Simon Bridges: the 15 March Christchurch massacre and winning at any cost




Just when you thought Simon Bridges couldn’t sink any lower – he has.

After the March 15th  Christchurch terror attack, the (current) Leader of the National Party issued strong committments to support urgently needed gun law reform;

- Sponsor Promotion -

“We will be ready and prepared to be constructive and to look at anything here because we do need to see some change.”

“Change is needed, I understand that, and the National Party will make sure it’s a constructive party in all of this. I am no expert in this. There may be loopholes that can be fixed quite readily and quickly.

Yes, that’s probably the right way to go [to ban military-style semi-automatic weapons] but let’s hear from the government. It is now for the government and the prime minister, whose roles I respect in this, to put forward those proposals. We are up for change.”

“Everything has changed. Everything has changed. Please don’t get me wrong – I’m not saying to you we shouldn’t have gun control change. I don’t myself know what would have changed this… we had someone who had IEDs in their car.”

National has been clear since this devastating attack that we support changes to our regime and that we will work constructively with the Government. We agree that the public doesn’t need access to military style semi-automatic weapons. National supports them being banned along with assault rifles. We also support the Government’s proposals to limit the access to other high powered semi-automatic weapons and ammunition.”

It’s imperative in the national interest to keep New Zealanders safe. The attacks on Friday changed New Zealand, the intention of the gun law changes is excellent and I understand the need for urgency. We remain committed to ensuring the safety of New Zealanders and fighting extremism in all forms.

National will work constructively with the Government to ensure we get this right. We support the prime minister and I think most of our rural communities will understand.”

The above statements from Mr Bridges were also posted on the National Party website. So there is simply no room for error and claims of being misquoted.

Writing on The Standard, L Prent acknowledged Simon Bridges’ constructive response to the massacre and need for thorough, wide-ranging gun-reform laws;

“Now I know that most people are going to be surprised that I finally have a reason to laud Simon Bridges (I know I am). But I just have to on this occasion. Both he and the public responses of National to the announcements yesterday were excellent.

They’re fully supporting the thrust of the proposed changes going forward into the future. As National seem to have made a career in politics of being stupid over my lifetime, I’m sure it won’t last. But I’m going to enjoy it while it does.

And on Twitter, this blogger posted a dire warning/prediction;



Alas, neither L Prent nor I were to be disappointed.

Six months later, Simon Bridge is back tracking.

On 28 August, Mr Bridges announced he would not be supporting a second trance of gun reform laws.

“No, I’m not making this political, it’s not about the Police Association. It’s about a situation where National supported the first law, which was the right thing to do – but the buyback scheme, however, is a fiasco.

We look at this new law, and it seems like it’s aimed at law-abiding New Zealanders. It’s not aimed at the gangs, the crims and the extremists, where it should be.

Just to be clear, the buy-back scheme has thus far netted around 20,000 banned weapons from 20 June this year. The scheme will be on-going until 20 December.

Whether the scheme will retrieve every single banned weapon and parts is unknown: successive governments have failed to implement registration of individual firearms. Which is bizarre, considering we, as a society, consider it normal to register cars, dogs, real estate agents, etc.

Since the initial banning of semi-automatic weapons and associated parts, and buy-back scheme (which Australia successfully carried out following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre by a deranged gunman), a second tranche of gun reform was introduced;

    • Establishing a firearms register
    • Make owning a gun a “privilege” that comes with obligations
    • Tighten the rules to obtain and keep a gun licence
    • Tighten the rules for gun dealers to get and keep a licence
    • Require licences to be renewed every five years
    • Not allow visitors to purchase guns in New Zealand
    • Introduce a new warning system for police so they can intervene if they have concerns about a licence holder’s behaviour
    • Introduce a licencing system for shooting clubs and ranges
    • Set up an expert group to advise the police on firearms
    • Introduce new advertising standards around guns
    • Require licences to buy magazines, parts and ammunition
    • Increase penalties and introduce new offences

The rules seem so straight-forward that it beggars belief they were not already in place. Bear in mind, these are lethal, high-powered weapons we are talking about – not registration of ‘Mr Bigglesworth‘, the family pet chihuahua.

By the end of August, Simon Bridges began walking-back of every statement he made following March 15th. His spin-doctor-crafted “talking points” glaringly obvious;

“We look at this new law, and it seems like it’s aimed at law-abiding New Zealanders. It’s not aimed at the gangs, the crims and the extremists, where it should be.

