ZOMG we need those anti-terror surveillance laws right now!

Forums › Off topic › ZOMG we need those anti-terror surveillance laws right now!

1 | ... | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | ... | 27

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199152 17-Dec-2014 14:07

JimmyC:
heylinb4nz:
Why dont people get the word "Training" here ?

a young constable can be trusted with a Glock 17 and he gets about 100 rounds a year to shoot \ practice.

Yet your average CCW holder \ Competition Shooter in the states trains monthly in multiple tactics shoots IPSC, IDPA, Speed Steel, ServiceMatch 3gun, is multiple weapon disciplined and has thousands of rounds per year shot.

Which one would you want in a room ??

Neither, because I don't want anyone who shoots targets for a hobby holding the balance of life in a crisis situation, regardless of their "training". Yes, in extremely rare situations a young constable may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to discharge a firearm at a nutter to save their, or someone elses life, but in a hostage situation like the one in Sydney, response is handled by the likes of AOS and STG, and possibly even the SAS if it gets that bad. They are professionals. Not weekend warriors with a gun fetish.

So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

Still cant get past the uniform thing and view it from a pure outcome standpoint.

and weekend warrior LOL it's more than police who are 6 monthly 100 rounds ...not even close to being warrior material.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1199155 17-Dec-2014 14:09

heylinb4nz:
JimmyC:
heylinb4nz:
Why dont people get the word "Training" here ?

a young constable can be trusted with a Glock 17 and he gets about 100 rounds a year to shoot \ practice.

Yet your average CCW holder \ Competition Shooter in the states trains monthly in multiple tactics shoots IPSC, IDPA, Speed Steel, ServiceMatch 3gun, is multiple weapon disciplined and has thousands of rounds per year shot.

Which one would you want in a room ??

Neither, because I don't want anyone who shoots targets for a hobby holding the balance of life in a crisis situation, regardless of their "training". Yes, in extremely rare situations a young constable may find themselves in the unenviable position of having to discharge a firearm at a nutter to save their, or someone elses life, but in a hostage situation like the one in Sydney, response is handled by the likes of AOS and STG, and possibly even the SAS if it gets that bad. They are professionals. Not weekend warriors with a gun fetish.

So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

Still cant get past the uniform thing and view it from a pure outcome standpoint.
and weekend warrior LOL it's more than police who are 6 monthly 100 rounds ...not even close to being warrior material.

Nonsense

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1199157 17-Dec-2014 14:11

ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: They are poorly funded, poorly equipped and hamstrung by the lack of legislative support

They have PLENTY of legislative support, they just aren't using it right.

If funding and equipment are an issue, then address that, don't sell the rest of the country down the river by legislating their rights away to make up for other failings.

It's a bit like saying the police don't have enough funding to keep us safe after dark, therefore the solution is a countrywide imposed curfew and no one is allowed outside after dark.

I should qualify one thing if greater powers are going to be granted based on an emergency situation I believe there should be multi party involvement in control like the War Cabinet used in WW2

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

roobarb

705 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 659

Trusted

#1199159 17-Dec-2014 14:12

heylinb4nz: So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

What percentage of the population are you expecting to be carrying handguns at all times, competent and waiting to respond to a hostage scenario?

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199160 17-Dec-2014 14:13

KiwiNZ:
ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: They are poorly funded, poorly equipped and hamstrung by the lack of legislative support

They have PLENTY of legislative support, they just aren't using it right.

If funding and equipment are an issue, then address that, don't sell the rest of the country down the river by legislating their rights away to make up for other failings.

It's a bit like saying the police don't have enough funding to keep us safe after dark, therefore the solution is a countrywide imposed curfew and no one is allowed outside after dark.

You do realise that we had far more reaching and restricting laws etc during the second world war that were quickly repealed when the need past.

- and are we to trust they will repeal them if \ when the time comes ?
- are we to trust them not to abuse powers while in place ?

perhaps trust is a 2 way street,

rather than breaking promises, ignoring referendums, ignoring overwhelming submissions, wasting public money, taking away peoples rights and treating the NZ population with comtempt

perhaps the government could earn some trust first before expecting us to rollover to yet more of their BS.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1199162 17-Dec-2014 14:21

heylinb4nz:
KiwiNZ:
ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: They are poorly funded, poorly equipped and hamstrung by the lack of legislative support

They have PLENTY of legislative support, they just aren't using it right.

If funding and equipment are an issue, then address that, don't sell the rest of the country down the river by legislating their rights away to make up for other failings.

