Firing off first impressions: the manifesto succeeds only in creating more details to quibble and argue over, rather than allow reasonable law abiding people to form a consensus on any underlying motive: the shooter was a communist, then he was an anarchist, later on even a libertarian (!), now he’s not sure what he is (and don’t all you people out there try to figure me out either!). Whether he’s being used as the battering ram for a hidden elite group with an agenda, or whether he is the classic lone nut angry white male right out of Central Casting, his actions certainly feed into the agendas of others, most significantly the gun grabber lobby: with the proliferation of ever cheaper consumer electronics, mass killers can now livestream their murderous rampages and literally create infomercials for politicians and lobbyists to replay to further erode the Second Amendment…or even just the basic concept of we all have a right — even an imperative — to self-defense, the protection of our property and loved ones. The NZ prime minister has already said stricter gun control is on the way. (Mental note: the more restrictive and repressive gun laws become, the more of these mindless acts proliferate.) Why do the two (gun control and massacres) always proceed hand-in-hand?
And his name: “Brenton Tarrant”? Really?? So similar to Tinseltown gore master Quentin Tarantino.
I take it back: this whole incident is straight out of Central Casting. and he obliges all the critics of the Second Amendment by wielding an AR-15, the poster-child weapon of choice waved around by the DC politicians who want to legislatively eliminate the right to bear arms, forgetting that only a nationwide referendum can alter the Constitution.