“In short, the Government is going after the good guys and not the bad guys [with these rules].

“There’s no politics. It’s simply a question of a next series of laws that seem to be aimed at good, law abiding people rather than criminals, the gangs and extremists.

It is difficult to understand how the proposed new restrictions would “not [be] aimed at the gangs, the crims and the extremists“. Just to remind everyone that the (alleged) Christchurch shooter was also a licenced, “good, law abiding person” – right up until he pulled the trigger at his first victim. Then he wasn’t.

In fact, the new laws should make it harder for  “gangs, the crims and the extremists” to possess firearms. Because – according to Police – most firearms ending up in the hands of “gangs, the crims and the extremists” – come from “good, law abiding people” with gun licences.

According to a NZ Herald report in 2016, by Phil Taylor, licenced gun dealers were a prime source of guns for “gangs, the crims and the extremists”;

“Most of the illegal guns we come across are from burglaries or from rogue licensed owners,” said the drug enforcement source.

Rogues such as Peter James Edwards. Edwards, who had a class A licence that enabled him to buy rifles and shotguns in a sporting configuration, made a business out of buying guns and pimping them for criminals by cutting down the barrel or stock and adding pistol grips and silencers.

Pistol-size firearms are prized by criminals because they are easily carried and concealed.

Over 18 months, Edwards, described in court as unemployed, bought 74 firearms including 69 from Gun City’s Auckland and Christchurch stores, plus more than 16,000 rounds of ammunition, a large number of parts including pump-action pistol grips, and pistol grips.

He pleaded guilty to supplying firearms to unlicensed people, supplying a pistol and supplying methamphetamine. Edwards sold methamphetamine to his daughter, starting on her 19th birthday.

He was sentenced in 2014 to a total of five years and 10 months in prison. It was revealed in court that he had 53 previous convictions in Western Australia. He had failed to declare any previous convictions on his gun licence application.

Edwards claimed not to know the names of anyone he sold to, and would not help recover 64 firearms that were missing and believed to be in the hands of Head Hunters gang members and associates.

In another example;

Another who didn’t want to help police trace the firearms he sold to criminals was John Mabey.

“He probably has a greater fear of those associated with the guns than anything we can bring to bear,” Inspector Greg Nicholls told the Herald after Mabey was sent to jail in 2009.

Mabey gained a gun licence at a young age and later added a “collectors’ endorsement” that entitled him to have restricted weapons such as pistols and submachine guns and military-style semi-automatics.

He fell into debt and decided to sell his collection on the black market. When notified that police planned to check his collection, he faked a burglary in which he claimed his entire collection of restricted firearms had been stolen. He maintained the fiction for two years before admitting he had faked the burglary.

Only 11 of 121 of Mabey’s restricted guns have been recovered. Glock and Beretta pistols were found in the possession of a drug maker and seller who had fired at police officers during a routine traffic stop.

A Browning pistol was found in the possession of a methamphetamine cook. A Luger pistol was found in the home of a Mongrel Mob member. Methamphetamine was involved again.

Because individual firearms are not registered, the number of transactions involving purchase and sales is not recorded. As the same police source pointed out;

“There is no way of identifying who is buying too many guns. There might be an innocent explanation for why someone buys firearms five times a year, but when someone buys 69 guns in a short space of time … hang on, that’s not right.”

In 2012, in a Police report – the (2011) National Strategic Assessment paper – found  that “325 illegal firearms were seized in police raids in the year to June. While that is the lowest haul in the past five years, it is still an alarming number and, along with other aspects of the present firearms regime, a cause for continuing concern. Most of the guns seized by the police were stolen in residential burglaries or from collectors by organised criminals.

Four years later, in 2016, information relating to the underground business of illegal firearms sales was sought by the the Law and Order Select Committee when Judith Collins was Police Minister. Simon Bridges was a colleague of Ms Collins in the same government. They did nothing to tighten gun control laws. Three years later, fiftyone people were shot dead in a Christchurch mosque and scores more injured.

The same 2012 Herald editorial, which revealed the findings of the (2011) National Strategic Assessment paper had warned presciently;

Parliament needs to act before the laxity of current regulations is underlined again by a tragedy involving unlicensed guns.

The (alleged) terrorist-killer was a legally licenced gun owner. His weapons – unregistered.

