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.

20 Responses to “The Christchurch Mosque Massacre and Gun Laws”

  1. Downunder says:

    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.

  2. Downunder says:

    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.

  3. JustCurious says:

    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….

  4. JustCurious says:

    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

  5. Downunder says:

    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.

  6. Downunder says:

    @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.

  7. JustCurious says:

    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…

  8. JustCurious says:

    @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.

  9. Vman says:

    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.

  10. Evan Myers says:

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

  11. Ministry of Men's Affairs says:

    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.

  12. Ministry of Men's Affairs says:

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

  13. JustCurious says:

    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

  14. triassic says:

    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.

  15. Downunder says:

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

  16. triassic says:

    @ 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.

  17. Downunder says:

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

  18. JustCurious says:

    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…

Leave a Reply

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