Gun Control After New Zealand Shooting: Why it Won’t Work Here. May Not be Working There.

 In 2nd Amendment, Foreign, opinion

As Democrats and other liberals scream for more gun control and “assault weapon bans” in the wake of the New Zealand shooting, let’s look at why America won’t be following suit.

New Zealand does not have a Second Amendment. They did have legal licensed gun owners, whom as of March 21 at 3 p.m. will now be required to hand their guns over to police or face stiff penalties. The banned guns are listed as:

  • a semi-automatic firearm that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine (other than one designed to hold 0.22-inch or less rimfire cartridges) that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges:
  • a semi-automatic firearm that is a shotgun and that is capable of being used in combination with a detachable magazine that is capable of holding more than 5 cartridges.

The question is: how many legal gun owners will actually turn in their weapons? Criminals won’t turn in theirs. Depending on the media reporting, as of March 21, only 37 guns were turned in out of 1.2 million registered weapons. Will all the New Zealand farmers turn in their weapons that they used to control wild boars and other predators? One article mentioned that New Zealanders were also flocking to gun stores prior to the ban.

The ban was a purely emotional reaction to a senseless tragedy that will do nothing to increase the safety of New Zealanders. It will increase their vulnerability.

“The real lesson to be learned from the Christchurch massacre is that madmen aren’t deterred by gun control laws, or laws against murder. Morality doesn’t enter into their thinking, so honest people must be prepared for the unthinkable and be able to respond.” Alan Gottlieb, Second Amendment Foundation in
USA Today

Can it happen here? Of course it can, it has before. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban attempted to ban semi-automatic weapons. Why didn’t it last? Some blame the NRA, which indeed is a formidable opponent to gun legislation. But the main reason is that it was NOT CONSTITUTIONAL.

We are a Constitutional Republic, not a Banana Republic. Cubans, Venezuelans all “turned in” their weapons to the government, as have countless numbers of people who like sheep turned in their only means of defense and paid for it with massacres. The only people with guns in those countries were the military and police. The people were at the mercy of ruthless agencies that killed them en masse.

We also don’t take kindly to the government demanding that we turn in our weapons. Some estimates say there are somewhere around 393 MILLION guns in this country – our population is only slightly over 327 Million. That’s more than one gun per person.

Police and even Feds are not likely to go door to door in order to confiscate them. They know what would happen. Red Flag laws are wrong-headed, but narrow in scope – police only have to go to one household. Imagine if they were tasked with going to every house. There would be carnage. That’s why they try to get people to voluntarily turn in their weapons, relying on that “law-abiding gun owner” idea. Ban our weapons and we will no longer be law abiding.

But does banning a weapon actually work? No. Do “Universal background checks” do anything? No. Of course that whole idea is lost on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (everything is lost on AOC, by the way- the common sense gene is nonexistent there.)

Bump stocks have already been banned, chick. Not a lot of folks have turned them in either. Just sayin’.

Buck Sexton from The Hill had this to say about the bans:

The problem with New Zealand mirroring the Australian approach to gun control is the Australian approach didn’t work and wasn’t needed.

There are more guns in private hands in Australia now than before the 1996 ban *and* gun violence has simultaneously gone down for decades.

So is the gun ban working on New Zealand? Maybe. Maybe not. The Christchurch shooting was a horrifying tragedy perpetrated by an evil person who just wanted to cause death and destruction. If it weren’t for a Muslim who ran at the attacker, picked up a “credit card machine,” then an empty gun, then threw it at the attacker’s car, shattering the window …there would have been more carnage (via ABC.net.au).

Confrontation works better than confiscation.

Showing 3 comments
  • CAp
    Reply

    So NZ already has gun control yhat didn’t stop the alleged mosque attack. Feinsteim thinks it’s going to work here? Idiot demagogue hyocrites!

  • Jon
    Reply

    Well imo we have become a banana republic, the radical left the Democrats real name. This has been planned for years , they do not care about the constitution or our country, look at how they divide everything the wall the collusion lowering vote age changing supreme Court, if you think they care about 2a I’d have to disagree, they want a war they want to what’s happening in Europe to happen here.Sadly imo they are clearly enemies of the country.

  • Ashley Nicely
    Reply

    New Zealand can wallow in it’s fake leftist guilt for an event it is not responsible for in the least. If 10% of New Zealand’s 1.2 million semi-automatics, NONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN USED IN A MASS MURDER OR HATE CRIME as far as has been told, I will blame the Maori. Hopefully, less than 1% will comply.

Leave a Comment

Start typing and press Enter to search

mueller reportrhode island