Gun Control & the Catholic Church

[vern_humphrey]

Well good. Then you must agree that the situation in Iraq needs to be fixed before leaving

Because that is exactly what His Holiness said.

So why do so many Catholics go against what the Pope said most** recently**?

 

[melensdad]

Because that is exactly what His Holiness said.

So why do so many Catholics go against what the Pope said most** recently**?

Vern, unfortunately people tend to be “selective” about things. For instance I opposed the invasion (as did the Vatican) but I now support staying to fix things (as does the Vatican). I may not be happy with the fact that we went in there, but I sure don’t think we can leave before the job is done.

In the case of those Catholics who also opposed the invasion, and NOW want to pull out, they clearly do not understand the difference between right & wrong and choose to only selectively listen to the Vatican when it suits their desires. Anyone who advocates pulling out of Iraq now is exhibiting selfish desire and not thinking about the horrible world ramifications that would result if we pulled out *(or worse, they don’t care about them). *

The Vatican clearly has articulated that the US forces MUST stay in Iraq until order is restored, stability is in place, and the Iraqi government can stand on its own without being toppled or overly influenced by terrorists.

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

But the Pope didn’t say the War in Iraq doesn’t meet the Just War criteria (that is, after all, not his call according to the Catechism.) Nor did he call on Catholics to oppose it.

In fact, his Holiness has said we must finish the job.

I did not say the Pope said the war doesn’t meat the Just War criteria. I said he opposed it.

And yes, I certainly agree that we should fix the situation before leaving.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I did not say the Pope said the war doesn’t meat the Just War criteria. I said he opposed it.

Popes always oppose war – that’s their job.

And yes, I certainly agree that we should fix the situation before leaving.

So we all agree – we’re at war and must finish the job.

 

[melensdad]

Popes always oppose war – that’s their job.

:doh2:

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

Popes always oppose war – that’s their job.

I’ll second melensdad:

:doh2:

 

[burnside]

Probably if i lived in the U.S.i would want a gun in my possession
However,when i was younger and had thoughts about emigrating,i
chose to avoid America because of the violence.I was brought up on American movies about Prohibition,the St.Valentine’s Day Massacre etc.I was prepared to allow for the movies being exaggerated,but more recent events make me glad i stayed where i was.
O.K.we have had our problems with nutcases using guns,like in
the Dunblane school shooting.However,guns have only started to be a problem here in recent times and seem to have arrived here
since the Northern Ireland problem.Another source seems to be
the Carribean.Some Britons originate from there.Perhaps if past Governments had been as security conscious as nowadays,due to Islamic terrorism,these guns would not have got into the country or,at least,would have been much reduced.Just a few days ago,the police had to shoot dead a female martial arts expert who was brandishing a gun.There was a time in my country
when disputes were settled by a “square go”.That is,people used their fists.Women and children were pretty safe.Even men,who were not gang members,were safe enough walking in rough neighbourhoods.Nowadays,they are liable to bite an ear off.In my boyhood,biting and scratching was something the girls did.A boy
who did this was re-christened with a girl’s name.
Instead of wasting so much time arguing about the right to bear arms,we should be trying much harder to create a decent society.
What we have got certainly isn’t a christian society.Having a lot of backsides on church pews doesn’t make it so.
When i hear people talking about the right to bear arms, sometimes i get the impression that the power goes to their head and they quite like the idea of killing someone.

 

[melensdad]

Probably if i lived in the U.S.i would want a gun in my possession
However,when i was younger and had thoughts about emigrating,i
chose to avoid America because of the violence. . .

Wow what a distorted view of the US you have. And I believe it would be fair to blame TV/Movies/culture for that view.

I’ve lived 46 years here and have also traveled extensively. While I am a strong supporter of gun ownership, I’ve never been a victim of any violence. I did have a car stolen about 20 years ago. When I was 8 or 9 years old my parents house was burglarized when nobody was home. Can’t recall any other criminal acts committed against me or my family. My sister lives in NYC on Manhatten. I used to live in Chicago, then the suburbs of the city, and now in a rural area not too far away. No problems walking down the streets alone. No fears.

Now in the Caribbean islands I was always in constant fear of petty theft. And on some islands I was simply afraid of violence, kidnapping and theft. In Europe I generally feel safe. But in any city in any part of the world you have to avoid SOME areas and you can freely travel in others. That is just as true in Dublin, London, Paris or Stockholm as it is in New York, Chicago or Los Angeles.