It's a bit like saying the police don't have enough funding to keep us safe after dark, therefore the solution is a countrywide imposed curfew and no one is allowed outside after dark.

You do realise that we had far more reaching and restricting laws etc during the second world war that were quickly repealed when the need past.

- and are we to trust they will repeal them if \ when the time comes ?
- are we to trust them not to abuse powers while in place ?

perhaps trust is a 2 way street,

rather than breaking promises, ignoring referendums, ignoring overwhelming submissions, wasting public money, taking away peoples rights and treating the NZ population with comtempt

perhaps the government could earn some trust first before expecting us to rollover to yet more of their BS.

so who do you like and who do you trust? I am struggling to think of anyone based on your posts

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199164 17-Dec-2014 14:23

roobarb:
heylinb4nz: So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

What percentage of the population are you expecting to be carrying handguns at all times, competent and waiting to respond to a hostage scenario?

Not specifically hostage scenarios (those are rare) more for personal defense. But ill entertain your question with the following answer.

ANSWER : anyone that can

a) possesses the appropriate licence \ permit
b) has completed the required level of training (and can re qualify annually)
c) has passed all background checks (criminal history, mental health etc etc)

If it means the chances of having a good guy in the room is even slightly more its a good thing. Perhaps even complementing the surveillance laws in case someone slips though like in Sydney. Failing that there is the end response we see in Sydney which is the police (the ambulance at bottom of cliff).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1199168 17-Dec-2014 14:24

heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

What percentage of the population are you expecting to be carrying handguns at all times, competent and waiting to respond to a hostage scenario?

Not specifically hostage scenarios (those are rare) more for personal defense. But ill entertain your question with the following answer.
ANSWER : anyone that can a) possesses the appropriate licence \ permit
b) has completed the required level of training (and can re qualify annually)
c) has passed all background checks (criminal history, mental health etc etc)

If it means the chances of having a good guy in the room is even slightly more its a good thing. Perhaps even complementing the surveillance laws in case someone slips though like in Sydney. Failing that there is the end response we see in Sydney which is the police (the ambulance at bottom of cliff).

Thank god the Beehive has sane people in it and this lunacy would never be enacted

Now lets move back to the topic and leave the Gun lobby stuff to the boondocks

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199177 17-Dec-2014 14:30

KiwiNZ:
heylinb4nz:
KiwiNZ:
ajobbins:
KiwiNZ: They are poorly funded, poorly equipped and hamstrung by the lack of legislative support

They have PLENTY of legislative support, they just aren't using it right.

If funding and equipment are an issue, then address that, don't sell the rest of the country down the river by legislating their rights away to make up for other failings.

It's a bit like saying the police don't have enough funding to keep us safe after dark, therefore the solution is a countrywide imposed curfew and no one is allowed outside after dark.

You do realise that we had far more reaching and restricting laws etc during the second world war that were quickly repealed when the need past.

- and are we to trust they will repeal them if \ when the time comes ?
- are we to trust them not to abuse powers while in place ?

perhaps trust is a 2 way street,

rather than breaking promises, ignoring referendums, ignoring overwhelming submissions, wasting public money, taking away peoples rights and treating the NZ population with comtempt

perhaps the government could earn some trust first before expecting us to rollover to yet more of their BS.

so who do you like and who do you trust? I am struggling to think of anyone based on your posts

About the only people you can truly trust in this world are yourself, friends, family and most of your fellow tax paying slaves (I mean voting public).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1199180 17-Dec-2014 14:32

We can talk an awful lot about a lot of things but what surveillance comes down to in the end is trust. John key says trust us. We know things you don’t and we act in your best interests. The problem is, I don’t trust him, not for that. I don’t trust anyone who says they know best and I should just trust them unless I have slept with them. I don’t trust intelligence agencies of any kind anywhere because they operate in secret with elevated powers but no proper accountability. I don’t trust government organisations because the ones we do know about make lots of dumb mistakes, sometimes break laws and try to cover it up, let themselves be guided by the personal prejudices and incompetence of people in charge, and often just don’t do a very good job anyway. Why should we be expected to believe that the secret organisations are any different? Anyone who wants my trust has to earn it, and so far these puppies haven’t.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

JimmyC

726 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 82

#1199184 17-Dec-2014 14:34

heylinb4nz:

So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

And the odds of someone being in a place to make any difference is what, astronomical? But in the mean time waiting for that perfect yet hideous moment to put their training into practice we have a bunch of people carrying concealed weapons walking around our streets. Sorry mate but that does not make me feel in anyway safer at all, but then that probably won't surprise you.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199186 17-Dec-2014 14:36

KiwiNZ:
heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

What percentage of the population are you expecting to be carrying handguns at all times, competent and waiting to respond to a hostage scenario?

