Bishop says tighter gun laws will help build culture of life

[TEPO]

There are a great deal number of semi-automatics in this country, but these shooters seem drawn to specific types. Is that just coincidence?

At what point does a ‘shooter’ become a ‘detonator’…? Lets just ponder on that for a moment…

I believe ease of access becomes that point. Explosives are explosives no matter how we choose to categorize it.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

At what point does a ‘shooter’ become a ‘detonator’…? Lets just ponder on that for a moment…

I believe ease of access becomes that point. Explosives are explosives no matter how we choose to categorize it.

I view that as semantics, to possibly detract from the topic at hand.

 

[Fairwinds]

isn’t this topic about what the bishop wants and our response as Catholics?

it seems to be focused on what the OP thinks.

F/

 

[TEPO]

I view that as semantics, to possibly detract from the topic at hand.

If you were to look further, I believe you would come to see it as logical. We need to be real with ourselves here. It’s all about getting to the crux of the issue. Why shouldn’t it be evaluated…? Because I said it instead of a politician or a Bishop?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

If you were to look further, I believe you would come to see it as logical. We need to be real with ourselves here. It’s all about getting to the crux of the issue. Why shouldn’t it be evaluated…? Because I said it instead of a politician or a Bishop?

If you read through this thread, you’ll see I haven’t based anything on what a politician said. Instead, I have expressed my agreement with the bishops. The reason I don’t see your comparisons as in need of evaluation is that it’s the same as comparing guns to cars, pools, planes, etc. They are different topics. If you want to compare home-made bombs to guns, let’s discuss the accessibility. It’s one thing to pickup a gun, load it, and pull the trigger, it’s another to successfully make a bomb. Even though the bombs can be deadly they are, I assume, illegal to possess.

BTW, you missed my question in a previous post. How would guns have stopped what happened in Boston?

 

[Fairwinds]

is this a thread about the bishop’s comments or gun control in general?

I’m interested in how we respond to the bishop, gun control at this point has devolved into people talking over each other.

F/

 

[TEPO]

If you read through this thread, you’ll see I haven’t based anything on what a politician said. Instead, I have expressed my agreement with the bishops. The reason I don’t see your comparisons as in need of evaluation is that it’s the same as comparing guns to cars, pools, planes, etc. They are different topics. If you want to compare home-made bombs to guns, let’s discuss the accessibility. It’s one thing to pickup a gun, load it, and pull the trigger, it’s another to successfully make a bomb. Even though the bombs can be deadly they are, I assume, illegal to possess.

BTW, you missed my question in a previous post. How would guns have stopped what happened in Boston?

Guns and bombs are similar in every way. They are all explosive devices using the force of percussion to inflict damage upon living creatures. They are ‘weapons’, unlike cars, pools and planes. The only difference as you have noted is accesability.

Now think of this. Guns are currently accessible to a lot of people and these people register these weapons when they purchase them. If you were to make guns difficult to obtain, let’s say -just as difficult as a bomb for example, then there would logically develop a market for other sources of explosive devices… Instruction manuals for homemade bombs similar to grenades would be a very simple solution. Then we have the problem of not being able to trace or track the weapons of choice. It could become chaotic because bullets can be traced back to the gun… Unregistered explosives are not traceable. You see what I mean?

 

[TEPO]

is this a thread about the bishop’s comments or gun control in general?

I’m interested in how we respond to the bishop, gun control at this point has devolved into people talking over each other.

F/

The Bishops have not taken into consideration how evil often takes advantage of good intentions. This is common among very good people.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Guns and bombs are similar in every way. They are all explosive devices using the force of percussion to inflict damage upon living creatures. They are ‘weapons’, unlike cars, pools and planes. The only difference as you have noted is accesability.

Now think of this. Guns are currently accessible to a lot of people and these people register these weapons when they purchase them. If you were to make guns difficult to obtain, let’s say -just as difficult as a bomb for example, then there would logically develop a market for other sources of explosive devices… Instruction manuals for homemade bombs similar to grenades would be a very simple solution. Then we have the problem of not being able to trace or track the weapons of choice. It could become chaotic because bullets can be traced back to the gun… Unregistered explosives are not traceable. You see what I mean?

Private gun sales does not necessarily mean those buyers went through a background check, or registration. Without those, what are you tracing a gun back to?

Possession of a home-made bomb is illegal, as far as I know. This means that even having one in possession is criminal. You don’t douse a fire by throwing gasoline on it. You don’t improve the control of explosives by making them legal, and developing a market for the parts and manuals.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

You’re stacking the deck here in using a bolt action as an example. Why not a muzzle-loader or bow and arrow?

The reality is that there are a lot of semi-automatics, from most pistols to (anymore) most rifles. Your argument has been in the past that being forced to use other semi-automatics instead of AR-15s would somehow save at least some lives.

However, that is a speculation based on the assumption that mass shooters would be unable to figure out how to kill just as many people with other kinds of semi-automatic weapons.

