Non-Compliance and Hustlers: New Zealand Gun Turn-In Going About As Well as You’d Expect

New Zealand Gun Buy back confiscation

Police Senior Sgt. Braydon Lenihan poses holding a banned gun that has been bent by a hydraulic machine outside a temporary gun collection venue in Porirua, near Wellington, New Zealand. New Zealand is six weeks into an ambitious program to buy tens of thousands of guns from owners across the country. (AP photo/Nick Perry)

New Zealand is now a couple of months into their minimally compensated gun confiscation and, well, it’s going…slowly. So far, less than 10% of the estimated number of newly-banned firearms have been turned in. And the cop who’s in charge of collecting the firearms says estimates of the number of guns (and therefore the rate of non-compliance, so far) are “unhelpful.”

With NZ$200 million set aside by the government for the “buy back,” one man is suspected of importing thousands of banned magazines from Australia (of all places) to turn them into cash. That’s apparently not in keeping with the rules set up by the Kiwis when they decided to disarm the country’s law-abiding gun owners…and pretty much no one else.

The Associated Press has this . . .

By Nick Perry

Some New Zealand gun owners are upset they’re being compelled to hand over their assault weapons for money. Others believe a government-imposed ban on certain semi-automatics following a March shooting massacre is the best way to combat gun violence. And The Associated Press has found at least one man may have tried to swindle hundreds of thousands of dollars from the system set up to compensate gun owners.

New Zealand is six weeks into an ambitious program to buy tens of thousands of guns from owners across the country. After a lone gunman killed 51 people at two Christchurch mosques nearly six months ago, the government rushed through new laws banning military-style semi-automatics in a move that’s being closely followed around the world.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told the AP in July that most New Zealanders disagree with the U.S. model under which gun ownership is seen as a constitutional right. The new laws in New Zealand emphasize that gun ownership is instead considered a privilege.

So far, owners have turned in more than 15,000 newly banned guns as well as 64,000 parts and accessories. In return, the government has handed them 32 million New Zealand dollars ($20 million). But nobody has a clear target for the program because authorities haven’t kept track of the number of guns in the country.

Tentative estimates put the total number of guns in New Zealand at about 1.5 million and the number of weapons that are now banned at up to 175,000. If those numbers are correct, it would mean less than 10% of the banned weapons have been handed in so far. Owners have until Dec. 20 to turn them over or potentially face charges.

Some politicians and opponents say the buyback scheme is a fiasco that is unfairly targeting law-abiding gun owners rather than criminals or gangs. However, Police Deputy Commissioner Mike Clement, a 40-year veteran tapped to oversee the scheme, says it has been working well. He’s been traveling the country to some of the dozens of buyback events, and says nobody really knows how many banned guns are out there so any estimates are unhelpful.

“We’re just going to keep pushing ourselves,” Clement said.

On Saturday, the last day of the Southern Hemisphere winter, Clement stood in the sun outside an event center near Wellington owned by a dog owners’ club. On this day, the center had been turned into a makeshift venue to hand in guns. Heavily armed officers patrolled while others greeted gun owners cheerfully as they arrived and ushered them inside.

Under the buyback scheme, gun owners get between 25% and 95% of the pre-tax price of a new gun, depending on the condition of their guns. Police take bank details from owners and usually deposit money into their accounts within a few days.

After collecting the weapons, police use a hydraulic machine to crush the barrels and triggers out of shape before tossing them into crates that are loaded onto a truck for disposal.

One of the owners who showed up on Saturday was Paul Campbell, a chiropractor who has enjoyed target shooting since he was 10 years old. Campbell said he was turning in an AR-15 rifle, an AR-10 rifle and a 1961 ex-army SLR rifle that he considered sacred because it was part of a collection used by soldiers in battle. He said he disagreed with the ban and felt it was a knee-jerk reaction to an isolated event. He said previous laws were adequate if they’d been properly enforced.

“Nothing is going to stop crazy behavior when crazy shows up, except good watchfulness by society to see the cracks, to see the problems, to see problem people,” Campbell said. “This is a mental aberration, it’s not a behavior brought on by the object.”