If Simon Bridges is now playing politics to curry favour with gun owners and conservative voters, it is a deadly ‘game’ he is indulging in. Fiftyone people paid the ultimate price because this country – and successive governments – was to naive and blase to realise the deadly nature of poorly regulated gun ownership.

Mr Bridges has plumbed new depths of dirty politics. To return to partisan politics on an issue which – literally – is a matter of life and death is troubling.

It is obvious that he has waited until the moment of the tragedy subsided. Once the screams and cries of frightened innocent men, women, and children no longer reverated through our collective consciousness; once the searing white-hot grief had dimmed; once the headlines moved on; did Mr Bridges think it was safe to conduct political business-as-usual?

If so, it demonstrates an almost sociopathic callousness that would be beyond most of us.

His win-at-any-expense strategy for next years’ election shows the true, deeply-flawed character of the man. It raises the question; what won’t he do to win votes?

And for all New Zealanders, especially National supporters, the question becomes; is this the kind of person we should trust to lead us?


A recent National Party leaflet delivered to households;



In the latest 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton poll, eligible New Zealand voters were asked what they thought of the Government’s moves [on gun reform]. 

Sixty-one per cent thought the changes were about right, 19% thought it did not go far enough and 14% thought it went too far.

Simon Bridges should listen more carefully.





NZ Herald: Christchurch mosque shootings: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern expected to announce gun law changes

Radio NZ: Christchurch terror attacks – National Party leader Simon Bridges says gun control laws need changing

Mediaworks/Newshub: Christchurch mosque terror attack – National changes tune on gun control

Newsroom: Military style semi-automatic guns banned

Fairfax/Stuff media: National supports gun law changes in wake of Christchurch mosque shootings

National: National supports firearms reform

Twitter: F. Macskasy – Christchurch shooting – Simon Bridges

The Standard: Adequate gun control and (almost) complete party support.

Radio NZ: Police Association says National playing politics with gun laws

Fairfax/Stuff media:

Fairfax/Stuff media: Scepticism and enthusiasm for new gun laws as buy-back figures approach 20,000

NZ Police: Information on prohibited firearms

Wikipedia: Port Arthur massacre (Australia)

Mediaworks/Newshub: Second tranche of gun law changes – Firearms register, tighter licencing

NZ Herald: Simon Bridges reveals National is unlikely to support second tranche of gun law reforms

Mediaworks/Newshub: Simon Bridges says gun laws soft on ‘crims, gangs and extremists’

NZ Herald: The Big Read – How are criminals getting their guns?

NZ Herald: Editorial – Unregistered guns invite a tragedy

Parliament: How do criminals get illegal guns?

TVNZ: New poll – 61% of New Zealanders back gun ban in wake of Christchurch atrocity

Other Blogs

Bowalley Road: What Happened Here?

The Daily Blog: Trying to understand National’s position on Gun reform is like trying to understand Trump’s position on nuking hurricanes

The Daily Blog: Dear Gun owners of NZ – you don’t like the buy back plan? We are honestly more than happy for you to be arrested and the guns seized from you

The Daily Blog: Gun nuts should be under surveillance now

The Daily Blog: Jacinda goes beyond ‘thoughts & prayers’ and will change gun laws

The Daily Blog: If we can ban single use plastic bags and fireworks – why the Christ can’t we ban machine guns for civilian use?

The Daily Blog: Bryan Bruce – 100% support for gun law reform call by The Prime Minister

The Standard: Adequate gun control and (almost) complete party support.

Werewolf: Gordon Campbell on why the government shouldn’t run the Christchurch massacre inquiry

Previous related blogposts

15 March: Aotearoa’s Day Of Infamy

The Christchurch Attack: is the stage is set for a continuing domino of death?




13 November 1990

That was then…



15 March 2019

This is now…




= fs =


  1. Just another one sided anti gun piece like the media have run non stop for months.
    Quoting Lprent . Lol.
    So we had some of the best and safest gun laws in the world with less gun fatality than Australia based on strict vetting of owners. We had a generally very good trust relationship with police, less than 1 percent of gun crime was from licensed firearms owners.
    “Until we didn’t” goes the trite anti gun reply.
    Actually it should read “until government laid off the vetters and overworked police failed to do their job”

    Police licensed a foreign extremist to own guns. By not following their own rules.
    I feel I should type that in caps.
    They have also licensed a bunch of gang members who have happily sold guns to their mates.
    Ms Ardern had just changed laws to further weaken oversight of online gun sales.
    Government for years had not heeded requests to stop selling large capacity magazines.
    We could be made safer by enforcing current law, making all centrefire semi autos e category and better (consistent) gun safe security.

