New Zealand Bans Sale of Assault, Semi-Automatic Rifles: PM:
New Zealand has banned the sale of assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons after the country's worst-ever attack that killed 50 people in two mosques.
"Be assured this is just the beginning of the work we'll be doing," Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told a news conference on Thursday.
[...]Ardern said she expects a new law to be in place by April 11 and buy-back schemes will be established for outlawed weapons.
"Now, six days after this attack, we are announcing a ban on all military style semi-automatics [MSSA] and assault rifles in New Zealand," Ardern said.
She said the man arrested in the attacks on two Christchurch mosques had purchased his weapons legally and enhanced their capacity by using 30-round magazines "done easily through a simple online purchase".
"Related parts used to convert these guns into MSSAs are also being banned, along with all high-capacity magazines.
"In short, every semi-automatic weapon used in the terrorist attack on Friday will be banned in this country," she said.
That was quick.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:03AM (2 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Mexico [wikipedia.org]
Result:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/americas/mexico-political-deaths-election-season-trnd/ [cnn.com]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:53AM (1 child)
If it reminds you of that, you haven't read the details.
Mexico's military-caliber ban is honest in that it does have something to do with what the military actually uses. E.g. the military uses or has used .45 ACP, so Mexican civilians can't buy a 1911 in .45 ACP -- but they can buy the same gun in .38 Super, which is no less effective. This law wasn't even intended to keep civilians outgunned in a military vs. criminal shootout -- rather, the goal was to prevent pilfering military ammunition and selling it for civilian use -- though in actual fact, gangs pilfer military rifles, or smuggle in military-caliber rifles from elsewhere, and use the pilfered ammunition themselves, so it doesn't really work out. (Law-abiding Mexican civilians do have a hard time exercising their supposed right to be armed, but not because of the military-caliber ban.)
Unlike the Mexican case, the "military style" in MSSA has nothing to do with the military. Rather, MSSA now includes every detachable-magazine semi-auto other than rimfires.
(Technically, it excludes weapons incapable of using magazines over 5 rounds, and includes rimfires over .22 caliber, but virtually every detachable-magazine gun can accept arbitrarily large magazines, and the larger-bore rimfires generally died out before the semi-auto era, the only exception I can think of being an Italian semi-auto shotgun in 9mm Flobert.)
(Score: 2) by driverless on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:47AM
It's even worse than that, the term MSSA makes it sound like an assault rifle ban but it actually covers any weapon with any one of a set of arbitrarily-chosen features, many of which have nothing to do with military assault rifles. This is what defines an MSSA, apart from being semi-auto, any single one of the following:
The two most common uses for semi-auto firearms in NZ are to deal with rabbit plagues and possum infestations, where you need a large magazine and rapid fire capability because they start to scatter on the first shot. Hunting possums without a flash suppressor (it's done at night) is more or less impossible unless you're planning to shoot only one of them every night - by the time your night vision recovers, the rest will have gone.
This a cynical gun grab by the government. The proposed measure, had it been in place, would have done nothing to prevent the shootings because the only E-endorsement MSSA he had, an AR15, was acquired illegally. The one thing that would have helped, registering how many and what sort of firearms the owners have, hasn't been implemented. So they're doing the thing that wouldn't have helped and not doing the thing that would.
Just for reference, I'm saying that as a non-gun-owner who doesn't really care much for them, so I don't have any horse in this race. What I'm objecting to is that it's an exploitation of a tragedy to execute a pre-planned agenda, not a genuine attempt to prevent the same thing from recurring.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:09AM (123 children)
Not quick enough, evidently, or the incident by the anonymous crazy auzzie would not have happened.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:14AM (7 children)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:24AM (2 children)
Lets all call him shitstain.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:28AM (1 child)
That's reserved for Trump, though.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:31PM
It is a class from which multiple objects, such as Trump can inherit. A
BASICelementary programming principle.To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by realDonaldTrump on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:57AM (2 children)
Allegedly. Whatever happened to people saying, Allegedly? Peoples lives are being shattered and destroyed by a mere allegation. Some are true and some are false. Some are old and some are new. There is no recovery for someone falsely accused -- life and career are gone. Is there no such thing any longer as Due Process, Fairness and Common Sense? New Zealand must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring him back from where he came!!!
(Score: 1, Redundant) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:01PM
Your point being - that you are allegedly a shitstain? Well, I haven't exactly thought of you that way, but who the hell am I to argue when I hear it from the horse's mouth?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:33PM
Schwarzenegger says you are 243 pounds. With enough encouragement and support from us, you could probably make it to at least 250 if not 275. Please try! We are all behind you and will encourage you in your efforts. But first you must set a goal. And 250 isn't a bad initial goal.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @09:34AM
Ok shitstain.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:39AM (101 children)
I think you need to look up the word "criminal". They, by definition, do not obey laws. The only folks who will turn in their guns are the ones who were not going to break any laws with them to begin with. And only some of those. The rest you've just turned from law-abiding, productive, loyal citizens into criminals for no reason other than being unwilling to kneel before panicky control freaks.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by aristarchus on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:44AM (45 children)
TMB added to the list of "criminals". Nothing we did not already know. But remember, having an ar-15 to shoot your piddling .22 cal, or 5.56mm NATO round has no purpose other than mass murder, outside of the military. And for you to own one, that you have admitted you have never fired, out of some nostalgia for back when you were in the Argive "Brotherhood of Arms" and buggery, is no reason not to think you may be a potential murdering mass murder, especially if we have to raise your taxes to pay for your medical care.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:55AM
Not true, they're perfectly serviceable for mass murder inside the military.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @04:18AM (10 children)
First of all, some people need killing. The AR-15 was put to great use in an Oklahoma home invasion. A lady (getaway driver) and 3 guys showed up with weapons. The adult son of the homeowner fired down the staircase at them, killing all 3 with just 2 bullets. That's 1.5 criminals dead per bullet.