Michael Dowling, chairman of the Council of Licensed Firearm Owners, said gun owners had mixed reactions to the ban and some felt badly treated but most were trying to comply with the law. He said the council doesn’t agree with the ban and believes it could create a much bigger black market.

“We’re concerned at a high level that the way this has been approached, it potentially could mean a lot of firearms don’t get handed in,” Dowling said. “And that will create issues for generations to come.”

Gun owner Phillip Fee poses holds his gun bag outside a temporary gun collection venue in Porirua, near Wellington, New Zealand. New Zealand is six weeks into an ambitious program to buy tens of thousands of guns from owners across the country. (AP Photo/Nick Perry)

But gun owner Phillip Fee, who was handing in his Remington semi-automatic rifle, said he supported the ban wholeheartedly, especially after the Christchurch shootings. He said there were lots of people who wanted to become infamous or highlight a cause, and that powerful semi-automatics gave them the means.

“There are not too many things that you can take that number of lives with in such a short period of time,” he said. “So there has to be some form of control.”

As well as some 250 buyback events like the one near Wellington planned over three months, police are also reaching out to dealers to try and collect weapons through them. Police also have so far traveled to the homes of more than 50 gun owners who have large numbers of weapons to pick up the guns directly.

In all, the New Zealand government has set aside more than NZ$200 million for the buyback scheme. And it seems at least one man may have tried to take advantage. Police are investigating whether the man, who isn’t a New Zealand citizen, imported cheap gun magazines from Australia to try to cash in.

Clement said the man showed up at an Auckland buyback event with thousands of magazines seeking to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in government compensation. A possible flaw in his plan? Clement himself happened to be at the event.

“It’s one of those things that didn’t look right, didn’t feel right,” Clement said.

He said police were keeping hold of the magazines and hadn’t paid the man any money while they carried out their investigation.

“The vast majority of people are doing the right thing,” Clement said. “But there are a handful of people who just, for whatever reason, feel like there might be an opportunity they might be able to exploit.”

Brenton Tarrant, a 28-year-old Australian white supremacist, has pleaded not guilty to terrorism, murder and attempted murder charges following the March 15 mosque attacks. He remains in jail ahead of his trial, which has been scheduled for next May.


  1. avatar former water walker says:

    He he…funny they mentioned Australia. Didn’t their “mandatory” turn-in go “not well”?!?😄It’s a tiny country. Imagine how poorly this would play out in ‘Murica!

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Of all the people within my large circle of AR-owning friends here in SoCal, there were actually a couple of them who voluntarily registered their 80% builds that they had completed themselves for the original purpose of keeping them off the radar. They reconsidered their plans and didn’t want to be a “problem” to the gun-hating authorities here, so they Fudd-ed themselves out. Needless to say, I’m glad I sensed their lack of devotion to the 2A long ago and spoke sparingly of my own guns to them.

      I believe such schemes would actually play out to some degree here in some parts of ‘Murica. It would, however, have the benefit of separating the wheat from the chaff, and we’d quickly know who we can and cannot trust if the S ever HTF.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        I Haz a Question,

        Unfortunately, I don’t think the scenario that you described would help us sort the wheat from the chaff. If government ever deems semi-automatic rifles “illegal” and requires that they all be turned-in, I have to believe that same government would establish an anonymous tip system to facilitate elimination of “illegal” rifles.

        Unless you had a law-enforcement spy who could see who submitted the tip against you, it would remain a mystery.

        1. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

          I suspect that there will be whole lot of “boating accidents” then. Few folks will keep arms where they can be found.

        2. avatar California Richard says:

          My guns aren’t “illegal”, they’re “undocumented” and discriminated against because they are black. I merely provide sanctuary, a safe safe space, for the persecuted.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Some will turn in their rifles. Some will hide their rifles. Some will defend their rifles. It won’t be pretty. If I were in Law enforcement, I would be considering retirement/career change.

        4. avatar Lost Down South says:

          From the article: “Heavily armed officers patrolled…”

          ‘Nuf said.

