MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

The Christchurch Mosque Massacre and Gun Laws

Filed under: General,Law & Courts — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 12:28 pm Sun 17th March 2019

Some comment is deserved following the horrific Christchurch attack last Friday. Our deep sorrow and sympathy go out to those injured, the families of those killed and all others traumatized in ripple effect.

Among the earliest statements made by Prime Minister Ardern were promises that gun laws will change, and that ‘now is the time for change’, i.e. this tragedy can be exploited to forward her political aims. Her proclamation seemed improper also because it’s not the Prime Minister who changes laws, it’s our parliament (and ultimately the English monarchy). Her definitive pronouncement about law change before any parliamentary process has taken place suggests that she sees herself as making our laws. Is power and international attention going to the Prime Minister’s head?

Firearms control is an easy target. The US constitution was based in part on the principle that citizens should be armed sufficiently to keep the government and its agents in line, to prevent a government from becoming another monarchy or dictatorship. In New Zealand there is no constitution and people’s complacency about the ever-increasing power of the state and erosion of individual rights seems to be based on a naive faith in the fairness and restraint of their government. Among many other examples, the Prime Minister’s unilateral proclamation about gun laws shows that faith to be misguided.

It may be that gun laws deserve to change. Decades ago the issuing of gun licences came to be based on positive reports from significant others. If a man applies for a gun licence or renewal, police will interview his wife, girlfriend or female associate , asking searching questions to uncover any indication of patriarchal power and control, domestic violence or female criticism of the man’s temperament, attitudes, circle of friends etc. Essentially, the power to grant gun licences for men was placed in the hands of women in their lives. We understand that it’s mostly men who apply for gun licences and we don’t know any women who have gone through the process. We don’t know if the female applicant’s husband or boyfriend is given a similar power to enable or prevent women from having a licence. We suspect this would be seen as politically incorrect.

The assumption that a wife or girlfriend’s information will be honest and reliable is unsafe. On the one hand, if the man is actually dangerous then his female companion may be afraid to tell the truth or may lie due to identifying with the man’s antisocial group, activities and beliefs. On the other hand a woman may use the opportunity to frustrate the man’s firearms ambition out of a desire to wield power over him or to punish him for displeasing her in some way. The woman may have an anxious disposition and/or be philosophically against firearms, leading her to express reservations about her husband’s ownership of firearms even though there is no good reason to predict he would ever behave unsafely with them. As is the case in the Family Court, a woman’s claim to feel subjectively frightened of a man even when he has never done anything to be frightened of is more than enough to deprive the man of many human rights.

In the case of the Christchurch mosque shooter Brenton Tarrant the firearms licencing process has been proven inadequate. We would prefer removal of feminist control over men’s rights to own firearms, with instead more emphasis placed on a male’s history, employment and presentation, perhaps including psychological testing to be considered alongside other information.

The Christchurch mosque shooting resulted in huge censorship of internet forums such that any opinions deviating from the ‘we are all one people’ stance were quickly removed. Any hint of criticism of Islam or reference to the huge number of atrocities committed by Islamic extremists including the many Muslims who traveled from around the world to join ISIS, was removed. Our Prime Minister was even photographed wearing Muslim-type head covering. There was frequent condemnation of ‘hate speech’, religious intolerance, right-wing extremism and ‘racism’. Quite a few references were made to Stefan Molyneaux and Lauren Southern by people claiming these speakers promoted racism, uttered hate speech and encouraged violence such as Tarrant’s whereas in fact they had never done so. The irony was of course that it would be difficult to match the Quran and other holy books on religious intolerance , hate speech and promotion of heinous violence against others (non-Muslims), which militant Islamic groups obey but luckily most NZ Muslims seem not to put into practice.

The relevance of this for the men’s movement is that our views are now likely to be classed as hate speech and right-wing extremism even though that’s untrue for all but a tiny number of contributors through the years. We can now expect more surveillance of this and other blogs related to men’s issues and we may experience further erosion of our civil rights including free speech, privacy and fair consideration for gun licences. For that alongside the many other reasons we blame and condemn Brenton Tarrant.


  1. You’re saying that we do not have a constitution?

    The US is a federation and their republic is notably based on a constitution as a founding document that has occasionally been amended and frequently interpreted by lengthy legal challenges.