It's a fun practice gun, with affordable bullets that give a flat trajectory. It has very low recoil, making it almost perfect for kids. (a bullpup like the Kel-Tec RDB or FN P90 or FN F2000 has some advantages there, being easier to hold)
The AR-15 is even good for hunting, though some states require a more-deadly gun such as the larger AR-10. Yes, really, the AR-15 is a bit weak for killing deer. (really it is fine though)
Guns made this nation. You're welcome to move to a place you prefer, with heavy gun restrictions, such as Mexico or Venezuela.
The state of Missouri was just declared a sanctuary state... for guns. If it works for pot and illegals, it will work for guns too. All enforcement of federal gun laws is prohibited in that state. Get some belt-fed goodness with exploding depleted uranium armor-piercing shells, and of course saw off the barrel and add a silencer. Check it out: https://thesentinel.net/politics/missouri-bans-all-federal-gun-control-laws-in-23-10-vote/ [thesentinel.net]
Speaking of silencers, lots of states have declared sanctuary status on that one. Silencers are being sold openly now. Many parts of Maryland have declared sanctuary status against that state's oppressive laws too.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by FatPhil on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:50AM (9 children)
I'm so glad I live in a civilised country, not the wild-west hellhole you live in.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:11PM
Does your country welcome people with third-world or 7th-century values? If so, it won't be long before you have a significant population of people who need killing.
When that happens, and you no longer live in a civilized country, you'll need to be armed.
The police are not bodyguards. They will not save you. They show up later, to photograph your corpse and track down witnesses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:01PM (1 child)
whining dhimmi bitch
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:58PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday March 21 2019, @07:23PM (5 children)
Yeah, I know ... it's a real comfort to know that you can burglarize people's homes without having them shoot back.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:54PM (4 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday March 21 2019, @10:51PM (3 children)
Okay, then explain it to me. What makes a country "civilised"?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday March 22 2019, @01:44AM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday March 22 2019, @02:25PM (1 child)
What a cop-out of an answer. I was hoping you would at least try to defend your position. We might both learn something from an actual debate. Instead, all I get is a baseless sense of smug superiority. How very "civilised" of you to respond that way.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday March 23 2019, @11:26AM
However, if you desperately want to be patronised, then I'm saying you're in the Wild West still.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @04:22AM (22 children)
What's your point? Any firearm I ever own will be specifically purchased with killing other human beings in mind; we're hands down the most dangerous living things on the planet. Are you saying I shouldn't pick the most efficient tool available for a job or are you just saying the people should never have the ability to effectively resist the men who have the "good guns"? How very Roman of you.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:15AM (14 children)
Your choice, I hope you don't expect others to agree and you'll not manifest a bias against the people that don't agree with you on this point.
I disagree; to the point I consider your statement bordering paranoia. (granted, being paranoid doesn't mean they are not after you, but in most of the cases the actually aren't).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:29AM (5 children)
Ok, I'll bite. What living thing on this Earth is more dangerous than a human?
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:36AM (2 children)
Many. Some viruses/bacteria is the first example that springs into mind.
You pick whatever living thing you want to be afraid of, I reserve the right to disagree with you and make my choice about what I am being afraid of.
So that, as a matter of personal choice, we can agree to disagree and waste less time in the process.
Deal?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Friday March 22 2019, @06:05AM (1 child)
Humans have the ability to cause global thermonuclear war. No other organism on Earth has comparable power.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday March 22 2019, @07:17AM
Nothing in the range from 'God given right to bear arms' or 'total firearms ban' will make you able to change anything in the case of thermonuclear war, not prevent one.
So, why do you think is relevant here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Funny) by aristarchus on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:32AM (1 child)
My gosh, mhjicek, if that is your real handle, are you not aware that c0lo dwells in the Land Down Under, where they name snakes by the number of steps you can take after having been bitten? And then the Australian Redback spider, and the Funnel Web spiders, and many more. Crocs! Humongous and quick Salties! Not to even mention the drop-bears. Everything in Australia is more dangerous than a human. Don't get me started on 'roos and punk Vegemite!
If TMB lived such a place, he would be in a constant state of fear and panic, and would not even be able to go fishing.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:58PM
Heh, the Redback is a sweety - unpleasant if you aren't used with, but you won’t die.
Add this cutie [wikipedia.org] to your list, though - I hear the pain is delightfully excruciating [youtu.be] and can last for weeks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:31AM (7 children)
Silly culo, we can wipe out all life on the planet at once or any species we care to individually. Hell, we do it plenty often by accident. We win the most dangerous trophy, hands down.
I don't mind what you think about what I do or why you buy or don't buy your own guns. I personally have no use for them aside from killing humans or the occasional annoying varmint though.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:41AM (4 children)
And your point is, asshole**? "Can" doesn't matter "will".
Besides, in the context, even if we "will", the ownership of a gun is useless anyway.
** stop using pejoratives, they add nothing to the discussion
I got it, your post is just an expression of a personal choice.
