Armed citizens

[Sir_Knight]

I personally carry a .380Sig in a ‘small of the back’ holster or a 9 mil Glock in an ‘inside the back belt holster’ or a .45 derringer depending on the situation.

Have you ever considered the Colt Pocket Nine? It’s the size of a Walther PPK but chambered for the 9mm Parabellum. Holds 6+1 rounds and is +P rated.

 

[FightingFat]

The same applies to a gun. The level you take it to is your own business. In many martial arts you are taught maneuvers and tactics that could easily deliver a killing blow. Even though you are taught to use it only defensively, what stops an individual from doing otherwise?

As for playing a game, you don’t think that some gun owners are doing the exact same thing? I know some that ONLY use it a firing ranges to see how accurate they are and they compete with their friends, much like darts.

Please address this hypothetical situation: You and your family are being attacked by an individual. Using your Chi Sau, you engage and subdue the attacker. Another person and their family are attacked, and he uses his gun, shoots the attacker in the arm or leg and stops the attack.

In both situations, the attack was thwarted in non-lethal ways and in both, some level of violence was used to do so. What exactly is the difference?

A lot of our faith is about grace and intention, would you agree? We are sinners and we often fail, but in admitting the sin and in asking for forgiveness we receive grace. I see this situation a little like that. I see the Church’s teaching on self defense (when taken in context with all the rest of Church teaching) like this also. If you have a gun, your intention is altered. The intention stated here is evident to me in this regard. It appears to me that in the USA guns are GLORIFIED in a most unedifying fashion.

Chi sau is a game you play in an art called Wing Chun that teaches you reaction and timing so it’s not really the means of defense in itself, but in any situation such as the one you present, my first intention as a Christian will be to defuse the situation and talk down the attacker, to try and avoid any conflict, not provoke unecessary violence. I would try to be Christ to that person and show them that there is another way. A way of love and compassion.

Peace be with you!

 

[vern_humphrey]

A lot of our faith is about grace and intention, would you agree?

And several times in this and other threads you have presumed to tell me and others what our intentions are. And you’ve been dead-bang wrong every time.

We are sinners and we often fail, but in admitting the sin and in asking for forgiveness we receive grace. I see this situation a little like that. I see the Church’s teaching on self defense (when taken in context with all the rest of Church teaching) like this also. If you have a gun, your intention is altered.

Once again you presume to tell the rest of us what our intentions are. And you’re dead-bang wrong once again.

The intention stated here is evident to me in this regard. It appears to me that in the USA guns are GLORIFIED in a most unedifying fashion.

Once again you presume to tell the rest of us what our intentions are. And you’re dead-bang wrong once again.

Chi sau is a game you play in an art called Wing Chun that teaches you reaction and timing so it’s not really the means of defense in itself,

No it’s not – it’s practicing to beat and brutalize other people.

but in any situation such as the one you present, my first intention as a Christian will be to defuse the situation and talk down the attacker, to try and avoid any conflict, not provoke unecessary violence. I would try to be Christ to that person and show them that there is another way. A way of love and compassion.

Peace be with you!

And the rest of us could never do that, in your opinion, eh?

 

[FightingFat]

Vern, my posts are obviously upsetting you. Please accept my appology; it really is not my intention to do anything other than offer my own perspective. I’m sorry if I am making unfair assumptions or upsetting you in some way.

Peace be with you.

 

[FightingFat]

Oh and you’ve obviously never seen anyone playing chi sau! LOL!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Vern, my posts are obviously upsetting you. Please accept my appology; it really is not my intention to do anything other than offer my own perspective. I’m sorry if I am making unfair assumptions or upsetting you in some way.

Peace be with you.

You’re not upsetting me – I’ve had many a good laugh over your posts. I enjoy your twisted logic and attempts to appear better than the rest of us.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Oh and you’ve obviously never seen anyone playing chi sau! LOL!

Oh, I have. And I said to myself, “There can be only one reason for what those people are doing. Those immoral brutes are practicing beating and brutalizing their fellow man.”