    New Zealand by comparison following the treaty has a Constitution Act and a collection of other acts that form our consitution and are generally modified ‘now’ by the Law Commission through parliament with infrequent input from the courts.

    These are two different processes, ours operating under a constitutional monarchy.

    I was equally disturbed that the Attorney-General made a similar statement.

    Your point is valid, that ‘our constitution’ and changes to it are being dictated by a select few.

    This is a step short of dictatorship rather than the preservation of democracy.

    Comment by Downunder — Sun 17th March 2019 @ 2:50 pm

  2. Classed as intolerance, hate speech and racism.

    I had that card pulled on me yesterday, on another site, for having a point of view and worse with considerable determination to shut down debate through some imagined elite authority.

    I think our political process is probably at the worst point I’ve seen in my life time and at its most dysfunctional and unstable point.

    Comment by Downunder — Sun 17th March 2019 @ 3:02 pm

  3. I can see that a lot of the information you spout downunder streams from a bed of imbecility too deep, dense and toxic for anyone to venture in to save you or for you to even wade out far enough to comprehend that your idiocy might me congenital and thus uncurable.
    You may not know this but the 49 people that have passed away are in a better place and muslims will not mourn them. They will be celebrated.
    You may be too ignorant to know that the basis of your entire freedom and even democratic processus of life that you are so enamoured with origniates from the muslim world.
    The many amazing scientific and fascinatic progress and development you might be so proud of including (sciences, astrology, astronomy, herbology, writings, maths….medicine…) all originate from the muslim world.
    As a bluff of history, it is shocking you do not seem to know that the fabled “golden age” that brought back Europe to life came from the Muslim invasion into Europe…
    You might find if I continue that truly you owe way too much to the muslim world to be able to repay it in another 300000 lifetimes.
    I thought you smarter but your venom is showing and it is worse than vitriol… your hate for things you do not understand sustain you in your old age… but you got no teeth left to bite with.

    ISlam is the religion of peace and a continuation of the Abrahamic religions starting with Judaism, followed by Christianity and ending with Islam as Abraham’s true religion…

    Three distincts phases of three distincts stages to be united in one people, on efaith and one God.

    It’s kinda funy that you do not know this even that none these laws you taut as right or wrong or strong or weak are all written under God and – Under the Queen.But without the Under GoD, none of it could stand…

    If you knew what islam was about and if you knew how strongly the muslims are urged to educate themselves, to research, to learn, to pray and worship and the two best forms of worship being huumanitarian and charitable and to fight injustice, you would know that all you hear or read in teh media about Islam is false…

    ISlam is the scape goat to all wars because there are two things it will always fight; “Unjustice and usury” Even basic hygiene was gifted to you by the muslims… You probably stilll wipe your ass with paper instead of using water to cleanse your self…. Howr will we have a clean world if you use trees to wipe you ass and still walk around with shit clinging to your ass? And you wanna protect nature? And you are recycling?

    Think—The Quran is the only book that addresses your mind and heart and reasons with you… You call it violent because you do not understand it and yet it has all the answers to any ailment this world has.

    It is a book of solution, of remembrance and of secrets and there is nothing left out.

    In your arrogance and conceitedness, you are trying to protect the gun laws but all you have done is simply state worldwide how ignorant you are about what you talk off. Guns kill.

    I see a russian, an american and a chinese talk, Russin says we got teh best weapon system. Chinese says we do. Americans say our budgetis 700 billions this year.

    The rest of the world is getting decimated… But we are proud because we have an industry that can kill millions of people.And we want to keep our right to “defend” which essentially is the same right which make that 7oo billions dollars industry rakes in about 7 trillions per year manufacturing war..

    ISlam is the first religion to emancipate women.
    The first religion to give rights to women and children and to affirm, declare and protect them.
    The first religion to decree that the care and upkeep of orphans was a sacred duty and that charity was a requirement towards the poor and the weak.
    The first religion to raise education (learning, knowledge, interrogation of the natural phenomenon, the sciences…) as paramount.
    The first and only religion where the rights of inheritance have been properly and justly assigned, succession and the weatlh of jurisprudence that came from it still makes the modern world pale when it comes to justice, fairness, transparence, consultation, tolerance and many other things, i am too lazy to name…
    Beleive you me, you are seriously off your chops on this one and I am shocked that you do not know this.