    But now we (that’s we gun owners not you anti gun people who are giving up nothing but happy for others to) are being punished. For government and police incompetence.
    Our country is less safe as guns are driven underground from a poorly supported pointless buy back, and will be unable to be registered when that is forced on owners soon. These guns are driven out of previously safe hands in to the grey and black market.
    FYI only 2500 of the guns handed in so far are MSSAs and we know there are at least 14000 of them. The public is buying a bunch of old .22s and shotguns and some heirlooms, historical museum pieces and some small capacity centre fire semi autos.
    Owners are spending their buyback money on new guns.

    Police are said to have lost part of their register of e cat MSSAs ( they have been phoning some owners with wrong information)
    Let’s hope more turn up by December eh..

    Police issue an import for every single gun brought into NZ so why claim they don’t know how many and what type of gun? Or can’t they run a register (that’s a rhetorical)

    You cannot comprehend the feeling of the firearms community going from being proud of a strong relationship with police, to being lied about by the the police association and vilified to enact their agenda.
    Destroying that relationship as they have is a very bad thing for which we are all worse off.

    Lastly a tip: for the love of god don’t use the term “high-powered” when talking about this gun control, it’s an emotive yet meaningless media buzzword that makes the author look silly especially when a bunch of the guns under discussion are .22s.

    • Postscript:
      “In the latest 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton poll, eligible New Zealand voters were asked what they thought of the Government’s moves [on gun reform]. “

      Your poll is not the latest poll from colmar brunton it’s from peak moral hysteria in April and does not have anything to do with tranche 2.
      Why lie?
      If you want a lesson in what happens to labour when they stop being interested in governing for everyone and go down the the city liberal rabbit hole of woke moral enforcement look over the Tasman.

      • “Why lie?”

        Whoa, steady on Buttercup! You may disagree with Frank but accusing him of lying?? The guy does his homework and if you have other info feel free to share it

        You’ve cheered him on in the past but now that he’s challenging the gun lobby and your pet hobbyhorse suddenly he isn’t to your taste??

        Calling out your selective bias and self interest there my friend

        • His post is incorrect: a lie.
          No emotion attached to the simple question I asked.
          Feel free to talk some facts.

            • Well first of all Brenton Tarrant has absolutely zero relation to New Zealand. If Tarrant had of come in with heavy-machine-guns the crown would have rolled over him with tanks. The idea that any armed armed resistance against the state being a little bit achievable is a grand delusion.

              Arming civilians as some sort of human right against the crown is just bullshit, totally unjustified. Arming civilians with machine guns have absolutely nothing to do with guns. So one reason for owning a machine gun is to confront the government, another reason is for controlling slaves.

              If you honestly feel like the crown is against you then fine – fight the state – but don’t use guns. People who say oh we need to be able to defend against the crown is bullshit because they don’t want people to rise up against true enemy which is private-corporate-power.

              In this case the government has popular support for the defence of the population against mass-murder and foreign terrorist.

        • You will also notice if you want to stalk me further, I’ll agree or disagree with almost every blogpost on its merit not the identity of the blogger.
          Why did he lie here if the case is so clear?
          Why did we subvert normal submission process if we want best law?

      • Keepcalmcarryon, think about what you are describing …. ” FYI only 2500 of the guns handed in so far are MSSAs and we know there are at least 14000 ”

        ten thousand odd ( 11500 ) angry, law breaking, military style weapons owner hold outs …. disobeying the law WITH the backing of the national party …that Would be the election gift that Labour could only dream of.

        Law breakers of the military style weapons owners type …. Would be seen as a Threat by a large majority … out of the non-military weapons owning segment of our population.

        But that would be the Simon Bridges touch indeed …. aligning with military weapons extremists. ….

        • Let’s hope the MSSAs come in eh, 3 months to go.
          Not a guaranteed outcome when you criminalise people overnight.
          That’s the worry.
          I hope they do the responsible thing.
          I’m no Nat apologist but not handing in would not be “with Nats blessing” – they voted for the buy back.

          • Well maybe the Nats are speaking out of both sides of their mouths ???

