Jump to content

Recommended Posts

guess we'll learn more about tonight's major armed offender squad operation tomorrow

"There was suddenly a massive crash, the sound of metal on metal, a full-on crunch," she said.

She then went outside and heard gunshots.

"There were probably three or four gunshots that went off. The cops were yelling for us to get back in the house. We ducked and ran back inside."


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

ahhh NZ, what a breath of fresh air !!  With so much of the rest of the world being dictated too by aggressive , power obsessed, stupid old men.... So called leaders whose main interest is s

Well, while that may well be (appears to be) what he means, society has previously decided those under 18 are not sufficiently mature to make these decisions, the mentally deficient are not up to it,

I don't think that's what KM is saying at all.  KM is saying (maybe I'm wrong) that there is is some inherent unfairness when quite a large minority of the population are not able to vote - the m

In the past two days police officers have twice been confronted with drivers with firearms; in Foxton and Rotorua. In one incident in the lower North Island, shots were fired at police.

"Last year that was really brought home with the death of Matthew Hunt which was a routine traffic stop. They're feeling very worried and concerned the chances of someone presenting a firearm at them seems to be increasing all the time," said Cahill.

While police didn't want to be armed, there was a general feeling they needed to be because they didn't know who they would be prepared to fire a weapon at them, he said.


Link to post
Share on other sites

again, reflexive.

Its easy to be prescient when you keep sayng the same thing over and over.  Granny Herald (and others) has been claiming increased threat to police and the public for years.

The facts don't back this.

Police Officers have an incredibly difficult time and are in the front line as a matter of thier work.  But the evidence globally is that directly arming the police routinely puts them at greater risk, not less.  The evidence is also that armed police forces kill more people in error.

In any case, all officers in a patrol car have access to firearms - they are locked in the boot of the car.

The evidence shows NZ police have killed more people in questionable circumstances than the other way around.   So its not a question of whether a person will be shot by a criminal - its which person will next be shot by a police officer overstepping the limits of thier authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites


from above

"New Zealand police have shot more people in the past 10 years than the previous 40."

who would care to bet that the nz police have been shot at more times in the past 10 years than the previous 40? in which case the article would fail at the first challenge of impartiality

A survey this year found a 38 per cent increase in the number of staff who'd been threatened with a firearm compared to two years ago.

Of frontline staff, 21 per cent had been threatened with a gun, 40 per cent of those more than once.


In the past three years, Scahill says, around twice as many people have shot at police than the other way around.

"What that tells you is that we've arrived at incidents, been shot at, and in roughly half of those we have resolved it without shooting."




Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree it would be terrible for our police to be regularly armed

but if our criminal element is going to regularly armed, presenting weapons and popping off shots at all in sundry what do you expect?

they be allowed to turn our streets into war zones and all we send in are the therapists?   


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, erice said:

i agree it would be terrible for our police to be regularly armed

but if our criminal element is going to regularly armed, presenting weapons and popping off shots at all in sundry what do you expect?

they be allowed to turn our streets into war zones and all we send in are the therapists?   


No, I am saying use the appropriate response to the appropriate threat.  Its basic risk management.

To do this you have to understand and recognise ALL the downsides.  One significant downside is that you end up in a war of escalation with a mutual expection of gunfire.  The ultimate endpoint of this the experience in the USA where every police interaction is treated like a terrorist incident.

Completely innocent people are regularly shot and injured or killed because the police approach is one of maximum force and self protection instead of risk management.

This is also happening here as explained in the article I linked.  People who are dangerous because they are mentally unwell (be that because of drug use or psychiatric problems) have tended to be on the receiving end.

Sometimes this is justified - where the public or a police officer is demonstrably at risk and there is no other practical method to manage the situation police may have to use lethal force.  Sometimes, it has not been.

The risk exists because we have taken a very hands off approach to firearms.  We  decided that state control of firearms was too burdensome and that the social marketplace would manage them better.

It hasn't.  So we need to manage the originating hazard (access to firearms) more actively to reduce the overall risk.  Arming police doesn't acheive this - in a boating context its like fitting a bigger bilge pump instead of fixing the leaking hull.


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reality is that all "country" police are armed, and probably most of the city dudes as well, It is just that they are "locked" in a gun safe in the car and not carried on the body.

Our local has I believe a rifle, shotgun, and glock available.

Interestingly although he is on the armed offenders squad etc. he hasn't had to have a gun license? Apparently he recently applied for one but the queue is pretty long

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, erice said:

the military don't have gun licences either

because most? of the gun licence training and testing 

does not align with the use of weapons by police and military





You are right Eric,  their training is definitely not what the nz public are taught re safe gun use. Nothing safe about about army or police use of lethal weapons for the person they are aiming at and occasionally ones they are not aiming at.

I had to smile a few years ago of a film clip of a raid on a Wellington city house / flat, a dog appeared, 42 shots fired +- none of which apparently hit the dog. Amazingly no one was injured by ricochets etc.

I would be very surprised if any of the people who point a gun at a police officer have a gun license, apart from the odd Aussie mass murderer.

I have recently read "True Red" by a mongrel turned Christian published in 2007, definitely no shortage of guns back then.

The export of undesireables from Aus to NZ has brought a much harsher reality to the gang scene, so yes expect more gun use, though mostly it will be gang and territory related.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...