Another way to keep track of firearm owners

With emotions running high surrounding firearms control, it is very easy to lose sight of the real issue: it is not the actual firearm which is the major issue, it is the person, so why in the tightening of the gun laws couldn’t the individual be targeted using the modern technology that is available?

For example: all existing firearms licences could be cancelled and replaced anew with password technology like an eftpos card. That card could be loaded with some criteria, e.g: name, photo, date of birth, number and type of firearms in the person’s possession, including date when purchased, ammunition purchase history, and be presented every time for scanning/updating at the place where a purchase was intended to be made.

It could have criteria enabling a nonsale being made and an automatic sending of relevant criteria to the police.

If you think about it, the technology outlined is currently being used now on everybody’s eftpos card so it’s nothing new and, if set up properly, would be simple and very effective.

John Martin, Manakau

I back a new name

I find myself in total agreement with Joe Bennett (March 20) and all others who favour a ‘‘Crusaders’’ name change. Given the horrific events of March 15, and I quote ‘‘’blood flowing from the doors’’, it seems very reminiscent of the actual crusades when it is said and written ‘‘the earth flowed with blood’’, mostly Muslim blood, I gather (or Moors as they were then known).

In keeping with Joe’s excellent suggestion that said name should have a Muslim flavour, might I suggest Canterbury Scimitars. These were the style of sword favoured by the Moors of old. It has a nice sort of meaningful ring to it too.

Doug Breitler, Silverstream

We’re in it together

When the flowers have died,and the national protest and mourning over the Christchurch mosque slaughter is ended, I hope we can all now think and change our attitudes to those ‘‘others’’.

We need to realise that every time we make snide comments about other customs and dress, snigger at racial slurs and jokes, laugh and justify as satire offensive cartoons in Charlie Hebdo et al, repeat anti-racial gossip as fact, object to the citing of a mosque, temple or synagogue in our neighbourhood, demand that those ‘‘others’’ should conform to our ways, we are contributing to the toxicity of racial prejudice.

Helen Pickford, Eltham, Taranaki

Isis practices

Rob Harris (Letters, March 19) claims that any meaningful discussion about Islam in the wake of the Christchurch terror attacks must consider the recently reported enslavement and rape of a Yadizi woman by Isis terrorists.

Harris’ letter misleadingly suggests the horrific treatment of this woman was somehow consistent with mainstream Islamic beliefs. As evidence, he claims that the prestigious Al-Alzhar University in Cairo ‘‘is on record saying there is nothing heretical about Isis practices v the Q’ran’’.

This is a gross misrepresentation. AlAzar University officials have labelled Isis as terrorists and launched informational campaigns to undermine the organisation. They have refrained from labelling Isis as heretics out of concern that would be used to fuel further violence by extremists. More importantly, the vast majority of Muslims vehemently reject the teachings of Isis as a horrific aberration from the Islamic faith.

By attempting to conflate the actions of Isis with mainstream Islamic beliefs, Harris deploys exactly the kind of Islamophobic logic which fuelled the terrorist attack in Christchurch.

We must challenge this kind of rhetoric, and listen to the Muslim community, if we are to grow as a country in the wake of this terrible event.

Liam Kennedy, Kelburn

Avoid ‘terror’

Just as we should quite rightly refrain from mentioning the name of the terrorist who committed the atrocities in Christchurch, could media, and others, please refrain from referring to this incident as a ‘‘terror’’ attack?

It was, to use the United Nations definition of terrorism, a criminal act calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public. In that, it has failed miserably.

We should not lessen what was a gutless terrorist act by using this awful Americanism. ‘‘Shooter’’ goes far enough. Peter Kennedy, Wellington

Karl du Fresne column

I am incredibly angry at the Dominion Post for publishing the opinion piece by Karl du Fresne (March 21).

He writes, ‘‘This leaves me wondering exactly who the Islamic Women’s Council represents and what its agenda might be.’’

The Radio New Zealand website states that the chair of the Islamic Women’s Council lost her son in the terrorist attack. He was shot twice. Her husband was shot in the head.

The failure of your newspaper to carry out even the most cursory fact-checking before publishing du Fresne’s odious column beggars belief. His contract ought to be terminated immediately.

John Rankin, Wellington

When Karl du Fresne has quite finished abusing others and belittling their views (March 21), I suggest that he reads Shabnam Dastgheib’s column printed next to his – it might just broaden his rather narrow and sheltered perspective of the world.

I won’t call him a Pollyanna, just

someone apparently unaware of the real world in which he lives.

Michael Mellor, Seatoun

Try this punishment

A correspondent recently opined that because the ‘‘alleged’’ perpetrator would spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement, at taxpayers’ expense, this supported the return of capital punishment.

That sort of Stone-Age thinking puts the letter writer into the same camp as the perpetrator. In any event, spending the next 50 to 60 years in solitary confinement would probably be worse than a death sentence.

A simpler and cheaper option would be to let him practise his white supremacy ideology in the Mongrel Mob wing of the Auckland Prison, Paremoremo. I reckon he would last, aw . . . a week?

Derek Quilliam, Clive

Evasions of new gun laws

I support the need for gun reform as a matter of absolute urgency. The Australian model seems to offer a working example from which we can learn much.

But I do have one question relating to the illegal possession of firearms. There will be people who will seek to contravene any prohibitive legislation. What of them?

Can we as a society agree that the authorities should be able to undertake ‘‘fishing expedition’’ investigations and raids of individuals and groups who, and whose members, might be guilty of not fulfilling their obligations as law-abiding citizens?

I understand this suggestion infringes civil rights that we hold dear, but perhaps in the name of strengthening the community and our supporting democratic agencies, we need legislative provisions that help counter illegal evasions of any new law.

Ken Gorbey, Wellington