LooseRounds.com
5.56 Timeline
Weaponsman.com

New Zealand’s Ongoing Gun Confiscation

You may recall a few months ago some guy did some things in NZ. The result of this action was for the NZ to do exactly what the guy who did, said they would do. They of course blamed the guns and legal gun owners and cracked down.


Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Following a ban on virtually all semi-automatic firearms, New Zealanders face 5 years in jail if they refuse to hand them in.

A France 24 report on the government’s new buyback scheme showed a line of gun owners wilfully giving up their guns in response to the Christchurch massacre earlier this year.

This despite the fact that the shooter himself said in his own manifesto that provoking mass gunfiscation was one of his intended goals. Mission accomplished.

Since the buyback scheme began, 19,000 firearms have been handed in. Most of the guns seen being handed in looked like ordinary rifles, not AR-15s.

Inspector Terry Van Dillen said he “accepted” that some people would be emotional giving up their guns due to them having been handed down by families for generations.

I’m sure any potential future mass shooters are gleefully handing in their firearms to police as I write this.

New Zealand’s gang members even publicly announced they would refuse to hand in any of the “banned” firearms.

Disarming responsible people and making them easier targets for actual criminals.

Genius idea.

Click Here To Save $15 at Ammo.com

1 thought on “New Zealand’s Ongoing Gun Confiscation”

  1. The people in charge can never give the terrorists what they want. Unless what the terrorists want also happens to be what the people in charge want.

    I haven’t read the Christchurch murderer’s manifesto, but for the sake of simplicity, let’s say he wants two things:
    1) Immigration reduced or eliminated, and
    2) Gun control for the purposes of social instability.

    1 is a nonstarter for Western elites. In fact, it’s likely that the elites will use the murderer’s manifesto to promote migration rather than restrict it. To restrict it would be to give the terrorist what he wants!

    2 on the other hand, is merely regarded as common sense among the elites, so who cares what the terrorist wants or doesn’t want?

    It is very difficult to use terrorism and protest to get elites to do things that they don’t already want to do. This is why the Civil Rights movement in the USA was so successful. If everyone in the US elite had had Bull Connors’s attitude, then it would have gone nowhere, or turned into a violent insurrection.

    When protesters/insurrectionists/rebels want things that are out of step with what elites want, then you get incidents like the US Civil War, where one side or the other must be brought into subjection against its will.

Leave a Comment