        5. avatar EndDangerEd says:

          Just like the Secret Police every where they’ll PAY your neighbors to Rat you out….. under the Cash for Creeps program. The Soviets, Hungarians, Italians, and Germans made great use of “civilian spies” for locating Jews, dissidents, and anyone with a “bad attitude”. Lots of Creeps liked it because they could get rid of anyone they didn’t like…. Sad to see America going that direction, even temporarily.

        6. avatar Herb Allen says:

          1-800-SNITCH hotlines have been around since the 1970’s in some cities. Now Red Flag will allow any worthless geek with a grudge to finger anyone he doesn’t like and send the po-po to kick in his door, kill his dog, and ransack his house.

          If you live in any of seventeen blue states and the District of Columbia, then congrats, you are now living in East Germany and the Stasi will be knocking shortly.

  2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    There’s an amazing illogic about all this. When it’s abundantly clear that spree killers intentionally choose the most vulnerable (i.e., most likely undefended) targets, gun-controllers and governments demand that even more people disarm themselves. . .thereby insuring that even more people can be killed by spree-killers. Good thinkin’!

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Garrison Hall,

      What you describe is a good thing if you a member of the Ruling Class because it is a classic “vicious circle” — leading to ever greater tragedies which leads to ever greater calls for government action which leads to ever greater elimination of rights and consolidation of government power, and the cycle repeats.

      1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        Of course this is tyranny. Which is the exact reason our founders crafted the 2nd Amendment in the way it is written. People in places like NZ are taught that rights are granted by governments and so can be taken away by governments. They find it odd that we don’t accept this idea.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          In places like NZ, what we call “rights” are called “whims” there. Meaning the Gov can take away whatever perception you have of rights on a whim.

        2. avatar California Richard says:

          Its the difference between being the citizen of a free state and being a subject under the crown authority.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Richard, that is not entirely fair. This is better described as the tyranny of the majority, the people have voted for the government to confiscate firearms, and they have no higher authority to appeal to. Without the foresight of our Founders, we would be in the same spot. Fortunately, it is extremely difficult to pass a constitutional amendment which has significant opposition, witness the Equal Rights Amendment a few decades back. It had a good premise, was widely supported, but was soundly defeated once people were informed what it would actually mean. Today, with social media, it would never get started.

          On the other hand, it is up to all of us to assure 2A is not simply ignored.

    2. avatar Ing says:

      They have no choice but to react this way. To do anything other than assert control, no matter how insane the assertion may be, is to admit that they are illegitimate and undeserving of the lofty status they’ve assumed.

      “The legitimacy of the ruling class – in whatever political form it may take – is based on the illusion that they can protect the people, whether from war, famine, economic hardship, or any other kind of disaster that disrupts the everyday routine of their lives and livelihood.

      By attributing the cause of these cosmically-induced events to humans, the elites maintain the illusion that they are, at least to some degree, in control; if they are causing it, then theoretically, at least, they could stop it.”

      P. Lescaudron & L. Knight Jadczyk, Earth Changes and the Human-Cosmic Connection

  3. avatar Shire-man says:

    The vast majority of people are doing the right thing.
    Also, don’t publicize how few people are cooperating as it may encourage others to not cooperate as well.

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      “Also, don’t publicize how few people are cooperating as it may encourage others to not cooperate as well.”…well, I certainly hope so!

    2. avatar California Richard says:

      I think you forgot the /sarc/ at the end of your statement.

    3. avatar Herb Allen says:

      I do hope you are joking. The article quotes Kiwis who are deadly serious about disarming.

  4. avatar NORDNEG says:

    A look into the Chrystal ball there America, this is what will happen with the next Democrat regime…
    bet on it.

    1. avatar David Bradford says:

      Yep, they will get less than 10% compliance too, leaving 17-19 million sporting (assault) rifles in the the hands of newly fabricated criminal citizens.


      “…this is what will happen with the next Democrat regime…”

      Nobody is coming for your guns! All they want to do is register them. Honest!

      (And if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor, the check is in the mail, and I promise I won’t *bleep* in your mouth. Watch the teeth!) 😉

  5. avatar uncommon_sense says:


    Imagine a “sexual assault epidemic” where countless people blamed the “easy availability of condoms” for the epidemic, because condoms make it easy for a rapist to rape dozens of women quickly and without risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases or leaving DNA evidence behind. Of course countless people would demand that government therefore ban condoms. After all, we don’t want to enable rapists to quickly and easily rape dozens of women.

