The firearm thread

[husaberg]

He was only able to obtain the licence because the police didn't follow the correct procedures, if they had then he would not have been granted a licence

That's a big call, do you have any evidence to back it up?
Do you have any evidence that he would not have received a license in the USA or Aust?
Under the then-current law, he was able to buy multiple AR15's and 60 round and 40 round mags. Anyone man and his dog cant buy these now
Something he couldn't do in AUST. Which is more than like why he did it here.

[onearmedbandit]

That's a big call, do you have any evidence to back it up?

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania...16-p55314.html

[jasonu]

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania...16-p55314.html

Well that’s fairly conclusive. Game set and match.

[husaberg]

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania...16-p55314.html

Its an opinion piece.
something that TDL and the old sinbin sulkerjason constantly dismisses when applied to Trump.............
in this case, the results of the investigation as far as I know have not been released

Police sources, who include both current and former staff who spoke to Stuff on the condition of anonymity, say the licence would not have been granted if proper procedure had been followed.

Another arms officer is supposed to check the applicant has been properly vetted before issuing the licence, yet no red flag was raised about the incomplete file.
The licence application came at a time when the arms office in Dunedin district was overloaded by applications. A source said Dunedin staff would at times call their colleagues in police headquarters, crying on the phone due to the pressure of their workload. Applications were being shunted through at speed.
The wrongful licensing was the result of a firearms control regime that was destroyed by years of mismanagement by police, a police source told Stuff.

According to Stuff, Tarrant was wrongly granted a firearms licence due to police failures. Sources said that police failed to interview a family member as required for obtaining a firearms licence, instead interviewing two men that Tarrant had met through an online chatroom. In the days after the attack, the police had quashed concerns that Tarrant had obtained the weapons inappropriately. Police have not given comment to this allegation, saying they do not wish to interfere with the ongoing inquiry into the event

Plus I had already raised it Fraser.

That said all the rest I said that you edited out still stands.

He was only able to obtain the licence because the police didn't follow the correct procedures, if they had then he would not have been granted a licence

That's a big call, do you have any evidence to back it up?
Do you have any evidence that he would not have received a license in the USA or Aust?
Under the then-current law, he was able to buy multiple AR15's and 60 round and 40 round mags. Anyone man and his dog cant buy these now
Something he couldn't do in AUST. Which is more than like why he did it here.

Well, put it this way, I don't know if he had a gun license in Aussie.
but his mum knew he had an arsenal of guns here yet never raised an alarm about it.



The police are meant to interview a next of kin, either family or partner I don't know what happens when his family is overseas, what they do.
He was able to legally obtain both ar15's and large mags 1000's of rounds of ammunition here on an A CLASS license,
He could not do that legally in Aussie, there is nothing to suggest he wouldn't have got a license in Aussie, he certainly would have got one in the USA
He then, I believe allegedly modified the AR15s for more rapid-fire.

and the triggers of some of the firearms were modified so he could fire them more quickly

You might suggest it was a licensing f- up, this well might be also true, as allegedly those two interviewed did not know him personally but all these write-ups i have seen about him are that he was outwardly pleasant. with little to suggest he was a danger
He was I a gun club they never seen any issues either.
but the fact is he obtained the weapons here on an A class license..

[onearmedbandit]

Plus I had already raised it onearmedbandit.

That said all the rest I said that you edited out still stands.

Huh? What did I edit out? I just merely linked an article supporting what kickaha had claimed. I never stated anything nor edited anything out.

[Kickaha]

That's a big call, do you have any evidence to back it up?
Do you have any evidence that he would not have received a license in the USA or Aust?
Under the then-current law, he was able to buy multiple AR15's and 60 round and 40 round mags. Anyone man and his dog cant buy these now
Something he couldn't do in AUST. Which is more than like why he did it here.

The link Fraser put up is one of many, there was also at least one person interviewed who had raised concerns with police about his behavior prior to the shooting and nothing was done about it

What does him being able to obtain a Firearms licence in the USA or OZ have to do with anything in NZ

The police fucked up and have not been held accountable

AR15 is nothing special, they well liked because they have a lot of accessories and are easy to customiseto suit the owner, if he couldn't of got those he could have done the same with other weapons

[FJRider]

That's a big call, do you have any evidence to back it up?

So ... the King of Google and paste [sic] ... couldn't find the NZ Firearms License Application requirements to confirm or argue those points raised. Your crown is getting a little tarnished. Cardboard crowns do get that way.

A firearms license applicant must provide two referees to be interviewed by police vetting staff tasked with assessing the risks the person could pose. This he did ... BUT (According to police's own firearms manual) ... one needs to be a next of kin and family member. Such as ... a partner or parent. Instead Tarrant gave the contacts as being a father and son that lived in Cambridge that Tarrant had met in an internet chat room. The second referee is supposed to be an unrelated person that knows the applicant well.

Thus simply ... the full (as required in Law) criteria was not applied in Tarrants firearms license application. You do not need to be a Lawyer to work THAT out.

Tarrant's license was granted without a family member even being questioned.

Another (and last part) of the application process is ... an arms officer is supposed to check to see if the applicant has been properly vetted before issuing the license. This never happened.

Do you have any evidence that he would not have received a license in the USA or Aust?

An irrelevant question. The application was made for a New Zealand Firearms License.

What he could/should/might have done ... is pointless to try and discuss. HE DIDN'T EVEN TRY in the US or Aussie. He KNEW NZ would be the easiest place to apply for one. And his own record would exempt him from entry into the USA. Which was probably the real reason he came to New Zealand.

