Talk:Aramoana massacre

message: While tragic, it don't see where this event is uncommon or unique enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. Things like this happen all the time worldwide. Please state a relevant historical significance -- (unsigned by)  Outlanderssc, Dec 16, 2004
:It is a significant feature of New Zealand history, actually. If "things like this happen all the time" I guess Columbine doesn't warrant inclusion either, considering the same number of people were killed, right? -Hn 12:45, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
::Outlanderssc, I really don't understand the objection. Any time a lone gunman kills 13 people is a notable event. The Aramoana massacre made all the international news. It was (and is) a major event in New Zealand history. -- FP 23:42, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
:::A great many New Zealanders associate the word "Aramoana" not with the town, but the massacre. I think this is historically significant, even if only for New Zealanders. -- Aidan 22:28, Jan 8, 2006 (UTC)
::::In a country with far more gun control and far fewer murders than the US, it was a very disturbing event: I think the worst of its kind here (or did Stan Graham kill more?) In any case, it's not something a non-New Zealander is in a position to make judgments on. I remember where I was when I heard the news... Copey 2 13:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The anti-Americanism is really quite tiresome, and that sort of attitude wouldn't be tolerated if directed at other countries or cultures. Enough already. Boneyard90 (talk) 12:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Objection

message: I've removed the link to kurtsaxon.com, because I can't see what it has to do with Aramoana, let alone the massacre.  This search on google returns no results.  Somehow it's been there since very early in the article's life, though, so if anyone knows what that link has to do with it, I'd be interested to know.  Izogi 07:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you read the article you would have seen, "It has also been suggested that Gray was influenced by the literature he read, in particular books by American author Kurt Saxon..." Gray read Saxon's work religiously and even had written correpondence with him. Given Saxon's slightly loopy survivalism it does have some relevance to what eventually happened. -- FP (talk)(edits) 20:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "It has been suggested..." Really? Suggested by who? The sentence should be more specific. Otherwise, its deletion was absolutely justified.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.240.61.2 (talk) 02:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of link

message: I removed "Sarkies believes that the subject matter makes for a very powerful film subject." Not encylcopedic. Richard75 22:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinion

message: I've just taken a look at the suicide by cop article, and I'm not really convinced that Aramoana is really an instance of it, as the article claims.  I'd be interested to see what other people think, though.
If David Gray was really intent on committing suicide, there were numerous occasions when he could have made himself known to the police and provoked them.  He probably could have let Sergeant Guthrie shoot him quite easily, but instead he distracted and proceeded to kill him.  When Gray finally did get shot, he'd been asleep in the house, and was only forced out after the tear gas was thrown in.  I guess that Gray probably realised he'd be dead by the end of it, and it might just be that he was accepting the inevitable when he ran out of the house, but I can't really see any evidence that this is anything he'd planned.  Add to this that even if he had had suicidal thoughts in the past, this incident started as an argument with his neighbour when he supposedly just lost control, and probably wasn't thinking about suicide.  If some people regard this as an instance of suicide by cop, then the article should state who the people are.  Otherwise I think it should be removed, and the See also link should probably also be removed from the suicide by cop article.  Thoughts?  Izogi 21:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've always thought that was pretty dubious. It seems a lot like original research.--Limegreen 21:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I've gone ahead and removed it.  (It can always be re-added if enough people disagree.) Izogi 02:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gray came running out of his bach, wildly firing a rifle from the hip in no particular direction, screaming "kill me, kill me," knowing that he was surrounded by armed police. The PCA report says as much. It's a classic suicide by cop scenario. (If it's not suicide by cop then what is it? He could have surrendered, or at least stayed in the bach, which had makeshift barricades against the gas grenades.) Any of Gray's thoughts or actions prior to that moment are totally irrelevant. Oh, and if that doesn't convince you, an article in the ODT on 18 November 1990 has an in-depth report on Gray's demise, with the headline Typical 'suicide by cop' — psychologist. So Gray's death was suicide by cop. It is not even remotely dubious; it is not original research; it is what authorities agree actually happened. I can hardly believe anyone is debating this. -- FP (talk)(edits) 21:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that you've verified that it's not original research, surely it would be appropriate to put those references on the main page rather than leaving them here?--Limegreen 22:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: References added -- FP (talk)(edits) 00:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's good that was have a source. In terms of the confusion, think a point some people missed in this discussion is just because he may not have started off the massacre wanting to suicide by cop, and in fact, possibly didn't try it until the end, doesn't mean it wasn't suicide by cop. The info on his actions strongly suggest that was the tactic at the end at least. In fact, while this may not apply to Gray, I'm fairly sure it isn't unheard of for more planned spree killers, who often seemingly don't want to survive, to basically plan to suicide by cop at the end of their massacre. As our current article on the concept suicide by cop at least says (don't know about the 2006 version), it doesn't always mean a case like the unfortunate Slovakian tourist where it appears the primary intention was suicide. Nil Einne (talk) 05:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

text: 18 November 1990 is a Sunday - the ODT isn't published on Sunday. I have photos from the DPL microfilm, of ODT articles relating to this, starting from the 14th. I have pages from the 17th and 19th but don't see this article. XLerate (talk) 10:27, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Suicide by cop?

