> increases the chances of someone seeing them and tipping off the cops

Based on my experience (in the US), almost no one outside of "firearms enthusiasts" is capable of distinguishing between legal and illegal configurations. In many cases, even those who do know the specific differences aren't in consensus on what is legal and what isn't.

Sure, because in the US an extremely wide variety of firearms are entirely legal. NZ is about to get quite limited in their permitted weapons.

This is not my understanding, based on Kiwis I've been speaking to online.

An AR-15 is a Class E firearm - unless it has a thumbhole stock, no "bad" features, and 7-round magazines. In that case it's a Class A firearm.

It's easy for someone who is somewhat mechanically inclined to manufacture a firearm, these law changes will not stop the next terrorist attack in New Zealand.

All this does is further disarm the populace and makes it even easier to carry out an attack. Australia or New Zealand could have an attack like this happen tomorrow, it's not like they are able to keep handguns and drugs away from your normal criminal gang member there, let alone a determined terrorist.

"All this does is further disarm the populace and makes it even easier to carry out an attack."

If the majority of school shootings etc in the States we're stopped by the populace with guns then yeah I'd agree with you.

Of course not. That's a tautology.

It may reduce the frequency and effectiveness of such attacks, as Australia's tightening of gun laws did for shootings. I'll take it.