International Maori Groups Say They WIll Not Turn In Guns.. NZ Gov't Says They Will One Way Or Another!

[ConcernedCitizen]

this indeed is gonna be interesting.

Did I just watch a heavy metal Haka?!

That. Was. AWESOME!!!

 

[CamoDeafie]

Did I just watch a heavy metal Haka?!

That. Was. AWESOME!!!

Yes indeedy ya did! And despite how european the band members look, they all have some Maori blood in them from their ancestors. Theres another band out there thats basically a heavy metal Mongolian folk band. I'll post in the music/video thread

 

[The Heretic]

I hope the Maori stand up and fight for their freedom, culture and liberties.. In the eyes of most European or UK Commonwealth governments, murdering people is only wrong when its citizens murdering citizens, not when its the government murdering citizens.

It is interesting the article makes no mention of anybody outside of the gangs not complying with the new gun laws, choosing to highlight only the gangs. What about the rest of the Maori and others?

So only "gangs" and probably criminals refuse? No one else.

Interesting spin if you get my drift; saying without saying "see gun owners? if you don't comply, this is the company you keep." trying to shame other gun owners if they don't comply. Powerful PR if you ask me.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Often how a message is delivered is as important , if not more important than the message itself.

Some things to consider :

Words and statements can be taken out of context , either on purpose or by being misread...

As pointed out The Heretic ...A "Spin" can easily be put onto any phrase or message...

Just who is giving the message , what do they gain or benefit from the message or hoped for outcome of the same...

How folks perceive the message and messenger at times outweighs the message itself , all the focus can go to who said what , and how it was said , not what was said...then the message gets lost.

History does indeed show that if a populace or group is disarmed , then abuses can easily happen to the populace or group that is disarmed.
Not much has changed over time , other than the ways and means of delivering abuse and mistreatment of our fellow man.
If I was a Maori , I'd be concerned too.
Andy

 

[The Heretic]

It is customary to attack the marginalized groups first, portraying them in a negative way (not saying the "gangs" are innocent - I don't know them). Many fewer people want to defend them.

That way there are few if any objections to the infringements on their rights. Then once they have been made an example of, proceed on to more mainstream, pointing back to the marginalized groups as examples.

Divide and conquer.

 

[Boats]

The Maori using firearms is illegitimate cultural appropriation anyways, like when non-Maori perform the Haka.

/s

 

[Martini_Up]

Or, they could create a Maori laundromat and tunnel underneath it.... Start making machine guns in the basement.

It worked for the Israelis

Endless supply of wire hangers, lol!

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

Yes indeedy ya did! And despite how european the band members look, they all have some Maori blood in them from their ancestors. Theres another band out there thats basically a heavy metal Mongolian folk band. I'll post in the music/video thread

I could definitely see the Maori in most of them, especially when they make faces.

I'm sure you've probably already seen it as it's been around forever, but the Maori wedding Haka is my all time favorite. The emotion they put into it is absolutely incredible.

The Maori seem to take their history very seriously, so I hope these politicians realize how trying to repeat history in this particular instance is a very, very bad idea.

 

[turbo_vanner]

has anyone refused to disarm and then been slaughtered by their own gov't in the last 30-40 years though? The world is a very different place.

Making analogies to Nazi controlled Europe and Wounded Knee seem about as appropriate as liberals saying European gun laws would fix american gun culture. The gap is just too big IMO.

 

[slimmer13]

has anyone refused to disarm and then been slaughtered by their own gov't in the last 30-40 years though? The world is a very different place.

Making analogies to Nazi controlled Europe and Wounded Knee seem about as appropriate as liberals saying European gun laws would fix american gun culture. The gap is just too big IMO.

The world is a very different place than 30-40 years ago? That's a blink of an eye. Human nature hasn't changed in a lot longer than that.

 

[Boats]

The world is a very different place than 30-40 years ago? That's a blink of an eye. Human nature hasn't changed in a lot longer than that.