Under the then-current law, he was able to buy multiple AR15's and 60 round and 40 round mags. Anyone man and his dog cant buy these now.

That IS true. The actual reason why HE CAME HERE. What the point you are trying to make ... by even mentioning this ... ??

Something he couldn't do in AUST. Which is more than like why he did it here.

In an earlier part of the post I am quoting ... you ASKED OAB ...

Do you have any evidence that he would not have received a license in the USA or Aust?

Why did you ask that question ... if you already knew/assumed the answer ... ????

[husaberg]

Huh? What did I edit out? I just merely linked an article supporting what kickaha had claimed. I never stated anything nor edited anything out.

the lines under the one you quoted?

[husaberg]

The link Fraser put up is one of many, there was also at least one person interviewed who had raised concerns with police about his behavior prior to the shooting and nothing was done about it

One of many unsustained reports from the same source it could have been reported a million times in 100,000 newspapers but it's at this stage only that.

What does him being able to obtain a Firearms license in the USA or OZ have to do with anything in NZ

You are claiming it's only a police licensing issue and completely disregard the fact without being able to legally buy the weapons it would not have likely played out the same.

The police fucked up and have not been held accountable

Your opinion based on guess what , an unsustained report. it way well be true but you don't have all the information to which you could make an informed opinion.

AR15 is nothing special, they well liked because they have a lot of accessories and are easy to customise to suit the owner, if he couldn't of got those he could have done the same with other weapons

that's why all that class of firearm has been banned on a A-class.
All a class of weapon he couldn't have brought in Aussie

[onearmedbandit]

the lines under the one you quoted?

Ah those lines. Edited out because I wasn't addressing them. I was merely supplying a link.

[FJRider]

One of many unsustained reports from the same source it could have been reported a million times in 100,000 newspapers but it's at this stage onely that.

How many times has ANY Police representative or Police Member made a statement denying ANY wrongdoing on their part ... ?? or giving any explanation of this case regarding the seemingly incorrect procedure used ... ???

You are claiming it's only a police licensing issue and completely disregard the fact without being able to legally buy the weapons it would not have likely played out the same.

He couldn't buy them in Aussie (you admitted that yourself) But ... with a basic (A class) license ... he could (then) and DID in NZ. The rules NOW are more inline with other western countries.

Your opinion based on guess what , an unsustained report. it way well be true but you don't have all the information to which you could make an informed opinion.

Nor do you have anything (other than YOUR opinion) to prove him wrong. Things called facts that you can quote.

that's why all that class of firearm has been banned on a A-class.
All a class of weapon he couldn't have brought in Aussie

Not BANNED at all ... just more restricted to purchase. Some firearms ... such as pistols (and now military style semi-automatic type firearms) ... also need a Police permit to procure each specific firearm ... and these weapons need to be registered with Police.

You can confirm ALL that yourself ... quite easily.

[Kickaha]

You are claiming it's only a police licensing issue and completely disregard the fact without being able to legally buy the weapons it would not have likely played out the same

Just like you completely disregard the fact that he was only legally able to buy them because of the police disregarding their own vetting procedure

I'm pretty sure with different weapons legally available now you could come up with the same end result

[FJRider]

Sauce?

As that would restore a small modicum of respect for the Police.

Tomato sauce.

Although the word you might have been looking for was source.

It would still not "Restore" the lives of the 51 killed during the two shootings.

Are the same people and numbers ... still in the firearms licensing departments ... ???

[husaberg]

Just like you completely disregard the fact that he was only legally able to buy them because of the police disregarding their own vetting procedure

It seems we have a different interpretation of what completely disregard means.

Well, put it this way, I don't know if he had a gun license in Aussie.
but his mum knew he had an arsenal of guns here yet never raised an alarm about it.

The police are meant to interview a next of kin, either family or partner I don't know what happens when his family is overseas, what they do.
He was able to legally obtain both ar15's and large mags 1000's of rounds of ammunition here on a A CLASS license,
he could not do that legally in Aussie, there is nothing to suggest he wouldn't have got a license in Aussie, he certainly would have got one in the USA
He then, I believe allegedly modified the AR15s for more rapid-fire.


You might suggest it was a licensing f- up, this well might be also true, as allegedly those two interviewed did not know him personally but all these write-ups i have seen about him are that he was outwardly pleasant. with little to suggest he was a danger
He was In a gun club they never seen any issues either.
but the fact is he obtained the weapons here on an A class license.

Ar15 's and similar have little to no practical use outside of killing people or pretending to kill people on a A class license.
The laws were changed to exclude them in the 1990's and the importers were constantly modifying them to get around the rules.
The gun laws prior to the incident were supposed t be world-class according to ti the gun lobby and they resisted any changes to them very strongly.

I'm pretty sure with different weapons legally available now you could come up with the same end result

Your own words do not convey a sense of certainty in this sentiment.

i think the difference is ,I value 51 people's lives higher than the rights of a few gun owners to own a gun on a A class license that has no practical need.

[Kickaha]

Your own words do not convey a sense of certainty in this sentiment.

i think the difference is ,I value 51 people's lives higher than the rights of a few gun owners to own a gun on a A class license that has no practical need.

I'll reword it for you, I'm fucking dead certain with the weapons legally available to today I could achieve the same result

51 people who would still be alive if it wasn't for the incompetence of the police who vetted him