And all this ignores what the real issue is… Mental illness…

 

[Ender]

The bishops speak on healthcare for all, in general terms; the same as they speak on gun controls in general terms.

When a bishop speaks about a particular law or a particular solution he is no longer speaking in general terms - that’s pretty much the distinction between “general” and “particular”. It’s the difference between saying this man is sick and needs to be cared for and saying this man is sick and needs a heart transplant … or saying “We need a better health care system” and “We need Obamacare.”

Ender

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

And all this ignores what the real issue is… Mental illness…

For me, regulating and controlling guns is part of building a Culture of Life, of doing what we can to protect and defend human life. The easy access to guns, including assault weapons, that exists in our nation has contributed towards a Culture of Death, where human life and dignity are cheapened by the threat of violence. No law, no piece of legislation, will ever be able to protect us from every act of aggression, or from the harm that can come from an individual bent on killing. But, we must do what we can to minimize the opportunities for such acts, by limiting the easy access to guns – and, I would add, by increasing funding for programs to treat those who suffer from mental illness, especially those that might lead someone to commit mass murder.

–Cardinal Dolan

We must also reflect on our own fears as we grapple with our prejudices toward those with mental health needs. Our society must provide health services and support to those who have mental illnesses and to their families and caregivers. As a community we need to support one another so no one feels unable to get help for a mentally ill family member or neighbor in need. Burdensome healthcare policies must be adjusted so people can get help for themselves or others in need. Just as we properly reach out to those with physical challenges we need to approach mental health concerns with equal sensitivity. There is no shame in seeking help for oneself or others; the only shame is in refusing to provide care and support.

–USCCB Call to Action In Response to Newtown Tragedy

1.Support measures that control the sale and use of firearms

2.Support measures that make guns safer (especially efforts that prevent their unsupervised use by children and anyone other than the owner)

3.Call for sensible regulations of handguns

4.Support legislative efforts that seek to protect society from the violence associated with easy access to deadly weapons including assault weapons

5.Make a serious commitment to confront the pervasive role of addiction and mental illness in crime.

–USCCB Call to Action In Response to Newtown Tragedy

 

[Ender]

is this a thread about the bishop’s comments or gun control in general?

It ought to be about the comments the bishops have made.

I’m interested in how we respond to the bishop, gun control at this point has devolved into people talking over each other.

The proper response to the bishops’ comments is my interest as well. The debate about appropriate gun control laws needs to be based on an evaluation of all the real factors involved. The problem their comments cause is that they imply that one of those factors is moral, which is simply not so. There is no moral choice involved; there is no sinful position; there is no moral distinction between one choice and another.

Ender

 

[Michael_Mayo]

Nice summary, Prodigal. It may seem “Left” to some but it is neither left nor right.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It ought to be about the comments the bishops have made.
The proper response to the bishops’ comments is my interest as well. The debate about appropriate gun control laws needs to be based on an evaluation of all the real factors involved. The problem their comments cause is that they imply that one of those factors is moral, which is simply not so. There is no moral choice involved; there is no sinful position; there is no moral distinction between one choice and another.

Ender

What’s the moral implication to leave abortion up to individuals? It will kill innocent babies. Gun accessibility has contributed to the death innocent people. We work for life through all means possible, including influencing legislative efforts, but we are not obligated to work towards the same goal for others? Supporting background checks, or not, has impact on some of the accessibility of guns to criminals. I can definitely see the implications of a culture of life and a culture of death, as the men of the Church speak of on this issue.

 

[TEPO]

Private gun sales does not necessarily mean those buyers went through a background check, or registration. Without those, what are you tracing a gun back to?

Every modern gun is traceable. Homemade bombs are not.

Possession of a home-made bomb is illegal, as far as I know. This means that even having one in possession is criminal. You don’t douse a fire by throwing gasoline on it. You don’t improve the control of explosives by making them legal, and developing a market for the parts and manuals.

…no, you keep bombs on the back burner by making traceable guns easy to get.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Every modern gun is traceable. Homemade bombs are not.

…no, you keep bombs on the back burner by making traceable guns easy to get.

So, guns through private sales, where there was no background checks or registrations, are traceable to where?

 

[TEPO]

So, guns through private sales, where there was no background checks or registrations, are traceable to where?

I give up.

But to answer your question, I believe the original owner If its a modern weapon such as those used most recently in school shootings…

Older bolt action rifles maybe not.

 

[Ridgerunner]

So, guns through private sales, where there was no background checks or registrations, are traceable to where?

To the person who bought the gun in the first place, a prospect that I think would be daunting to most. Of course, among criminals and those who willfully aid them, it wouldn’t matter because they wouldn’t comply anyway.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

To the person who bought the gun in the first place, a prospect that I think would be daunting to most. Of course, among criminals and those who willfully aid them, it wouldn’t matter because they wouldn’t comply anyway.

Those prospects do not stop the private sales from happening right now, where guns and cash change hands without even name exchanges. We’re supposed to think that those guns are traceable so sufficiently as to solve crimes?