    Banning firearms because we don’t want to enable homicidal maniacs to quickly and easily murder dozens of people makes just as much sense — which of course makes no sense at all since banning firearms eliminates our ability to defend ourselves, and does nothing to stop a determined spree-killer from embarking on a murder spree.

    As countless people have stated countless times, a homicidal maniac can murder the same number of people just as quickly and easily with hundreds of other methods besides using semi-automatic rifles. We should be focusing on identifying homicidal maniacs and being hard targets rather than playing “wack-a-mole”, trying to eliminate any given method of murder.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      New Zealand has 5-10 murders annually with firearms generally involving gangs. Since gangs aren’t required to turn in their firearms how will this combat the nonepidemic of gun violence?

    2. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

      Don’t laugh uncommon_sense, there already is an “epidemic” of sexual assault. They’ve just lowered the bar. The new definition is anything a woman says is assault. Look at her funny=guilty. Compliment her clothes=guilty. Compliment her=guilty. Don’t call her the next day=guilty. The pendulum has surely swung far the other way. I feel sorry for the young men today, especially at school.

  6. avatar Raymond P Clark says:

    One of the concerns I have is that if you ban these firearms, perps will come up with more creative (and deadly) ways to reach their goal of killing as many people as possible. They will up their game to bombs, bio and chemicals.

    1. avatar Guest says:

      There are already multiple examples of that which has already happened in America. The federal building bombing in Oklahoma city in April 1995 and the twin towers were also bombed before being destroyed on 9/11.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Raymond P Clark,

      Unfortunately you are correct.

      Our modern life depends on countless objects and substances with ginormous destructive potential.

      Chemicals and poisons are easily and readily available in mass quantities. Combustible materials, fuels, and accelerants are easily and readily available in mass quantities. Heavy and fast objects are easily and readily available. Any homicidal maniac could employ any of those possibilities with horrific effect.

      As I said in another recent comment, we as a society should be focusing on identifying homicidal maniacs and being able to effectively defend ourselves from homicidal maniacs from their inevitable attacks rather than trying to eliminate their ability to acquire the necessary stuff for deadly attacks.

      1. avatar rt66paul says:

        Sadly, it is not about citizens’ safety. They don’t want to treat mentally ill people who want to use violence, they want to get the guns from the public’s hands so they won’t rebel or seek out their oppressors individually. The end game for total domination over the people.
        This is the new world order

  7. avatar Joatmon says:

    I bet a lot of people had tragic boat accidents happen.
    Can’t turn in what you don’t have. 🤷‍♂️😂


      “I bet a lot of people had tragic boat accidents happen.”

      I wonder how many guns were on that Catalina Island dive boat that just burned, killing dozens…

      1. avatar I haz no gunms says:

        One of my Glocks was on that boat! I loaned it (under the 72-hr CO law) to a friend!

  8. avatar Rocketman says:

    I have a great idea, let’s instead of Greenland, offer to buy New Zealand. By now I’m guessing there’s enough PO gun owners that would jump at the chance to have Donald Trump as their head of state!

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Great idea. Then a ton of gun owners can move there, turn it into another Constitutional Carry state, and enjoy life in a paradise. I’ll ditch California for that.

    2. avatar California Richard says:

      Once they disarm and sheepify their citizenry, we could just send the Girl Scouts over armed with 10-22’s and 30rd mags and annex the place.

  9. avatar daveinwyo says:

    If I remember correctly, one of NZ’s top crime lords said “not us, no way, will not comply”. Even showed his picture.
    So disarming the law abiding helps how?

    1. avatar EndDangerEd says:

      But he DID promise “his boys” would do their best to keep “civilian casualties” to a minimum…. after all we ARE dealing with armed drug gangs… we hafta protect ourselves!!

  10. avatar tdiinva says:

    I wonder how many firearms owners who have turned in banned rifles have a spare back at home?

