New Zealand Bans Assault Weapons

This is what responsive governance looks like. 

Five days after a white supremacist unleashed a terror attack on two mosques with an assault weapon in Christchurch, NZ that killed 50 people, New Zealand has taken action to fix the problem with their gun laws that allowed it to happen.

On March 20, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced a ban on all military style assault weapons.   This took just ten minutes.



And here's PM Ardern's speech announcing the ban and other adjustments to NZ's gun laws, including a buyback for already purchased weapons.

Welcome, everyone. On 15 March, the nation witnessed a terrorist attack that demonstrated the weakness of New Zealand’s gun laws. New Zealand’s regulation of arms primarily dates back to 1983. Sadly, since that time, the most substantive changes to our laws came following the Aramoana shootings. Those changes, however, did not go far enough. Successive attempts have been made, and failed, to change our laws since then. Those attempts were in 1999, 2005, 2012, and more recently though a select committee inquiry in early 2017. And still, none of the changes that have been made in the past dealt with one of the most glaring issues we have that sets New Zealand apart from many other nations: the availability of military-style semi-automatic weapons.

The attacker on 15 March took a significant number of lives using primarily two guns. They were assault rifles, and they were purchased legally on an A category gun license, the standard license held by gun owners in New Zealand. The capacity of these assault rifles was then enhanced using 30+ round magazines, essentially turning them into military-style semi-automatic weapons. While the modification of these guns was illegal, it was done easily, through a simple online purchase.

The guns in this terrorist attack had important distinguishing features. First, the capacity, and also, the delivery. They had the power to shoot continuously, but they also had large-capacity magazines. I absolutely believe there will be a common view amongst New Zealanders, those who use guns for legitimate purposes, and those who have never touched one, that the time for the mass and easy availability of these weapons must end. And today, they will.

Today I am announcing that New Zealand will ban all military-style semi-automatic weapons. We will also ban all assault rifles. We will ban all high-capacity magazines. We will ban all parts with the ability to convert semi-automatic or any other type of firearm into a military-style semi-automatic weapon. We will ban parts that cause a firearm to generate semi-automatic, automatic, or close-to-automatic gunfire. In short, every semi-automatic weapon used in the terrorist attack on Friday will be banned in this country.

These changes will require legislation. That legislation is now being drafted and will be introduced under urgency. A short and select committee process will apply, so I encourage all those who wish to submit to start now. My expectation is that the law will be in place by the end of the next two-week sitting session, which is by the 11th of April.

As a government, however, we did not wish to allow a situation where irresponsible dealers continue to sell weapons that will be banned within a few weeks. That is why we have taken an interim measure. As at 3 p.m. today, an order-in-council took effect. These changes to our regulations will ensure virtually all of the weapons I have announced as being banned will be categorized as weapons that require an E-Class endorsement. The effect of this will mean that no one will be able to buy these weapons without a permit to procure from the police. I can assure people that there is no point in applying for such a permit. This is an interim measure to ensure the trade of these weapons ceases from 3 p.m. today.

As a government, we acknowledge that there will be gun owners who have legitimately purchased weapons we have now moved to ban. Some, for instance, will use them for large scale culling, such as dog. We will as a cabinet work through legalized exemptions for these purposes, but they will be tightly-regulated. For others, these guns will now come out of circulation. I acknowledge and thank those retailers who have voluntarily ceased to sell military-style semi-automatic and assault rifles. You have seen the collective issues we face as a country and I thank you for that. For other dealers, sales should essentially now cease. My expectation is that these weapons will be returned to their suppliers, and never enter into the New Zealand market again.

For current owners of the weapons we have moved to ban, I acknowledge that many of you will have acted within the law. In recognition of that, and to incentivize their return, we will be establishing a buy-back scheme. The details of the scheme are being developed in parallel to the drafting of the legislation to enforce the ban.