message: Any reason why the article doesn't start off with the date this incident occured? Usually an important feature of a historical event...
-- Yeppoon
:Not only does it not start with it, it's not contained anywhere in the article. A thousand monkeys... --Golbez 13:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually the date details had been removed a few days previously by a vandal and have since been restored. Spare your insults. -- 125.238.206.106 01:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Time and date?

message: I have noticed that some parts of the narrative in this article seem to be taken straight from the film, Out of the Blue. Do I really need to point out that the film is a fictional interpretation of the real events, not necessarily identical with the events themselves?! There are aspects of the film which do not completely agree with the events, or where artistic licence has been taken — in particular, the depiction of David Gray's last moments.
My message is that an encyclopaedic narrative of events should come from primary sources where possible, not from a film based on the event. -- 125.238.205.80 07:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be a good if you could remove the parts of the article which are incorrect. --Nick Dowling 00:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Veridical"? I think you mean accurate. Veridical should only be used of linguistics.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The film is NOT completely veridical 

message: Is this the best term to use? It seems like he was the nutty type of survivalist- however, owning several firearms including a cheap Chinese semi-auto AK knockoff doesn't make you a collector. John Nevard 01:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm. As far as I'm concerned, owning several firearms DOES make you a collector. Do they have to be expensive firearms? Are you not a collector if one of your firearms is Chinese?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.240.61.2 (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re. 'gun collector' 

message: Just from reading a bit about the movie "Out of the Blue" the article states "Jim Dickson's mother Eva" but according to many other sources her name is Helen, I'm a bit confused, http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10353715 calls her Eva but many of the movie reviews call her Helen, "Perhaps the most poignant is Helen Dickson (Lois Lawn), an elderly resident who crawls across a street to place a duvet on another of the wounded." is from http://www.lumiere.net.nz/reader/item/1255.  Apologies for the formatting (lack thereof) contributing to wikipedia isn't my thing I'm just wondering.(222.154.110.95 10:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dicksons name 

message: We need a citation for the statement that a scope makes you a more accurate shot? What the fuck people, that's what scopes are made for. Christ, bloody townies.--61.30.11.130 (talk) 07:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not needed for being 'a more accurate shot'- that's irrelevant. One is needed for the claim that a scope of some undefined quality would make him accurate 'at long range', especially more so than the police with decent rifles rather than Chinese Kalaskni-ockoffs. John Nevard (talk) 08:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed? 

message: Somewhere along the line there seems to have been a 12 hour error introduced to this article. Was the whole incident 22 hours long (8pm to 5.50pm) or 34 hours long (8pm 13th to 5.50am 16th?). I suspect we will have to resort to offline references to resolve this.
====22 hours====
* Presumably Bill O'Brian did some proper research before calling his book Aramoana - 22 hours of terror
* I have a strong memory image of Paul Holmes standing on the hilltop above Aramoana in the evening, giving the breaking news that Gray had been shot.
* The Time article says 23 hours.
* The listnener article on the film mentions that Gray was shot just before the start of the 6pm news.
====34 hours====
* crime.co.nz - whose research standard isn't that great jusding from some of their other articles.
* The 6.01a.m (which would make it the 15th, not the 14th)  time of death in the article is cited from the Police Complaints authority report, which isn't an online reference.
Most of the online material now relates to the film, so should be treated with caution.
Two other points:
1) I don't think "standoff" is the correct term. Gray evaded police for 20 hours - they weren't sure which crib he was holed up in.
2) Since David Gray is notable ONLY for this incident, should David Gray (murderer) be merged and redirected here? That would be the policy for a living person.
dramatic (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: herald has an article and says 23 hours. David Gray should be merged, it's unlikely to get any bigger and *if* that does happen can be split off again. - SimonLyall (talk) 10:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article needs a lot of attention. There are factual errors and inconsistencies. For instance the "first" policeman to arrive was actually the first armed policeman, the next sentence stated that another policeman was already there. I have corrected that careless mistake. Then there are references to "the children", what children is not clear, though possibly it means children from a van. But all of these ambiguities make the article rather hard to understand.Royalcourtier (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article inaccuracies 

