Ummm, so left wingers take their daughters to climate crisis protests and the right train their’s with AR-15 rifles?
PM Jacinda Ardern responds to 13-year-old girl’s plea over AR-15 rifle ban
A 13-year-old Waikato girl has sent a letter to the Prime Minister criticising the Government’s decision to ban the rifles she used for sport shooting.
Maddy Millen-Turner says she competed in three gun and multi-gunning events under her father’s gun licence, with an AR-15 rifle purchased for her 13th birthday.
She said it was something she had always wanted to do.
“I’ve always wanted to do competitions with my dad with shooting and then on the Sika Show in Taupō he got me my birthday present which was an AR-15 rifle,” she said.
She said the AR-15 rifle, which is one of the kinds banned under the new gun laws, could be used for hunting or competition shooting.
…ummmm. What?
A semiautomatic rifle as your 13th birthday present?
Ummmmm. Y-e-a-h. I think I’ve underestimated the gun nut cult by a factor of 10.
Let’s ban these guns quicker shall we? I had no idea they were brainwashing their kids into the gun cult as well.
I have no problem with real oversight coming into effect here, gun nuts have had it too good for too long and there are bugger all checks and balances put in place due to political cowardice.
The Christchurch atrocity provided real momentum for gun reform and the unspoken agreement by the vast majority of Kiwis that civilians don’t need guns that can kill as quickly as these AR-15 rifles.
So boo hoo to the gun nuts.
BUT.
They do have a real and legitimate concern regarding new Police powers of warrantless searches. Allowing ill trained Police to enter gun owner’s houses without warrants is a recipe for bloody disaster.
Your average gun owner is paranoid as it is, and in their own home, they are sure as hell unlikely to do anything other than fire up if cops kick the door in during a warrantless search.
You can see in your minds eye the outcomes of this.
If Police suspect a gun owner is committing a crime, far better all the warrants are signed off and appropriately trained Officers enter the property, allowing some alpha male PC Plod warrantless searches is going to end in more people getting into shoot outs.
Yes, let’s get meaningful gun reform, no let’s not give Cops intrusive powers that will only result in more possible conflict.
And let’s stop buying 13 year olds bloody guns.
Poor kid lost her military grade weapon–hey, never mind, maybe a hand held Stinger missile launcher for her 16th?
National’s Dirty Digital campaign for 2020 is well underway. Social media is a whole lot more important than previously acknowledged to the next election. Hundreds of thousands in the provinces and smaller towns access various formats, and the Nats are targeting them relentlessly. This includes embracing the minority gun love lobby.
Anyone that doubts this should look back at the infamous Treasury “hack” and any number of public service leaks and backstabs. The Nats have a Dirty Digital dept. well beyond the likes of now ex Whale, and the Penguin.
Informed, researched, triangulated posts are mere pearls before swine online for the masses at FB. “Reckons” being more than equal to informed views. The NZ National Party have gone full Trump junior and will stop at nothing to try and get re-elected.
Bloody sick family there Martyn.
What would a 13 yr old need an automatic rifle for???????
Can’t you read? it was clearly mentioned she wanted one so she could compete with her father (being a 13yr girl it was probably customised to suit her smaller frame) and its not automatic, its semi-automatic, they are two different things. I don’t see an issue with a child using a firearm in a controlled & supervised environment which is what the firearm was bought for although you and Martyn seem to be implying that she has a free reign to shoot whatever she wants.
Martyn – where do you get off calling this family right wing? Nothing in the article says anything about the family’s political leanings, stop spreading this left/right divisive bullshit.
For father-daughter bonding, Cleangreen. Yes sir. Kid thinks she’s Greta. Kid’s aggrieved. Kid writes to PM. Kid contacts the media.
There’s a great gaping hole in this bonding, and if the family cannot see why a semi-automatic rifle’s not the best present for a 13 year old girl then perhaps none of them should have guns. And girls have hormones too.
A kid in Sandy Hook shared a life-long love of guns with his mother. She was the first person he shot before he went off and massacred half a schoolful of little children.
Kia ora Martyn,
What age do you think kids should start using firearms? We need to debate this.
The Firearms Prohibitions Orders promoted by National and COLFO also involve Police right to warrentless searches. They have in mind one rule for so-called law-abiding-citizens and one rule for anyone who looks like they might be “crims, gangs and extremists”.
Cheers,
Hera
Hi Hera, Posting this here as it seems pertinent, and you have blocked my comments on the Gun Control NZ Facebook page from being seen by anyone other than my friends. Doesn’t really seem like debating issues is of any interest to you and your collective.
“So, your recommendation, based upon your analysis of the data is that the minimum age to hold a firearms licence should be 30? If this is so, are you also advocating that this be the same for a drivers licence? After all the likelihood of of someone under 30 getting behind the wheel and injuring someone (or worse) must be exponentially greater than the likelihood of the same person injuring (or worse) with a firearm. After all, if the percentage of the population who hold a firearms licence is 5 %, then it should follow that 5% of people between the ages of 16 and 30 will fall into this category. Now, i might be a little off here, but realistically as many as 100% of the population between 16 and 30 can, and may desire to hold a drivers licence. Lets say however that 10% of them have no interest, or may not be able to due to medical reasons. That leaves us 90% give or take. Now, is it just me, or is 90% of people aged 16-30 significantly greater than 5%. ? and if 5% of this population can’t (in your eyes) be trusted enough, even with police vetting to hold a firearms licence, then how can 90% be trusted to hold a drivers licence? or for that matter, be able to vote, or become a police officer, or a lawyer, or a doctor, or even an MP? Have we just solved the countries problems? don’t let anybody participate in anything requiring any sort of personal maturity or responsibility until they are 30. Nailed it. So, what can they do? how about get a PHD in a totally unrelated field, and start telling everyone else what they should and shouldn’t be able to do. Job done. Good work Hera.
