Bishops remain focused on 'responsible restrictions' on gun ownership

  • Thread starter Thread starter liturgyluver
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

liturgyluver

Guest
uscatholic.org/news/201212/bishops-remain-focused-responsible-restrictions-gun-ownership-26690

As momentum builds to implement new limits on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips, the Catholic bishops of the United States remain focused on seeking “reasonable restrictions” on gun ownership without infringing upon Second Amendment rights.

“The bishops continue to support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and continue to call for sensible regulations on handguns,” Kathy Saile, the bishops’ director of domestic social development, told Catholic News Service.

Prior to the past two presidential elections, the bishops in their quadrennial statement “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” supported “reasonable restrictions on access to assault weapons and handguns.”

The bishops are not alone. Other religious leaders, community activists and advocates for families and children have long called for strict regulations and bans on weapons specifically designed to kill, as well as stronger controls on handguns.

Details of a survey released in August by the Public Religion Research Institute show that 62 percent of Catholics favor stricter gun control laws. That compares with 35 percent of white evangelical Protestants and 42 percent of white mainline Protestants.

Overall, according to the survey, 52 percent of people favor stricter regulations on guns with 44 percent opposed.

Conducted in early August, the survey sampled 1,006 adults and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points
 
You are in the UK. Quite different attitude and governmental form there. The problem is that we have a George III as leader now and rendering the public essentially helpless against a massively powerful federal government seems to be his aim. An armed citizenry appears to be our only check against such governmental abuses. In biblical times, the Hebrews had no voice. We do.

We must not take the Bishops’ views as a condemnation of weapons ownership, as the Church makes no such condemnation. Bishop Rpbert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin explains this situation in a manner that is not acceptable to government: isthmuscatholic.org/resources/media/448
 
Gun control is something that Catholics can have differing views on, it is not an issue of infalliable teaching but prudential judgement

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace The International Arms Trade: an Ethical Reflection, (55) Evangelicum Vitae, and Catechism say using a gun for legitimate defense is a right
 
_Abyssinia said:
Gun control is something that Catholics can have differing views on, it is an issue of prudential judgement, not infalliable teaching. The Catechism and Pontifical Justice give the right to bear arms
Click to expand...
It seems that you are part of the 38% of Catholics who disagree with the Bishops on this issue. I think the Bishops might just be aware of what the Cathecism says.
 
liturgyluver said:
It seems that you are part of the 38% of Catholics who disagree with the Bishops on this issue. I think the Bishops might just be aware of what the Cathecism says.
Click to expand...
What the Bishops said does not conflict with the Catechism. Bishops are not objecting to the right to own a gun but they are in favour of gun control laws. That is their choice, but it is an issue that Catholics can have differing views on
 
Thanks for the article. It seems to be fair. There is respect for the 2nd Amendment so I fail to see the validity of any criticism by the gun rightists.
 
I have a question…and maybe it should be it’s own thread…I dunno…But I read these things periodically about “gun control laws” and they all seem to focus predominantly on restricting sales of certain types of weapons and little else.
The problem with this is that it runs afoul of the constitution which clearly grants the right to keep and bear arms.

Why not - instead of constantly trying restrict the sale of weapons, simply require that those who purchase them demonstrate proficiency, safety, lack of criminal record etc.
Such would be entirely within the bounds of the second amendment guarantees since the right to keep and bear arms is tied to the need for a “Well regulated militia”.

Peace
James
 
_Abyssinia said:
Gun control is something that Catholics can have differing views on, it is not an issue of infalliable teaching but prudential judgement

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace The International Arms Trade: an Ethical Reflection, (55) Evangelicum Vitae, and Catechism say using a gun for legitimate defense is a right
Click to expand...
I always see irony in that claim. 😦
 
po18guy said:
You are in the UK. Quite different attitude and governmental form there. The problem is that we have a George III as leader now and rendering the public essentially helpless against a massively powerful federal government seems to be his aim. An armed citizenry appears to be our only check against such governmental abuses. In biblical times, the Hebrews had no voice. We do.