As long as you stay within the law of your land, I have no objections to that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:10AM (3 children)
They add fun. You don't like fun? I knew you were a pinko commie.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:39AM (2 children)
You may like my style of fun. Based on what you say, I certainly don't like yours.
But that's no problem, you rotten nazi, you are not married one with the other (thanks God), and thus we can each have our own kind of fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:45AM (1 child)
No, we can't. You see, last night I became a progressive, so all fun has to either be exactly like mine (which is no longer any fun at all) or it has to be punishable by death.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday March 23 2019, @11:30AM
What a coincidence! Last night I became Ethanol Fuelled. Literally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by J053 on Friday March 22 2019, @12:25AM (1 child)
Oh, yeah? Then, why are there still cockroaches and mosquitoes then, huh? Huh?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:46AM
Because we care more about other things than about killing cockroaches and mosquitoes and don't put in the effort.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:07AM (4 children)
My apologies, oh Minute Buzzard, when I dispatch you with a Rigby .577 Express, not designed nor intended for use against humans. None of my firearms are meant for use against humans, those are military weapons, and I find them abhorrent. It is beyond me why anyone but a homocidal maniac would own such weapons, unless required by his government. And he should disbuse himself of such weapons as soon as his period of service is complete. If he does not, he is showing signs of being a sociopathic killer, like all those who have used the civilian equivalent of the US Army M-16, as sucky as that weapon is for all purposes compared to its Communist counterpart.
Oh, Nota Bene, dear Bird of Carrion, the Rigby is a double-rifle, two barrels, so nearly instantaneous second shot, and a speed loader puts the third and forth not much further away. With good markmanship, the advantage of semi-auto, or auto-loading firearms is negated. Even though, and again, I cannot make this point too clear, it is never intended to target humans. People, People who buy guns to kill people, are the unluckiest people, in the world! Streisand, you scumbag!
(Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:13AM (3 children)
Silly Ari, there's no need to be a sociopath to kill another human being. Plenty of people are in need of it on a daily basis for reasons too numerous to list here.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Touché) by aristarchus on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:12AM (2 children)
Dew teil, oh Consumer of Dead Corpses, what reason might those be? And I assume we are referring to morally justifiable reasons? Otherwise, your observation is pointless. Do you know the effective range of a Rigby .577 Nitro Express? I thought not.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:48AM (1 child)
Rape, murder, running for office, making reality TV shows, texting while you're out to dinner with friends or family... The list is a long one.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday March 23 2019, @06:47AM
Any of these offers rich targets, so long as you are not moving too fast, kind of like Muslims at prayer, bowing, and not posing much a of threat to a coward Whine Supremercist idiot. So, again, Termangerant Boussant, what is your point? You are not one of these right-wing Washita bastards that marched your ancestors out of their ancestral lands? Because, you know, they were "white"? I am going to paint you with the broad war-brush, because either you stand with the invading imperialist, or you stand with the rest of humanity. Humanity says kill all white people, mostly because there are no "white" people except as defined against Black and Red, and Yellow, Brown, and Purple people. So if you are not one of those, you are "White" because you have no identity, except to be opposed to people with identity forced upon them by "White" people. For you, a national of a native tribe, to allow yourself to be associated with half-breed Greek-English siwashes such as Milo Toosucchmyccockallicious, My ancestors weep for your ancestors. One such as you, have forgotten the faces of their fathers, [reddit.com] as Idris Elba says in "The Dark Tower" Buzzard, remember you grandma, but do not forget the face of your father. I still remember it.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:31PM (1 child)
I don't think you are fooling anyone. We all know you mostly use it as a phallus.
Yes, indeed. Human stupidity and hubris can be quite dangerous. I don't think this is anything to brag about, though.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:49AM
No. This is my rifle, this is my gun. This one's for fighting, this one's for fun.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:03PM (2 children)
Your stupidity gets tiresome. You don't get to decide who the criminals are. Perhaps you've heard of "constitutional carry". Maybe you're even familiar with the constitution, and the second amendment. You don't become a criminal for owning, or carrying a weapon. You MAY become politically persecuted, but you don't become a criminal.
You may now return to your political persecution of everyone with whom you disagree.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:23PM (1 child)
No, idiot Runaway, I have never heard of such a thing! What consititution do you refer to? And why would you want to be a Bundy, parading about with a Mormon pocket constitution in your pocket? What does carrying constitutions have to do with anything we are talking about here? Are you in possession, Runaway? Of illegal substances, or implements, or ideas? Turn yourself in, it will go easier for you.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday March 23 2019, @06:52AM
I have decided that Runaway1956-2626 is in fact a criminal, at least by my states laws and the laws of humanity. Shoot on site, or off site, or until you see the sites of his eyes, I say! Or, perhaps, we just wait till he slips up at work, for the H**** plant, and commits sexual harassment just one too many times? Wow, you are such a looker, Runaway, come over here and plant a big one right on my lips! Oh, wow, Sucker! Lawsuit!!!
