Thoughts and prayers do work faster in New Zealand.
It was now or never for stricter gun control in our country, which has been put to one side by successive governments since at least 1997.
Those who warned of tragedy, most persistently the Police Association, were accused of scaremongering.
Whenever the issue of semi-automatic firearms were raised, most recently in 2017, the gun lobby would cry "don't punish legitimate firearms owners".
They urged politicians to let Parliament, not the police, decide what weapons should be considered Military Style Semi Automatics (MSSA).
Police lost a significant court case when challenged by the firearms community about the definition of MSSA firearms.
Time after time, political momentum petered out and nothing happened.
This led to a loophole where anyone with a basic A-category licence could purchase a semi-automatic, such as an AR-15, and easily upgrade the firearm into a more dangerous MSSA weapon.
Anyone, including the Christchurch shooter who killed 50 innocent people and wounded nearly as many.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing and now is not the time for blame. Ironically, the gun lobby - who will no doubt vigorously oppose the new ban - will be listened to.
It will now be up to Parliament, not the police, to decide what is an MSSA.
And it's difficult to not see widespread political consensus following the atrocity in Christchurch.
The announcement by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern successfully balances the tension between making New Zealand safer, and the legitimate concerns of the rural community.
By instantly changing the Arms Act to reclassify any semi-automatic with a calibre greater than .22 as MSSA firearms, weapons such as the AR-15 now require E-category licences.
These licence endorsements are much more difficult to obtain.
Of the 242,000 licensed firearms holders in New Zealand, around 7500 hold E-category licences.
Semi-automatic shotguns capable of using detachable magazines with more than five cartridges also fall into this category.
The instant classification means there can be no stockpiling of AR-15s, or similar, before all MSSAs are totally banned in a few weeks' time.
This is a sensible move.
In particular, AR-15s are the "weapon of choice" for mass shootings. Las Vegas, San Bernadino, Sandy Hook.
Nearly all of my friends and family I've spoken to this week had no idea of the incredible firepower easily available over the counter in our country.
None will be worried about a ban. All asked why it's taken so long.
The ban was first recommended in 1997 by Sir Thomas Thorp who reviewed New Zealand's laws following police shootings here and the Port Arthur massacre in Australia in 1996.
All 60 recommendations of the Thorp Report were ignored.
This was in stark contrast to the speed with which the then Australian PM John Howard acted after 35 people were killed with MSSA weapons in Port Arthur.
He banned all semi-automatic weapons, including shotguns and .22 rifles, in the face of stiff opposition. The total ban is considered Howard's defining legacy and the impact he is most proud of.
This is where New Zealand's ban on semi-automatics - estimated to cost up to $200 million in a buy-back amnesty for firearms owners - did not go as far as Australia.
Exempted from the ban in New Zealand are semi-automatic .22 rifles (with a magazine which holds no more than 10 rounds), as well as semi-automatic or pump action shotguns with internal magazines (holding no more than five rounds).
This is also a sensible move. These firearms are regularly used by farmers for pest control, as well as hunters.
Banning them would cause great unrest in rural communities in particular, so politically speaking, the exemption makes it hard for critics to argue legitimate firearms owners are being unfairly targeted. I suspect most won't complain.
It seems many in the firearms community came to that conclusion even before the ban.
Large retailers, such as Hunting & Fishing, had already pulled semi-automatics from their shelves.
Press releases from other lobby groups, such as the Mountain Safety Council, acknowledged the ease in which such firepower was available was "deeply troubling".
The shooter knew his weapon of choice would trigger gun control debate. He wanted it to, another strategic decision a bid to incite hatred and further division.
The smart, swift compromise by the Government - banning dangerous weapons while reaching out to those who will be most affected - will go a long way to unite most people behind the changes.
As the PM said, owning a gun is not a right - it's a privilege.
No doubt, the gun lobby and vocal individuals will be vigorous and vocal in telling our MPs what they think.
Politicians must listen instead to the vast majority of New Zealanders who will support this ban.
However, the reform of New Zealand's gun laws must go further than a ban on MSSAs and the parts used to make them.
There are gaping holes in licensing and vetting, the range of ammunition available, as well as the registration of firearms bought and sold.
It's now or never for New Zealand.
And for the sake of those who lost their lives, never again.