We must not take the Bishops’ views as a condemnation of weapons ownership, as the Church makes no such condemnation. Bishop Rpbert Morlino of Madison, Wisconsin explains this situation in a manner that is not acceptable to government: isthmuscatholic.org/resources/media/448
Click to expand...
Do you really think privately armed citizens have our government in ‘check’? 😃
 
liturgyluver said:
It seems that you are part of the 38% of Catholics who disagree with the Bishops on this issue. I think the Bishops might just be aware of what the Cathecism says.
Click to expand...
Lol I am sure all of our bishops are experts on guns lol :rolleyes:

People fear what they don’t know or understand.
 
Some people are quick to tell others what, and how they must believe. The same people are also quick to say, ‘we’re allowed to disagree with that.’ We should be fitting our views to the Church, and not fitting the Church to our views.
 
Bishops do not leap, fully grown, from the forehead of the Pope. :rolleyes: I am sure there are quite a few who have fired a gun in their lifetimes.

Anyway, their position seems very balance.
“The bishops continue to support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and continue to call for sensible regulations on handguns,” Kathy Saile, the bishops’ director of domestic social development, told Catholic News Service.

“In addition to that, we need to make a serious commitment to address the pervasive role that addiction and mental illness have in crime,” she said …
Click to expand...
 
It is virtually impossible to legally own a gun in Mexico. The government there has very strict laws governing all types of firearms. Is that country safer than the US?

The stricter we regulate guns, the less armed responsible citizens will be. However, it isn’t going to disarm the criminals, especially the most violent among them.
 
Well that is good. Since our guns laws are already ‘sensible’. They already provide for restrictions on the sale of firearms. Felons, minors, and the diagonsed mentally ill are all prohibited from purchasing them. Those others who seek them for legitimate self-defense, as provided for in Catholic teaching, are free to seek them.

The bishop’s desires are thus satisfied. Thus there is no need to change them. :cool:

I could not also help but noticing in the the bishop’s statement that the call was also specifically directed to the sale of handguns. No mention of restrictions on 'assault weapons" :rolleyes:
 
A highly motivated and well trained individual won’t be stopped by any gun controls. There are plenty of pistols with 10 or more round clips, which are instantly changed out when spent. I don’t really see the point of assault weapons being widely available.
 
JRKH said:
I have a question…and maybe it should be it’s own thread…I dunno…But I read these things periodically about “gun control laws” and they all seem to focus predominantly on restricting sales of certain types of weapons and little else.
The problem with this is that it runs afoul of the constitution which clearly grants the right to keep and bear arms.

**Why not - instead of constantly trying restrict the sale of weapons, simply require that those who purchase them demonstrate proficiency, safety, lack of criminal record etc. **
Such would be entirely within the bounds of the second amendment guarantees since the right to keep and bear arms is tied to the need for a “Well regulated militia”.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
Very good idea. Maybe even a written exam and a demonstration exam like we do/ have for drivers license.
 
Hey I support “responsible restrictions” to gun ownership as well. We already have them, background checks, certain criminals can’t own firearms nor can the mentally ill.

I’m pretty sickened that the anti gun crowd is using the death of a bunch of children to further their agenda though. Lanza wasn’t a gun owner. He was murder who killed a gun owner and stole her guns to commit further crimes. But of course all the emphasis is on gun owners and gun buyers, neither of which he was.
 
Cider said:
Hey I support “responsible restrictions” to gun ownership as well. We already have them, background checks, certain criminals can’t own firearms nor can the mentally ill.
Click to expand...
I can’t remember. Honest question: Was it the NRA who pushed for these restrictions?
 
Cider said:
Hey I support “responsible restrictions” to gun ownership as well. We already have them, background checks, certain criminals can’t own firearms nor can the mentally ill.

I’m pretty sickened that the anti gun crowd is using the death of a bunch of children to further their agenda though. Lanza wasn’t a gun owner. He was murder who killed a gun owner and stole her guns to commit further crimes. But of course all the emphasis is on gun owners and gun buyers, neither of which he was.
Click to expand...
I don’t think this is true…The Emphasis is generally on certain types of guns, not on the people who own guns…
Should these certain types of guns be allowed to be sold…should they be allowed to be owned? But these kinds of proposals are going to continually run into the second amendment and it’s protection.

On the other hand - requiring training and periodic testing is a perfectly legitimate form of “gun control” under the second amendment. There is an old saying among gun owners that says, “Gun Control means hitting what you are aiming at”.
I agree with that sentiment. Gun control also means knowing how to handle and store them safely and responsibly - and the government, under the “well regulated militia” provision, has the right to demand that you demonstrate your proficiency.

Peace
James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top