Heck some of the Paris suburbs are some of the scariest places on earth!

 

[Bennie_P]

That same quotation was restated in a letter, on July 11, 2001, to the *International Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects. *I suspect that the same quotation, used twice, under the direction of the Vatican, should not be considered out of date.

You really like to pick and choose what you quote to defend your position and then try to make those that want sensible gun control look as if they are defying church teaching, but if you read past what you are attached to, then you might be able see that the right to possession of firearms is not an abosolute right without restrictions, according to the Church.

Unfortunately, however**, **it is impossible to ban all kinds of small arms and light weapons. “In a world marked by evil … the right of legitimate defence by means of arms exists. This right can become a serious duty for those who are responsible for the lives of others, for the common good of the family or of the civil community. This right alone can justify the possession or transfer of arms”. (Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, “The International Arms Trade: an Ethical Reflection” in Origins 8 (24), 7 July 1994, p. 144).
This is not an absolute right, since there are specific conditions placed on the licitness of the production, possession and acquisition of arms. Nonetheless, in our meeting today the topic is fairly limited. Here we are discussing illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. This is, in a manner of speaking, a negative statement of the fundamental question of the legitimacy of the international arms trade. more

So the debate, on gun ownership and sensible laws doesn’t go against Chruch teaching. Just as I recognize your right to own guns and to defend yourself, but you should not paint those that push for sensible gun ownership laws as being anti-Catholic, or in desent of church teaching.

Many that want sensible gun laws are not anti-gun.
Myself I was taught how to shoot as a very young boy by my grandfather. I qualified as an expert rifleman when I served in the Army. Currently I’m a Shooting Sports instructor and range officer for the Boys’ Scouts of America. But I don’t keep firearms in my house, two reasons:

1. I don’t hunt, I’m not against hunting, I just don’t.
2. I live in a inner city nieghborhood, the number one crime around here is burglary, the chance of a gun getting into criminal hands could be great if I have firearms in my house. I once was broken into 15 years ago - you know what, the jerks that like to break into people’s homes wait until no one is home, before coming in to steal your stuff. They are real cowards. I installed an alarm system after my breakin, when it goes off, (we have had a couple false alarms) the cops are at my house within 5 minutes. To the police.
   Of course I know that is not the norm. But no burglary attempts have been made on my home since it has been posted that we have an alarm system.

We have the right to carry concealed weapons in my state and I do not oppose that idea, as long as the gun owners have background checks, shooter-safety training and thier guns registered. Which in my personal view and opinion should be required for all that own handguns. Is this an anti-Catholic view?

Though I really enjoyed shooting automatic weapons and the M-16 when I was in the Army, I see no need for the sell of assualt weapons to the general public. Why? look at reason # 2 why I do not keep firearms in my home.

The main force behind the opposition to sensible gun ownership laws is the firearm industry and it is based on greed and is feed on fear.

As to the fear of death -

Mark 5:36 But Jesus having heard the word that was spoken, saith to the ruler of the synagogue: Fear not, only believe.

And to the troubles we face in this world as Christians.

Luke 9:23 And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
Luke 9:24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: for he that shall lose his life for my sake shall save it.
Luke 9:25 For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world and lose himself and cast away himself?

The personal applications of these verses should be prayerfully considered.

 

[mary_bobo]

Vern, unfortunately people tend to be “selective” about things. For instance I opposed the invasion (as did the Vatican) but I now support staying to fix things (as does the Vatican). I may not be happy with the fact that we went in there, but I sure don’t think we can leave before the job is done.

You are so right. IMHO, I think the terrorism will hit our shores with a vengeance. They have told us in plain language that they want “the infidels” dead, and that would be us. I have never understood how so many can go blissfully along and ignore that fact.

In the case of those Catholics who also opposed the invasion, and NOW want to pull out, they clearly do not understand the difference between right & wrong and choose to only selectively listen to the Vatican when it suits their desires. Anyone who advocates pulling out of Iraq now is exhibiting selfish desire and not thinking about the horrible world ramifications that would result if we pulled out *(or worse, they don’t care about them). *

Or could we charitably call them naive?

The Vatican clearly has articulated that the US forces MUST stay in Iraq until order is restored, stability is in place, and the Iraqi government can stand on its own without being toppled or overly influenced by terrorists.

Amen.