    1. avatar David Bradford says:

      That may help to get you off the list of “doors that we NEED to kick in and search” and onto the list of “doors that we can knock on before we search”.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        I think you overestimate the enthusiasm of a public servant

  11. avatar neiowa says:

    I wonder how many in HK coolies have recently figured out that being armed would be a good thing.

    Perhaps “Jacinda” could send the firearms she is stealing to HK.

  12. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:


    Trucks. Trucks can take that number in as short a time. Matches. Matches could do it. Just ban firearms, trucks and matches and it could make quite a difference.

    1. avatar Rocketman says:

      Governor, go on Google and check out the “Happyland Fire” in New York City many years ago. Nutjob set fire to an afterhours club and killed about 84(?) people. Didn’t need to use an assault weapon just a can of gasoline and a match.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        The guy in Nice killed 86 and injured 400-something with a truck.

  13. avatar SoCalJack says:

    I recently had the pleasure of talking to a NZ gun owner, visiting SoCal. He owns bolt actions and shot guns. He’s never shot an AR/AK and thinks they don’t have a civilian function other than recreational use shooting paper targets, so he was ok with NZ banning them. He’s into bird hunting and didnt like the idea of losing his current firearms if it came to that.
    IMO, the AR15 is a symbol of freedom. Most American gun owners have one, but not so much for NZ folks maybe?

    1. avatar RCC says:

      I saw a lot of mini 14’s over there in July, more than AR style. The owners of both types very unhappy with the “buyback”.

      You can find Fudd owners anywhere plus some people were brought up with bolt action and just use those.

    2. avatar HP says:

      Rough estimates suggest that there are about 5 times as many AR-15’s in circulation in the United States as New Zealand has inhabitants. I’d say you’re correct about most people viewing it as a symbol of freedom. It’s the most vilified gun in America, but it’s used in so few murders, the FBI doesn’t even keep track. I surmise it’s popularity is at least partially attributable to bed-wetting liberals screeching about it as a “weapon of war”, even though no military has ever marched into battle with it. It’s the Streisand effect, and Americans in general don’t like to be told they can’t have something, especially when that thing is legal and seems increasingly essential to personal and societal liberty. This great nation was founded on rebellion from tyranny. New Zealand doesn’t have that pedigree. So it’s no surprise that the AR-15 and similar firearms might not be as popular. As for the subject of this TTAG post, if the compliance rate is so low for the Kiwis, then the concept of a new AWB and government “buyback” is utterly laughable here in America.

  14. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Like the Jews voluntarily turning themselves in to the Nazi’s.

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      “That sort of thing could never happen in a western democracy!”
      – every American intellectual c.1932

      “We have concentration camps on the border! We have the most racist government in American history! This government wants to enslave women! Our government needs to take all our guns away right NOW!!”
      – every American intellectual c.2019

      1. avatar Rocketman says:

        I’m confused. Are they saying the civilian guns all gone so the government can enslave the women faster?

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          Does that mean we will have coffee and ale wenches and women to go make us sandwiches?

      2. avatar Ranger Rick says:

        So given their track record I’ll have to be very hesitant in relying on any of their consensus?

      3. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

        Perfect. I just try listening to how they talk about Trump and depending where you look, he is the most evil genius the world has ever seen or he is a bumbling fool

  15. avatar RCC says:

    I spent June to early August in a rural area of the South Island of New Zealand. During this time I also went to several meetings organised by local gun owners. To say the new laws are viewed as “over reacting” is a huge under statement. Local media is ignoring gun owners and keeping the government line.

    Not mentioned by the police is that the shooter had basic licence but not the local “E” endorsement. He could not have legally bought the multiple semi autos used in the shooting. It appears the police slipped up in the process and are now carefully covering that up.

    The maximum “buyback” price is 95% of new even for unfired stock in gun shop. The list of prices is very outdated and for most rifles too cheap. Maximum price for parts is 70% so I am surprised by the magazines supposedly brought from Australia.

    While I was there the government announced 10 year firearm licences were going to be made 5 years without any compensation for the lost 5 years. Plus they want to register individual weapons now. Again very unpopular with legal owners.

