Christchurch Terrorist Attack and NZG Response.

[kiwipatriot69]

To address a new direction from Christchurch regarding terrorism and expanding our military assets to cover quicker response to a potential crisis nationally - shpuld this go to the "off topic section"

Exactly, its a matter of National security, which is why I brought up the topic in the first place.And our benign environment is well and truly over I'd say. I have no problems with extra spying powers being given to our GCSB, police etc to catch would be terrorists. It could have just as easily been a plane hijacking like 911 scenario,or an attack on shipping too, and we have neither an armed response , in plane's or ships in adequate numbers to stop either.

 

[Xthenaki]

Exactly, its a matter of National security, which is why I brought up the topic in the first place.And our benign environment is well and truly over I'd say. I have no problems with extra spying powers being given to our GCSB, police etc to catch would be terrorists. It could have just as easily been a plane hijacking like 911 scenario,or an attack on shipping too, and we have neither an armed response , in plane's or ships in adequate numbers to stop either.

Absolutely - We are undermnanned, underequipped and underresourced. A good start for the South Island would be to expand Burnham - provide a SAS group and some choppers A109's or NH90's. The North Island will require further expansion and funding. We might finally become defense orientated enabling us as a nation to become AWARE and PREPARED

 

[ngatimozart]

This is a thread for posts regarding the 15/3/2019 terrorist attack in Christchurch, NZ and the NZG response to the security threats that it has highlighted.

I have copied the two posts above to start this thread from the NZDF thread because they ask basic questions.

 

[seaspear]

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.
This could be one of the actions to reduce this event happening again ,amongst the weapons handed in was a mortar for Kangaroo culling various amounts of heavy machine guns stories of little old ladies coming off the tram or bus with with a cocked and loaded semi action rifle presenting these for assessment , some of the rarer ones went to the Canberra museum .
I cant comment on quick police organised response times for this that could come also out in a review ,
A problem is also that the event was allowed to be live on social media and what can be done about this
Another question should the monitoring of social media be organised to identify undesirables and charging with hate crimes and even the denial of entry of any person spouting this vile or associating with groups connected to anti social activity

 

[John Fedup]

I was watching a news media program discussing social media platforms and their responses to this event. Apparently over a million copies and/or edited versions of the killer’s live video were removed from various sites the first day. People forward this stuff at rates that overwhelmed the algorithms that detect them. Shutting down the Internet appears to be the only quick solution but saved copies will start reappearing once it is restarted. Even making it a criminal offence to post such content is difficult because getting all nations to agree would be next to impossible.

 

[Rob c]

I think we will have to look at internal security for all minorities as well as the general population. The extremists groups irrespective of their origins will always look for targets to blame for their own failures in life or what ever made them marginalised. They will never look at themselves as the problem but look for a target to blame. It is an unfortunate, if extreme result of the blame culture that has steadily grown in our society over the past decades. In this case I think that if the muslims had not been available they would have blamed and targeted someone else,like the jews , or the chinese. In my view this finding someone to blame for your failings and not looking at you self has become a significant part of our society and the current disaster and atrocity is an extreme manifestation of this. What we need to do in this case when the necessary inquiries are concluded is not to go on the blame game, but rather look at what we can do better and concentrate on that, No one is perfect and while we must work always to improve we will, all of us, have failings and the blame game only makes people more likely to hide these failing, which makes them harder to see and correct.

 

[Rob c]

This is a poem that I got off MS news which a young man recited to a group of muslims in CHCH,
Terrorism has no colour
Terrorism has no ethnicity
Terrorism has no one belief
The only thing all terrorism shares is hatred
Hatred for all those things that make our world beautiful
If a rainbow was only one colour, would you still appreciate it?
If everything smelt the same, would you still go out of your way to smell a rose?
If every sound had the same tone, would you still listen to music?
You see, the thing that makes the world a beautiful place is the thing that makes us human: difference
And this is especially true for the place we call home
Our country is diverse
Diverse in our land, diverse in our culture
And our diversity is what makes our country beautiful
Don't let hatred take over your heart just because things are different
Look after each other, family

I think It fits very well our current situation

 

[King Wally]

I think this event highlights a bigger issue in NZ.. that of "island mentality". Where a threat cannot be seen as real for NZ until it literally hits the island ...and it's too late.

NZ was arguably geographically and culturally close enough to the Port Arthur Massacre and the Aus Gov gun control response and it's effectiveness back in the mid 90's but for some reason the island mentality convinced them that it wasn't a threat to NZ and didn't warrant a response.

My REAL concern here is when you expand this logic into a global war/conflict situation, I think there's a very real likelihood that NZ may leave itself vulnerable and fail to prepare well past the point where reaction is even possible.