 

[abu_kamoon]

Though I really enjoyed shooting automatic weapons and the M-16 when I was in the Army, I
see no need for the sell of assualt weapons to the general public. Why? look at reason # 2
why I do not keep firearms in my home.

The main force behind the opposition to sensible gun ownership laws is the firearm
industry and it is based on greed and is feed on fear.

Your argument sounds reasonable, but let me make a few points. Number one, what is an assault weapon? The fact is, there is no definition. An assault weapon is whatever a politician, or one of their lackeys in the media decides.

When this point is brought up, the other side starts talking about hand grenades, artillery pieces and atomic bombs. This is really a case of changing the subject of the discussion. I know of people who own legal machine guns. They are not the problem. My point is, other than something like hand grenades, which are a threat to public safety, exactly what type of small are someone owns is not the business of government. Rather, government is supposed to protect our rights. Government is supposed to apprehend, convict and punish the criminal element - not attack our rights.

If a semi-automatic AR-15, or a semi-automatic AK-47 is an “assault weapon”, maybe next year the m1 carbine, or even the m1 rifle may qualify. Do we really want to let our politicians decide what type of weapon we can own. And do we really want them to know who owns what?

There have been incidents right here in the US, in New Jersey and California where certain firearms were blacklisted. The state passed laws requiring that they be registered. A few years later, they were outlawed. The owners now had to turn them in to the politicians. That is really the only reason for registering firearms. Eventual confiscation.

That’s what history teaches. The Twentieth Century was the most bloody in history. More people died in wars than in any other century in recorded history. And four times the number of people killed in wars were killed by their own governments!

Politicians are not to be trusted. That’s why the Founders gave us the Second Amendment. In our system, government is supposed to be our servant, not our master. If you think that we need some sensible gun control laws, take a look at the federal agencies that have been arming themselves over the last ten or fifteen years. Take a look at the DVD called Freedom to Fascism that is circulating. If you put it all together, it is a frightening picture. For this reason, I am opposed to any attempt of politicians to “control” firearms. They are supposed to use the laws against the criminals, not us.

A SWAT team kicking in someone’s door, and abusing the people inside (who are presumed to be innocent, and many times, are) is not my idea of law enforcement. It is terrorism.

Everybody saw the picture of the Cuban boy, with a thug in black pointing a submachine gun in his face. I think we need some type of controls to reign in abuses like that.

abu kamoon

 

[vern_humphrey]

The main force behind the opposition to sensible gun ownership laws is the firearm
industry and it is based on greed and is feed on fear.

The main force behind the opposition to anti-gun laws is the knowledge that they do nothing to prevent or reduce crime and they violate the Constitution.

If you were in the Armed Forces, you took an oath to uphold the Constitution. That oath had no escape clause, “except for the parts I don’t like,” and it had no expiration date.

When you see other constitutional rights being violated, as you mentioned in your post, remember, they are only driving through the hole left in the Bill of Rights when the 2nd Amendment was ripped out.

 

[Evan]

If a semi-automatic AR-15, or a semi-automatic AK-47 is an “assault weapon”, maybe next year the m1 carbine, or even the m1 rifle may qualify. Do we really want to let our politicians decide what type of weapon we can own. And do we really want them to know who owns what?

Yes, we do. In the United States it is a govt of the people. We are the govt. To protect ourselves, we need to know. You don’t have an attitude of “assume the best” which is what is taught by the Church. Yours appears to be a conspiricy theory attidute: “They are out to get me”.

There have been incidents right here in the US, in New Jersey and California where certain firearms were blacklisted. The state passed laws requiring that they be registered. A few years later, they were outlawed. The owners now had to turn them in to the politicians. That is really the only reason for registering firearms. Eventual confiscation.

That is not the only reason. There is conviction of criminals, protection of the innocent.

That’s what history teaches. The Twentieth Century was the most bloody in history. More people died in wars than in any other century in recorded history. And four times the number of people killed in wars were killed by their own governments!

However… these were totalitarian regimes. We live in a Christian society. We have a working balance of power and an effective electorate. Most of the deaths in wars were in WWII, not one gvmt attacking it’s own people. Most of the deaths out of war were in the Russian Gulag.

Politicians are not to be trusted.

Then elect politicians you trust. Thats why we have elections.

Remember: a Government of law is only effective when we obey the law. The right to bear arms is not a God given right, it is given by the Government and can and should be regulated by the Government.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Remember: a Government of law is only effective when we obey the law.