(Score: 2) by chewbacon on Thursday March 21 2019, @07:33PM (6 children)
Wrong. 5.56 is used as a hunting round by some people who prefer the lower recoil. I'll disregard the rest of your delusional, mistaken authority on the issue. Thanks for playing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:19PM (5 children)
Lower recoil because of tiny projectiles, and thus less effective knock-down power, resulting in wounded animals that these pantywaists are unable to track and administer a coup de grace for the same reason they cannot handle a weapon with the necessary recoil. Wooses!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @02:52AM (4 children)
You're poorly informed. When a 5.56 NATO round hits flesh, it tumbles end over end all through the body of whatever it hit. This does not make for a pleasant, restful evening and is far more deadly, ounce for ounce, than a bullet going straight through.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday March 23 2019, @08:30AM (3 children)
Which is why it in violation of not only the Hague Conventions against inhumane weapons, but also in violation of the "St. Petersburg Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Explosive Projectiles Under 400 Grammes Weight", and the International consensus that British Dum-dums were dumb. So how does it feel, oh non-alt-right ammo-sexual Buzzard, to know you could hold in your hands, or stick up your butt, a weapon that is in fact in violation of international law of armed conflict? Bad-ass, eh? Careful with the trigger, or you may, you know, blow your balls off. With tiny projectiles that don't even get the chance to spin. [wikipedia.org]
And besides, with the Rigby, it is the skill of the marksman that is definitive, not any techno-magrifiction that gives you a three-shot burst to compensate for piss poor marksmanship, or a tumbling projectile that basically serves the same function. A Rigby rifle, handled by a competent marksman, might only give you a through and through, but mind you that this is an over half-an-inch hole, with quite some force behind it, regardless of the range. 750 grains will go through you, even if it is just falling straight down! Your toy gun has a 55 grain projectile, which might be felt, if it hit you at beyond 200 yards. Grok the Ballistics, you who claim to be right wing! Or those of us who are left wing and can put 5 in a minute of arc at 1000 yards at Creedmoor will have something to say to you. You will not hear it coming, however.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday March 23 2019, @01:41PM (2 children)
So how does it feel, oh non-alt-right ammo-sexual Buzzard, to know you could hold in your hands, or stick up your butt, a weapon that is in fact in violation of international law of armed conflict?
Pretty good. I mean I don't recognize international law because I don't recognize any international body with authority over my nation. Add to that the entire purpose of war is to make the enemy either dead or no longer wishing to fight, so using less brutal weapons actually increases death and suffering by prolonging the conflict. And on a personal level, if I point a weapon at something animate, it's because I want it to become inanimate. Anything lessening the chances of that is directly contrary to the purpose of weapons.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:47AM (1 child)
Which nation, you siwash bastard! You do know that the rights of the nation you were born into are guaranteed by international law of treaties? As I recall, the text went: "This land will be yours for as long as the sun shines and the grass is green, or 90 days, whichever comes first."
No, that is not the purpose of war, though it may seem like it from the perspective of the lowest grunts. And the whole "a war is merciful if it be brief" argument? Oh, dear, tell that to the dead in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in Atlanta and Magdeburg! I now understand why the rogue nation of the United States has made side-treaties with almost all other nations in the world to exempt their ignorant and war-criminal forces from being brought before the ICC in the Hague, under the Rome Statute [wikipedia.org].Only seems fair, if you are any indication of how much education American soldiers are given in the International Laws of Armed Conflict. Which, by the way, you are under the jurisdiction of, whether your nation has agreed to them or not, so be careful where you travel to, as does Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, and GW Bush. War Crimes, TMB! Universal jurisdiction, and no statute of limitations. If they find you when you are Eighty, like the Nazi camp guard in Chicago, you are still going down. Hope all your war crimes are just fantasies, Buzzztard!!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 27 2019, @12:41PM
Treaties are agreements not law. Laws require an entity above any participants with the authority and ability to adjudicate and enforce them. It's the difference between Runaway1956 punching you in the face for modding one of his comments Spam and me mod-banning you for it. There is no such entity above nations, we do occasionally pretend there is but only when it's politically convenient to do so.
I have and will again right now. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings saved millions of lives, both American and Japanese, and caused so much less destruction of Japan than a ground invasion would have that your position is beyond laughable.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:04AM (50 children)
The main purpose: make the acquisition of a new automatic gun not impossible but at a much higher personal cost (money and personal risks). Granted, criminals may still be able to get them, but the rate of acquisition will be much lower (hopefully so much lower that it may be practically zero). Remember: security is a trade off, absolute security is impossible, asking "perfect security or nothing" is a Nirvana fallacy [wikipedia.org]
---
** New Zealand has about 1 firearm for every 4 people [smallarmssurvey.org] (PDF - see table 2 at page 4), unlike USA with 1.2 guns/head. In addition, New Zealand doesn't have a "ma' God-given right 2 bear arms" culture like US.
From this 0.25 guns/head, many will not be "military style" - thus the ownership of them will be not affected (for now). Those that have these kind and don't turn them in will be indeed criminals by the new law. Since saying this is a tautology, what exactly is your point? (i.e. what problem do you see with it?)
It worked in Australia and I guarantee you the jails haven't suddenly burst with "criminals".
Maybe the USians should keep you "moral indignation" for themselves, many other societies don't have a problem with that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:07AM (2 children)
Estimated 75% non-compliance with the mandatory buy-back?
Biker gangs mass-producing SMGs?
The Australian PR apparently worked, but that's about it.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:31AM
Citation?
And your point?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:45PM
The last mass shooting in Australia was in 1996.