Not specifically hostage scenarios (those are rare) more for personal defense. But ill entertain your question with the following answer.
ANSWER : anyone that can a) possesses the appropriate licence \ permit
b) has completed the required level of training (and can re qualify annually)
c) has passed all background checks (criminal history, mental health etc etc)

If it means the chances of having a good guy in the room is even slightly more its a good thing. Perhaps even complementing the surveillance laws in case someone slips though like in Sydney. Failing that there is the end response we see in Sydney which is the police (the ambulance at bottom of cliff).

Thank god the Beehive has sane people in it and this lunacy would never be enacted
Now lets move back to the topic and leave the Gun lobby stuff to the boondocks

I'm interested to know where your complete trust and confidence in government comes from. Have you been institutionalize \ conditioned at some point in your life (military, police, university educated ) ? Im truely interested as a large and growing number of people in the world are starting to cotton on to the truth of how the world works.

Top points for loyalty though.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1199189 17-Dec-2014 14:38

heylinb4nz:
KiwiNZ:
heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

What percentage of the population are you expecting to be carrying handguns at all times, competent and waiting to respond to a hostage scenario?

Not specifically hostage scenarios (those are rare) more for personal defense. But ill entertain your question with the following answer.
ANSWER : anyone that can a) possesses the appropriate licence \ permit
b) has completed the required level of training (and can re qualify annually)
c) has passed all background checks (criminal history, mental health etc etc)

If it means the chances of having a good guy in the room is even slightly more its a good thing. Perhaps even complementing the surveillance laws in case someone slips though like in Sydney. Failing that there is the end response we see in Sydney which is the police (the ambulance at bottom of cliff).

Thank god the Beehive has sane people in it and this lunacy would never be enacted
Now lets move back to the topic and leave the Gun lobby stuff to the boondocks

I'm interested to know where your complete trust and confidence in government comes from. Have you been institutionalize \ conditioned at some point in your life (military, police, university educated ) ? Im truely interested as a large and growing number of people in the world are starting to cotton on to the truth of how the world works.

Top points for loyalty though.

Thanks for that now I have to clean my monitor and make another coffee

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#1199190 17-Dec-2014 14:38

Rikkitic: We can talk an awful lot about a lot of things but what surveillance comes down to in the end is trust. John key says trust us. We know things you don’t and we act in your best interests. The problem is, I don’t trust him, not for that. I don’t trust anyone who says they know best and I should just trust them unless I have slept with them. I don’t trust intelligence agencies of any kind anywhere because they operate in secret with elevated powers but no proper accountability. I don’t trust government organisations because the ones we do know about make lots of dumb mistakes, sometimes break laws and try to cover it up, let themselves be guided by the personal prejudices and incompetence of people in charge, and often just don’t do a very good job anyway. Why should we be expected to believe that the secret organisations are any different? Anyone who wants my trust has to earn it, and so far these puppies haven’t.

And even if you did trust John Key, or he was genuinely trustworthy....who's to say the next government, who inherit these powers are just as trustworthy or equally responsible.

Twitter: ajobbins

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1199197 17-Dec-2014 14:42

JimmyC:
heylinb4nz:

So you are saying tactically its better to have unarmed hostages and rely on taking a room by force with 10+ guys amped up on adrenalin packing burst fire M4 shooting 5.56mm shooting in dark with flashbangs going off and no idea where the gunman is in the room ?

vs

Having an appropriately trained and competent person conceal carrying who has eyes in room, and a weapon way more appropriate for close quarter defense.

And the odds of someone being in a place to make any difference is what, astronomical? But in the mean time waiting for that perfect yet hideous moment to put their training into practice we have a bunch of people carrying concealed weapons walking around our streets. Sorry mate but that does not make me feel in anyway safer at all, but then that probably won't surprise you.

Bit like the odds of thwarting a terrorist attack with random legislation, when in reality its just a matter of meeting in a park, setting a date and time and then getting down to some Jihad.

RE: CCWs Id feel safe, because I base my safety on common sense not emotion and what the media tells me. If you deal with people in a civil manner they aren't going to whip out their concealed weapon and start killing you are they. Cops in Australia are all armed, they are governed by same laws, they get agro at them all day everyday, they dont shoot people at random if they get annoyed, give the human race a little credit and stop looking at things from the anti-gun propaganda view.

1 | ... | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | ... | 27