This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 79%. (I'm a bot)

> "While the lowered threat level is a positive sign, the lowering of the threat level does not mean there is no threat," Kitteridge said in a statement.

> It was the first change to the terror threat level since April 2019, when the threat risk was raised to medium in the wake of the Christchurch mosque terror attacks the month prior.

> According to the SIS statement, the change to the threat levels was due to CTAG having "Not sighted information to indicate New Zealand is currently the target of credible and specific attack plans by violent extremist groups or individuals, either based in New Zealand or offshore".

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: threat^#1 level^#2 attack^#3 terror^#4 New^#5

I feel realistically it should be at the lowest right after an attack and gradually increase, instead of the other way around.

Too soon :(

generally, it's the opposite. the risk is highest directly after as it can cause copycats.

Well US hasn't been lower than it was since pre- 9/11

I’m sorry my Kiwi siblings and still ashamed that POS is from my country :(

how would they know its low when that fucker slipped through their fingers, maxwell smart would have a better idea than NZSIS

Just speaking generally, I feel like the terror threat is at zero immediately following an attack. Mostly because the attack has already happened. These "terror threat levels" are kinda goofy.

EDIT: I hadn't considered copy cats. Fair. Even so, dispense with scaring people and do good police work to catch perpetrators and prevent attacks.