[On Friday], New Zealand Police issued me with a notice revoking my firearms licence. According to the Firearms Safety Authority, I will not be getting my firearms licence back.
This follows the temporary suspension issued to me on 30 June and the subsequent submissions made by my lawyer opposing that suspension.
The decision goes even further. I am now prohibited not only from possessing my own firearms, but from possessing or using a firearm even under the supervision of a licensed firearms holder.
After holding a firearms licence for many years without issue, Police have now decided I am no longer a “fit and proper person”. And why?
Four of the five matters relate to statements I made concerning the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi. To recap…I was publicly challenging serious human-rights issues in India under Modi’s leadership, including reports of:
- Christians being killed and persecuted.
- Sexual violence and attacks against Christian women and girls.
- Churches being attacked and burned.
- Child marriage and the treatment of vulnerable children.
[...]
POLICE SAY THEY SUPPORT FREE SPEECH
Inspector Glenn Nalder, who made the decision to revoke my licence, says his decision was made independently, impartially and in accordance with the Arms Act 1983. [...]
But then comes the paragraph that should concern every New Zealander who values free speech:
“The Police position is that your words speak for themselves. Your speech appears prepared and considered, and your statements were calculated, direct, unequivocal, and repeated. This is not a situation where an off the cuff or spur of the moment remark or phrase escaped without proper forethought. You encouraged and promoted violence and significant property damage. You say you have no history of threatening violence or ‘causing social harm through such fears.’ Police disagree.”
Think about what is being said here. My words are central to the decision.
Not an allegation that I misused a firearm. Not an allegation that I threatened somebody with a firearm. Not a history of unsafe firearms handling.
In fact, the decision itself acknowledges: “I have taken into account that you have held a firearms licence for many years and, until recent events, no question has been asked of your fitness to possess firearms.”
Yet the verdict is: “On balance I am not satisfied you are fit and proper to possess firearms.” That contradiction deserves scrutiny.
– Brian Tamaki
Overreach of the Day
You don’t have to agree with me and you don’t have to like what I said, but once we accept that authorities can punish a Kiwi for political speech they consider too confronting, every New Zealander should be concerned. Free speech isn’t free if you can be punished for using it.
Related
Face of the Day
Pressed repeatedly on if Labour would bring back the Māori Health Authority axed by the National-led coalition, Jackson said the party was “still talking about” it – before he conceded his own view on the issue.
Face of the Day
As a medical doctor by trade, Reti always had the prospect of becoming health minister in his sights. Nearly a decade after entering parliament, he finally got that chance this term.
Face of the Day
A cause of death was not immediately given, but Curry had been in ill health for some time.
Face of the Day
In a career that spanned over half a century, Parton captured the American experience, penning more than 3000 songs.
Latest
C-19 Windows on Woefulness and Worse
In New Zealand, the China virus’ only gainful function has been to open our eyes even wider to the dishonesty of our power elites and health tsars, and to be even more suspicious of The Man, the Deep State, the Bloberati, official “inquiries”...
What Is He Trying to Hide?
Let’s start with the fact that his government is funding antisemitic hate groups.
Bigger Benefits Won’t Help Children
A government that wants better for children whose parents can’t or won’t care for them properly would ensure that the substantial resource going into these homes was practical and effective.