Understanding the Christchurch Mosque Attacks: Motives and the Impact of Gun Laws

The 2019 Christchurch Mosque attacks remain one of the most chilling and tragic incidents of mass murder in recent history. The motivations behind this heinous act have fueled extensive debate and analysis. Despite the terrorist's words during sentencing, several key factors have contributed to the targeting of Christchurch. This article delves into these motives and how the absence of strict gun laws in New Zealand prior to the attack played a significant role in the devastation.

Motives Behind the Attacks

The only person who knows for sure is the terrorist, Brenton Tarrant, and he did not provide any substantial explanation during sentencing. Some suggestions offer insights into potential reasons behind the attack. Tarrant might have exploited New Zealand's relative safety from such atrocities, where extremist acts of violence were unprecedented. His journey to radicalization involved adopting supremacist beliefs, albeit not acting on them until the Christchurch attack. While his fellow travelers often promote irrational conspiracies, they generally refrain from converting these beliefs into violent acts. Tarrant believed he could incite a race war and somehow uphold his beliefs in a civil order that would arise from the tragedy, a view that is clearly delusional.

A Profile of the Terrorist

Brenton Tarrant is described as a coward. His actions—arming himself, taking precautions against police, and targeting unarmed civilians with no personal grievances—highlight his cowardice. The bravery displayed by some victims and the police officers who arrested him stand in stark contrast to Tarrant's cowardly behavior. Tarrant could have come from any background, but there is no apparent link in his upbringing to an extremist philosophy of hate.

The Role of Gun Laws in Australia and New Zealand

Australia: In the wake of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, the Australian government, led by a principled right-wing Prime Minister, John Howard, quickly implemented strict gun laws. These measures included a national firearms agreement and the buyback of over a million firearms.

New Zealand: In contrast, New Zealand's gun control efforts were less robust. The National party led by Prime Minister John Key, which relied on support from farming and hunting lobbies, failed to implement meaningful gun control measures despite substantial public support. Bipartisan commissions recommended stricter controls on military-style high-capacity semi-automatic weapons, but these measures were never enacted, allowing Tarrant to exploit the permissive gun environment.

Post-Christchurch Mosque Attacks

The attack by Tarrant served as a catalyst for significant changes in New Zealand's gun laws. Despite political hesitancy in the past, the new Labour government swiftly acted to prohibit military-style semi-automatic weapons. This situation highlights the political and societal history of gun control in both countries. Right-wing parties have a track record of opposing gun control measures, such as the use of armed militias during labor strikes and the militarization of police forces.

Conclusion

The Christchurch Mosque attacks remain a dark chapter in New Zealand's history. Understanding the motivations of the perpetrator and the environmental factors that contributed to the tragedy is critical. While Tarrant's actions were an aberration, the findings highlight the importance of stringent gun laws and the need for political will to implement them. As Australia and New Zealand navigate their gun control policies, the lessons from Christchurch serve as a stark reminder of the consequences of inaction.