The Iraq side is interesting, as from the stories it's likely he's seen what bad guys with improvised munitions can do as well. No thought to increase control of fert or fuel, or vehicles or any of the other myriad of things that were used in the fighting over there. That can do real serious damage... My own opinion is that I suspect there is more to the story with firearms than we are being told and that for whatever reason the 'line being pushed' is not going away as others have said and that to make any changes in that space may be non-starters no matter how good the evidence or how undeniable the logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Waimata
8.5mill just to run the registry a year would likely either 'fix' or go a very long way towards fixing the Nelson hospital issues, and that would save a lot more than 2 lives a year that Mitchell quoted as justifying the registry (and that's ignoring the fact that there are no stats or any measures that could prove this either way and that he stated that the registry is only intended to give a picture of lawful firearms ownership but then stated that if it saves 2 lives a year through criminal use of firearms then it is worth it - both statements being mutually exclusive).
On this one, despite the fact that I think Act don't get everything right by a long shot - I think that on the Arms Act issues they have nailed it on the head and that National's position is not supported by evidence and only exists to fuel emotional arguments.
Speaking of distractions we need like a serious medical event:
https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/na...ety-authority/
