Gun Carrying Catholics Armed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seagull
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JanSobieskiIII said:
As far as being law abiding, there’s a difference between obeying a just law and letting a fundamental freedom be legislated away unjustly.
Click to expand...
And that is a valid distinction. There is no doubt that committing crime for gain or personal benefit is on a different plane. However, we also need to consider that what same may see a killing others in a just cause may vary, especially with disturbed individuals.
 
JanSobieskill makes a very good point. A law isn’t just if it’s contrary to a natural right.

“However, we also need to consider that what same may see a killing others in a just cause may vary, especially with disturbed individuals.” Sure, but now we’re talking about something different. The right to bear arms and determining the justification of a homicide are two different things.
 
Last edited:
Escabrosa said:
JanSobieskill makes a very good point. A law isn’t just if it’s contrary to a natural right.
Click to expand...
And who decides what is a natural right? Is carrying 10 rounds a natural right, for example, or is just self-defense a natural right. If the latter, then gun restrictions can never be contrary to a natural right, as the right to self-defense remains.
 
MonteRCMS said:
Very few NRA members conduct mass-shootings … none … actually.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think it came out that all the NRA certificates in Adam Lanza’s home were completion certificates for training courses. On the whole, it is hard to argue that NRA training courses do not make society much safer, rather than otherwise.

I’m not that surprised that there haven’t been. Political activism comes from thinking you make a difference. Mass ambush-attacks are committed by people who think they have to do something like that to make a difference. (I refer both to mass shootings and also bomb attacks like Oklahoma City and the Boston Marathon bombing…it isn’t as if a gun is required to commit an ambush attack.)

Pollsters have found that a segment of the population corresponding to about 14 million people tell pollsters they are NRA members, even though the number of people who actually send dues into the NRA is closer to 5 million. There are over 300 million firearms in this country and about 8 guns per gun-owning household, so statistically there are over 7 times as many gun-owning households (about 37 million or so) as there are NRA members. Kip Kinkel wasn’t old enough to be an NRA member and the Clackamas Town Center shooter didn’t even own the gun he “borrowed” from an unsuspecting friend for his murder-suicide spree.
 
Nothing makes you safe when someone decides to do what he did because it has nothing to do with training or safety or responsible ownership.

That’s mental illness. He killed his own mother. That doesn’t have much to do with safety.

Having been at ranges with the uneducated and unthinking, I would say training actually does make you safer. Because training stops you from doing stupid stuff like not remembering what you’re holding can kill.
 
Natural rights aren’t decided, they’re recognized or not. I get your point though. However, if your restrictions prevent a person from having the means to adequately defend themselves, aren’t you violating their rights? The right to bear arms is recognized as a right under the second amendment, but it doesn’t lay down any restriction. Good call.
If we find it necessary to impose restrictions, shouldn’t we at least ensure that people have access to the same level of weaponry a possible attacker may possess? If not, we’re inhibiting their ability to defend themselves, meaning we don’t really recognize that right. Who gets to decide what is adequate or not?
 
Then you don’t recognize a person’s right to self defense. Most countries don’t recognize it, and don’t allow their law abiding citizens to possess the means to defend themselves. The UK is a good example. They claim that a person has the right to use reasonable force to defend themselves, but allows them no means to do so. That kind of defeats the purpose of recognizing the right.
 
They don’t even really allow self defense. You can get charged for it in certain cases
 
My instructor told us to prepare ourselves for the fact that, if we ever need to defend ourselves, we would face a very expensive trial. He recommended NRA membership for the legal defense stuff or prepaid legal.
 
Pup7 said:
Having been at ranges with the uneducated and unthinking, I would say training actually does make you safer.
Click to expand...
As I said, it is hard to argue that it doesn’t, in spite of the fact that people who will later become deranged can take safety courses, too. That is obviously not what made them dangerous!
 
I am a gun owner. I live by three gang territories and there is a lot of drug activity here. Although it’s not that bad i figure it’s better to be armed. I don’t take my gun outside my apartment though unless I’m going shooting. The gun is just so I have a fighting chance in case of a home invasion.
 
So then are you talking about yourself?

Cause if that was an attempt to maintain cool left-wing cred, it kinda backfired.

🗣️
 
BoomBoom: Prosecutor. The G34 isn’t a bad carry piece. I plan on getting Gen 5 G34 to complete the modular 9x19mm Glock family. The G43…why bother? Sig P938 🙂 [even though mine hasn’t been the most reliable Sig I’ve owned].

ToC: I prefer condition 1 in 1911 and clones/near clones. I don’t keep my Glocks chambered… don’t trust the “safe action.”

Cruciferi: That double 1911 looks like an escapee from Warhammer 40,000 (storm bolter).

Jan: at close range, a knife beats a holstered gun everytime, and it only gets worse if you need to chamber it. Sig had an issue with their P320 with certain drop angles.
 
I actually had someone on twitter tell me they were from IL and bought in Indiana. If true, they just admitted on the internet to committing a federal felony.
Seeksadvice said:
Jan: at close range, a knife beats a holstered gun everytime, and it only gets worse if you need to chamber it. Sig had an issue with their P320 with certain drop angles.
Click to expand...
Oh, that’s debatable. If you’ve got a got 300 lb guy coming at you full speed do you want a Swiss army pocketknife or a Glock?
 
Last edited:
Guy with knife out and attacking, at close range can successfully hit before gun gets drawn. ~15-20 feet give or take.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top