    Because licenses were for ownership without firearm registration the government is only guessing numbers of firearms. A great argument against “registration”. The “buyback” ends in December and I am predicting a very low compliance rate.

  16. avatar Brodirt says:

    Me: Do I have a right to self defense?
    Govt: Yes.
    Me: With my hands?
    Govt: Yes.
    M: With the candlestick on my mantel?
    G: Yes.
    M: With my son’s aluminum baseball bat?
    G: Yes.
    M: With my 10″ Chef’s Knife?
    G: Yes.
    M: With my Mossberg 500 .20 gauge bird gun?
    G: As long as you bought it from a retailer who ran a NICS.
    M: With my duly licensed 5 round .38 revolver?
    G: Is your license up to date? Did you retreat first?
    M: With my duly licensed 9mm Glock with 19 round magazine?
    G: Arent we getting a little over-zealous, what do you need 19 for?
    M: With my .444 Marlin?
    G: What’s a .444? Yes, we guess.
    M: With my Mini-14 .223 Ranch Rifle.
    G: Its made of wood and is only .223. Yes.
    M: With my featureless AR15 with 10 .223 rounds?
    G: We need to check the features first but, probably.
    M: With my fully kitted AR15, 5.56mm 30rd round mag, free float handguard, adjustable stock, pistol grip, muzzle break, bayonet lug?
    G: Are you kidding? That thing is a menace! Those rounds are explosive.
    M: With my M1 Garand, 30-06 8 round stripper clips, bayonet lug?
    G: Its wood and it shoots deer bullets, only has 8 rounds; you’re good to go

    1. avatar =BCE56= says:

      Yep. That about covers it.

      For now…

    2. avatar Perry says:

      Very good. Thank you for the illustration. Continue repeating; the signal cannot be stopped.

      I have only fired the M-1 once. Ouch. Built for much younger men.

  17. avatar Rusty - Molon Labe - Chains says:

    Put the happy face on and pretend your government program is working. Unfortunately for them, they don’t have a written constitution with a list of what the government isn’t allowed to do.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Is that true? None at all? Nothing setting out how the government works, elections, courts, nothing? Maybe I’ve been an American too long, I cannot conceive of that. With one more than 50% of a vote, the government can do ANYTHING? Even that would require some manner of a constitution, wouldn’t it? I think you must be wrong. But I sure don’t know.

  18. avatar jonndoe says:

    I wonder how likely the nut job would be to open fire If knew the entire group of “law abiding citizens” In the room are armed and willing to fire back I personally believe the number of mass shootings would plummet (just thinking out loud).

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      Just like that art festival in Texas a few years back where they were expecting it to get attacked by crazy Jihadists. A pair of nut jobs complied and got hosed by the cops at the door. I think one cop got shot in the foot…. only shot that one cop though, so the incident didn’t qualify as a mass shooting, so ya,…. number of mass shootings would go down. If not by deterrence, then by practical effect…. Unless there are more than 4 attackers. When they all get killed by the room full of armed citizens, then the 4 dead (attackers) would technically qualify the incident as a mass shooting.

      1. avatar Rusty Shackleford says:

        Was that the one that included an FIB agent in-tow who told the two jihadis to “Tear up Texas”?

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Are you talking about the internationally advertised competition to draw cartoons of Mohammed? Anyone with the slightest knowledge of Islam would expect jillions of nutbar jihadis to show up prepared for mass murder. There was a heavy LE presence, since it was an *obvious* trap, armor, machine guns, the whole shitaree, but the only two who made it were shot dead by a local cop who saw them unloading their murderous shit, before they even got close to the assembly itself. And no, he was not wounded, nor was anyone else except for the bullet riddled assholes. Should be an annual exercise.

      3. avatar Mr. Lucky says:

        The criteria for “mass shooting” is 4 or more deaths not counting the perpetrators.

  19. Good little Royal Vassals of NZ….Your PM. Jacinda has spoken….You DON’T NEED to own such things! She almost sounds like she part of the American DemoCRAP Aristocracy…Good thing THEY DON’T have a “Declaration of Independence” I guess….Good little Royal Subjects!

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Momo has spoken, and she will haunt your dreams.