 

[mgrobertson79]

In America we will disarm because we want to, not because we have to or are told to. I say that as a collective statement, but people will die if someone decides that we can no longer own guns.

 

[searching06]

OK, Can you show me where Jesus said “if a man rapes and murders your wife, shoot him with a gun”?

Catholicism doesn’t not reconcile itself with violence. Quite the opposite in fact!

Sir, I will happy to stand in front of you and your wife and shoot the SOB who tries to kill you or me. Tell me, if you did not have a gun, would you use a knife to defend yourself? A pencil, with which you could kill? Your bare hands? Or would you stand there and let someone kill your family?

No, Christ did not say to go kill anyone; nor did He say you should let someone kill you. Turn the other cheek? Absolutely. But not to death for no reason. Die for my faith, maybe so, if God wills it to be.

But I can guarantee you this: there is a time coming where we will have to defend ourselves against the currently elected government and/or terrorists. That’s my two cents. Our first amendment rights are being attacked and stripped (McCain-Feingold, the Fairness Doctrine); you have the Supreme Court who used the Fourth Amendment against search-and-seizure to construct Roe v Wade; they have deemed it OK for cities to take property away from citizens for private corporate ventures; there are terrorists coming across our borders in Mexico which the government will do nothing to stop (Albanians at Ft. Dix and Albanians were recently caught crossing into Texas - coincidence?) and the Second Amendment will be attacked in '08 when a Democrat is elected to the White House, if not attacked sooner.

Catholicism doesn’t not reconcile itself with violence? It doesn’t reconcile itself with suicide either. I am very Catholic and an old soldier, and I have no problem defending my country, my family, myself, or you.

 

[searching06]

This is getting ridiculous, guys.

Yes, the Church acknowledges one’s right and duty to personally defend oneself and those in one’s care.

Yes, the Church acnowledges the right and duty of the state to protect its people from agression.

Yes, the Church acknowledges that war is just in some cases.

No, the Church does not allow or disallow gun ownership by Catholics. However, her teachings on the sanctity of life should be instructive beyond how we deal with the unborn and the infirm. I contend that, in owning a weapon, one is affirming one’s willingness to kill.

Here is the problem: in the CCC quotes that have been thrown about here, the general idea is this: if one takes an aggressor’s life while defending oneself, one is not morally culpable for that death – **but the death may not be the intended **result:

How does one escape culpability if, long in advance, one has already willingly assented to the death of the aggressor?

Peace,
Dante

So soldiers are wrong? Are policemen? If you have never been there, it is easy to sit in judgement. Maybe you have and you view this as you do for a reason. I was a soldier and you are taught to shoot to kill; if you carry a concealed weapon legally, you are taught to shoot to kill; if you are a policeman, you shoot to kill if needed. I have no problem with that.

I am fiercely pro-life under all circumstances. I am also Catholic, have a shotgun, plan to get a license to carry, and will probably buy a weapon which holds more than three rounds. I plan to defend my family at all costs if need be; I’ll defend yours, too. It does not make me a bad Catholic if I intend to defend them.

 

[searching06]

So, when you brandished that gun, did you aim at their chests? Their heads? Were you to have shot them, what are the odds that they would have died, given where they’d have been hit?

What part of this are you unsure about?

Peace,
Dante

Center-mass, shoot to kill. You DO NOT take a chance on wounding or missing, because you know what - they will come after you. Kind of like cornering a wounded bear.

And the sad fact of the legal system is also if you do not kill them, they will probably sue the daylights out of you. Does that mean that is justification to kill? Absolutely not. But those licensed to carry are taught exactly what to do and how to do it. In Texas, the requirements for getting a license to carry are supposedly more stringent than to become a police officer.

 

[searching06]

The issue with gun control is that, yes, criminals and gangs would still have guns, but the kids who take a gun in to school and shoot the place up are not usually career criminals, nor do they have any gang connections. If handguns were banned, then these people would not be able to get them. If handguns were banned, it would also aid citizens in reporting armed and dangerous people to the police, because you could assume that anybody who was armed on the street was dangerous.