message: * crime.co.nz - whose research standard isn't that great jusding from some of their other articles.
* The 6.01a.m (which would make it the 15th, not the 14th)  time of death in the article is cited from the Police Complaints authority report, which isn't an online reference.
Most of the online material now relates to the film, so should be treated with caution.
Two other points:
1) I don't think "standoff" is the correct term. Gray evaded police for 20 hours - they weren't sure which crib he was holed up in.
2) Since David Gray is notable ONLY for this incident, should David Gray (murderer) be merged and redirected here? That would be the policy for a living person.
dramatic (talk) 00:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: herald has an article and says 23 hours. David Gray should be merged, it's unlikely to get any bigger and *if* that does happen can be split off again. - SimonLyall (talk) 10:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article needs a lot of attention. There are factual errors and inconsistencies. For instance the "first" policeman to arrive was actually the first armed policeman, the next sentence stated that another policeman was already there. I have corrected that careless mistake. Then there are references to "the children", what children is not clear, though possibly it means children from a van. But all of these ambiguities make the article rather hard to understand.Royalcourtier (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 34 hours

message: Following the principle that we cover the events people are notable for and not the people if that is their only notability, I am proceding to merge the article on David Gray with this one. The infobox is the only material which isn't a recap of material already present here, but the bio section on Gray needs some additional background on Gray. None of the online sources have much, but I'm guessing the books will. If anyone already has them avaialble, please add something, otherwise I will try and get hold of a copy. dramatic (talk) 05:38, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of David Gray (murderer) 

message: I changed the number of deaths from thirteen to twelve as reported here on their website.   .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.  06:58, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Twelve, plus Sergeant Guthrie; see also list killed, other references, e.g. XLerate (talk) 09:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, so sorry.  The article on the page I referenced seems a bit vague on the point of "twelve plus".   .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.  13:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Total number of deaths is 14! 12 civilian victims of Gray before Police arrived, plus Sergeant Guthrie, plus Gray himself. If the Aramoana massacre were recorded according to the current NZ Police National Recording Standard and Recorded Crime Victim Statistics counting rules there would be 13 murder victims and 1 sudden death (justifiable homicide) spread across 3 separate "criminal incidents". - 210.86.82.145 (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of deaths edit 

message: According to Zero-Alpha: The NZ Police Armed Offenders Squad official history by Ray Van Beynen, p. 209: "After some discussion it was decided by the Police Administration in 1992 that the name should be changed from the ATS to the STG". The QCBC citation for the 4 personnel who confronted Gray (NZ Gazette 1991/4061) describes them as being "members, of an Anti-Terrorist Squad". Media reports state that the Police Commissioner gave approval for the ATS to be used.
As a result of this - I've changed STG to ATS on this page - and since it is the official history will add the Zero Alpha ref to the STG page to indicate when the squad name was changed. Clarke43 (talk) 20:54, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  STG --> ATS 

message: Does anyone have a citation for:
"The situation was considered dangerous as Gray had a scoped rifle, making him potentially accurate at long range. By now the police had ordered that Gray was to be shot on sight - without a warning shot."
Since Police use of firearms regs "don't encourage" the use of warning shots this is regular practice. Shooting without challenge however is another kettle of fish... Clarke43 (talk) 09:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations required 

message: A first reading of the article shows a few gaps, that need filing in. For instance it is implied that the first attempt to contact the police failed, and that only the second call got through. If that is true it should be stated clearly. When the police arrived they surrounded (as well as two men could do!) Grey's crib.  But the last we heard of him he was out shooting neighbours. When did he return home, and how did the police know that he was home? And there is a reference to an armoured car. The police do not have armoured cars. What was the vehicle?Royalcourtier (talk) 07:35, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing details  

message: I put a dubious-tag by the following text:
Helen, who had recently had a hip replacement and was unable to walk without assistance, pulled herself along on her stomach using her arms and feet in a ditch to get inside and phone for help. She then crawled back to Cole to tell him help was coming. After waiting for some time, Helen again crawled back to her house and phoned 1-1-1 (emergency telephone number).
It seems strange that she would crawl back and forth multiple times. Also, if she called 1-1-1 no sooner than after having crawled the Cole-to-house distance for the third time, who did she call for help the first time she reached inside her house? Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:25, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now changed the text to say that she called 1-1-1 the first time she got inside, until someone can explain this. Mikael Häggström (talk) 07:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crawling back and forth? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Aramoana massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111028124224/http://tvnz.co.nz:80/national-news/tvnz-wins-high-court-appeal-over-aramoana-story-4486488/video to http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/tvnz-wins-high-court-appeal-over-aramoana-story-4486488/video
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified