Bishops remain focused on 'responsible restrictions' on gun ownership

[Prodigal_Son1]

I was not aware society was in my home. I may need more square footage.

Tell you what, you totally ignored my question, why, despite a total ban on guns does the city of Chicago have the highest rate of gun violence in the US?

You respond to that, I’ll give you more of my time.

Ironic you would point out I overlooked a question, when you still haven’t addressed the questions I posted, and then demand I respond to yours first and then you’ll give me more of your time.

I can’t reconcile not inconveniencing my gun rights as an attempt to give others a better quality of life, or at living. Christ taught us to pray, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us…’ It wasn’t, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we prepare to kill those who trespass against us…’ That’s not to say we don’t have a right to protect ourselves, or our families, if attacked, but there’s a spirituality, and mentality, in the teachings He gave us.

The answer in Chicago is not to put more guns in the vicinity; guns that can be stolen, or taken and used against the owners, than the public at large. That’s my honest opinion. If anything, we should place officers in the vicinity to remove the illegal guns already there.

 

[pete_29]

Ironic you would point out I overlooked a question, when you still haven’t addressed the questions I posted, and then demand I respond to yours first and then you’ll give me more of your time.

I can’t reconcile not inconveniencing my gun rights as an attempt to give others a better quality of life, or at living. Christ taught us to pray, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us…’ It wasn’t, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we prepare to kill those who trespass against us…’ That’s not to say we don’t have a right to protect ourselves, or our families, if attacked, but there’s a spirituality, and mentality, in the teachings He gave us.

The answer in Chicago is not to put more guns in the vicinity; guns that can be stolen, or taken and used against the owners, than the public at large. That’s my honest opinion. If anything, we should place officers in the vicinity to remove the illegal guns already there.

When are you going to answer my question?

 

[pete_29]

This is my big one. There simply is no down side I can see for the responsible gun owner. With privilege comes responsibility. I will go one step further and say I would like to see any gun owner that recklessly provides a gun used in a commission of a crime to be charged as an accomplice.

Why waste time? Just throw gun owners in jail now!

 

[ProVobis]

Chicago has gone further than you and banned all guns entirely …

Guns are legal in Chicago. Where do you hear this nonsense?

The answer in Chicago is not to put more guns in the vicinity;

I don’t think there’s room for any more guns in Chicago.

 

[TEPO]

Guns are legal in Chicago.

Even downtown in the Loop?

I heard they were’nt… Same thing with NY city -thats what my dad told me, who I believe to be a gun ‘fanatic’.

 

[Geist]

Ironic you would point out I overlooked a question, when you still haven’t addressed the questions I posted, and then demand I respond to yours first and then you’ll give me more of your time.

Re-read thread, I asked you about Chi-town first. You completely ignored it.

I can’t reconcile not inconveniencing my gun rights as an attempt to give others a better quality of life, or at living. Christ taught us to pray, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us…’ It wasn’t, ‘…forgive us our trespasses, as we prepare to kill those who trespass against us…’ That’s not to say we don’t have a right to protect ourselves, or our families, if attacked, but there’s a spirituality, and mentality, in the teachings He gave us.

The answer in Chicago is not to put more guns in the vicinity; guns that can be stolen, or taken and used against the owners, than the public at large. That’s my honest opinion. If anything, we should place officers in the vicinity to remove the illegal guns already there.

Again, Chicago has a large police force, and dang near all the guns there are illegal (unless your “connected” via the cities famous corruption) yet the problems persist.

WHY don’t your ideas work? And why do you persist in them?

I live in a small city of 200,000-ish, we lost power for 10-14 days in July during a heat wave this year and tempers were high, but we had exactly two incidences of theft in that time (one business and one home got robbed). No looters.

We own alot of guns here, I’d say most people have one or several. We have very sensible gun laws (i.e. almost none), why wasn’t this city a bloodbath like Chicago would have been, even adjusted for population under similar circumstances (no power and brutal heat)?

Guns are a solution, not the problem. They keep the peace. Anyone proposing limits to them is an enemy of liberty and life.

 

[Geist]

Guns are legal in Chicago. Where do you hear this nonsense?

LOL, only if you’re “connected”, like NYC.

