Let me say right at the start: I'm not a fan of Brian Tamaki. He's a troublemaker who doesn't seem intelligent enough to understand what he's doing. But I still feel uncomfortable about the police taking his guns off him.
If you listen to the podcast that appears to be the one the police are reacting to, I don't think he sounds at all like he's actually going to use his guns on anyone.
A couple of times, he refers to the fact that if he lived in India and had a daughter under the age of 10 who was being forced into a child marriage, he would go to the man's house and shoot him.
That's not a credible threat. He does not live in India, he does not have a daughter under 10 and his daughter is not being forced into a child marriage.
What actually alarmed me more was that he repeatedly referenced burning down temples and mosques. I think that's a more credible threat because there are temples and mosques in this country, where he lives.
So if that's the case, why did the police take his guns? Why not charge him over the actual thing that many of us would have listened to and thought, "Whoa, that's a bit much. What's he doing there?" To me, that looked like a case for at least considering a charge of inciting violence. That genuinely seemed the more serious issue in the podcast.
I'm not quibbling with the police's right to do this. If they want to take his guns, they can because, as far as I can tell, he has breached the good character test, which includes not inciting hate. So they've got him fair and square.
Although I will point out that it's a test many of us would probably fail if the police chose to apply it strictly to everyone because you're not supposed to misuse drugs or alcohol either.
What it feels like is happening here is that they're simply looking for something to do to Brian because everyone hates Brian right now. So they're taking his guns, which doesn't address what appears to be the main issue in the podcast: the repeated suggestion that people burn down mosques and temples.
It also feels political. Last week, ACT wrote to the police asking them to do something about this.
I'm not defending Brian Tamaki. I don't actually care whether he has guns or not. What I don't like is seeing what looks, to me, like the police being pressured by politicians and then trying to find something - anything - to do to someone we don't like at the moment.
So they've found the guns and they're taking the guns away, even though the guns are not actually the problem here.
On principle, I'm very uncomfortable with all of that.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and radio broadcaster who hosts Newstalk ZB's weekday Drive-Time Show – where this article was sourced.
4 comments:
>"I don't actually care whether [Tamaki] has guns or not."
I do. People who go around threatening to torch temples other than those of their own brand are a danger to society and should not have the means to inflict harm on those they have it in for.
ban fire I say.
So are these the same police that decided that Tarrant was of good character despite all the warning signals?
It is impossible to see this as anything but intimidation. The police seem to be intent on destroying any trust the general public have in them.
Brian Tamaki does this kind of thing for the publicity. If he wasn't controlled opposition he wouldn't have the profile that he does. He is a manifest public heretic. He exists to provoke anti-Christian sentiment, but he isn't actually one.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.