The truth is a pretty damn good PR campaign.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:12AM (34 children)
semi-automatic != automatic
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:17AM (33 children)
Your point?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:35AM (31 children)
---->
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:43AM (30 children)
Since I don't see any point being depicted, I'll consider your reply as pointless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:22AM (27 children)
Automatic does not equal semi-automatic, and for some reason to the "ammosexuals" it makes some big difference in how quickly you can get off. I usually equate it to the "jihadist" spray-and-pray" tactic, which, since they expect 72 virgins, is not all that irrational. But the point is that most of these "semi-auto" sticklers are full of shit, and basically ignorant. It only takes a slight modification to make a semi-auto a full auto. In fact, full auto is the default condition of a "machine gun". Hold the trigger down, and it keeps firing. Let the trigger up, and it stops. Now a semi-auto is the exact same thing, except it will stop before the next round, unless you release the trigger and press it again. So now you know how "bump stocks" work. But that is the point. Autos are for people too stupid to aim, semi-autos are for people too stupid to work a bolt, a lever, a fore-arm, or break the action and reload. So you can see how they would be sensitive. All those poor ISIL guys, never learned to shoot, and now they are all dead. If only they had not had automatics or semi-automatics, and thought they could rely on them. Fucked by the gun.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:11PM (26 children)
LOL, I half agree with you. I've always been contemptuous of autos and semi-autos in any setting outside the military. But - you're still missing the point of the second amendment. The hillbillies are supposed to be capable of revolting when they get sick enough of the city slickers. The constitution guarantees that citizens have the right to revolt, and the second amendment guarantees that they have the means to do so.
If those ammosexuals need 500 rounds per second to get off, just leave the deviants alone. You don't like 500 rounds per second, you don't have get off with them. Just stay in your own bed, alone.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:10PM (1 child)
This isn't a very cute argument.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:23PM
You're going for "funny"? I left cute behind about a half century ago.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday March 22 2019, @02:51AM (23 children)
"The hillbillies are supposed to be capable of revolting when they get sick enough of the city slickers."
Er, no. Actually read the 2nd Amendment, please. It said nothing about rural or urban areas, you self-serving, dishonest, lying fucking lunatic. It says that a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of the State, i.e., nation of the US of A. If you want to masturbate to the idea of shooting a bunch of New Yorkers and spouting some idiot one-liner, go ahead, but that's not either the letter or the spirit of the Second. People like you are why we need gun control.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Friday March 22 2019, @02:31PM (22 children)
Your ignorance is pretty amazing, too, you know. There are a lot of city slickers outside of NY, Chicago, D.C, and LA. There are even city people in (gasp) TEXAS!!! (Can you believe it!?!?!)
Now, you may have a minor point about the letter of the law - but you're entirely full of shit regarding the spirit of the law. The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting, little to do with serving in the state, or federal militia and/or army, and EVERYTHING TO DO WITH KEEPING GOVERNMENT IN LINE.
Don't bother arguing with me. Go read about the Tree of Liberty requiring the blood of patriots and tyrants to thrive. Pick any of the founding fathers, and read the body of his works. All of them believed strongly that all able bodied men should keep the accoutrements of war ready at hand. He might need to join the state militia at a moment's notice this year, then he might need to join a rebel force at a moment's notice next year.
Maybe you can stop by Walmart, and get you some spirit, so that you can get into the spirit the founding fathers intended.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday March 22 2019, @09:13PM (21 children)
And if I told you I carry a small sidearm that dispenses .22 rounds (I know, I know, might as well be blowing spitballs...) what would you think?
PS: when the Founding Fathers wrote that, the closest thing to a weapon of mass destruction was a bunch of cannon in parallel, *maybe* some sort of homemade fertilizer bomb if someone had worked out the properties of potash by some (un)fortunate accident. According to your post, the "spirit" of the second is that individual citizens should have nuclear weapons, tanks, fighter jets, nerve gas, blister agents, and cruise missiles.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 23 2019, @01:46AM (20 children)
I'll never badmouth the .22. It has put a lot of food on my table. It has also sent two of my friends to the grave. It is no spitball - please don't help to spread that myth. It was once a well known fact that the .22 has killed more people than any other caliber. I have no reason to suspect that statistic has changed in the last half century. A hollow point to the spleen from close range is deadly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 23 2019, @08:39AM (1 child)
Stop shooting your friends with your .22, Runaway! Friendly fire isn't!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 23 2019, @08:48AM
My name is not Dick Cheney, and I've never shot a friend.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 23 2019, @11:24PM (17 children)
Odd how that suddenly changed your tune, isn't it? Can I be a "hoplophobe" (Jesus jet-skiing Christ...) and own a sidearm at the same time? Are you confused? Surprised? Aroused? (Please no...).
Understand something: the idea of holding death in my hands fucking TERRIFIES me. I hate that this kind of power can exist in one place, and be so easy to use. I hate the idea that even the threat of it may ever need to be used. All my life I've tried to build people up and heal their bodies and minds. That thing feels like an evil demon in capsule form.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 24 2019, @03:32AM (16 children)
Yes, you can be a hoplophobe, and own a weapon at the same time. You can fear dogs, and own a dog. You can fear horses, and own a horse. On and on it goes. People do weird shit.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 24 2019, @04:48AM (15 children)
A phobia is an irrational fear. There are good, rational reasons to fear holding the Reaper in your hand, able to strike at a distance with a mere push of the finger. Some people need dead; what I fear is that I may have to be the one to do it someday.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 24 2019, @05:01AM (14 children)
Good. That is one of the most important lessons for any shooter to learn. There is nothing irrational about fearing being a situation where killing a person may be necessary. But, it isn't the weapon that should be feared. It is inanimate, has no will of it's own, cannot perform an action without your input. When you realize all of that, then you arrive at the an obvious conclusion: You fear yourself, and you fear the asshole who caused the situation.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 25 2019, @04:36AM (13 children)
It's not so simple. Some devices are larger force multipliers than others, and some people are too unstable to have access to force multipliers above, pardon me, a certain caliber. I notice that the right wing is very, very black-and-white about this: it seems they think either we have utterly unrestricted access, or we become some kind of totalitarian state if there are any restrictions at all.