Feel free to reply, or unblock my comments from general view. The truth is out there, if you let it see the light of day.
Hi Hera, I’m posting this here as you (or someone you know) has blocked my comments on the GCNZ Facebook page from being seen by anyone who is not in my friends list. So it doesn’t really seem like you do want to debate the issues. Anyway, here we go.
So, your recommendation, based upon your analysis of the data is that the minimum age to hold a firearms licence should be 30? If this is so, are you also advocating that this be the same for a drivers licence? After all the likelihood of of someone under 30 getting behind the wheel and injuring someone (or worse) must be exponentially greater than the likelihood of the same person injuring (or worse) with a firearm. After all, if the percentage of the population who hold a firearms licence is 5 %, then it should follow that 5% of people between the ages of 16 and 30 will fall into this category. Now, i might be a little off here, but realistically as many as 100% of the population between 16 and 30 can, and may desire to hold a drivers licence. Lets say however that 10% of them have no interest, or may not be able to due to medical reasons. That leaves us 90% give or take. Now, is it just me, or is 90% of people aged 16-30 significantly greater than 5%. ? and if 5% of this population can’t (in your eyes) be trusted enough, even with police vetting to hold a firearms licence, then how can 90% be trusted to hold a drivers licence? or for that matter, be able to vote, or become a police officer, or a lawyer, or a doctor, or even an MP? Have we just solved the countries problems? don’t let anybody participate in anything requiring any sort of personal maturity or responsibility until they are 30. Nailed it. So, what can they do? how about get a PHD in a totally unrelated field, and start telling everyone else what they should and shouldn’t be able to do. Job done. Good work Hera.
Up to you Hera, if you do want a healthy debate about the situation, start by unblocking everyone. Censorship is a tool of cowards.
I find it very sad. Not a lot of hope for our society if individuals prescribe negative connotations on ideas or activities they dont understand. Instead of focusing on the true human and potentially positive motives of ordinary actions.
Are we all to be labeled gun nuts, because we have a different view and these changes in the law affect us? By doing so do you hope to silence a different opinion simply because you don’t agree?
Or do you simply wish to paint others as less human, a bit different to suit your bias?
Is it just possible that there are some aspects of the new laws that are not well thought out and maybe they affect people unfairly?
Is it just possible that people in the firearms using community have experience and knowledge and can see the flaws better than those who don’t have experience and have never had to understand?
Craig – firearms are made to kill and military weapons are made to do so on an industrial scale. Do you really expect society to accept and endorse those who want to have unencumbered rights play with lethal toys?
Ahh, but nowhere did I say anything about unencumbered rights. And your reply does not answer the question I put forward. IN fact the reply proves the point I make. There are solutions that mean people can continue their sports without total bans. Because a ban is not an encumbrance is it. I can think of restrictions that will achieve greater safety. Can you without the solution being a ban?
No one’s saying you can’t have guns. You just can’t have a fucking assault rifle. And, really, what do you need an AR-15 for? Clay pigeons? Bagging rabbits? “But… but… I need it! I can’t use a bolt-action rifle because it’s too slow!” Tough. Practice makes perfect. You don’t need it. You just want it. Given the vast array of firearms available for sale, I’m reasonably sure there’s something out there fit for purpose that can’t be used to gun down hordes of innocent civilians. Improvise. You’re New Zealanders. You’re supposed to be good at that sort of thing.
This is a very poor reply, and once again shows exactly what im talking about. The generalisations and lack of understanding evident here shows a bias with no desire to try understand. I don’t hope to change your mind. But I would like you to think to yourself why you hold such firm views without the need for knowledge.
The girls sport requires these firearms. She can not compete without them. Its somethings has grown up with and its an activity she enjoys with her father.
As I stated above, there are solutions that can allow the use of these guns other than straight banning.
I do not need one of these guns myself, and I don’t own any. But I do have friends who do, and I do see first hand the impact this unnecessary ban has had on good, ordinary people such as this girl and her father. Who, by the way, do not deserve the dehumanisation of titles such as gun nut. And thats the issue for me. I see these people as other ordinary members of our community, who deserve a fair hearing. A good percentage of the posters, and the author here, portray them as different in a negative manor.
All I ask is that you put aside your bias if possible.
Well bugger me.
Why is it wrong to teach your kids, in a supervised situation and under very strict guidance, how to shoot firearms.
My three children have been bought up with shooting from 6. They respect the opportunity to get out and shoot my rifles under my supervision. The understand the safety aspect of firearms and have been hunting enough to know what happens when bullets hit flesh.
To brandish the whole firearms community in New Zealand as a parallel to the school shooting nutcases in The States is just scare mongering.
We have a far more mature attitude to our firearms safety here. We dont have loaded pistols under the bed for personal protection, or for kids to find and play with.
Stop making your average shooter look like a gun toting madman, because your average Kiwi shooter is far from that.
Comments are closed.