nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Mass shooting New Zealand Mosque - MOD NOTE POST #1

MeMen2_MoRi_

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/live-mass-shooting-christchurch-mosque-police-respond-active-shooter-situation

Rip to all involved.

Filmed himself doing it and videos are on the net/YouTube.

Mod Note:

Please do not propagate videos or links to manifestos in this thread. Given the seriousness and impact of this event, its just not appropriate right now.

Given this happened this morning, i dont want any victim blaming or conspiracy theories that have no direct basis or backing in fact..

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

King of Kings

KikiLaRue wrote: »

You're in a small minority in criticising her response, which has been widely praised.

Who cares if he's laughing at her in a headscarf? She's showing empathy to the victims, IDGAF what he thinks.

There is no correct response to an event like this...her promise to never mention brenton tarrant by name is virtous bs...
Call me a cynic but it sounds like a spin doctors dream.

KikiLaRue

King of Kings wrote: »

There is no correct response to an event like this...her promise to never mention brenton tarrant by name is virtous bs...
Call me a cynic but it sounds like a spin doctors dream.

Why are you so focused on that one thing she said when she has announced a whole raft of measures?

1641

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I understand the country is in shock and in a state of mourning, but I can't see not mentioning his name being of any benefit, the damage is done

The rationale for not mentioning his name is that by doing so we are adding to his notoriety - which, for those of similar viewpoint, is the same as celebrity. The more notoriety/ celebrity any of these is given the more likely it is to "inspire" copycats. They even name reference each other in their "manifestoes".

For those of similar persuasion (any similar sense of personal inadequacy/failure) the allure of becoming a celebrated name within the subculture may be enough to tip more into similar action.

Graces7

1641 wrote: »

The rationale for not mentioning his name is that by doing so we are adding to his notoriety - which, for those of similar viewpoint, is the same as celebrity. The more notoriety/ celebrity any of these is given the more likely it is to "inspire" copycats. They even name reference each other in their "manifestoes".

For those of similar persuasion (any similar sense of personal inadequacy/failure) the allure of becoming a celebrated name within the subculture may be enough to tip more into similar action.

compare with the Brievik massacre in norway? he revelled in any press coverage he got. gloried in personal "fame" every chance he got and yes, other crazies might copy

MeMen2_MoRi_

King of Kings wrote: »

There is no correct response to an event like this...her promise to never mention brenton tarrant by name is virtous bs...
Call me a cynic but it sounds like a spin doctors dream.

You're a cynic.

He's just apiece of hate filled ****e, the sooner he's forgotten about the better.

SoundsRight

Boggles wrote: »

It might be aimed at you, but not me lad, I have absolutely no time for racist scumbag cowardly murderers or their opinion on anything.

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims. If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

batgoat

SoundsRight wrote: »

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims. If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

Problem is, you've already implied it's immigration's fault.

tuxy

SoundsRight wrote: »

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims. If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

Middle Eastern societies are flawed?

KikiLaRue

SoundsRight wrote: »

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims. If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

How on earth can you make that out?

You think Boggles or yourself has more in common with that guy based on what - the fact that he's white?

I would strongly wager Boggles has more in common with the victims, who were by all accounts just decent people going about their day.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

1641 wrote: »

The rationale for not mentioning his name is that by doing so we are adding to his notoriety - which, for those of similar viewpoint, is the same as celebrity. The more notoriety/ celebrity any of these is given the more likely it is to "inspire" copycats. They even name reference each other in their "manifestoes".

For those of similar persuasion (any similar sense of personal inadequacy/failure) the allure of becoming a celebrated name within the subculture may be enough to tip more into similar action.

Exactly, he should not have his name immortalised. We shouldn't know the names of mass killers off the top of your head, Timothy McVeigh, Bundy, Manson are known to everyone. And that's exactly what they wanted.

The guy deserves the death penalty and have his body thrown into the ocean. But I know that the law shouldn't be changed for one off reasons.

There is a big push to have the video of it scrubbed from the internet, which I don't agree with.

Boggles

SoundsRight wrote: »

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims.