    But I must thank you for exposing the media lies you have been greedily feeding yourself with.
    There is nothing but peace in Islam…but i have to admit, even some of the clerical islam have no idea what their own religion is about. Adn they do contribute as much as the media in feeding the world what rocks their own boats….

    Comment by JustCurious — Sun 17th March 2019 @ 11:06 pm

  4. strange that on the same day, in egypt, 300 people died in a mosque during the friday prayers too… but that got little media attention.
    Whilst in NZ it appears some real changes might be happening finally for those who matter really

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 7:43 am

  5. I can see that a lot of the information you spout downunder streams from a bed of imbecility too deep, dense and toxic for anyone to venture in to save you or for you to even wade out far enough to comprehend that your idiocy might me congenital and thus uncurable.


    I understand the country is a little stressed at the moment and you appear to need a punching bag.

    If there is any information that is factually or historicaly incorrect, THAT I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR, I will happily amend that.

    There may be some confusion as to who authored the post and the author is not me.

    Can I suggest that you point out in the comments what it is you’re challenging as incorrect.

    Otherwise thank you for point of view and have a nice day.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 8:47 am

  6. @4 I haven’t seen any news on the event you are referring to. Possibly an incident in 2017.

    Here’s a link to a Wikipedia page under construction referencing media reports in respect of the Christchurch events.

    Comment by Downunder — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 9:14 am

  7. Downunder, I seriously and ashamedly apologize.
    I was shocked and disappointed at what I had read from someone I thought was you.

    Even though I disagree with you often, I did not think you would stoop low enough to shoot people armless, on their knees and grieving by spouting such racist and anti-islam propaganda in the same post that apparently expresses sorrow as per original poster hypocritical words such as:

    “Our deep sorrow and sympathy go out to those injured, the families of those killed and all others traumatized in ripple effect.”

    This sneaky comment is what set me off:
    “…The irony was of course that it would be difficult to match the Quran and other holy books on religious intolerance , hate speech and promotion of heinous violence against others (non-Muslims),…”

    So as he is expressing hypocritical sorrow, his real ambit was to push his own agenda forth which simply was aimed at marring such a beautiful religion with disease of his own mind.

    I had thought you had authored the post but it turns out to be MOMA…

    I cannot apologize enough and I am happy to redress the post to aim directly at MoMA.
    My best regards…

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 9:25 am

  8. @5, you are right, that was in 2017… popped up this morning and the date posted was 3 days ago and I assumed it had happened at the same time and that as always, it did not make the news. I should have checked as I am now guilty of the same shit I am blaming MoMA for… allowing the media to taint my vision without fact checking.

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 9:36 am

  9. I’m a bit concerned that this thread is destined to shoot off on all kinds of tangents.
    50 innocent people were gunned down for no good reason so I think the need to make it clear that no one in NZ supports such terrorism is the key message.

    I agree that Islam has some fundamental problems, such as it’s inherent lack of compassion for other people. (At least 2 Jihadists were radicalised in Al Noor mosque). Which leads to a back lash etc. However now is not the time to focus too much on that, because right now the important thing is that terrorism is never OK.
    Also this monster wanted people to be at each other’s throats. That was his stated motivation. The best response is to show we can have civil arguments of ALL ideas in this country, thanks to the Age of Enlightenment.

    I think the OP was correct, that the back lash this will release could well lead to “hate speech” laws and other very harmful authoritarian responses. Something like “hate speech” laws are a slippery slope with no end. Us men will be the targets of such authoritarian responses and so we should speak against it in a civil way.

    Comment by Vman — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 3:36 pm


    It is an extraordinary event and other countries appear to be taking that view with an international investigation.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 5:18 pm



    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 7:13 pm

  12. JustCurious: We stand by our statements including the expression of genuine sorrow for the victims at all levels. We have donated to the Givealittle fund for the immediate victims and their families and we encourage others likewise. From our perspective this is a crime of horrendous magnitude that has damaged the lives of many innocent people, and we mourn the deaths and suffering. If as you say Muslims won’t mourn, that’s up to them.

