I am a NZ firearms owner and licensee. I also hold a security license. This debate seems to be playing out in America through memes and statistics (X killed in Chicago, Y killed in Iraq, etc). I think it IS about proliferation and availability of guns (the same applies to alcohol and binge drinking in NZ). Guns do kill (ask the parents of children killed in curiosity accidents). I do not share the paranoia in some US circles that reducing the types of some guns disarms the public and leaves them vulnerable to tyranny. In the end the army and police are Americans too, and would have to be complicit in any despot wanting to enslave the American populace. Just reducing guns does not make Americans unsafe; it will make them safer because most Americans die in domestic or civil violence, not government vs people.
In the end this is about people and laws. The ability of governments other than to ‘broad-brush’ (send directional steers) is limited. Reform is feasible and would be positive (why does the American populace need military weapons and handguns? Why not just keep hunting-type rifles or rifles of a certain calibre? Caught with a gun in a criminal act? Automatic extra 2 years, like our home invasion loading in NZ).
So, I’m with Piers Morgan on this. A reasoned de-escalation and restriction of weapons in the US, better registration, respecting hunting rights, but targeting criminal gangs and smaller hand guns and military ordinance, can only be good for America.
Like this:
Like Loading...
About coNZervative
A blog about politics, life, culture, literature, music and thought from Christchurch, New Zealand [NZ] (the home of 10,000 earthquakes since 4 Sept. 2010) built because of the bullying and cajoling of Liberal opinion-makers (journalism and Hollywood) against conservative-minded people who are as entitled to opinion and a perspective as anyone; and because Conservativism has served the world well.
John Stringer is a New Zealander (Christchurch) in his 40s married to an American from Taco Bell; they have 5 adult children in 3 diff. countries. John is an ex-Anglican pastor, a teacher, published author (NZ), novelist (USA) and cartoonist (Aust, NZ), and has spent the last 25 years in NZ politics with the National party (he was a parliamentary candidate in 1999). There was a stint in London working for the British Conservative party as well, where he did media minding and campaign work with several Brit cabinet ministers, including Baroness Thatcher, Baroness Blatch, Michael Howard, Tom King, among others. He has an MA (classical studies, Victoria); is a graduate of the New York Film Academy; and has various awards for writing. His passions include British bulldogs, fly fishing, and history (Ancient and WWII).
Winston Churchill was mainly a “Conservative” but also a “Liberal” MP between 1900-1964. A Member of Parliament for 64 years, he contested 21 parliamentary elections (for Oldham, Manchester North West, Dundee, and Epping/Woodford). Throughout his career Churchill stood for liberty. He believed in open debate and freedom of speech, and opposed any system or ideology that tried to dictate the way one should think. Churchill felt deeply that disagreements within the democratic system should not degenerate into personal animosities.
RIDER: This site is not connected to nzconservative, a Catholic site, or NZ Conservative Party, although from time-to-time I share some of the views espoused by both groups and other sites I follow, as published; I am an independent thinker and blogger.
While you may not “.. share the paranoia in some US circles that reducing the types of some guns disarms the public and leaves them vulnerable to tyranny”, others – American citizens – do.not regard it as a paranoia. As you correctly state, it is about people and laws, specifically the US Constitution. The Second Amendment was put there after much debate with the express purpose of deterring would be tyrants both foreign and domestic. It was never intended to be anything else. Why anybody would need a small caliber, large magazine, self loading weapon for hunting is beyond me; protecting your home, possessions and family from home invasion is more effective with a shotgun and less effectively with a pistol. But that is not the point of the Second Amendment and never was. Assault weapons are designed to suppress opposition at short to medium range. An increasing number of people regard the likes of the hubristic Obama as a self serving reptile with a disdain for the Constitution and anyone who doesn’t share his elitist ‘progressive’ viewpoint. They have a point and they’re arming themselves. Piers Morgan and his big smart Alec mouth can go and get stuffed as far as they are concerned.