A mass shooting is a tragedy, but if NZ doesn't learn larger lessons about global threats then something far worse could eventuate into the future.

 

[ngatimozart]

I think this event highlights a bigger issue in NZ.. that of "island mentality". Where a threat cannot be seen as real for NZ until it literally hits the island ...and it's too late.

NZ was arguably geographically and culturally close enough to the Port Arthur Massacre and the Aus Gov gun control response and it's effectiveness back in the mid 90's but for some reason the island mentality convinced them that it wasn't a threat to NZ and didn't warrant a response.

My REAL concern here is when you expand this logic into a global war/conflict situation, I think there's a very real likelihood that NZ may leave itself vulnerable and fail to prepare well past the point where reaction is even possible.

A mass shooting is a tragedy, but if NZ doesn't learn larger lessons about global threats then something far worse could eventuate into the future.

"island mentality" You are dead right there @King Wally It's a major component of the sea blindness that I talk about. In NZ's case it's not the ostrich sticking it's head in the sand but the moa, and whilst the ostrich has got some brains the moa was a stupid bird; the extreme opposite to the kea in the intelligence stakes. The dominant conversation within the NZ political literati, gliterati, MFAT, and great hairy unwashed is that because of it's perceived big moat, NZ will not be affected by a large war between tier one powers in Asia or elsewhere. They believe that we can still go on our merry way and live in our own little world unaffected by such nasties who live in lands far away. Somehow they think that new consumer electronics, vehicles, oil, fuel etc will still magically appear in shops, petrol stations, malls etc., and that they will still be able to fly to exotic overseas locations for their holidays and big OE.

Better chance of multicoloured unicorns and flying fairies like my granddaughters believe in. I was going to say flying pigs but the there is the F-111

 

[Traveller]

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.
This could be one of the actions to reduce this event happening again ,amongst the weapons handed in was a mortar for Kangaroo culling various amounts of heavy machine guns stories of little old ladies coming off the tram or bus with with a cocked and loaded semi action rifle presenting these for assessment , some of the rarer ones went to the Canberra museum .

Hello seaspear

You might take a look at the link below from the Australian Broadcasting Commission. The link provides researched insight into the popular claims regarding firearm related murders and suicides plummeting. You will note the research cites bona fide organisations and puts some challenge to the extent of social mythology.

A further point I would like to raise is the several hundred thousand centre-fire semi-automatic rifles that were never surrendered. States like Queensland had no long-arm licencing in 1995. Apart from import records there is a dearth of information on where these firearms now rest rest.

Fact check: Have firearm homicides and suicides dropped since Port Arthur as a result of John Howard's reforms?

I posted this as I hope it causes my Kiwi cousins to think on the so-called Australian Model. What happened in New Zealand was a terrible and abhorrent act, but does it justify punishing tens of thousands of law abiding firearms enthusiasts?

 

[King Wally]

Hello seaspear

You might take a look at the link below from the Australian Broadcasting Commission. The link provides researched insight into the popular claims regarding firearm related murders and suicides plummeting. You will note the research cites bona fide organisations and puts some challenge to the extent of social mythology.

A further point I would like to raise is the several hundred thousand centre-fire semi-automatic rifles that were never surrendered. States like Queensland had no long-arm licencing in 1995. Apart from import records there is a dearth of information on where these firearms now rest rest.

Fact check: Have firearm homicides and suicides dropped since Port Arthur as a result of John Howard's reforms?

I posted this as I hope it causes my Kiwi cousins to think on the so-called Australian Model. What happened in New Zealand was a terrible and abhorrent act, but does it justify punishing tens of thousands of law abiding firearms enthusiasts?

The sad reality of humanity is that 1 in every ~1,000,000 people will be likely to commit horrific acts … sadly yes everyone has to suffer the price which in this instance is the heavy bans or restrictions to firearms sales and ownership. I was an enthusiastic shooter myself prior to Port Arthur but over time came to realise I and everyone else have a small price to pay to ensure the safety of my children and in time their own. Nothing stops me occasionally going down to my local shooting range, paying a small fee and enjoying a few shots on the range but at least now I know that 1,000,000th person has a slightly harder time going on a rampage the day their brain bursts in a frenzy.

 

[Rob c]

I posted this as I hope it causes my Kiwi cousins to think on the so-called Australian Model. What happened in New Zealand was a terrible and abhorrent act, but does it justify punishing tens of thousands of law abiding firearms enthusiasts?