DC is similar, guns are “technically” legal, but good luck getting one. Emily Miller of the Washington Post has been writing about her ordeal to get a permit in DC. Chicago is similar. The barriers put up are so stringent its effectively impossible to get one.

Naturally in NYC many big name liberals have a permit. Who’d a thunk it?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Re-read thread, I asked you about Chi-town first. You completely ignored it.

Again, Chicago has a large police force, and dang near all the guns there are illegal (unless your “connected” via the cities famous corruption) yet the problems persist.

WHY don’t your ideas work? And why do you persist in them?

I live in a small city of 200,000-ish, we lost power for 10-14 days in July during a heat wave this year and tempers were high, but we had exactly two incidences of theft in that time (one business and one home got robbed). No looters.

We own alot of guns here, I’d say most people have one or several. We have very sensible gun laws (i.e. almost none), why wasn’t this city a bloodbath like Chicago would have been, even adjusted for population under similar circumstances (no power and brutal heat)?

Guns are a solution, not the problem. They keep the peace. Anyone proposing limits to them is an enemy of liberty and life.

It’s been answered, but you don’t agree. The solution is not to place more guns in a vicinity with guns. More law enforcement is necessary. We don’t turn our problems over to the public sector.

Now, are you going to answer my questions?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

LOL, only if you’re “connected”, like NYC.

DC is similar, guns are “technically” legal, but good luck getting one. Emily Miller of the Washington Post has been writing about her ordeal to get a permit in DC. Chicago is similar. The barriers put up are so stringent its effectively impossible to get one.

Naturally in NYC many big name liberals have a permit. Who’d a thunk it?

LOL? I thought it was a serious discussion. It seems to be an attempt to minimize the seriousness of the topic when one choose to LOL, in my opinion.

 

[ProVobis]

I heard they were’nt… Same thing with NY city -thats what my dad told me, who I believe to be a gun ‘fanatic’.

AFAIK, they’re restricted in airports, ball parks, and some other public events. But this is true in most of the cities.

Chicago is still the city of Al Capone and others, as far as I’m concerned. The Valentine’s Day Massacre wasn’t an isolated event.

 

[scipio337]

AFAIK, they’re restricted in airports, ball parks, and some other public events. But this is true in most of the cities.

Chicago is still the city of Al Capone and others, as far as I’m concerned. The Valentine’s Day Massacre wasn’t an isolated event.

Handgun ownership was only recently allowed under the DC v Heller decision. Prior to, handguns were banned in both D.C. and Chicago

There’s also a lenghty (and somewhat expensive) process of obtaining a gun license in Cook county and the District of Columbia, registration of all handguns, an “assault weapons” ban, “high capacity magazine” ban, handgun registration, etc.

suntimes.com/news/metro/11729575-418/court-gun-rights-advocates-can-pursue-challenge-of-cook-county-assault-weapons-ban.html

library.municode.com/HTML/13805/level4/PTIGEOR_CH54LIPEMIBURE_ARTIIIDEWEDE_DIV4BLHOASWEBA.html

suntimes.com/news/metro/11729575-418/court-gun-rights-advocates-can-pursue-challenge-of-cook-county-assault-weapons-ban.html

District of Columbia requires owner fingerprint record, a spent shell casing for a ballistic “fingerprint”, and a declaration on how the weapon will be used and where it will be kept

nytimes.com/2008/12/17/us/17gun.html?_r=0

csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2010/0326/Federal-judge-OKs-D.C.-s-latest-set-of-gun-control-laws

Point being, gun laws are very strict in both DC and Chicago (including an outright handgun BAN until a few years ago), yet the murder and gun crime rates are exceedingly high.

With the previous 30+ year BANS D.C. and Chicago had prior to 2008, you would think their murder rate would have been almost nonexistent, prior to the Heller decision. But we all know that’s not the case.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves…

Gun laws don’t deter crime. Adam Lanza broke 41 laws on his shooting spree. Would 42 have stopped him?

 

[ProVobis]

Point being

No, the point is to stay away. Don’t irritate, don’t bless, don’t negotiate.

 

[Ender]

Common sense. The stricter regulations are, the harder it should be for bad guys to get their hands on weapons.