    We accept that the timing of our reference to Islamic terrorism and critical comment about the Quran and other holy books may be seen as insensitive. We believe that honestly facing up to these matters would assist in reducing the risk of escalating war and future atrocities.

    We reject your ad hominem attacks that not only add nothing to your argument but prove our point regarding Islamic intolerance and indeed violence towards anyone who might disagree with their beliefs.

    Meanwhile, factions of our government are exploiting this tragedy perpetrated by a single individual to make knee-jerk law changes in line with their prior bias, changes that will mainly reduce the freedoms of men. Knee-jerk, opportunistic law changes tend to be ill-considered with unintended bad consequences. For example, reducing licenced gun ownership will increase the relative power of the criminals and extremists whose gun ownership won’t be much bothered by the law. Consideration and discussion about this has suddenly become urgent.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 7:30 pm

  13. And here’s an incredible example of the loving, humane side of Islam that inspires most followers.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 7:44 pm


    Comment by Downunder — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 8:14 pm

  15. To both of you MoMA and Downunder, my apologies….
    I did run hot… But it is not your fault…
    This is perhaps not the right forum…
    What is of most concern is that every opportunity is good to further one’s own agenda.
    In both the articles you linked to, it is easy to see the purpose behind the article and the agenda clearly spelt out.
    I found more misinformation than fact of any kind (specially the one linked to by Downunder).
    The Saudi is a terrorrist regime but that has nothing to do with islam.
    So is the USA, Britain, France and mainly Israel but Islam is their scape goat.
    They are all waging wars in other’s homes and countries but complain of the overflow in their own countries.
    Or for the french to complain about african immigrants when these africans are still dealing with exploitation, imperialism and neo colonialism.
    And they are taking skiffs accross the atlantic to find better anchorage.
    It’s kind of a roundabout way of creating ammunition for one’s own weapons.
    And using religion for political and economic interests.
    And once again the cycle continues…
    People remain divided, polarized and focused on details when the essential which needs to be preserved is the first casualty of this war.
    And that is our humanity.
    I accept many of the things you say and I know your point is valid re gun laws or any law (as far as trigger gun happy changes.)
    What you seem to have forgotten is the cause of this horrible act… It is not the gun laws that need changing, it is better laws for the family. removing sexists laws. stopping the double standard. reducing police powers… supporting father child relationships…

    Currently fathers are kicked out of the homes and replaced by violent video games and social medias.
    There is more violence in the children’s homes than anywhere else on this earth and instead of addressing the cause of these children’s lost, grief and anxiety resulting in these actsof untold violence; we are once again entering a polemic over gun laws or personal freedoms and liberties

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 8:44 pm

  16. Whilst it is a bit early to comment on this subject when emotions are raw I will however note that we now risk a situation where empathy could well drive policy. In my post I explain it in detail with a link to Johnathan Haights blog on the subject. Empathy has no place in deciding policy without dire consequences.

    Comment by triassic — Mon 18th March 2019 @ 8:53 pm

  17. @triassic couldn’t help making that link myself. That will be interesting reading.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 19th March 2019 @ 8:55 am

  18. @ Downunder -unfortunately I confused Johnathan Haight with Paul Bloom chatting on Sam Harris podcast.
    Muslims in NZ are, by far, moderate which makes this tradgety so shocking. The greatest weakness in the extreme left and right is their intense hate that blinds their ability to reason. The left use the facard of compassion and the right use nationalism. Both are shams.

    Comment by triassic — Tue 19th March 2019 @ 11:05 am

  19. I knew what you were referring to. I’ve been back for another listen of the podcast.

    Comment by Downunder — Tue 19th March 2019 @ 11:31 am

  20. 16- Triassic, I guess that is what Moma was saying…
    And I agree, well reasonned and all inclusive laws are a must…
    not knee jerk reactions with unforeseen or ill considered consequences…

    Comment by JustCurious — Tue 19th March 2019 @ 5:38 pm

  21. #BREAKING A businesswoman attempted to import 20 military-style semi-automatic guns and 100 magazines of ammunition into New Zealand before a judge was required to stop the arms deal, a newly released court decision reveals.

    What was this WOMAN going to kill?

    Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 23rd March 2019 @ 7:06 pm


    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 25th March 2019 @ 5:52 pm

  23. The US has its own distinctive set of issues.

    Two of their biggest are the their vets and their relationship with the Muslim community.