It is a fact of life that restrictions must be placed on a large number of activities due to the actions of a small minority and those restrictions need to be reviewed from time to time for the greater good of the majority of the population. Hence for instance we have the road rules. In the case of the use of firearm, because of the lethal ability the limits must be set at a level at which keeps the general public reasonably safe from the misuse of weapons and this is necessary due to the lethal ability of certain weapons. I am sure that some enthusiasts would love to be able fire RPG's at targets and other things if allowed. but would it be appropriate to have RPG's in the community, I think not, So it is evident that we need to set the bar at a level that provides us with a reasonably safe community.
I have had a reasonable exposure to firearms over my life as I was in the RNZAF for 20 years and fired off thousands of rounds through rifles, semi autos machine guns, sub machine guns and pistols and would admit to enjoying it immensely and I in the past went shooting in the wonderful NZ bush. I still go out on my sons farm with a rifle to help keep the the goats and pigs under control, but have always used a bolt action rifle which helps to be accurate. I do not see the need for the type of weapon that was used in CH CH and will not mourn its passing from the public domain.
In answer to your question regarding justification of restrictions on firearms for enthusiasts, my answer is 50 lives justifies any restrictions by 50 times and that no enthusiasts hobby or vocation is worth 50 lives, irrespective of how genuine that enthusiasts motives are. In my view any enthusiast who considers that what he does is more important than 50 lives is taking a rather selfish approach and that is my very mildest description of it.

 

[Xthenaki]

It is a fact of life that restrictions must be placed on a large number of activities due to the actions of a small minority and those restrictions need to be reviewed from time to time for the greater good of the majority of the population. Hence for instance we have the road rules. In the case of the use of firearm, because of the lethal ability the limits must be set at a level at which keeps the general public reasonably safe from the misuse of weapons and this is necessary due to the lethal ability of certain weapons. I am sure that some enthusiasts would love to be able fire RPG's at targets and other things if allowed. but would it be appropriate to have RPG's in the community, I think not, So it is evident that we need to set the bar at a level that provides us with a reasonably safe community.
I have had a reasonable exposure to firearms over my life as I was in the RNZAF for 20 years and fired off thousands of rounds through rifles, semi autos machine guns, sub machine guns and pistols and would admit to enjoying it immensely and I in the past went shooting in the wonderful NZ bush. I still go out on my sons farm with a rifle to help keep the the goats and pigs under control, but have always used a bolt action rifle which helps to be accurate. I do not see the need for the type of weapon that was used in CH CH and will not mourn its passing from the public domain.
In answer to your question regarding justification of restrictions on firearms for enthusiasts, my answer is 50 lives justifies any restrictions by 50 times and that no enthusiasts hobby or vocation is worth 50 lives, irrespective of how genuine that enthusiasts motives are. In my view any enthusiast who considers that what he does is more important than 50 lives is taking a rather selfish approach and that is my very mildest description of it.

I agree - I do accept a bolt action rifle with a magazine used for sporting or Rifle club shooting. It will be an impossible task to reign in all the automatic weapons at large within our communities but a start is a positive move. Any gun is a distinct threat in the wrong hands and obviously looking at individuals is the first place to start.

 

[Todjaeger]

I do have a few reservations about announcements by gov't regarding restricting Kiwi firearms ownership.

As an outsider looking in, it seems to me as though the gov't is at least partially treating the attacks in Christchurch as what are referred to in the US as "active shooter" incidents. It concerns me that this treatment is happening in what I would consider to be so soon after the incidents, when it is possible that the attacks were really intended as terror attacks using firearms as the weapons.

The difference between the two might be meaningless to some, but I fear that complacency could set in with the NZ gov't and populace if the attacks are labeled the work of an active shooter and more comprehensive gun controls the solution.

OTOH if the intent was to cause terror, more gun controls would be unlikely to either stop a future incident or detect any of the precursor activities to a future attack.

Now if the security and LE organizations within NZ already know enough about the person to categorize him as "just" an active shooter, that would be one thing. Given what has been publicly released about his beliefs and/or ties to white supremacy, and how that category of beliefs has morphed and become in some cases less nationalistic and more multi-national, I have concerns that he might have interacted with others of similar beliefs who encouraged beliefs and behaviors which ultimately led to the incidents in Christchurch.

 

[King Wally]

OTOH if the intent was to cause terror, more gun controls would be unlikely to either stop a future incident or detect any of the precursor activities to a future attack.

Gun control isn't always about creating zero threat, it's about minimising damage windows.

For example Australia has had two Islamic terrorist attacks in recent years when the terrorist has used firearms as their primary weapon and in both instances the attacker only managed to kill one person each before being neutralised and or civilians escaped. Largely due to the fact the best firearms they could get were poor quality black market items with low rates of fire and poor acuracy (A revolver and sawn off shot gun in these two cases).

Tighter gun controls wont stop future incidents but they may convert them from 50 deaths to 1 death.