Shotguns and rifles are useful for hunting and target practice, handguns are only for one purpose - killing other people - they also wouldn’t be of any use in taking on a professional army in the event of a totalitarian government taking over and the American people having to take back control. Handgun bullets are easily stopped by bullet-proof vests, to say nothing of tanks, APC’s and aircraft.

Britain banned handguns 15 years ago after the shootings at Dunblane primary school, we haven’t become a dictatorship, nor are we at the mercy of gun-toting gangs.

This ain’t England.

 

[FightingFat]

but people will die if someone decides that we can no longer own guns.

That’s an interesting statement. Perhaps you need to ask some questions about why that is necessarily true in your society?

 

[Sir_Knight]

That is true in EVERY society. The stronger alway prey on the weaker unless the weaker either have someone else to protect them or a means to protect themselves.

 

[FightingFat]

That is true in EVERY society. The stronger alway prey on the weaker unless the weaker either have someone else to protect them or a means to protect themselves.

So fewer people would die in England if we had more guns?

 

[Sir_Knight]

All I’m saying is that in America, every state that has introduced laws allowing citizens to own and carry guns has seen a drastic reduction in violent crime. In another thread on this board I supplied a couple of dozen stats along with references supporting those statements. I’ve also provided stats showing that states which restrict gun ownership have a higher rate of violent crime compared to those states that do not restrict gun ownership. I posted this within the past month or so on another thread of you wish to look them up and verify the stats for yourself if you doubt my comments.

As to what it would mean to England, I can not foresee the future but can only tell you what has happened here in the past.

 

[mary_bobo]

That is true in EVERY society. The stronger alway prey on the weaker unless the weaker either have someone else to protect them or a means to protect themselves.

Someone my age and who at times may appear vulnerable, I have a carry permit and to keep proficient I go to the range once a week to practice. Tuesday I hit 98 out of 100 inside the black with 48 right in the middle. I would hate to have to use it to protect myself but I would if necessary. I can’t wait to see if someone will protect me.

 

[Sir_Knight]

That’s pretty good. At what distance? What size target? And what do you shoot?

 

[FightingFat]

Sir, I will happy to stand in front of you and your wife and shoot the SOB who tries to kill you or me. Tell me, if you did not have a gun, would you use a knife to defend yourself? A pencil, with which you could kill? Your bare hands? Or would you stand there and let someone kill your family?

I applaud your noble sentiments, dear sir and brother in Christ, which are evident to me. I would however emplore you to relate your words above to my post #126

No, Christ did not say to go kill anyone; nor did He say you should let someone kill you. Turn the other cheek? Absolutely. But not to death for no reason. Die for my faith, maybe so, if God wills it to be.

Fair play to you. But again, I emplore you to read the words of our living God, who himself said:

“You have heard that it was said to your ancestors, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment, and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raqa,’ will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be liable to fiery Gehenna.
Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison.
Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny”. It seems very straighforward message to me, and setting yourself up to visit violence upon violence does not reconcile with Jesus’s words. I’m not saying that an unfortunate situation may occur, but preparing ourselves to deal out death is not the Christian way-- at least not IMO-- and it does not reconcile with the message I have tried to live my whole life.

Catholicism doesn’t not reconcile itself with violence? It doesn’t reconcile itself with suicide either. I am very Catholic and an old soldier, and I have no problem defending my country, my family, myself, or you.

Then you know more than me the sacrifice that those who are commissioned with our defense bear. For my part, I cannot and will not say that I would never rise up in anger to defend my home and my family. What I can say is that that day has yet to come, and for now my work is in spreading the peace and joy of Christ and his love and blessings to all I encounter.

 

[mary_bobo]

That’s pretty good. At what distance? What size target? And what do you shoot?

Tuesday the targets were 15 yards, 8" target, Ruger Security Six. I also own a S&W snub nose 38, but I have trouble siting it. But it is my carry gun. Next week I am moving the target out about 10yds and try husband’s Ruger Vaquero with 7 1/2 inch barrel (replica) SAA. We take different guns each week and I enjoy seeing how much better I can get. It’s a sport after all. But I guess our anti-gun posters would not understand that.