hasn't gone crazy about our (relative sane) gun laws. They can still get a gun, or several, for hunting or shooting on a shooting range or whatever they need.



What's the problem your Montana ranchers?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Well go figure.

I'd always been led to assume that the Swedes wear Speedos on any of their sporting outings. Those guys aren't wearing Speedos? Are you sure they are Swedes?

PJPOWER

Spiritual_Chaos said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

Literally nobody thinks America can just snap its finger and ram through gun legislation... because the America gun culture makes that impossible. Not the size of the population. The number of people in the country is irrelevant. It would be the same with only 100M people, or 50M, since the same ratio of those fighting against regulation despite shitloads of evidence that would rationally encourage people from other countries to concede would still exist.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/14/us/politics/gun-control-laws.html

On a a smaller scale - State by state - there are changes. So yes the size as a country makes it more difficult. Tough to convince some rancher in Montana that gun laws are needed...they never see or have to live with the effects.

But I agree the gun culture is not healthy and is a deterrent to smart gun laws. 

Swedes up north hasn't gone crazy about our (relative sane) gun laws. They can still get a gun, or several, for hunting or shooting on a shooting range or whatever they need.



What's the problem your Montana ranchers?

Glad these hunters have your support!  Wonder what they are hunting with dogs and rifles?  Not birds... Maybe they are trained on moose blood?

mcgruff10

PJPOWER said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

Literally nobody thinks America can just snap its finger and ram through gun legislation... because the America gun culture makes that impossible. Not the size of the population. The number of people in the country is irrelevant. It would be the same with only 100M people, or 50M, since the same ratio of those fighting against regulation despite shitloads of evidence that would rationally encourage people from other countries to concede would still exist.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/14/us/politics/gun-control-laws.html

On a a smaller scale - State by state - there are changes. So yes the size as a country makes it more difficult. Tough to convince some rancher in Montana that gun laws are needed...they never see or have to live with the effects.

But I agree the gun culture is not healthy and is a deterrent to smart gun laws. 

Swedes up north hasn't gone crazy about our (relative sane) gun laws. They can still get a gun, or several, for hunting or shooting on a shooting range or whatever they need.



What's the problem your Montana ranchers?

Glad these hunters have your support!  Wonder what they are hunting with dogs and rifles?  Not birds... Maybe they are trained on moose blood?

Not a lot of orange either, very unsafe.  Heck the one guy in the middle is not wearing orange,  responsible until he is not.  
I'm thinking they are hunting boar.  

Meltdown99

Those are not Swedish hunters.  That's the Swedish army of foot patrol...

JT167846

Our parliament just passed the third reading of the gun ban bill by the way. Comes into effect Friday. Hoping that people complaining about it years down the line will use "but there's only been one mass shooting in NZ with semi automatic weapons" as a point to make because then it will have done its job.