You never did, I notice, reply to my pointing out that your naive reading of the Second would imply individual citizens should have access to chemical and biological weapons, heavy artillery, fighter jets, and so forth. Why is that?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 25 2019, @06:15AM (1 child)
Your first paragraph is hogwash, plain and simple. A deadly weapon is a deadly weapon, and in the hands of a skilled warrior, it matters little whether it is a .18 pellet, a .22, .38, .45, .50 round. With some minor difference, they all perform the same function - to penetrate and destroy flesh, organs, bones, and the vascular system. As I've already pointed out, that little .22 hollow point at close range destroys a spleen, and the victim usually bleeds out in less than a quarter hour, oftentimes much quicker.
You are looking for opinions on weapons of mass destruction? Seige weapons? City killing weapons? Those are all beyond the scope of the discussion that I am willing to engage in here. Some other time, maybe we'll get the context for that discussion.
Naive reading of the 2nd? Did you go in search of the writing of Jefferson, and others who participated in framing the constitution, and it's amendments? No - of course not. They explicitly state that the purpose of the 2nd is to reserve to the people the power to forcefully change governments. Governments, like underwear, should be changed pretty regularly, according to the people who wrote the constitution.
The 2nd has NOTHING to do with hunting, and little to do with day-to-day self defense. The 2nd is all about maintaining the people's control of government. The 2nd put's a bull's eye between the eyes of every government official - and THAT is why people like Pelosi fear that amendment so much. Trump? Not so much. (Of course, there is the possibility that Trump isn't smart enough to understand that he wears a target.)
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 25 2019, @09:04PM
You miss the point, again: we-the-people would NEED that sort of firepower to make the government "afraid" of us. That is why I call your reading naive, and that is what you have demonstrated with your response. You want to "put a bullseye" on a government official? Good luck with that; s/he can project force further, faster, and deadlier than you, and with the advent of AI and drone weapons, the gap just opened about an order of magnitude wider. Assassin drones by 2030: you heard it here. Tiny ones.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 27 2019, @12:55PM (10 children)
There's your mistake then. Firearms as weapons aren't actually multiplicative but additive and firearms add enough that they make the starting value largely irrelevant. You're essentially saying you do not want equality among people if you're advocating against the greatest equalizer of human beings ever invented. This doesn't actually surprise me as you've said as much many times but I'm not certain it was visible to you, so I'm pointing it out now.
As for overkill examples on the 2A? The founding fathers had just used privately owned ships armed as well as they could afford and artillery to help create the nation when they wrote it. I'm pretty sure they meant to include them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:34PM (9 children)
Okay then, that settles it: we civilians NEED nuclear weapons! I have a RIGHT to a Minuteman missile in my backyard, by Jove!
We cannot allow a mineshaft gap, Mr. President!
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday March 27 2019, @10:16PM (8 children)
Go right ahead and build one then as far as I'm concerned. For the most part, people who can afford that kind of expense don't want the non-governmental consequences owning one would bring down on them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday March 27 2019, @11:37PM (7 children)
But if we're going to keep "thuh eebil gubbamint" in line, according to what you believe the spirit of the Second says, we *need* that sort of armament, no? If the Second is supposed to keep us armed on an equal footing with Thuh Gubbamint (TM) we kind of *need* drones, MIRVs, tanks, smart bombs, chemical and biowarfare agents, tactical nukes, not-at-all-tactical-in-the-least nukes, and all the computer systems and infrastructure and logistics to support them all.
This interpretation of the Second leads straight down the rabbit hole.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 28 2019, @02:00AM (6 children)
Nope. We don't really need anything more than the same small arms they have. It would make the inevitable a lot less bloody to have better weapons but it's not strictly speaking necessary. WMD type weapons in particular would be fairly useless in a civil war if your goal isn't to scorch the earth you plan on living on when it's over. None of the above gives the government the right to violate what is ever so explicitly stated in the 2A though.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 28 2019, @04:53AM (5 children)
"The same small arms they have," he says. Look, Uzzard, when the inevitable Civil War 2 happens, and at this point in time the probability matrices are pointing to one almost 100%, it's not gonna stay "small arms" for very long
Reality isn't some sort of spaghetti Western, you are not John Wayne and never will be, and we will see atrocities committed against the "rebels" in short order, especially if there's a large AI presence by the time it escalates that far. The "rebels" will be treated like terrorists, insurgents, the kind of people we've spent the last 15-20 years fighting in the Middle East. This includes you. You'll never get a chance to play freedom fighter; you'll lie there choking to death on a cloud of VX, muscles on fire from tetanous spasms as you suffocate by inches. Or you'll just get blown apart in a bombing run and no one would be able to identify what remains of you even if someone bothers to try and can piece enough fragments of you together.
You are not a hero, and never will be. When the dunghill hits the windmill, you are dead, dead, dead, just like everyone else on the "wrong side."
