Mass attack in mosque(s) in New Zealand
 

There's been an attack on at least one mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand this morning. And apparently he lived streamed it on Facebook


Shooting reported at multiple mosques in New Zealand's Christchurch; mass casualties feared, Australia/NZ News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

My kid mentioned a rumor about him referencing PewdiePie somewhere in his pre-attack social media but I haven't seen that in the legit media reports anywhere.

(I mention it here unconfirmed mostly because I'm curious to see if it turns out to be true or not)

Yeah its not been confirmed yet Jon but saw a couple tweets on it. Something about how people should subscribe to his channel, which is just bizarre if true.

It's true. It's in the 16 minute video from his Facebook livestream.


Something like "don't forget to subscribe to pewdiepie." Looks like a Dyan Roof'esque with a lot of history in the dregs of the internet (8chan)

The video is on Liveleak. I wouldnt watch it. One of the most disturbing things I have ever seen.

I've read at least 3 accounts of the situation in the news (2 int'l, 1 was NZ-based I think) and I've yet to understand a simple question: was it the same shooter(s) at both locations or separate shooters?

As of posting this I've read that 4 people are in custody (alleged roles unspecified so far) but you'd think that at least one story this far along would address the same/different shooter aspect at least.

As far as I can tell there's very little info to come from the second location, but looking how far apart they are and the amount of co-ordination involved I'd take a guess and say it's two shooters.

What the fuck is wrong with people.

The arrest video on the BBC is pretty interesting as well, looks like a parked car with the trunk open was rammed by armed police and a guy dragged out of it. You wonder if they didn't manage to stop something even worse.

I was over in NZ a few years ago chatting to a Turkish guy who had been living there for awhile. One thing he said to me that really stuck with me re: why he loved NZ was along the lines of it being so far away from the troubles of the rest of the world.

Sounds like one of these fuckers was an Aussie, too.

40 plus dead.

Holy shit.

Not sure who this guy is and all his beliefs but have to say I'm good with him hitting the teen. If the kid was 13-14-15 that's a different matter but this kid looked old enough to take a smacking.

Australian Senator Fraser Anning punches teen after being egged | Australia news | The Guardian

I wish at the very least he’d used an ostrich egg. Anning is a far-right blight on our political scene who was elected on a technicality. Spends his days fearmongering Islam and Sudanese refugees when he comes from one of the most drug-ravaged (mostly “good old Aussie” demographic) regions of this country.

He could have quite the political career in Kentucky if they'd let him.

Never had an ostrich egg so had to look it up. Sounds like quite a chore to eat one.

Ostrich egg, the ultimate egg experience - Le Manger - english version

I bought one of these at a Boston grocery store around 2001, just because it was there. I had no clue what to do with it. We kept it around the house for a while until it went rotten.

It was part of a challenge for The Amazing Race a few years back. It wasn't pretty.

He is a fascist. Like not shy about it either.

I got to "no clue" and thought just google it and then realized this was back in ... 2001.

I remember briefly attempting an internet search and reading something about finding an air pocket and smashing the egg there, but ya, this was before gaining the assumption we all have now that the answer to any question can be found in a minute or two.

Should have shot him. I mean, is a smack really enough over some produce poured on you ?

If you spout the type of racist drivel this guy does and knowing the ramification of this sort of rhetoric (it's amazing that people still seem to have "well, those are just words" attitude), i am good with him getting egged as often as humanly possible. I mean that piece of shit seriously went into "well, it was essentially self defense/preventive action" territory when commenting on the Christchurch attack and out of thin air conjured that 'Muslim fanatics' are basically overrunning New Zealand. And when you consider that White Nationalists/Supremacists in countries like Australia have even less of a leg to stand on considering they are descendants of invaders you've gotta wonder if some egg seeping into his brain wouldn't be an improvement.

The guy is an asshole. So is the kid. If you crush an egg against someone's head when they're not looking then start filming them I have no problem with them punching you and I don't think it should be a surprise if they do. Credit to the kid for taking the punch well.

I don't support egging of the idiot Australian senator.

I do support him being shunned, kicked out of the Australian senate and mocked for the rest of his life.

(and before you go WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED HIM IN... He got in because Australian politics is weird. He got 19 FIRST PREFERENCE VOTES. NINETEEN. The would be-winner got 20,000+).

(this is the asshole who supported a "final solution" to immigration. Yes, the Holocaust)

Fraser Anning: How only 19 people voting for him secured Senate gig

Us Aussie taxpayers have all been paying to fly him around the country to meet tiny, fringe far-right groups, too. He's become a poster child for them and I fear is giving some credibility to them as well. The fact that he is an independent because he was kicked out of our most right-wing major political party is an enormous red flag in itself.

It's restored a tiny/fractional amount of my faith in Australian politics how quickly both our major parties have moved to condemn him. Our current party in power is definitely right-leaning.

I support egging the fascist.

:withstupid:



I agree with you. But are you okay with him smacking the kid?

yes.

Back to the actual story, maybe, a bit...

The Daily follow-up episode

Deep details aside, I am all in for their Prime Minister. Understands the right things to say and do in the immediate wake, and then says we're acting. Perhaps (as I would anticipate hearing) this NYT podcast is just more "fake news" whitewash by the failing libtard media, but until she gets milkshake ducked, I'm totally on board for her.

I listened to that podcast this morning- one of the few benefits of having a dog that demands to be walked first thing. I was incredibly impressed by how she’s handled this crisis from the moment it happened until now. There was genuine compassion for the victims, their families, and the community and strong, political action taken to address one of the core issues at play. While I hate how things always seem to come back to our President, it’s really hard not to compare the two.

Don't know if its all semi-automatic weapons (e.g. lots of regular hunting rifles, pistols are semi-automatic) or just specifically the military styled ones. I've not read of any big uproars in NZ but it does seem strange to me that law abiding citizens are giving up their "privilege" (vs. "right" in the US) to own semi-automatic weapons so willingly.

Just a different way of thought and upbringing. Not saying good or bad, just saying it is interesting and how different it would be if it happened here.

New Zealand gun ban is not the answer to stop mass shootings | TheHill

Exactly what we did here in Australia. The good ole NRA has been trying to meddle in NZ as well re: the latest ban, just like all the other times the idea has been floated over the past decade or so. They're getting vocal pushback from politicians this time, which is great.

I'm among those who still have that attitude. So was this guy, who certainly was not a fascist . I think putting up with distasteful rhetoric is one of the prices of living in a free society, and decidedly better than the alternative. I don't need to listen to much Fraser Anning to realize the further he is away from any position of public responsibility the better, and it sounds like some political reform as to avoid such eventualities as him being elected or whatever with such minimal support would be in order. But on the subject of egging - if it's ok to do it to him, it's ok to do it to anyone offer an opinion you don't share. That hardly seems to be the basis for a civil society. I'm also not ok with him punching the offender - let the legal system sort that out and behave like a statesman, not a brawler.

It seems worthwhile to make the distinction that this fellow wasn't being egged for his opinion, he was being egged because he has that opinion AND he took the public position to put power behind it, apparently with less than 10 votes. I think the only person in any kind of danger of serial eggings is just this exact guy.

Has the Australia buyback really worked? The article below seems contradictory to me.

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted. - Vox

I think it’s pretty shortsighted go ban all those guns in Australia. Drop bears kill hundreds of people a week.

I think the "murders and suicides plummeted" part is the give away. ;)

Thing is, it's still possible to own a gun in Australia. All types of firearms are given a class, and each class is restricted to certain people based on location and profession.

There are of course illegal guns here as well and illegal shipments are uncovered from time to time, and a suspiciously high number of folks like security guards are targeted for their hand guns, which are one of the most difficult types of guns to get a general license for (outside of military-grade weapons). But the difficulty and time it takes to get hold of a gun through legal means really reduces the opportunistic/spur of the moment incidents which I think is the reason for the huge drop in gun crime even if 80% of guns weren't handed in.

Where exactly is it contradictory ? Or are we back to the 'either 100% or nothing' argument here ? Apart from the guns being taken out of circulation being a significant number* it also set a tone. And as Groundhog mentions and has been shown fairly conclusively for a lot of different regions (including within the US): Bureaucracy and other hurdles are a very effective tool in reducing gun deaths and everything reducing visibility and common-placenes (yeah, sorry ;) ) is a good thing.



There's actually a ton of guns owned in Germany as well, but it isn't made out to be essentially a kitchen knive that goes bang.



*And without having the time to dig into the numbers it would be interesting to see how that correlates to "percentage of gun owning households" as well as "percentage of 'active' guns" (as opposed to those untold hundreds of thousands gathering dust in an attic or cellar) as well as location. My first instinct would be for example that a lot more people in cities and households with children would have handed in their guns (relatively speaking) and a large number of the 80% remained in a comparatively smaller percentage of households, meaning the 20% reduced the households with a gun by a larger percentage than 20.

Again, purely speculation.

...and now we get breaking news in Australia that the NRA has been secretly working with our nutty far-right political party One Nation here to try and water down our gun laws. No doubt because they are sick of Australia (and now NZ) being thrown around as sensible examples on how to respond to mass shootings.

I was questioning that only 20% turned in their guns. In my mind, that didn't really equate to "success".

FWIW a Snopes article.

Australian Guns Stats

Yeah, I think the fact it was only 20% of guns bought back and the murder/suicide rates dropped is actually a better thing and provides a more reasonable way forward here in the US. Gun advocates love to say 90%+ of gun owners are responsible law-abiding citizens, and there is that large percentage that will just never hand in guns during a buyback. So if the majority of the gains can be achieved just by increasing waiting times and drastically decreasing loopholes that's much more feasible here.

The difference in gun culture and gun control philosophies isn't the only big difference between the way other countries address these things:

Christchurch mosque shootings: 'Manifesto' deemed objectionable | RNZ News

Knowingly possessing the killer's manifesto (which the government has deemed objectionable) can get you 14 years prison in New Zealand.

I'm seeing sentiment for this kind of thing, and other criminalization of "hate speech" increasing a little in the U.S. Though what happens if your legislature is further right (or even moves further right in someplace like New Zealand), shifting the government's perception of what is "objectionable"?

I'm a dirty socialist Canadian and even I am not a fan of laws that get you jailed for possessing 'objectionable' materials.

Dola

Though I guess things like possessing child pornography are maybe similar? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Still, seems like making thoughts and ideas illegal is a pretty slippery slope.

JUST IN: Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz says we can now confirm that there was financial support and so a connection between the New Zealand attacker and identitarian movement in Austria pic.twitter.com/wtNMI4Y2E8

— Reuters Top News (@Reuters) March 27, 2019

I don't support the restriction on the manifesto (definitely a slippery slope) but definitely agree to child porn. But to be honest, I don't where the "line" is because I know societal values changes over time and what would have been deemed an absolute "no" in the past is an "okay" now or vice-versa.

Going along this line of thought, from a civilization standpoint, roughly 8000 years, it wasn't all that long ago that early teens were married off and having kids.

Agree with this. I think of China as an example.

You can't yell "FIRE" in a movie theater.



Why?


Use that as starting point "A" and go from there.


That is the standard. Language that is used that endangers mankind. Not a group, mankind.

You know the court case which used that analogy was overturned 40 years ago right?

So I CAN cause a mass panic in the name of free speech?