The New Zealand mass shooting at two mosques is terrible and is rightly condemned by all decent people. Using firearms to murder and maim a helpless and unarmed group of worshipers in their church is about the lowest form of depravity one can imagine. To call it an unparalleled act of cowardice doesn’t adequately describe it. The victims usually lack any means of defense against such an attack. This is especially true in New Zealand where acutely restrictive gun laws exist.
Strict gun laws, much more strict that any in the U.S., did not prevent this mass shooting. Laws restricting guns never do because only good people obey them. Placing restrictions on those who will never commit a heinous gun crime [or any crime] will never make a dent in gun violence. In fact, such laws make these terrible acts more likely to occur because they render people defenseless, powerless and exposed. Active shooters don’t want their victims to fight back. They avoid places where there could be anyone with the ability to respond in kind.
Even liberals in Denver said, after the Columbine Massacre, that there will never to be mass shooting at East High School because there would be bullets flying back at the shooter. [East High was and is located in a part of Denver that hosts several violent street gangs]
Forty-nine people were killed in the Christchurch massacre, 41 at the Al Noor Mosque and 7 at the Linwood Mosque. Why only 7 at Linwood? The reason might be, is likely to be, that there was someone with a shotgun shooting back at the killers.
A second shooting happened at a mosque in the Linwood area of the city.
One Friday prayer goer returned fire with a rifle or shotgun.
Witnesses said they heard multiple gunshots around 1.45pm.
A well known Muslim local chased the shooters and fired two shots at them as they sped off.
He was heard telling police officers he was firing in “self defence”.
“They were in a silver Subaru,” he told police.
Lives were saved by the man who shot back at the killers. If more good people were armed there would be fewer mass shootings. Maybe none. By the time police arrived at the Al Noor Mosque most of the 41 were already dead. Police are not the first responders that are most needed in mass shootings. Those already there who are armed and capable of responding right away are the true first responders. Police may be only minutes away, but it is seconds that count when these things happen.
There is, or might be, another aspect to the Christchurch shooting that few are talking about. Many may be thinking about, though. It’s rather delicate, but it pertains to Islamic terrorism. I doubt that any of the worshiper victims at the Christchurch Mosques are terrorists. Still, everyone knows Islamic terror is a fact of life. While most Muslim believers will never commit any acts of terrorism, they are nonetheless silent on the matter. They may not themselves ever commit an act of Islamic terror, but nor do they condemn it. At least most of them don’t. This is a problem.
Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people in the Oklahoma City Bombing. Some people, supposedly Christians, tried to paint McVeigh as a Christian soldier affirming God’s will for the Ruby Ridge fiasco. This immediately sparked a backlash by other Christians who stood up to say that such violence has no place in the Christian religion. As if anyone needed to be told. For at least the last 200 years Christianity has never been responsible for violent acts against non-Christians. Christian believers will always be the quickest to condemn violence of any sort. Think what one will, the Christian faith practices good will toward all.
Islamic faith would benefit from a movement by Muslims everywhere if they would condemn Islamic terrorism. I can’t be certain the Christchurch massacre would not have occurred, but at least the killers would be deprived of their main excuse.
Yesterday Rush Limbaugh read a statement given by a NZ Senator from Queensland that will be considered provocative by many people. Rush didn’t say he agreed with it, and I also can’t say I entirely agree with it. But it does make a point:
….there is a senator from Queensland. His name is Fraser Anning, William Fraser Anning, and he published a statement about the New Zealand mosque shooting.
Are you ready for this? I checked this guy. I verified this. I went to a Wikipedia page to make sure, ’cause there’s so much hoax stuff out there, and I found his Wikipedia page and I found this statement referenced. “Speaking following reports of multiple shootings at two Mosques in New Zealand earlier today, Senator Fraser Anning has responded with strong condemnation. ‘I am utterly opposed to any form of violence within our community, and I totally condemn the actions of the gunman,’ he said.
“‘However, whilst this kind of violent vigilantism can never be justified, what it highlights is the growing fear within our community, both in Australia and New Zealand, of the increasing Muslim presence. As always, left-wing politicians and the media will rush to claim that the causes of today’s shootings lie with gun laws or those who hold nationalist views, but this is all cliched nonsense. The real cause of bloodshed on New Zealand streets today is the immigration program which allowed Muslim fanatics to migrate to New Zealand in the first place.’”
This is Senator Fraser Anning, Queensland. “Let us be clear,” he writes, “while Muslims may have been the victims today, usually they are the perpetrators. Worldwide, Muslims are killing people in the name of their faith on an industrial scale.” He goes on to characterize Islam as a “violent ideology of a sixth century despot masquerading as a religious leader.” He goes on to say, “The truth is that Islam is not like any other faith.
“It is the religious equivalent of fascism. … As we read in Matthew 26:52, ‘all they that take the sword, shall perish by the sword’ and those who follow a violent religion that calls on them to murder us, cannot be too surprised when someone takes them at their word and responds in kind.” This probably, if it circulates, is going to create all kinds of outraged backlash.
But he covers his bases by condemning the act and talking about how rotten it is.
Of course, the Democrat BigWigs and their media accomplices will have none of this [if they ever hear or read it]. They were quick to lay the blame for the Christchurch massacre on Donald Trump. In my view, this puts them on a level of depravity just a notch or two above the mass shooters.
UPDATE: 17-year old smashes an egg on lawmaker who blamed immigration for NZ attack. The lawmaker was Senator Fraser Anning of Queensland, the same one that Rush Limbaugh quoted and which I posted above. Apparently the Leftist brats of New Zealand hate free speech as much as do our American brats. Senator Anning is referring to Islamic terrorists, not all Muslims. I traveled extensively in the Middle East in 2002 (the last time that was a safe thing to do) and was treated very well by all the Muslims I met. I was warned that they hated the U.S. I was often asked where I was from. When I said I was from the United States I saw big smiles and handshakes. When I asked for directions or other assistance all within ear shot gathered around me. Mostly we communicated with my sparse Arabic and their limited English. It was hilarious but they all figured out what I was trying to ask them and did their best to help me. I learned that it is a Bedouin tradition to treat strangers with respect so long as you don’t try to take their water. It’s too precious.
UPDATE II: We’re at the 50th anniversary of the first Islamic terrorist act committed against America. I was the 1968 killing of Robert Kennedy by Palestinian Sirhan Sirhan.