  20. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Australia did not collect millions of firearms overnight either. It takes a bit of time before the proletariat realizes they are doomed and there is nothing else to do except turn them in especially when they see a friend or Neighbors house assaulted by men in black i.e. the storm troopers.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      If my neighbors are attacked, there will be a sniper in the mix. Unless it’s you.

    2. avatar George Washington says:

      You really do sound like an idiot…. And only an idiot would read your stupid fkn comments….
      Go fk your wetback mother…. You little bitch

    3. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      To Fake Vlad Tepes

      “Australia did not collect millions of firearms overnight either”

      This is so true the Australians collected 650,000 guns in their buy back and since then they have imported 1 million new guns so they now have more guns in circulation than they did when they started. This proves Australian style gun control works it works to increase the number of guns to be confiscated. This could work in the US also we could have a national buy back for some guns and increase the number of guns in this country from 400 million to 500 million or even 600 million.

      1. avatar Blurb says:

        I’m thinking there would be more high-end bolt guns in the new mix.

  21. avatar joefoam says:

    As you would expect, law abiding citizens will obey the law and turn in their guns. Criminals will do what criminals do and ignore the laws as professed by the gangster in his interview. Thus the law will have no effect on saving lives as was admitted by the PM. She openly declared the entire fiasco was all about creating a gun registry. We gun owners, at least those who have opened a history book, know where that leads.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Thinking people need, really NEED, to spend some time trying to imagine what a registry could POSSIBLY ever do. You quickly discover there is only one thing, and that is to assist in door-to-door violent confiscation. The government attacking and murdering citizens who do not consent to tyranny. I’ve had people tell me it would assist LE by advising who owned a firearm similar to the one used in a crime, and I try not to laugh. “The victim was shot with a .380, 9mm, .38, or .357 projectile fired by one of the following 100 million guns.”

    2. avatar George Washington says:

      Bs…. Law abiding citizens WON’T turn in their guns….
      Just stop….. Please…. You fudds are so gd BORING!!!!

  22. avatar GS650G says:

    New Zealanders got what they voted for or at least what a majority wanted. The minority is persecuted of course but the left laughs that off.
    When the left is screwed by a majority they cry like babies.
    At least the people who don’t like being axrewes by Jacinda can immigrate out. If they are skilled and have a little money there is that option. Most won’t or can’t.

  23. avatar Alan says:

    Their prime minister went decree happy, and got parliament to go along with her idea, it seems. It is now up to her, and the forces of law and order, or whatever they are called there to enforce or should one say, make their foolishness work.

  24. avatar Richard Steven Hack says:

    China will be so happy should they ever get in a war with Australia and New Zealand.

    None of that “Red Dawn” crap in New Zealand! (Except from the criminals who didn’t obey the law.)

    1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      Red Dawn movie was a silly Right Wing Fantasy movie. It only works with the uneducated. In a real war if you do not have a steady supply of ammo and replacement guns you lose very quickly and if the opposition starts deliberately killing civilians many of the insurgents come to the realization that resistance then results in annihilation of the population and is not worth it and the population itself will stop supporting you in every way to the point of turning you in to the enemy. Self preservation forces the population to switch sides very quickly.

      It is even less known that many U.S. citizens turned in U.S. Revolutionary fighters to the British (they were called loyalists) and they actually outnumbered the number of Americans supporting the revolution. If it had not been for the French pouring in millions in cash and arms and supporting the incompetent George Washington with skilled French Storm Troopers and artillery and the entire French Navy the arrogant and incompetent Washington would have been captured and hung by his dirty balls. Too bad it did not happen that way as the corrupt rich founded a Representative Government that down to this day was founded for the criminal rich and by the criminal rich and to this day has refused democracy to the people.

      So next time you bad mouth the French you actually have every right to bad mouth them because if they had kept their damn noses out of our revolution we would have lost to the British and ended up with true democracy and a parliamentary government. The French got their democracy with their revolution and we never did.