 

[seaspear]

During the gun buy back scheme I was in a position to see first hand the types of weapons handed in for destruction, there were ,many weapons that should not have been in private hands these dated back to all of the wars of the last century Australia was involved in
I dont believe there is a legal need for citizens to own automatic weapons ,gas guns ,grenades,bazookas or mortars in working order with ammunition
My raising of the gun buy back scheme was not to claim this as a cure for all of society problems ,you wont stop suicide simply by taking one means of this away,there is going to be armed robberies because some weapons can be smuggled in or stolen by those people,

 

[Todjaeger]

Gun control isn't always about creating zero threat, it's about minimising damage windows.

For example Australia has had two Islamic terrorist attacks in recent years when the terrorist has used firearms as their primary weapon and in both instances the attacker only managed to kill one person each before being neutralised and or civilians escaped. Largely due to the fact the best firearms they could get were poor quality black market items with low rates of fire and poor acuracy (A revolver and sawn off shot gun in these two cases).

Tighter gun controls wont stop future incidents but they may convert them from 50 deaths to 1 death.

What I am most concerned about is the potential focus on gun control as a solution, and away from establishing and maintaining awareness of individuals and/or groups who would be inclined to engage in terror and/or active shooter incidents.

Being able to reduce the availability of firearms certainly has the potential to reduce the impact of a future event, provided that the efforts to prevent a future incident do not stop at gun control and include efforts to identify potential threats before future planned attacks reach certain stages. The unfortunate reality though is that there have been a number of successful terror incidents in the western world where firearms either were not used, or had a minimal role in the success of the attack, and scores or more of people were killed, with many more injured. It is these cases were greater awareness of the attacker might have enabled law enforcement and/or security personnel to act earlier to either prevent or minimize the success of the attack.

 

[seaspear]

Would you agree that if individuals or groups who have been monitored as mentally ill or have espoused dangerous or illegal anti social rhetoric should be denied access to firearms ?
As a society we are developing technologies of monitoring that are slowly mirroring George Orwell's 1984 in its abilities

 

[King Wally]

What I am most concerned about is the potential focus on gun control as a solution, and away from establishing and maintaining awareness of individuals and/or groups who would be inclined to engage in terror and/or active shooter incidents.

Being able to reduce the availability of firearms certainly has the potential to reduce the impact of a future event, provided that the efforts to prevent a future incident do not stop at gun control and include efforts to identify potential threats before future planned attacks reach certain stages. The unfortunate reality though is that there have been a number of successful terror incidents in the western world where firearms either were not used, or had a minimal role in the success of the attack, and scores or more of people were killed, with many more injured. It is these cases were greater awareness of the attacker might have enabled law enforcement and/or security personnel to act earlier to either prevent or minimize the success of the attack.

Thanks for the expanded thoughts, I totally agree. It reminds me of Airline regulation following September 11.

Yes you need to do it BUT it can't be your end point. You must expand your threat management across the spectrum including identification and monitoring of people of interest.

Gun regulation still must happen, but your right if you squeeze it tight vile people will seek other options (car jacking a petrol tanker and driving it into a Mosque for example could generate 50+ deaths as well. So? ….regulating self locking doors on Trucks in motion in traffic may be an idea, tighter background checks at truck rental points? Many things need to be debated and considered etc).

 

[Rob c]

What I am most concerned about is the potential focus on gun control as a solution, and away from establishing and maintaining awareness of individuals and/or groups who would be inclined to engage in terror and/or active shooter incidents.

Being able to reduce the availability of firearms certainly has the potential to reduce the impact of a future event, provided that the efforts to prevent a future incident do not stop at gun control and include efforts to identify potential threats before future planned attacks reach certain stages. The unfortunate reality though is that there have been a number of successful terror incidents in the western world where firearms either were not used, or had a minimal role in the success of the attack, and scores or more of people were killed, with many more injured. It is these cases were greater awareness of the attacker might have enabled law enforcement and/or security personnel to act earlier to either prevent or minimize the success of the attack.

You are very right in this and I also believe that there is no simple solution. It is highly unlikely we can eliminate terrorism in the near future as not only do we have to guard against terrorist attacks and minimise the harm they can do, we also need to address the basic causes that lead to terrorism. Why do people need to become terrorists is a question which probably has a huge number of individual answers. The problem is also compounded in that we cannot remove all the popular weapons of choice as has been shown in europe with the use of the bomb and the motor vehicle to cause maximum casualties, the best we can achieve is a reduction in harm at this stage. It is also evident that we must give our intelligent services greater backing and more tools to achieve the best results. but we must not fool ourselves that we will ever be totally on top of the problem. I am also in the teaching of life skills in school group and these should include mental skills to give a more positive outlook on life.