The loss of life was the tragic moment when a psychopathic Aussie went on a killing spree.
The lasting effects of this event will not just be with the friends and family of the victims and those survivors with long term injuries from that day, not if Ardern gets her way. Which so far she is.
Our sick, self centred politicians are using this event to change the fabric of our society and push through agenda laws that bare no resemblance to the causes of the events that day.
Forgetting the rushed through gun laws, that have done oh so much to quell gun violence.
It’s free speech they are after now.
On the back of the Christchurch massacre we are losing our rights to free speech.
This is such a slippery slope to go down for a number of reasons.
One of the obvious is, who now is in control of what is “Hate Speech?”
The Prime Minister’s description of, you will know it when you see, it is about as sensible as banning coal exploration so that you can import it.
If you think they will stop here, you obviously don’t know the smell of coffee.
But there are more subtle issues with these hate law laws.
With free speech comes openness. People are able to voice their opinions in plain sight. It’s much easier to identify genuine antisocial actors if they are not hiding away from restrictions of free speech.
Those, that are the ones, that are most likely to enact antisocial behaviour will be forced underground. There desire to inflict harm
Not be quelled by “hate speech” laws. They will simply continue to plot away in the shadows.
The gunman who attacked the mosques committed a “hate crime.” He targeted specific people with the intent to murder them. this is a crime and covered in our current legislation.
He wasn’t ranting on the street corner about wanting to kill Muslims – and had he, he most certainly would have done his chances of doing what he did a lot of damage.
Here is a paragraph from the royal enquiry into the Christchurch attack on Hate Speech
“Unlike hate crime (such as a hate-motivated assault), conduct criminalised by a hate speech offence – in this case, what has been said – is not usually independently illegal. The difference between legitimately criminalised hate speech and a vigorous exercise of the right to express opinions is not easy to capture – at least with any precision – in legislative language. As well, the more far reaching a law creating hate speech offences, the greater the potential for inconsistency with the right to freedom of expression.”Christchurch attack Royal Commission
As always in law, the devil is in the detail. If the law is written in such a way that if someone is offended by what you say that you are now breaking the law, then we are essentially being muzzled by the government to stop hurty feelings.
This would be an absolute ridiculous outcome and one that serves no purpose.
We have laws now that say you are not to incite harm on to others. What’s wrong with that law again?
I don’t believe this law is there to do anything but slowly get us used to the fact that the government wants total control of what we think, say and do.
While they work on removing our rights, they use our money to fund propaganda.
The revelation that Labour has been using tax payer money to run adds that appear like genuine journalism just doesn’t seem to gather any traction. perhaps because the benefactor of these funds is the press.
Look at this latest blog from kiwiblog.co.nz if this isn’t socialism style propaganda that what is?
We have the most corrupt, devious and nasty Government in New Zealand history. And still the masses can’t get enough. of Ardern. This is how countries lose their freedom, they put a corrupt leader on a pedestal and its not until its too late that most of the sheep wake up.