            They fought the law and the military weapons owners won …seems like weird gun fetish foolishness …. to the non-owners of these killing tools.

            ” Out of my cold dead hands” NRA crap …. goes down like a cup of cold vomit in NZ society.

            Brinkmanship from the less than 0.25% of the population … that make up the numbers of military mass murder tool owners….. goes from creepy to threatening real fast.

            Why do these men covet the ability to possess such things ?.

            The smaller the dick the bigger the mag ?
            Why military style for those not in the military ?

      • KCCO: All my information is referenced with appropriate citations.

        If you have counterfactuals to what I have presented, I welcome sharing the information with us (with links) so we can assess the merits of what you have to offer.

        Until then, I stand by my reporting.

        • Ok to spell it out:
          Your link claiming to be “the latest 1 news colmar brunton poll” linked to this
          Which is dated 16 April.
          This is not the latest colmar brunton poll another poll was done in July surveying different questions
          also as the old poll you linked fell in April , it’s assessment of new gun laws had nothing to do with tranche 2 the details of which hadn’t been leaked yet.

          • KCCO: Thank you for the Colmar Brunton link.

            I have checked the eighteen pages of various poll questions. None of them relate to gun control.

            It is unclear what relevance that CB poll has to this discussion.

              • Amen Bert

                Keepcalmcarryon is his ownworst enemy in this issue. Its clear he has a ‘thing’ for guns, so much so its clouding his reason

                If your going to accuse a blogger like Frank you’d better have your ducks in a row. In Keepcalm’s case, those ducks waddled off long ago

                Regarding Simon Bridges, if he wants to align with the gun and hunting lobby, and only a minority, to be specific, he’ll be having to do some fast explaining come election year next year

                Most NZers dont own guns and see gun aficionados as an American aberration we want no part of

                • Yawn.
                  The woke response to what they don’t understand: slur, demonize and ban.
                  That “thing” is understanding.

                  • Now I know you ain’t calling me woke. And I don’t like machine guns in civilian hands. I use to think it was okay. It’s not that Tarrant went on a rampage. It was that he was allowed to travel to a second location. We where unprepared and now the guns, they’re gone burger.

  2. 100% agree Frank

    Simon Bridges :“We look at this new law, and it seems like it’s aimed at law-abiding New Zealanders.”

    ….The christchurch white subpremacist was law abiding … until he committed mass murder,…with weapons specifically designed for the job.

    Also … their was a huge failure by the National enlarged security services, to pick up on all the huge red flags left on the internet … and his passport … before the subnormal mass murder live streamed his terrorist crime.

    He’d posted up pictures like these on twitter and other open non-hidden websites …..Two days before his cowardly gutless shooting of unarmed people who were praying.

    The second photo shows the type of fear-mongering encouragement right wing parties give to violent subpremacists …. Simon should know this…. his ’emotional junior staffer’ seemed to get it.

    Anyway, People who write such things on their guns …. should have them taken off them….. ASAP

  3. Yes i heard Mr hudsons’ weak excuse for not supporting the second trance of gun laws it was a rather weak idea he said gun owners won’t go to see their doctors. When asked by Corrin if he could mitigate the fact he was not very forth coming and this is typical of this party and their tactics as they will do everything possible to make life harder not just for their opposition but all NZers. Its win at all costs.

  4. The dirtiest campaign since Muldoon’s 1975, and Key’s 2014, is here right now for 2020. It is a fork in the road election because it is the last one where boomers will predominate in voting, by 2023 the new generations–generations rent and student loan–will the majority, albeit just.

    Even Radio NZ seems on board with the Nats now that staff have got pay rises, and the station secured funding!

    The gun debate is disgusting as a Nat vote grabber. So some gun nuts in some psychological distress may not go their doctors? Does not that prove the case for the second tranche? Denial does not work for pilots–no see doctor, no fly airplane–simple as that.

      • Hey even if some NZ citizen wanted to blow off steam and let some rounds off you could spend two thousand on a Thai holiday. Waiters give you coctails by the pool all week, for two thousand, that includes accomodation plus airfares, and you can fire off a hundred rounds a day. I mean these gun nuts take shit way to seriously.