His was a rhetorical trap anyway. Think any Rwandans cared that it was their neighbors that slaughtered nearly a million of them?

 

[turbo_vanner]

The world is a very different place than 30-40 years ago? That's a blink of an eye. Human nature hasn't changed in a lot longer than that.

I would say the internet has slightly altered the way in which the world works. A gov't can't even threaten its citizens without some sort of outcry on the internet. One example would be this thread and article. The NZ government hasn't even done anything and it's in the spotlight.

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

has anyone refused to disarm and then been slaughtered by their own gov't in the last 30-40 years though? The world is a very different place.

Making analogies to Nazi controlled Europe and Wounded Knee seem about as appropriate as liberals saying European gun laws would fix american gun culture. The gap is just too big IMO.

The current method has been to ostracize or imprison those who speak out against governments or defy the will of the state, but the threat of disarming them by force seems pretty clear in this instance.

What do you think will happen to anyone who resists?

 

[turbo_vanner]

His was a rhetorical trap anyway. Think any Rwandans cared that it was their neighbors that slaughtered nearly a million of them?

ok, 3rd world countries that the world doesn't care about aside, it was not a rhetorical question.

Any examples?

 

[turbo_vanner]

The current method has been to ostracize or imprison those who speak out against governments or defy the will of the state, but the threat of disarming them by force seems pretty clear in this instance.

What do you think will happen to anyone who resists?

In the case of NZ, I'm assuming there is a registry of owners of whatever they're trying to ban. I would also assume they would send a letter or something to non-compliers with a warning, probably followed up by a visit from law enforcement if the letter doesn't work.

Whether or not the NZ citizens will shoot those cops or turn in their weapons when faced with authority, I do not know. I would bet money that they will not be bagged and dragged out, lined up and shot by a firing squad though.

 

[revjen45]

Interesting spin if you get my drift; saying without saying "see gun owners? if you don't comply, this is the company you keep." trying to shame other gun owners if they don't comply. Powerful PR if you ask me.

Placing me in the company of the Maori warrior is hardly a put down.

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

I would say the internet has slightly altered the way in which the world works. A gov't can't even threaten its citizens without some sort of outcry on the internet. One example would be this thread and article. The NZ government hasn't even done anything and it's in the spotlight.

That's why the media has already started to imply that the only people resisting are gangs. What outcry will there be when all of these dangerous "gangs" are dealt with swiftly and severely? That will probably sound like a public service once the media is done spinning it, and there will likely be a cheer instead of an outcry from the majority of ignorant citizens.

After all, they were bad guys and they deserved it, right? That's what they heard on the news, anyway...

 

[turbo_vanner]

That's why the media has already started to imply that the only people resisting are gangs. What outcry will there be when all of these dangerous "gangs" are dealt with swiftly and severely? That will probably sound like a public service once the media is done spinning it, and there will likely be a cheer instead of an outcry from the majority of ignorant citizens.

After all, they were bad guys and they deserved it. That's what they heard on the news, anyway...

From one perspective yes, but this article in question paints the gangs in a positive light.

It is a bit of a weird situation though, do liberals support the native minorities, even though they are fighting to be armed? Or do Conservatives support gun rights, even though its for 'gang' members and 'thugs'?

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

ok, 3rd world countries that the world doesn't care about aside, it was not a rhetorical question.

Any examples?

If Rwanda doesn't do it for you, what about Rhodesia/Zimbabwe and South Africa?

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

From one perspective yes, but this article in question paints the gangs in a positive light.

It is a bit of a weird situation though, do liberals support the native minorities, even though they are fighting to be armed? Or do Conservatives support gun rights, even though its for 'gang' members and 'thugs'?

I personally support gun rights for everyone, as everyone has the right to self defense. That includes gang members and thugs.

Once they start using those guns for evil purposes, hopefully some good people with guns will put a stop to them.

The problem is when the good people no longer have guns, how will they stop those with guns from doing evil?

As history has shown us, governments are just as capable of doing evil as an individual is. The real problem starts when only the governments have guns.