I have nothing in common with him, you might do not me.

You do understand that right?

SoundsRight wrote: »

If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

Hitler says Hi.

:rolleyes:

SoundsRight

Boggles wrote: »

I have nothing in common with him, you might do not me.

You do understand that right?

Hitler says Hi.

:rolleyes:

I'm talking about society today, not a hundred years ago. Western society should not be producing the likes of Tarrant and Brevik. They could be your brother or son, let's not pretend they are alien to us.

tuxy

oops

Boggles

SoundsRight wrote: »

Western society should not be producing the likes of Tarrant and Brevik.

That's exactly why you have to clamp down on the racist hate speech and introduce more stringent gun controls.

Something you don't think the focus should be on.

Go figure.

jmayo

o1s1n wrote: »

So should we forget about all mass murderers then? Just wipe them from our collective memories?

I really wish people would stop with this virtuous bull****. Whether you or anyone 'doesn't say the perpetrators name' is utterly irrelevant.

The event has happened, the perpetrator has been named. The best we can do now is to ensure he faces the full strength of the law and doesn't harm anyone ever again.

If you murder a load of people you are going to gain notoriety. It just the way things work.

Exactly.

Those people will still be dead and people who might think along the same lines will find his name, his bullsh** manifesto and ramblings no matter what you do.

This is the 21st century where you can't wipe someones identity and detail from the world, especially someone that has already attained such coverage.

It is not like the past where all traces of a person could be removed from history.
We live in the age of instantaneous information flow and with that information being around forever.

There are huge amounts to be learned from this sad episode.

For a start NZ has to have a total review their access and licensing of firearms.

The entire world needs to learn how to force the social media companies into preventing ar**hole terrorists and mass murderers from using modern social media to desseminate their atrocities online to the wider world.

Western governments have had plenty of time to rein in the likes of Youtube when they were willingly hosting videos of the vile executions carried out by ISIS.

And intelligence agencies, police forces need to learn how to spot and negate people like this guy before they get to act out their death cultish desires.

I look at each of these attacks, be they islamist, right wing or whatever, much like an air accident.
There are always things to be learned to prevent a reoccurrence.

1641

SoundsRight wrote: »

I'm talking about society today, not a hundred years ago. Western society should not be producing the likes of..( these murderers..)... They could be your brother or son, let's not pretend they are alien to us.

909 followers of "Rev" Jim Jones died in "Jonestown" - the majority apparently by suicide following instruction but also many by murder.

Do you think that we should examine the "teachings" of Rev Jones in order to "understand" and "better address something that has gone wrong in society"?

King of Kings

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Why are you so focused on that one thing she said when she has announced a whole raft of measures?

It seemed like the pertinant thing under discussion and cos I think that piece of her speech was grandstanding.

I am against rushing in legal changes immediately after a terrible event as such changes are generally driven my emotion.

As they say "hard cases make bad law"

KikiLaRue

King of Kings wrote: »

It seemed like the pertinant thing under discussion and cos I think that piece of her speech was grandstanding.

I am against rushing in legal changes immediately after a terrible event as such changes are generally driven my emotion.

As they say "hard cases make bad law"

All she has done is lead the way for placing the victims and their families front and centre in this tragedy rather than the perpetrator.

I don't see it as grandstanding. It's one sentence from a series of statements over days that have focused on supporting the victim and healing the nation.

And no new laws have been announced, but as we can see with Port Arthur, sometimes a dramatic change in the law after a major event can be a good thing.

WinnyThePoo

'grandstanding' 'virtual signalling'. Lads she's the fcukin prime minister of her country.

batgoat

King of Kings wrote: »

It seemed like the pertinant thing under discussion and cos I think that piece of her speech was grandstanding.

I am against rushing in legal changes immediately after a terrible event as such changes are generally driven my emotion.

As they say "hard cases make bad law"

From what I gather, most of the proposed changes will be previously proposed legislation that was previously rejected. The incident last week has made New Zealand gun owners more supportive to prevent a repeat of such an incident.

tuxy

KikiLaRue wrote: »

And no new laws have been announced, but as we can see with Port Arthur, sometimes a dramatic change in the law after a major event can be a good thing.