      1. avatar George Washington says:

        Leave it to a coon to tell others about being uneducated…..
        We ALL can tell you AREN’T educated…. AT ALL

        1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          I am so educated you would not believe how educated I am I learned all of the true facts about the Revolutionary War playing World of Warcraft and other video games.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      The government has removed the citizens’ responsibility to defend the country and the government. That leaves them essentially defenseless, since MY government had better not spend my money or my sons on the defense of anyone so stupid. Perhaps the UK will defend them from China. Probably not.

  25. avatar TheTruthBurns says:

    I love Dipshits who Voluntarily Disarm because when the Shit Hits the Fan Thankfully you will the 1st Killed Thank You! Do Not FEAR Governments, Banks, Police, Military or Any Man ONLY FEAR GOD! In the meantime Pray for Peace & Prepare for WAR & Killing Demons!

  26. avatar LifeSavor says:

    Paraphrasing Mark Twain: ‘New Zealand. A country inhabited by 12 million sheep. Five million of which thin they are people.’

  27. avatar Chuck says:

    The displays of ignorance from some of the NZ gun owners is concerning to say the least. The “once we get the high-powered semi-automatics gathered up, it will make us safer” attitude, as if the bolt, lever and single shot guns have less “power?” That’s a Tard statement if I ever heard one. How it mechanically functions has no bearing on “power” at all. This is what you end up with in any form of government, when you let the elected dictate the rules. I guarantee none of their ministers are affected by the “ban.” They probably wrote exemptions for themselves as they crafted the legislation.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      More to the point, their police are not affected, I am sure. The whole idea is to make citizens easy prey for police, so that they can run amok and kill whoever they like so long as they are properly “authorized” (to begin with). Eventually, if it works well enough, the police discover they do not really need that authorization, they have all the power themselves. If the government capitulates, we have a police state; if not, we have a coup. Either way, we have a totalitarian government and mass executions of citizens.

  28. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

    It said “heavily armed officers patrolled” Why heavily armed? Why any officers? Patrolling what? Some army going to steal something?

  29. avatar Richard Coon says:

    I heard there’s quite a rash of “boating accidents” occurring in kiwi-land…..

  30. avatar John Galt says:

    Future Headline

    CHINA takes New Zealand……not a shot fired!

  31. avatar Anon says:

    For how long has mankind been at war and invaded other countries, places and areas?
    Must not have history classes in NZ or Australia.
    The British Empire did not like civilians with guns and actively tried to keep them (us) disarmed.
    The Boer War placed 35,000 Boers against thousands of British troop. 3 years later the Boers surrendered (15,000) left against over 350,000 British troops. It almost broke Great Britain.
    Nazi Germany took firearms from civilians, then later sent German Jews who had won the Iron Cross in WWI to the gas chambers.
    Stalin in Russia disarmed his citizens.
    During WWII, free Americans sent thousands of firearms to Britain to help fight Nazi Germany after the Dunkirk fiasco as the Army left their guns on the beach at Dunkirk and British civilians had few firearms.
    Venezuela: Chavez disarmed the population, Madura, the current President likes it now.

    Nazi Germany did not invade Switzerland for several reasons in WWI because men, after mandatory military service were required to keep ammunition and a rifle in their homes.

    Japan’s Army wanted to invade the US before WWII, Admiral Yamamoto was a navel attache to the US during the 1930’s and toured the country. He said don’t do it because behind every blade of grass will be an American with a rifle.

    Australia has about 26,000,000 people, NZ about 4,800,000 people and Indonesia has over 260,000,000 and China has about 1,400,000,000.

    Sooner or later Chins and or Indonesia is going to Australia and New Zealand.

    Countries don’t attack others unless they think they can win.

    Australia and New Zealand should be able at least to make China and or Indonesia think before invading, which they will ultimately do.

    I doubt if the US will intervene.

    No one learns the history of the world. Just before the Japanese attack on the US, we were trading more than ever with Japan, just before Nazi Germany invaded Russia, trade was through the roof.

    Coincidence does not mean correlation, BUT who trades a lot with China.


    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Thanks, Anon. Good post.

  32. avatar Steve D. says:

    “Brenton Tarrant, a 28-year-old Australian white supremacist, ”

    They’re still trying to pass off this Socialism loving Eco-Fascist as a “White Supremacist”!

    That kind of media shilling is sickening.

Write a Comment


button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email