    Making a film about that intersection may be relevant to the US but I don’t see that it holds much relevance for us in New Zealand.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 25th March 2019 @ 6:42 pm

  24. @ 23
    just remember that what happens in America always happens in NZ.
    Every trend I come accross from America, I find here within two years.
    Whether it is something in fashion which usually is overnight
    or a financial catastrophy which takes slightly longer.
    WE are in a global world… and the butterfly wing beats in the pacific can create storms on the shores of our coastlines.

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 25th March 2019 @ 7:23 pm

  25. Three hundred thousand troops were stationed abroad and they were bringing more body bags home from suicide that conflict casualties.

    There vet suicide rate went over 20 per day.

    These are not trends I would expect from within our armed forces.

    But I do understand their suicide rate has increased due to domestic issues like separation.

    Whether we’re making films about Muslim soldiers in New Zealand in two years … probably not but it is possible.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Mon 25th March 2019 @ 7:37 pm

  26. @25 Mr Myers
    It’s nice to have all the “facts” but to miss the point these same men missed,
    They are the Crusaders of old brought back to fight yet another unjust war.

    They got weapons and guns in a land where they have stones only, a #8 wire attitude and their own bodies as ammunition against the imperialists.

    Hidden from a distance these americans shoot to kill and yet still lulled by their own humanity fail to see how the enemy willingly will surrender his own life to embrace that of these soldiers.

    But the real point is this man in the documentary was filled with hate and he went to the mosk to do as this 28 year old did here, But knowledge and mercy came his way and out of it he found peace and understanding.

    Maybe that’s not the same script for NZ… one thing is sure though, we all beed the same

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 25th March 2019 @ 7:58 pm

  27. The real point as you put it was the that man was stripped of his identity and given a facade which suited the crusades as you put it.

    Rather than find himself again he’s traded identities with the facade of his former employer enemy.

    He has been reduced from a Freeman to a dependent of organized religion.

    The relevant comparison in New Zealand is the bad man,the misogynistic despotic demonic mansplaining dead beat patriarchal rapist who suppresses the freedom of women and must be brought down.

    It’s a collective war on the male identity that’s responded to in a similar way. Join us, become a white knight enabler. Let the others walk away, or resist, if they cause trouble destroy them.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 26th March 2019 @ 7:29 am

  28. Employer is not meant to be in that previous comment.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 26th March 2019 @ 7:32 am

  29. @28-I cannot quite grasp the comparison.

    True, it can be still a part of a marine’s journey to reclaim one’s own identity.

    It could also be that the entirety of his own personal crusade
    was to confront him with his true identity as the true enemy of injustice.

    And which he has now discovered and embraced?

    Comment by JustCurious — Tue 26th March 2019 @ 12:57 pm

  30. “Cannot grasp the comparison.”

    I’m not surprised. As a result of this incident your first rant read like the dialogue of a religious madman and now you’ve gone looking for anything that defends Islam.

    You’ve lost your objectivity completely, grasping at situations from other countries and perhaps trying to defend the political direaction of the prime minister.

    If you look at the development of identity and how consolidated that is in formative years and how difficult that can be to deal with in later life its not a matter of some true mysterious identity.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Tue 26th March 2019 @ 1:46 pm

  31. Mr Myers: @30
    It’s just a documentary of one American soldier’s encounter with faith
    and you are using science/psychology to deny him that faith.
    Failing that you propose it can not happen in NZ due to different dynamics.
    You might be right.
    Your vision is indeed as sharp as a scalpel.
    But your acumen or your grasp even makes the lone ant feel pity.

    The point the rant was meant to deliver was
    “great, the muslims are safe in NZ.”
    “Now how about the sexist laws that bring violence on our men and our kids?”
    Shine the light on the many kids hooked to violent video games.
    Especially those without positive male role models.

    And it’s not going to be with more after school center or
    mentoring programs that we are going to fix that problem in NZ society.

    Comment by JustCurious — Tue 26th March 2019 @ 6:22 pm

  32. But your acumen or your grasp even makes the lone ant feel pity.

    You don’t feel pity. You pity another person because of your feelings about then.