The Prime Minister has promised new gun laws will be announced in a few days.

Billy86

SoundsRight wrote: »

You've more in common with Brenton Tarrant than you do with any of his victims. If western society can produce mass killers in the same vein as Middle Eastern societies, then something has gone wrong somewhere and it needs to be addressed.

That's it buddy, keep pushing the agenda at every opportunity while remaining adamant we should be listening to white supremacists like this eejit. It's not like it's obvious or anything.

1641

tuxy wrote: »

The Prime Minister has promised new gun laws will be announced in a few days.

The recommendations on the reforms of gun laws have been there since 1997 - the Thorp Report. Attempts to introduce them by various governments have been twarted by intense pressure by the gun lobby.
Introducing these reforms now is not "rushing in legal changes", and "hard cases make bad law" as suggested by another poster. It is pushing on with reforms that have been discussed for over 20 years.

Billy86

1641 wrote: »

The recommendations on the reforms of gun laws have been there since 1997 - the Thorp Report. Attempts to introduce them by various governments have been twarted by intense pressure by the gun lobby.
Introducing these reforms now is not "rushing in legal changes", and "hard cases make bad law" as suggested by another poster. It is pushing on with reforms that have been discussed for over 20 years.

And even if it were rushed, weren't Scotland's after Dunblane and Australia's after the Tasmania shooting both 20 odd years ago? I'm pretty sure those have worked quite well.

friendlyfun

King of Kings wrote: »

It seemed like the pertinant thing under discussion and cos I think that piece of her speech was grandstanding.

I am against rushing in legal changes immediately after a terrible event as such changes are generally driven my emotion.

As they say "hard cases make bad law"

How many Mass Shootings happened in Scotland since Dublane?

Wibbs

friendlyfun wrote: »

How many Mass Shootings happened in Scotland since Dublane?

How many mass shootings happened in Scotland before Dublane? How many mass shootings happened in Australia before Port Arthur?

mvl

King of Kings wrote: »

There is no correct response to an event like this...her promise to never mention brenton tarrant by name is virtous bs...
Call me a cynic but it sounds like a spin doctors dream.

Think in some cultures the name can be more fluid.
Maybe they could call him a generic name - Mr <number of years of sentence> from now on ?!?

Another point - having in mind that Australia and NZ PMs have had some (recent) escalations related to Australia criminal deportations habits, assume there is almost zero chance NZ would deport this one until he's served his sentence ... anyone heard differently ?

Robert ninja

biggebruv wrote: »

Oh Jesus that sounds horrible couldn’t you just stick to resetera or neogaf
I wouldn’t wanna risk seeing horrible stuff like that does it come up when you enter that 8chan site

Both those sites you mentioned are wildly censorious, account-based, ban-happy and have very heavy moderator bias so there's not really any reason I'd use em'... they're not even close to the same thing as minimal-moderation, simple-html, anonymised image boards. The threads I use are about niche gaming topics which are usually pretty tame.

Billy Mays

Wibbs wrote: »

How many mass shootings happened in Scotland before Dublane? How many mass shootings happened in Australia before Port Arthur?

A sh*tload. There were 4 alone in the 1990s before Port Arthur

Manic Moran

The

Billy Mays wrote: »

A sh*tload. There were 4 alone in the 1990s before Port Arthur

You would think, though, that if the laws had particular effect, the ones which were conducted by weapons not prohibited would continue. Only one of the four was conducted with a semi-auto, (Franklin, 1991, 7 killed plus one with a knife). Two of the four: Baker, 1992, six dead, and Evers, 1990, five dead, were conducted with shotguns, and one, May, 1996, six dead, used a lever-action rifle.

Port Arthur was fairly unique in the scale of it, a shock to the national consciousness, but afterwards, despite an estimated two thirds of prohibited weapons remaining “on the streets”, spree shootings generally stopped be it with lever actions, bolt actions, or shotguns. I put it to you that the stop was more a societal thing, than a firearms law thing.