In the meantime, we are asking all current holders of military-style semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles to visit www.police.govt.nz. There they will find details of the weapons included in this ban. In the next 48 hours, a form will be available on this site that we are asking these gun owners to complete, identifying what banned guns they hold. The police will then arrange for these weapons to be handed over, and eventually destroyed. Details of the weapons handed back by owners that are covered by the ban will also be taken to ensure that fair and reasonable compensation is paid once the buyback is in place. If owners are unable to complete the online form, they are able to contact the police on the phone to arrange the handover of these now-banned guns. I do want to emphasize, to manage the flow of information to the police, online is the best way to arrange the return of your weapons. Do not arrive at the police station unannounced with these weapons in your possession.

As the legislation is developed, we will determine the time available for the return of military-style semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles, and the duration of the buyback scheme. I can assure people that there will be time for the returns to be made, and that they will not be criminalized overnight. After a reasonable period for returns, those who continue to possess these guns will be in contravention of the law. Currently, the penalties for this range from fines of up to $4,000 and or three years in prison. The draft legislation will look to increase these penalties.

I want to acknowledge that the weapons available in New Zealand are only part of the problem, and loopholes with our current law continue to exist. On Monday, Cabinet will receive and consider further amendment to our gun laws. These proposals will however go through a more fulsome process. But be assured, this is just the beginning of the work we need to do.

Finally, I want to repeat a message I have consistently shared since announcing our laws would change. We do have guns in New Zealand that are used for legitimate purposes by responsible owners every single day, and that includes our rural community. They manage pests, they’re used for animal welfare, and also for recreation. I’ve been steadfast in my belief that the vast majority of these owners will support what we are doing here today, because it’s about all of us, it’s in the national interest, and it’s about safety. I will work hard to retain that support as we work on the remaining tranches of reform that we must make to prevent an act of terror happening in our country ever again. I will now hand over to the Minister of Police

Brava PM Ardern and New Zealand.

Imagine what we could do in the US with the political will and no NRA 

CNN Guns Town Hall

For those of you who missed it, here's the  town hall that CNN broadcast featuring the students and parents of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School vs the NRA and Sen. Marco Rubio (NRA-FL)

Also taking part in this conversation that was moderated by CNN's  Jake Tapper  was Sen Ben Nelson (D-FL), Rep Ted Deutch (D-FL) and Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel along with NRA shill spokesperson Dana Loesch . 

As you probably guessed, coming a mere week after the mass shooting event that killed 17 people, it was contentious at times.

Here's the video of it.

Ugh, Texas College Campus Carry Law Takes Effect

Just what we needed on Texas college and university campuses, armed drunken frat boys.

In more GOP ammosexual idiocy sponsored by the NRA and the idiots comprising our Texas Republican legislative majority, campus carry is now allowed on the campuses of public Texas colleges and universities.  It is now the eighth state, after Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Utah and Wisconsin to do so.

What's the difference between campus carry and open carry?   Semantics.   Open carry is banned on Texas college and university campuses.  

But CONCEALED licensed permit holding ammosexuals have the rights as of today to carry their handguns on public Texas colleges and universities, and only the university presidents have the authority under the law to declare areas of the campus as 'gun free zones'

Texas private colleges and universities have the ability to opt out of the looney SB 11 law, and many of them like Houston's Rice University, Baylor University in Waco and others promptly did.  

There is also the ability to declare areas on Texas public college and university campuses as gun-free zones, but doesn't look like this is happening in the areas where it counts in classrooms and faculty offices, and only the university presidents can do so..

They had no problem however banning campus carry in on campus stadiums and arenas.  Nope, can't let those football and basketball attendees of our games that pay for the athletic programs become free fire zones, inside the classrooms are okay.

The law signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R) took effect today, which happens to be the 50th anniversary of the 1966 day that 24 year old Marine trained sniper and UT architectural engineering student Charles Whitman, after killing his wife and mother before heading to the UT campus, climbed into the observation deck of the 27 story tower at the center of the campus that at the time was one of the tallest buildings in Austin, armed with rifles, pistols, and a sawed off shotgun.

Over the next terrifying 92 minutes, starting at 11:48 AM CDT Whitman killed 13 people and wounded 30 others on campus and up to two blocks away before he himself was gunned down by APD officers Ramiro Martinez, George McCoy and UT employee Allen Crum to end the carnage.