    If you want to project your feelings throught the image of a lone ant, that’s up to you.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Wed 27th March 2019 @ 4:50 am

  33. I must say I am very worried that society , coupled with technology is creating a pressure pot for people, fragility not resilience, insular not inclusion, pretence not honesty, empathy not love, ignorance not discipline, inclusion not freedom, join the shiney faces or be alone forever?

    Comment by mama — Wed 27th March 2019 @ 10:49 am

  34. @33 — BEAUTIFUL
    sums up a thousand books

    @32— ~From your perspective~
    Psychology or science is NOW religion;
    Everything is explained in your holy book (what DSM5?)
    all other faith thus are blasphemy…
    … religious crimes against reason.

    Comment by JustCurious — Wed 27th March 2019 @ 12:21 pm

  35. There is a suggestion in this thread that religion is based on faith alone, and cannot be dissected logically.

    Many well known scientists have been dedicated to some form of organized religion and that’s not surprising.

    Paul’s encounter with the Corinthians in the formative years of Christianity gave him cause to confront this issue.

    At the same time an unwarranted defense of Islam beyond condemnation of the mosque attack in Christchurch is likely to give rise to a casualty rate well above the 100 or so killed and injured in New Zealand.

    That’s a dangerous game to play.

    Comment by Boonie — Wed 27th March 2019 @ 2:59 pm

  36. I believe the most dangerous thing to emerge from the tragedy in Christchurch is our own government.

    Within a day you have both the PM and NZ attorney general announcing “they” would be changing NZ law and banning firearms ownership.
    Both individuals obviously flouting any due process or consideration of NZ lawmaking.
    All in the name of “keeping the public safe” … oh and coincidentally ramming thru a authoritarian wet-dream grab-bag of draconian survelliance legislation that isn’t being listed or discussed in any detail aside from the pall of “saftey”.

    On the back of that you have this tyrannical rush to censor anything around the tragedy, video, documents,with the instant insertion of quite draconian penalties for non-compliance.

    I have no personal desire to view the video footage, I do find it odd the NZ gov went into dalek mode over the document the butcher left behind – it stated what his goals were and govt so far has bought straight into it.

    We are living in some darkening times my countryfolk.

    Comment by Hillbilly — Thu 28th March 2019 @ 8:33 am

  37. And we see our police take another opportunity, soon after the last one just a few weeks ago, to carry guns routinely rather than the establised custom of carrying guns in their cars but not displayed on their person. The justification is that it’s necessary to ensure safety against copycat crimes after the Brendon Tarrant massacre. Necessity to ensure safety for the community will always be pertinent, can be used and clearly is going to be used to justify police displaying guns most or all of the time. And you can be sure they will be the semi-automatic, automatic and military type weapons now disallowed for everyone else. What we have seen in other countries is that having overtly armed police patrolling the streets actually increases risk over time as criminals increasingly arm themselves to match the threat and as the model of lethal gun violence to control others becomes normalized.

    Actually, we don’t begrudge police wanting to feel protected and we don’t mind routine and overt guns for police in certain key risk situations such as airports. However, we are uncomfortable with what we see as creeping authoritarianism and back-door law and practice changes that increase the power of the state in intimidating the public and restricting people’s liberties, speech and thought. Men are especially vulnerable in this regard as almost any criticism of feminism or challenging the fashionable practice of male-denigration gets treated as hate speech.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Thu 28th March 2019 @ 11:54 am

  38. The religion of peace sees its peaceful, tolerant, enlightened ways adopted as law by Brunei:

    Three of the 2002 Bali nightclub bombers, pawns in the atrocity, were executed by the Indonesian state for murdering 202 mainly young westerners including 88 Australians and 28 Britons. The Muslim controlled Indonesian media called them ‘heroes’. Higher up people in the massacre were treated lightly by the Indonesian Muslim state; for example Abu Bakar Bashir, believed to be the instigator of this attack and others, was sentenced to 4 years in prison and served much less than that. The bodies of the three executed front-line attackers were welcomed back by large numbers of their Muslim communities as heroes and martyrs. The family of one of the bombers handed out pamphlets urging more such bombings:

    None of this in any way justifies Tarrant’s horrific murders or the distorted ideology inspiring them. but it’s important not to allow his wickedness see us ignore recent history or to live in some starry-eyed denial. Our Prime Minister has allowed her emotions to override clear thinking and leadership over this issue. That has been reflected in knee-jerk announcements and law changes, a great deal of shallow propaganda and her acceptance and indeed encouragement of out-of-control censorship of opinion and truth. Men seem better able to maintain a broader, rational perspective that can condemn Tarrant’s hideous evil while not forgetting existing real problems for non-Muslim countries around some Muslim beliefs, practice and integration. Men seem better able to maintain rational dialogue and debate in emotionally-charged situations, and this is also evident in the field of gender issues with the men’s movement providing a great deal of careful, honest consideration of the issues and facts while the feminist side is dominated by emotive outbursts, self-serving thinking, narrow consideration, hypocrisy, half-truths and blatant falsehood. It’s important that men step up and speak up about all social issues with the bravery that is their inheritance. Shutting down rational honesty and debate will only drive matters underground and increase the risk of violence from those who are isolated from wider influence.

    Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 29th March 2019 @ 10:32 am

  39. When something happens that politicians have little or no control over they start behaving like insane animals.

    Little said he was fast-tracking a widespread review of New Zealand’s existing hate speech legislation.

    This would include deciding if hate crime should be established as its own separate offence, as it is in the United Kingdom.

    Oops I had a thought.

    Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 30th March 2019 @ 8:37 am

  40. Evan, that’s hate speech against politicians. Not allowed, sorry. (that’s sarcasm in case anyone missed it…)

    It may be a good idea for our leaders to define clearly what ‘hate speech’ is but unfortunately we can expect the definition will be vague so that any related law can be applied at whim and inconsistently, and even further the definition will be inherently discriminatory against groups currently out of favour such as white men.

    Where were any objections from Little or Ardern about the hate speech spouted by the Maori separatists who hijacked a ‘Rememberance Vigil’ on March 22nd in Auckland concerning the Christchurch massacre? Surely it’s hate speech to call white New Zealanders ‘racists’, ‘terrorists’, claiming that ‘white hatred’ was the foundation of the Christchurch massacre and implying that being white means you’re racist and culpable for past violence against Maori. As if Maori never committed atrocities against both other tribes and European settlers and as if Maori never intended to cause fear through their own campaigns of violence. But we predict that hate speech will continue to be treated as ok or not ok according to the ideological fashions of the day rather than on the basis of any clear definition or consistent underlying principles.

    Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 30th March 2019 @ 9:28 am

  41. @35 – Islam needs no defense…
    what cannot be defended is what interpretation people prefer
    Extremists naturally prefer hatred.
    Hatred’s only outlet is violence and destruction.

    Those who know the intent and purpose know that what the media portrays of iSlam or what even Islamic countries do in the name of ISLAM MAY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH iSLAM.

    So the point is not to defend Islam but rather to get people to stop and look at it instead of regurgitating what every one already “knows” about Islam (through the media and through social media and through the extremist point of view).

    Those are the only three lenses anyone has any familiarity with it.

    #36 — very true… More rights confiscated from the people and more powers “vested” in the police.

    #37 — we should definitely begruge the police.
    IF the Government has the monopoly of violence and the police is the only licenced party to use force or violence then should not NZ Police be sued for failing to provide protection?
    Their only job is to infiltrate the civilian population and keep a tab on each and everyone instead of affording the protection promised.
    They are the only ones (with the law society in complicity) to be in permanent partnership with the government against the population.
    Every right taken from the common person is “vested” in the police. And yet on a busy friday afternoon in Christchurch, they were nowhere to be found.

    @38 — Shari’a Law is not something many muslims understand.
    Jesus when asked who should throw the first stone, his reply was
    “let it be him whom has no sin.”
    Jesus is a prophet of Islam and those rules have not changed
    “Mercy above all chatiment. Only God judges.”
    So the rules are pretty simple. Let him who accuses have four witnesses. And he whom accuses without four witnesses, he is the liar before God.
    WE could learn from this in case of domestic violence/protection order/without notice…. the whole gamut.
    The indonesian bombers might see themselves as martyrs as such is the policy among extremists groups. But I would ask them to go back and learn from the book itself rather than rely on some heretic telling them to strap bombs on themselves in exchange for 72 virgins in heaven.