    • Your ravening at “gun nuts” being in mental distress revolts me.
      Your posting puts me in mind of something I read yesterday

      “For many of the respondents it was clear that they were far more interested in outrage than outcomes”

      “Like many on the extreme left, this was a person who placed a higher value on the punishment of their enemies than on the protection of their friends. Someone who got more satisfaction in an angry tweet than a life lived in peace. Yet another self-declared “progressive” who actually prefers protest over progress.”
      You haters, labelers and denouncers are going to sink labour here too.
      You’re welcome.

  5. Same bullshit as after Aramoana.

    For us who been here before, and warned about the stupid laws which would just enabled another massacre – there is no satisfaction in being right, only more dead bodies and broken families.

    Sure national are going to play politics with this, they always have. So rather than get upset – just face the reality – there is a section on NZ who are violent, self indulgent, and smug – they care nothing for anyone else.

  6. The new laws don’t address the route cause of any issues concerning firearms crime. If they want good laws maybe invite the firearms community into designing them. Gun control NZ has written 3/4 of them. Some unqualified, trumped up academics with 400 followers on Facebook and Cahill a union leader. Most ridiculous law making to date. Not even a shooter and this looks like a flop.

  7. Bridges is a side show. Gun owners are not the only target of this terror-farce. We all are.
    Anyone objectively studying the videos or watching Scott Bennett or Cody Snodgrass or Ole Dammegard analyse the ballistics and methodology know this is the GLADIO/psyop franchise landed in ChCh. And in case you didn’t, there are TWO videos – but the Linwood one is SO embarrassingly bad, it didn’t even get classified – is so amateurish NO mention is made of it at all in the hope it’ll just…disappear – Is such parody the Film and Literature Classification Office kept no records of having seen it. And thats an official OIA response to my questions of their adjudicative process, by the way.
    All of us suffer the burden of this LIE.

  8. The first thing that needed to be done was to find out if the existing laws and procedures had been followed, did the police follow all procedures to access if Tarrant was fit to possess a fire arm, that was not done! Or it was and the public was not told (MSM). There is no point in making new laws if the old ones were adaquate but not followed. This was just a left Liberal pile on to bri NG us into line with the EU and the NWO, shame on all you politicians, we were bretayed again.

  9. Ironic that you goaded Simon not to make political capital out of the deranged mosque shooter Frank. I wonder if you would have advised both Winston and Andrew Little not to make political gain out of the death of 29 miners. Least I remind you that it’s been two years and they still haven’t entered the mine (no the drift doesn’t count).

    But is it ok when the left do it hey?

    • Yes, when the chch tragedy is used so due law making process is ignored and gun laws can be rammed through, it’s not using the situation apparently.
      But an opposition party being an opposition is.
      Don’t fret it, the right does sellouts, the left does moral hypocrisy they are blind to it themselves.

    • What arrant nonsense. You’ve tried to conflate 2 separate, unrelated events and failed miserably. Is that the best you can do? At least this government is following through on Key’s broken promise! Remember that?

    • Any other unrelated issues you want to conflate BG? Sinking of the Titanic maybe? Germany annexing the Sudetenland and invading Poland? Thats how ridiculous your comment appears to us

      • Refer to Frank’s Twitter reply to Bridges…Do not exploit this for votes

        Are you saying Winston and Andrew didn’t exploit Pike River for votes, then I have a bridge to sell you?

  10. Here is the buyback failing:
    “Of the 14,000 or so MSSAs that are registered with police, 2500 have been handed in.

    Clement cited estimates that put the number of now-banned firearms between 56,000 and 173,000.

    But National MP Brett Hudson said there were police estimates of 240,000, a figure that Clement did not dispute, though he added that the true number was simply unknown.”
    The number could be 350 000

    Aside from alienating firearm license holders (responsible for less than 1 percent of gun crime), and aside from rushing bad legislation , police and government also CHOSE THE BUYBACK OPTION WITH LOWEST COMPLIANCE.

    “Hudson noted in a report from consultancy group KPMG that the buyback option chosen was the one with the lowest expected compliance.

    An option with higher expected compliance would have been to have one price for a model of firearm, regardless of its condition.”

    What percentage of now illegal guns must be handed back in order to be safe? All? Because government have set this up to fail.
    Every banned gun not handed back will become grey or black market by definition, worsened when registration comes in. (Won’t be able to leave sitting in gunsafe) These guns will go from gun safes to literally on the street.

    This is a horrendous outcome.

    It’s enough of a debacle that the auditor general is going to monitor the buybacks effectiveness

Comments are closed.