This might be rational assumption but it isn’t the way things work. I lived in New York for several years and applied for a pistol permit. After being fingerprinted (twice), enduring a background security check, taking a firearm safety course, and appearing before a judge to explain why I wanted to own a pistol, I received a permit. This took a total of ten months. During that time a felon who had been released from jail only a week earlier managed to get a handgun and commit another crime. My permit, by the way, was not good for New York City, which has even stricter laws … which did not stop an escapee from the city jail on Riker’s Island from getting a gun after being out less than 24 hours. The point of all this is that stricter regulations typically only make it more difficult for the good guys to get their hands on weapons. The bad guys don’t have those problems and the bishops appear not to recognize that the solution is not quite as “common sensical” as it might appear.

Ender

 

[Geist]

It’s been answered, but you don’t agree. The solution is not to place more guns in a vicinity with guns. More law enforcement is necessary. We don’t turn our problems over to the public sector.

Now, are you going to answer my questions?

I did, it seems the concept of “private property” is too alien to you to even notice it being described.

 

[Geist]

LOL? I thought it was a serious discussion. It seems to be an attempt to minimize the seriousness of the topic when one choose to LOL, in my opinion.

As others have explained your ilk (the gun-grabbers) are operating on a level of naivety that really can only be laughed at. God knows it can’t be reasoned with.

It’s hard to take you seriously when you cling like death to ideas that have been proven to be utter failures and intrusive to the rights of law US citizens.

I could say the same about your little back there too no?

 

[scipio337]

No, the point is to stay away. Don’t irritate, don’t bless, don’t negotiate.

Not sure what you mean by that.

 

[pnewton]

Why waste time? Just throw gun owners in jail now!

Another absurd strawman. No one has even remotely said anything like that.

Ender asked.

The other point that should be obvious here is that if the Church supports the private ownership of guns then where is the argument?

I think this bears consideration. Why is there such emotional reaction against an innoccuous statement? It is this very visceral response that got me to thinking that maybe Pro Vobis has a point when he brought up idolatry. We have a serious problem of materialism in this country. There should be nothing we should hold such attachment to.

 

[pnewton]

Gun laws don’t deter crime. Adam Lanza broke 41 laws on his shooting spree. Would 42 have stopped him?

That would depend on how hard breaking that last law was (or that first law). More to the point, would breaking one law have prevented the guns from being available to him.

Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it. All aspects of gun ownership need to be considered, if we are truly concerned about the lives of others. I say for those in the restrictive camp that it is equally foolish to refuse to examine the possibility of armed and trained people closer to children as it is to refuse to examine our current gun laws.

 

[pnewton]

When bishops speak out on matters of political policy, they are subject to question like anyone else. A synod is one thing, an organization like the UCCB is another.

I think there is some misunderstanding about the USCCB. They exist for a reason and have a real place within the Church. Making pastoral statement is one thing they do. Catholicism is unlike Protestantism, even in America, or at least it should be. As CAF is a faithful Catholic apostolate attack of this organization is not allowed, as a matter of policy. Yes, they have limits, which they are far more familiar with than we here are.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1L.HTM

Can. 447 A conference of bishops, a permanent institution, is a group of bishops of some nation or certain territory who jointly exercise certain pastoral functions for the Christian faithful of their territory in order to promote the greater good which the Church offers to humanity, especially through forms and programs of the apostolate fittingly adapted to the circumstances of time and place, according to the norm of law.

§2. A legitimately erected conference of bishops possesses juridic personality by the law itself.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

As others have explained your ilk (the gun-grabbers) are operating on a level of naivety that really can only be laughed at. God knows it can’t be reasoned with.

It’s hard to take you seriously when you cling like death to ideas that have been proven to be utter failures and intrusive to the rights of law US citizens.

I could say the same about your little back there too no?

I hear you loud and clear and won’t repeat that I have tried pushing suggestions of controls in place of bans. I hunt and use hunting weapons as home protection. Should there be bans, it won’t affect my ole shotgun and pistol.

Laws against drugs, murder, robbery, rape, etc. have been utter failures.

The government grants us rights, we have a higher calling to answer to though.