    Comment by JustCurious — Sat 30th March 2019 @ 12:04 pm

  42. There are questions about this event that must be answered. How did he fund his extensive travels and lifestyle? Why did he mention groups that he knew would be tarnished with guilt by association with what he did? Looking at his lack of employment, the countries he visited, the long terms of his stays in some and concerns people raised with the police about him, is it plausible that no one knew anything about him?

    We have money from heaven, over years time was spent in North Korea, Israel, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria and in and out of Turkey, we have a person who was a world tourist with no photos, no video, no social media, no friends, no school chums, no neighbors. Looking at the small home he could have inherited and shared with his sister, his inheritance would have been very small. The money from Bitconnect story raises questions. Bitconnect began in February 2016 and collapsed in 2018. He apparently began his travels in 2011.

    Comment by Frank — Sat 30th March 2019 @ 5:17 pm

  43. @44

    from the link above

    “Tarrant’s father, Rodney Tarrant, died of cancer at age 49 in April 2010, according to an obituary The Daily Examiner in Grafton. He was described as a “dedicated family man” and “competitive athlete.” According to the obituary, Tarrant’s father separated from his mother when he was young.”

    I am more curious about how this affected him?

    He did not seem to have spent much time with his father.??? Could perhaps someone confirm or infirm?

    Father passed away in 2010. Kid was 20.

    Twenty often is an age where specially male kids from separated families start to gear up and need to reconnect with the male side they have learned to hate all their lives to justify his absence in their world. It’s not usually until later that they will actually make the steps necessary to reunite.

    SO the timing of his father passing could would have been traumatic.

    Comment by JustCurious — Sat 30th March 2019 @ 10:54 pm

  44. This is copied from RNZ and includes information on the current suppression orders.

    Brenton Tarrant, 28, appeared via a video link from Auckland Prison in for what was a quiet, ordered hearing.

    The public gallery was packed to standing capacity with members of the Muslim community and journalists from New Zealand and around the world.

    Armed police were outside as survivors and relatives of victims of the attack arrived at court.

    Women in hijabs hugged one another as they arrived at the courtroom. Senior police officers, including Detective Inspectors Dave Lynch and Greg Murton, were seated in the front row of the public gallery.

    The defendant was able to see the judge and lawyers and hear the proceeding but the camera was turned away from the public gallery.

    His manner was calm thoughout the hearing as he intently listened to the proceedings; his screen was muted.

    It is the defendant’s second court appearance, after briefly appearing in Christchurch District Court on 16 March, the day after the mosque attacks. At that hearing police had laid a single charge of murder.

    He now faces 50 charges of murder and 39 of attempted murder.

    Justice Cameron Mander formally recorded that a further 49 charges of murder and 39 of attempted murder had been filed by the Crown.

    He noted the initial murder charge, which named a woman who was in fact alive, was to be amended and suppressed that woman’s name.

    The judge also suppressed the names of the attempted murder victims.

    Two Auckland lawyers, Shane Tait and Jonathan Hudson, were to representing the accused. Mr Tait issued a brief statement last night saying the right to consult and instruct a lawyer, and the right to a fair and public hearing, were protected rights in New Zealand law.

    Justice Mander ordered that two mental health reports be completed to assess the defendant’s fitness to plead. He remanded him in custody without plea to next appear on 14 June.

    The families of the victims of the mosque attack were briefed about the court appearance by court officials and victims’ advisors.

    Media had the right to be present and report on the hearing – other than any discussions held in chambers, as is usual court procedure – but the judge had declined applications from New Zealand and overseas media to film, take photos and record sound.

    The starting principle on such applications is open justice, but it is up to the judge to decide whether it is appropriate and in this case Justice Mander found it was not.

    In a minute issued to media he said he had taken into account a number of factors in reaching his decision, including the need to preserve the integrity of the trial, the role of the media, and the court’s obligations to the victims of the massacre.

    Comment by Downunder — Fri 5th April 2019 @ 11:15 am

  45. Thanks Downunder.
    I think we should let him go free.
    Life in jail is not good enough for him.
    A death sentence is too good for him.
    Either way there is no justice in this court system.
    Fanmilies will in the end hurt more from the parody of justice than they would be from accepting their grief and moving on.

    Comment by JustCurious — Mon 8th April 2019 @ 2:19 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar