So the expensive Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch massacre gets underway next Monday. Why? What on earth could it possibly accomplish?
A non-descript Australian, Brendan Tarrant, turns up in Dunedin, lives a fairly innocuous life, on what source of income we don’t know. Like thousands of others he joins a gun-club and a gym. Then suddenly he cracks and runs amok with a gun.
There was absolutely nothing in his background to explain such extreme behaviour and no way the Police could have had cause for suspicion. By all accounts they were super efficient once the shooting began. Having views on cultural purity are not grounds for preventative action or suspicious for such attitudes are held by hundreds of millions of totally decent folk, as they’re entitled to. They’re not racist or hate-filled, or cultural superiority but instead a form of conservatism about the status quo.
One question the Commission apparently must answer is how to stop this happening again? I can save them the time. We can’t.
Frankly, knowing him I’m surprised Willie Young took on this nonsense role which is utterly embroiled in tokenism.
8 Comments
Bob
They were not super efficent when they did not interveiw his referees when he aplied for a gun licence
Dewey
Incredibly accurate. Another grandiose ‘Royal Commission Report’ destined for the rubbish bin. But note – not even a single Opposition MP has the courage today to express this truth even though they’re universally in agreement “confidentially”…
So well stated Bob.
Feeling consevitive about the status quo . The status quo needs to change because it has racism at its base .
Hi Bob
Do you think they’ll leave ‘no stone unturned’ in regard to the history of Al Moor, In particular events in 2014 revolving around the Mosque training militants & the Saudi response in 2016.
Possibly events on the day will be bought to the public eye such as ‘the good guy with a gun’ episode that seemed to change tack with the wind direction , & other events surrounding Linwood.
Perhaps an explanation on how the massive amount of documentation to force law changes was prepared so rapidily just days after the event ?
Or am I being facetious in assuming there will be no enquiries of the sort.
Absolutely Agree. There is no realistic means for preventing attacks by motivated, methodical, modestly intelligent loners like Tarrant and Breivik. Even China’s extreme surveillance state would likely fail to catch such a threat. If Tarrant had been denied guns he could have killed even more using home made bombs, poisons, or a Truck etc. Even an automatic gun can be built in a garage with a few relatively cheap machine tools.
Technology is what can make a real difference.
We can dramatically increase police response times with armed drones. We can even install alarm systems activated by the sound of gun fire, which in turn instantly activate drones. All to keep the body counts down.
For interest: http://andrewatkin.blogspot.com/2016/12/zero-crime-cities-you-can-run-but-you.html
It irks me that they used this tragedy to remove semi automatic rifles from gun owners. I don’t understand how this guy got a gun license when he had no relative here to interview. He had to pass a background check and present two referees to be interviewed to acertain his soundness, someone who knew him and the other had to be a relation or spouse. Yet the general assumption is gun licenses are handed out to anyone who wants one.
The findings will be used as an excuse for more irrelelvant and draconian limitations and interventions on the law-abiding public.