It was sadly one of the first mass shootings that happened on a school campus, and we would see that reprehensible list get longer at Columbine, Sandy Hook, and Virginia Tech just to name a few.

The reality based folks in Texas are pushing back against SB 11, with the most vehement opposition happening on that same UT Austin campus that witnessed firsthand 50 years ago the problem of having an armed shooter blasting away indiscriminately at unarmed people minding their own business people

But what we are seeing already before the fall semester even starts is the chilling effect it is having on free speech and debate in Texas public college academic settings, which is probably what the conservative authors of this law were hoping for when they proposed and passed it.

"Weapons designed to end human life have no place in the academic life of the University, except when carried by duly authorized law officers." the University of Houston faculty senate wrote in a resolution condemning SB 11 last year.  "The diverse campus communities and free academic discourse are especially threatened by the presence of deadly weapons in teaching, research and living spaces."

Amen, and proud of the faculty of my alma mater standing up for common sense.  Their thoughts are echoed by other faculty members across the Lone Star State.

I also feel for the dedicated campus police officers across our state who will have to deal with the headaches brought on by this idiotic law.

There are times when things happen in classrooms and discussions get heated.  I have seen testosterone fueled drama between frats at step shows and intramural sports blow up into fights.   Students and professors at times have heated arguments over grades and other subjects inside their offices and classrooms..  Professors have been pissed off when they get denied tenure.  Collegiate romantic relationships go sour.

Now imagine a gun being introduced into to all those situations I just mentioned.   What could go wrong?  

We sadly know the answer to that question.

Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo Bans Open Carry For 2016 Event

Still chuckling because the backlash continues against HB 901, the open carry law the GOP controlled Texas Lege passed that took effect January 1.   A long list of venues in Houston, Dallas, Austin and San Antonio have banned open carry in their establishments, and earlier today the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo joined that long list of events in doing so.

"The Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, in an effort to provide a safe environment and promote a family friendly atmosphere at the city's iconic entertainment event, will prohibit concealed and open carry by private citizens at the 2016 show," the organization said in a press release.

"It's our goal to promote a family friendly atmosphere," said Joel Cowley, president and CEO of the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo."We don't think the private carry of handguns is conducive to that."

Even though RodeoHouston is held on Harris County property in the NRG Stadium/Astrodome complex, the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo retains exclusive use and control rights of the complex for the duration of the rodeo that will kick off March 1 and run through March 20.

Hmm, may have to check our the rodeo for the first time since i moved back home, now that I know drunken fools walking around the complex won't be armed.

Why I Hate HB 901

As the New Year dawned in Texas, another example of idiotic Texas GOP governance took effect as the ammosexuals danced with glee.

The loophole ridden HB 901 took effect that allows the open carry of guns across the state, and is so convoluted it is practically unenforceable.  However, if a business doesn't want open carry handguns on their property, they must post a Section 30.07 sign alerting the gun toters of that fact.

As a TransGriot public service, here's a list of the Houston area establishments that will ban open carry of handguns compiled by Kyle Nielsen, Phaedra Cook and Darla Guillen.

There's also this graphic making the rounds of a card people can leave for business who are trying to straddle the fence between sane Texans and the ammosexuals.  

I know I'm not hanging around any place in which ammosexuals show up with guns and I don't know what their intent is, especially in light of the fact we had a 1991 mass shooting at a Luby's in Killeen. TX.  

I'm also careful when I drive because of the possibility of a road rage incident escalating into gun violence.  Got a reminder of it on New Year's Eve in Denton when 20 year old Sara Mutschlechner, a University of North Texas coed acting as a designated driver for her friends, was shot and later died in a road rage incident.

I also have another reason hate HB 901 and be nervous about its implementation after what recently happened at a Biloxi. MS Waffle House when an ammosexual with a short fuse shot and killed a waitress for telling him to put out his cigarette and all the anti-Black, anti-Muslim, anti-trans, and anti-Latino hatred being stirred up on the GOP presidential nomination trail.

Until all the uncertainty sowed by HB 901 is sorted out by the courts, may be doing a lot more drive through in restaurants that don't have Section 30.07 signs, or frankly, not taking my business there at all.