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday March 28 2019, @11:20AM (4 children)
You're really not all that sane, are you? DC not only wouldn't use WMDs of any kind on the population, they couldn't if they wanted to do anything but starve to death. Hell, they can't really even use any of their bombs or artillery unless they happen across an insurgent gathering large enough to make it worth destroying the infrastructure they rely on. It's going to be entirely conventional weapons warfare and no amount of tanks and planes are going to help when your insurgents look just like everybody else right up until they kill you. That's assuming you even keep a significant portion of the military and police under your control at all, which is far from guaranteed.
I guess I shouldn't go assuming sanity in a conversation where you're saying both "Trump is going to destroy the universe!" and "Only Trump should have guns!" though, should I?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 28 2019, @11:09PM (3 children)
See elsewhere in the thread for the warning about what happens to people who muster up armies of strawmen. It's half in jest, but *only* half. Point still stands: you are not a hero, you will not go out in a glorious blaze of gunfire, and you'll be lucky if you even have time to draw a weapon or even know that you should do so; more than likely, if you aren't actually close enough to the center of some bad shit to catch a noseful of Satan's kimchi farts, you'll just end up starving or dying of infection with no infrastructure around you. Not exactly the cross between Rambo and John Galt you make yourself out to be, in other words.
An "insurgent gathering large enough" could be as small as a few dozen people. Bio and chem agents mostly dissipate after a while; they're the closest thing we have to the old "kills people, leaves buildings standing" ideas about a theoretical neutron bomb. Drones are a thing, as are targeted assassinations with said drones.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday March 31 2019, @01:14PM (2 children)
You think I'm concerned about being a hero? That implies I care what others think of me. Has that been your experience here? If so, we need to notify the folks in charge of the 2020 US Olympic team. Those would be some world class mental gymnastics.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday April 01 2019, @01:00AM (1 child)
You care what you think of you, and you think you're some kind of rugged individualist, some sort of cross between John Galt and Robinson Crusoe, bucking the system from the inside and thumbing your nose at it. The sort of war your kind cheers on will be a rude and fatal awakening.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday April 01 2019, @01:41AM
I say and do what I say and do because it's what I believe is right. I only ask of myself that I make that effort. If you want to call that heroic, that's on you. I just call it attempting to live up to my ideals.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Funny) by slinches on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:00PM (1 child)
It was a pointedly hollow point, I grant you. Maybe he'll expand upon it later.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday March 22 2019, @01:37AM
I so much prefer things that expand first and have impact later.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @07:28PM
Listening to people who know nothing about guns is like listening to some random dude at Best Buy give tech advice. More often than not, the information is crap from top to bottom, from basic facts through proposed solutions. Crap the whole way through.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:31AM
Sure, cause that strategy worked so well for alcohol and drugs. /S
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:05PM (10 children)
That 1.2 guns per person in the US seems a lowball number. I thought it was more like 3 each, and climbing. Even liberals are going out and buying guns these days.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:55PM (5 children)
My feeling as well, but even with the conservative figure of 1.2 guns/head, US is ridiculous well ahead of any other country.
What is scarier though is not that "even liberals are buying guns these days", but for sure there are a significant number of households that are gun free. Which means some people may have a mini-arsenal worth of guns. WTF?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @07:18PM (4 children)
Yep, there are a significant number of us who are unarmed. And then there are a bunch of crazy loons armed to the teeth. Those crazy loons will tell you that they need all the guns in their arsenal for protection, but mysteriously they are hardly ever anywhere to be found when a mass shooting occurs; when seconds count they are typically just minutes away. Or they end up shooting themselves or someone else (by accident, naturally). My impression is that what they are really trying to do is over compensate for...something. Of course, there is a vast middle ground of people who have a few guns because they like to hunt. Most of us have no problem with them. The hard part is figuring out how to prise all the assault rifles out of the hands of the loons while not startling the hunters into believing that we are after their hunting rifles; the NRA typically tries to use scare tactics on the hunters.
Indeed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @07:43PM (3 children)
It's been nothing but give and never get. You probably won't look at it but the cartoon but is exactly on point on the history of gun control: https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2013/11/08/cake-and-compromise-illustrated-guide-to-gun-control/ [everydaynodaysoff.com]
Perhaps as an exercise, you should learn enough to understand why the focus on stuff like the AR15 while "not startling the hunters into believing that we are after their hunting rifles" is pretty laughable. Hint, start with the physics, not the politics.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:42PM (2 children)
Frankly, what we might charitably refer to as the historical "analysis" in that cartoon is just plain childish. Seriously? Gun control as a cake? It would be laughable except that the consequences are deadly serious. So, tell us, what have you gun owners had to give up? An extended magazine of 30+ bullets? Do you really need that many bullets to chase off a few bad guys? If you can't chase off some hoodlums with 30 bullets in your gun then what you really need is to go to the shooting range and do a bit of target practice, not a bigger magazine; in fact, if you actually need all 30 bullets then you are clearly a hazard to everyone within shooting range. So, what are you really giving up then? You have to go through a background check? Don't you want to keep guns out of the hands of known criminals? A mental health check? You do realize that many of the 12000+ gun deaths reported in the USA are people killing themselves with their own gun, right? And the five day waiting period is now typically reduced to a few minutes of waiting at the gun shop. So, what have you really given up yet? Tell us!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 22 2019, @01:31AM (1 child)
We should give them up when cops do.
One might ask, why is there always an exception for police? Is it because deep down there is a recognition that multiple attackers exist? Or that people don't just fly backward instantly dead when they get shot?
