Cardinal Dolan finds common ground with Obama on guns

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prodigal_Son1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Road rage? Imagine the entire civilian population carrying guns. Not everyone is safety conscious, or rational enough, in my honest opinion. We have 300 million guns in this country. The solution is not to add more, in my opinion and the Cardinal’s, the USCCB, the Holy See, etc.
Click to expand...
OK, explain away.

This post clearly shows your opposition to concealed carry.:mad:
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
…
In the instance of the mall shooting, was the CCW holder in violation of a ‘gun-free zone?’
…
Click to expand...
clackamastowncenter.com/content/pdf/code_of_conduct.pdf

Yes, not sure what the laws are, but the Mall’s policy is no firearms. (I don’'t agree with their policy but do believe that the property owner should be able to set the policy.)

So, the CCW holder was in violation of at least policy, I do not know whether he was also in violation of the law. That is- is a CCW holder bound under the law to respect the policy decisions of private property owners.

Here’s a link to the local story–
kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
 
styrgwillidar said:
clackamastowncenter.com/content/pdf/code_of_conduct.pdf

Yes, not sure what the laws are, but the Mall’s policy is no firearms. (I don’'t agree with their policy but do believe that the property owner should be able to set the policy.)

So, the CCW holder was in violation of at least policy, I do not know whether he was also in violation of the law. That is- is a CCW holder bound under the law to respect the policy decisions of private property owners.

Here’s a link to the local story–
kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
Click to expand...
Seems strange that someone is so worried about a law abiding citizen being armed in a mall where a mass shooter was killing people. I would think the mass shooter breaking the law would be concern. But then I don’t have agenda that will cost innocent lives.
 
Please someone address these:

How far do you limit guns? If all these gun laws passed and another massacre happens do you go for guns again? 🤷 Where is the line drawn?
 
Cor_Cordis said:
On the contrary I’m defending it because that’s the one you are vilifying.

The AR15 is INVOLVED IN LESS THAN 2% OF ALL “ASSAULT WEAPONS CRIMES” - SO WHY ARE YOU PICKING ON IT?
Click to expand...
Because it’s a scary lookin rifle that fires an underpowered round. And it’s “military style”.

Could I interest you in a computer with a “Windows-style” OS?
 
jay29 said:
Please someone address these:

How far do you limit guns? If all these gun laws passed and another massacre happens do you go for guns again? 🤷 Where is the line drawn?
Click to expand...
Yes. That’s the point. That’s the goal. That is why the push for laws that have been shown to have no effect on crime, that only result in more vulnerable victims. This ensures that there will continue to be mass shootings, those shootings can continue to be used as justifications for additional restrictions, those restrictions will still be directed at limitations on guns which won’t stop criminals, which will result in more shootings and higher crime, which will be used for justification for additional gun restrictions, which won’t stop the crime… and when they’ve completely confiscated all the guns from the law abiding, and crime continues to be a problem they’ll start in on banning certain types of knives (either by length, or type of point).

The continuing mass shootings and crime aren’t a flaw, they are a feature.

It’s why, instead of pushing for laws showing at least a correlation to lowered crime/mass shootings (shall issue CCW, banning of gun-free zones), the push for policies in high crime areas- gun bans, carry bans.

Chicago has high gun crime, let’s enact their policies everywhere. I find the thought process particularly interesting in that argument— The gun crime is high in Chicago because the criminals get their guns from areas where they are more widely available (and gun crime is lower). So, let’s make the folks where gun crime is lower adopt the Chicago type laws.
 
Coming from Australia, where we have neither a “right to bear arms” nor a history of extensive gun ownership, it seems to me that limiting the spread of dangers weapons in society - especially a society as out of whack as ours at the moment - is probably a good idea. Certainly, guns are not the cause of all this senseless violence and bloodshed but making it easy to obtain them doesn’t help. God bless the good Cardinal!
 
jonathan_hili said:
Coming from Australia, where we have neither a “right to bear arms” nor a history of extensive gun ownership, it seems to me that limiting the spread of dangers weapons in society - especially a society as out of whack as ours at the moment - is probably a good idea. Certainly, guns are not the cause of all this senseless violence and bloodshed but making it easy to obtain them doesn’t help. God bless the good Cardinal!
Click to expand...
Countries who still recognize a monarchy might feel thus. Free men might think differently.
 
jonathan_hili said:
Coming from Australia, where we have neither a “right to bear arms” nor a history of extensive gun ownership, it seems to me that limiting the spread of dangers weapons in society - especially a society as out of whack as ours at the moment - is probably a good idea. Certainly, guns are not the cause of all this senseless violence and bloodshed but making it easy to obtain them doesn’t help. God bless the good Cardinal!
Click to expand...
Interesting article on the effect of gun bans on Australias crime rate. Note the dramatic increase in rapes after ensuring women are barred from an effective means of taking on opponents much larger than them.
thebrennerbrief.com/2012/12/03/gun-control-does-it-work-to-reduce-crime/

And, yeah, we in the US aren’t any better. The folks trying to ban firearms in the US are every bit as sympathetic towards women on the rape issue

townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/03/05/colorado-democrat-lectures-rape-survivor-amanda-collins-about-rape-statistics-n1526392
 
styrgwillidar said:
Chicago has high gun crime, let’s enact their policies everywhere. I find the thought process particularly interesting in that argument— The gun crime is high in Chicago because the criminals get their guns from areas where they are more widely available (and gun crime is lower). So, let’s make the folks where gun crime is lower adopt the Chicago type laws.
Click to expand...
So they can also enjoy Chicago style crime rates…
 
I just added another handgun to my collection last week. If there were more to be had, I’d be planning the next purchase already.
 
SamH said:
So they can also enjoy Chicago style crime rates…
Click to expand...
Or not. Because if it’s not the availability of guns, what is pushing the crime rate? Is it demographics? The presence of gangs? If the actual issues driving crime aren’t present in the lower crime areas-- banning guns won’t necessarily result in an increase in crime. Again folks in those areas are generally law abiding to begin with, it’s why guns can be plentiful and have lower crime. Initially. Will those factors migrate to those areas after a ban, who knows.

Don Kates, a lawyer involved in civil rights in the south wrote a fairly interesting article back in 1990.

firearmsandliberty.com/kates.gc.html

But his contention was that gun bans didn’t drive crime rate one way or the other. He believed they were symptoms of the conditions prior to the ban being enacted. That is, at one time banning guns seemed to be a logical reaction to increasing crime. So, they were tried in higher crime areas like DC, New York, Chicago. Now, we’ve seen these bans haven’t had an effect because it wasn’t the availability of weapons that was the problem. I provide his argument for an additional viewpoint. I don’t agree with him because of the experience in the US with decreasing crime and the increase in shall-issue CCW states as well as the experience in the UK and Australia.
 
The Left-Wing Liberal Media controls the narrative on guns.

And one of the most effective tactics they use is selective journalism.

Frequently they simply don’t report stories that are less than useful to their agenda.
Concealed Carry Prevents More Crime Than It Creates, Study Says
Click to expand...
“Many defensive gun uses never make the news,” the report said. “After all, ‘Man Scares away Burglar, No Shots Fired’ is not particularly newsworthy.”
Click to expand...
Among the researchers’ findings were 285 incidents involving concealed carry licenses, 154 instances involving defensive gun use by women, and 21 cases for minors and 201 for seniors. For specific crimes, 65 carjackings saw defensive gun usage, as did 25 rapes.
Click to expand...
The authors also said concealed carry policies on college campuses lead to a reduction in crime, using two Colorado schools as test cases. After the state enacted its concealed carry law in 2003, Colorado State University decided to allow students to carry concealed weapons while the University of Colorado prohibited them. The report found a 60 percent decrease in crime at Colorado State since 2004, while the University of Colorado saw a 35 percent increase during the same time period.
Click to expand...
“(It does not) seem likely that a would-be robber would be deterred because of stickers on the doors announcing that armed robbery is severely frowned upon by the student code of conduct,” the report said. “Conversely, a campus that allows concealed carry, and where even one student, professor, or even a member of the maintenance staff is armed, would present a much riskier target to criminals.”
Click to expand...
The study comes just days after 35 year old Nazir Al-Mujaahid of Milwaukee shot a robber at an Aldi grocery store in what has become Wisconsin’s first major instance of a concealed carry license being used to shoot in self-defense.
Click to expand...
 
thomasf said:
I just added another handgun to my collection last week. If there were more to be had, I’d be planning the next purchase already.
Click to expand...
I simple can’t justify any more than I have. I dont shoot half of them because of all the shortages of components which the government actually likes.
 
Prodigal Son,

I just wanted to acknowledge that I understand you have not been advocating a complete ban. Your discussion has been addressing limitations regarding ownership and certain types of weapons, as I understand it. Very different than a complete ban.
 
jonathan_hili said:
Coming from Australia, where we have neither a “right to bear arms” nor a history of extensive gun ownership, it seems to me that limiting the spread of dangers weapons in society - especially a society as out of whack as ours at the moment - is probably a good idea. Certainly, guns are not the cause of all this senseless violence and bloodshed but making it easy to obtain them doesn’t help. God bless the good Cardinal!
Click to expand...
Actually, the data begs to differ::rolleyes:
England And Australia: Two Cautionary Tales of Gun Control
Click to expand...
WSJ - Strict gun laws in Great Britain and Australia haven’t made their people noticeably safer, nor have they prevented massacres. The two major countries held up as models for the U.S. don’t provide much evidence that strict gun laws will solve our problems.
Click to expand...
 
Northumbrian said:
:

This thread is not about me, but if you really want to know, I will tell you that i work afternoons and evenings. As a teacher. :tiphat: Back on topic…
Click to expand...
Hey, it’s your story.

You tell it any ole way you want to. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top