Open Carry Laws Racist Enforcement

One of the things I'm not in favor of is the proliferation of guns and open carry laws that allow ammosexuals to carry assault rifles in public.

I see them as problematic.  'Stand your ground' laws have come to be 'Kill Black People And Get Out Of Jail Free' cards for white people while Black people like Marissa Alexander do jail time for simply firing warning shots in the air.

I'm highly skeptical of open carry laws and how they will be enforced.by police departments that let's be real, have their share of racist cops.

And right on cur, here's a video that basically encapsulates how I believe these laws will disproportionately be enforced.

Note the difference in how the persons carrying an AR-15 down the street are treated.

Is It Time For The Huey P. Newton Gun Club To Visit Austin?

“no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.” - See more at: http://disinfo.com/2011/08/the-black-panthers-and-the-gun-rights-movement/#sthash.1hCCErCD.dpuf

"I see no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying a loaded weapon."
California Governor Ronald Reagan (R), May 2, 1967

There have been loud calls by the Tea Klux Klan and the conservafools that run our state legislature (boo hiss) to enact Open Carry laws here in the Lone Star State because believe it or not, my home state is one of just six in the nation that do not allow you to carry modern weapons without a permit..  

And with racist idiots like the Fort Worth based Open Carry Texas walking around doing nekulturny crap like threatening state legislators that  are lukewarm to the idea, that's a good thing.  I'm not in favor of an open carry law unless there is a provision in it to do instant background checks that weed out people who shouldn't have access to weapons whose sole purpose is to kill mass quantities of human beings on a battlefield in the first place.

But with GOP control of both houses and a new GOP governor, if they propose and file it, if it has enough support it'll probably pass.

But I'm seeing something in our past history that might change their conservaminds about just how great an idea open carry is, and it's based on events that happened in California back on May 2, 1967.

To protest the Mulford Act, a bill that was being proposed to repeal the law that allowed for the open carry of loaded weapons on California streets, on that day 24 Black Panther Party men and six Black Panther Party women armed with .357 Magnums, 12-gauge shotguns, and .45 caliber pistols arrived on the Cali capitol's West lawn, climbed up the capitol steps, and marched through the capitol building before Bobby Seale read Executive Mandate Number 1, a statement about Black people arming themselves against the anti-Black terror aimed at us before it was too late.

The Panthers opposed the Mulford Act because it targeted their armed police patrols designed to end the epidemic of police brutality and inform people of the constitutional rights,.  Members of the BPP would listen to police calls on a short wave radio, rush to the scene of the arrest with law books in hand and inform the person being arrested of their constitutional rights. BPP members carried publicly displayed loaded weapons on these patrols while being careful to stand no closer than ten feet from the arrest so as not be accused of interfering with the arrest.

Of course the sight of Black peeps with guns marching through the Capitol building combined with their police patrols, and Malcolm X's statements concerning  Black people exercising their 2nd Amendment rights scared the crap out of the powers that be, and they reacted in California by passing the Mulford Act  and they, along with the NRA pushing for increased gun control.

I noted that Open Carry Texas attempts to try to hold an armed march through Houston's historic predominately Black Fifth Ward neighborhood on MLK Day and Juneteenth and South Dallas ceased and desisted after the Huey P Newton Gun Club marched through South Dallas last August and members of the Houston New Black Panther Party chapter confronted the Open Carry Texas bigots at a meeting informing them they were not welcome in our neighborhoods while showing of their assault rifles

Maybe it's time for the Huey P. Newton Gun club to take a drive down I-35 south and do some lobbying for their 2nd Amendment rights as other Black 2nd Amendment advocates join them in Austin for a rally at the Capitol

Any bets on how fast the Lone Star Republicans will drop the idea of open carry when they realize that open carry laws cuts both ways and we Black folks also own guns?    

And how fast would they back off of Open Carry laws if those same Black open carry advocates marched through the ritzy Dallas area enclave of Highland Park, Houston's River Oaks and San Antonio's Alamo Heights or some ring suburban neighborhoods?

Maybe then and only then will those Republicans see the error of their conservaways and ponder the  wisdom of Saint Ronald of Reagan's words about guns 48 years ago.