There's also the fact that ALWAYS, the defender is at an immediate disadvantage because she is responding to an attack. As a result, the defender is unlikely to have access to reloads while the attacker, being a criminal and who could choose the time and place of attack, as well as having no qualms over an illegal mag, will always be at an advantage in every conceivable way while the defender will probably have nothing more than the gun and what is in it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 22 2019, @08:31PM
and the baby killing scum at the atf, fbi, dea, etc. war is coming little yuppy bitches and we're going to strangle you with your man purses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:04PM (3 children)
And, somehow, I feel less and less safe with each passing day.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:09PM (2 children)
That is precisely why you should #walkaway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @08:35PM
FTFY
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:22PM
Indeed, it is looking more and more like the only real solution is to leave the country and let the entire lot of you crazies shoot each other to death; when it is all over the rest of us can come back, bury the bodies, and dance on your graves.
(Score: 1, Troll) by VLM on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:54AM (3 children)
Its simpler than that, its merely that law abiding sportsman tend to be straight white Christian males, and anything that screws them over is loved by leftists.
Obviously this ban will not impede criminals, its sole purpose is to screw over the racial enemies of Jewish leftists.
Gun control only exists where there's white straight Christian males to be punished by the usual type of leftists. What a weird coincidence that the "problem" of guns only exists where there's still some white men left to be whipped, huh?
Its basically this generation's reefer madness, which was anti-hispanic racism wrapped in a cloak of drug BS.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:13PM (1 child)
You're wandering out there in weird field. But, you know that, right? When guns were banned in China, it didn't affect a lot of white hetero males. I don't think the Jews had much to do with it either. About 20 million Chinese died as a result, though. The real lefties were happy with that, from Chairman Mao on down.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Sunday March 24 2019, @02:47PM
In different cultures something can be sacramental or not. For example, a cracker is a sacrament of a Catholic mass in the Christian world, but in China a cracker is just a cracker.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday March 22 2019, @02:54AM
Okay I think I've finally got you figured out: you are a really, really, *really* deep-cover troll on the far left fringe and your angle is to say such insane shit that anyone reading it instantly discredits everyone right of Kamala Harris. That has to be it. There's no way you can say things like that and actually mean it; that would imply brain damage of a level that requires mechanically-assisted ventilation and very possibly adult diapers.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @03:56AM (8 children)
At the first mosque, a target ran off to get a gun and came back with it. He fired a couple shots at the attacker, dissuading the attacker from continuing there.
The death toll was much higher at the second mosque, which didn't have anybody able to put up a properly armed defense.
(Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @06:01AM (7 children)
maximum extecta taurus! [wikipedia.org] (major bullshit detected)
Al Noor Mosque [wikipedia.org] - first site
Linwood Islamic Centre [wikipedia.org] - second site
---
Bullshit.
The only challenge the attacker faced at the first location was "Mian Naeem Rashid, charged at the gunman but was shot, and later died in hospital."
At the second site, the attacker was challenged by Abdul Aziz Wahabzadah, who is credited with the attack.
He used... wait for it... a credit card reader. All it took to drive off the fucking coward was a credit card reader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @11:16AM (2 children)
(groan! should have been : Maximum excreta taurum... I think)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Friday March 22 2019, @02:05AM (1 child)
What you said makes no grammatical or lexical sense. Let me help.
I'm assuming what you actually wanted was something like, "Ille est stercus tauri," i.e., "That is dung of a bull." Well, stercus is a polite term for the Romans, so perhaps, "Ista est merda tauri," which is more like, "That [ contemptuous stuff of yours] is the shit of a bull." If you really wanted, you could throw in a maxima after merda, but it would be really weird in idiomatic Latin.
Because a Roman speaker would take that literally and think you were asserting something was a literal pile of feces. So if you really want idiomatic Latin, I'd go for "Nugae sunt istae magnae" (said in Plautus) which is difficult to render literally ("Nonsensical [things] are your ['your' here carrying a notion of contempt] great [things] "), but basically implies you are full of BS.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday March 22 2019, @02:13AM
Got it, thanks!
(teaches me right to be a poser. Next time, better stick with what I really want to say in the simplest form)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:18PM (1 child)
Are you repeating what Aristarchus had to say a couple days ago?
It's WRONG!
Abdul used a credit card reader, apparently throwing it at the shooter. Then, he played dodgem with the freak, in the parking lot. Eventually, Abdul stumbled over a firearm that had been discarded by the shooter, because it was empty. Abdul didn't know it was empty - he picked it up, and went after the infamous asswipe. Asswipe didn't like having weapons pointed at him, so at that point, he decided to cut and run.
The credit card reader is an important part of the story, but it isn't the story.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday March 21 2019, @02:50PM
I quoted Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] - the link is present in my comment.
Even maybe not exact, seems like a good approximation of what happened. Certainly a closer approximation for the reality that the bullshit in the comment I replied to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Touché) by isostatic on Friday March 22 2019, @09:13AM (1 child)
All it took to drive off the fucking coward was a credit card reader
Ironically the same people who love guns, hate credit cards
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 22 2019, @09:52AM
Pedantically speaking, "incidentally" fits better than "ironically". Like in "it just so happens that..."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:09AM
You mean it would not have happened the way it happened.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:15AM
What, NZ is banning Subarus??
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @04:28PM
If there had been a couple of comparably armed individual in the place where NZ Assaults happened, the shooter would have been dead...
Shooters pick soft targets. Unarmed = soft.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 21 2019, @05:56PM
stfu, you stupid bitch.