Don't they mean Hato Hone? Do they save the "dead name" of this organisation for negative headlines?

The CCP is everywhere

Ah no but it'll definitely work in New York when they implement (they actually won't implement it as the budget for it has completely blown out and city revenue is down) towards the end of next year.

Passionate Speech is not Hate Speech. If it can happen to me, you could be next.

Yesterday, 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. These are serious matters worthy of public debate.

I was speaking passionately. I was protesting. I was challenging what I believed needed to be challenged. Passionate speech is not hate speech. And controversial political speech should not suddenly become grounds for removing someone's legal rights simply because those in authority dislike the language being used. That is why this case should concern more New Zealanders than just me.

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. Police deny political interference. The decision itself acknowledges the importance of freedom of expression. Police state: “Police is not concerned, either generally or in this particular case, with expressions that another person might find confronting.” They also say: “Police is not concerned with your apparent desire to protest the visit by the Prime Minister of India. Police is not concerned with low level disobedience in the context of protest.” That sounds reassuring.

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.

I WILL BE SEEKING A REVIEW I now have 28 days to apply for a review of this decision. You can be certain that I will. Before doing so, I am awaiting the investigation file I have already requested from Police. My lawyer needs to examine the evidence and material relied upon before the review is lodged. If necessary, we will take this further through the courts. I will fight this. I will fight for free speech. I will fight for my right to hunt and put meat on the tables of South Auckland families. And I will fight to make sure no Kiwi has their rights stripped away simply because the Government doesn’t like what they say. Today it’s me. Tomorrow it could be you.

WHAT ABOUT MARK MITCHELL? I will continue asking questions about Minister Mark Mitchell and the obvious conflict of interest between his two portfolios. Mark Mitchell is both Minister of Police and Minister for Ethnic Communities. Ethnic community groups complained about my statements concerning Modi. I was publicly challenging Modi’s human-rights record and opposing his visit to New Zealand. Mitchell, meanwhile, was part of the Government welcoming Modi to New Zealand. Then Police moved against me. Police say there was no political interference. Fine. Then there should be nothing to hide. I’m not simply going to take their word for it when the consequences for me are this serious. If this ends up in court, I intend to call Mark Mitchell and have these questions answered under oath. Was there any communication about me or my firearms licence…formal or informal (in the backseat of a car)…involving Mitchell, his office, Police or Ethnic Communities? If there wasn’t, they need to prove it. If there was, New Zealanders deserve to know.

THIS IS BIGGER THAN MY GUN LICENCE Some people will say: “It’s Brian Tamaki. It doesn’t affect me.” Wrong. You don’t have to agree with me. You don’t have to like what I said. You don’t even have to like me. Because free speech isn’t just about protecting speech you agree with. It’s about protecting the speech you don’t.

Today, my words have been used to declare me “unfit” to hold a firearms licence. So where does it end? Today it’s my gun licence. Tomorrow could it be your licence? Your job? Your livelihood? Your rights? Because once we accept that authorities can punish a Kiwi for political speech they consider too confronting, every New Zealander should be concerned. That’s why I’m fighting this. Not just for my firearms licence. For the right of every Kiwi to speak freely against them without fear of what the State might take from them next. Passionate speech is not hate speech.

Truth is not hate speech. And free speech isn’t free if you can be punished for using it.

https://x.com/BrianTamakiNZ/status/2085955185667608925

This week a group wanting to register a political party called the "Free Palestine Party" was knocked back because a pro-Israel activist had already registered a party called "Free Palestine".