And the fundamental law, which superceeds all others, is the Constitution, which says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The right to bear arms is not a God given right, it is given by the Government and can and should be regulated by the Government.

The right to life is a God-given right. And inherent in the right to life is the right to self defense. Therefore the right to bear arms is not given by the government, but merely recognized as pre-existing the government.

 

[Bennie_P]

A SWAT team kicking in someone’s door, and abusing the people inside (who are presumed to be innocent, and many times, are) is not my idea of law enforcement. It is terrorism.

Everybody saw the picture of the Cuban boy, with a thug in black pointing a submachine gun in his face. I think we need some type of controls to reign in abuses like that.

abu kamoon

Your whole argument appears to be driven by fear, fear of the government which you claim gives you the right to bear arms without restrictions.

As Christians we shouldn’t be living in fear, but hope, sorry I don’t place my hope and many other Christians don’t either, in the sword nor the gun, but by the hope of the coming of the Kingdom of God and our resurrection in Christ.

Myself I will leave the dreams or nightmares of Armageddon and Apocalypse to the left behind crowd.
Personally I think we should be more concerned in winning souls then concerned with our attachments to instuments of death or any other worldly attachment.

1Peter 4:13 - 19 But if you partake of the sufferings of Christ, rejoice that, when his glory shall be revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy. If you be reproached for the name of Christ, you shall be blessed: for that which is of the honour, glory and power of God, and that which is his Spirit resteth upon you.

**Oh by the way, we don’t live in Cuba. **

I don’t trust politicians, but I don’t trust armed hooligans hiding out in the northwest waiting for Armageddon, nor the gun manufactors who want to sell me a shotgun on Monday and assualt weapons to homegrown and/or foreign terrorists on Tuesday.

Greed and fear - fear and/ or greed.

I’m 100% pro-life - - supporting sensible gun regulation, for me, is part of that, though not my first concern. Protecting the unborn will always be first on my political agenda - so please don’t brand me a liberal. I’m Catholic.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Your whole argument appears to be driven by fear, fear of the government which you claim gives you the right to bear arms without restrictions.

First of all, the government doesn’t give us the right to bear arms. That right pre-exists government, and is a subset of the right to life.

As Christians we shouldn’t be living in fear, but hope, sorry I don’t place my hope and many other Christians don’t either, in the sword nor the gun, but by the hope of the coming of the Kingdom of God and our resurrection in Christ.

Youi’re mixing metaphors here – our hope is in Salvation. That’s a spiritual matter.

In the temporal world, there is no guarentee that we won’t be victims of automobile accidents, home fires, disease, and crime – We have every right to be apprehensive of those calamities and to take precautions against them.

I don’t trust politicians, but I don’t trust armed hooligans hiding out in the northwest waiting for Armageddon,

Me, neither. That’s why I’m armed.

nor the gun manufactors who want to sell me a shotgun on Monday and assualt weapons to homegrown and/or foreign terrorists on Tuesday.

You seem to have a lot of monsters in your anxiety closet.

I’m 100% pro-life - - supporting sensible gun regulation, for me, is part of that, though not my first concern. Protecting the unborn will always be first on my political agenda - so please don’t brand me a liberal. I’m Catholic.

Then how can you condemn others for asserting their right to life, which includes the right to self-defense?

 

[Bennie_P]

Then how can you condemn others for asserting their right to life, which includes the right to self-defense?

I’m not condeminmg anybody and I don’t oppose gun ownership, I just believe if we live in hope in our faith we shouldn’t fear sensible gun ownership laws.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’m not condeminmg anybody and I don’t oppose gun ownership, I just believe if we live in hope in our faith we shouldn’t fear sensible gun ownership laws.

Just like we shouldn’t fear “sensible abortion laws?”

Think about it – when a right is infringed, there is no such thing as a “sensible” limit to that infringement.

 

[Bennie_P]

Just like we shouldn’t fear “sensible abortion laws?”

Think about it – when a right is infringed, there is no such thing as a “sensible” limit to that infringement.

Funny you to say that, because those that claim thier unrestricted right to thier guns sound just those that claim thier unrestricted right to abortion. When I hear people screaming for thier righs - I always think of the innocent that are the ones that ultimately pay for those rights.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Funny you to say that, because those that claim thier unrestricted right to thier guns sound just those that claim thier unrestricted right to abortion. When I hear people screaming for thier righs - I always think of the innocent that are the ones that ultimately pay for those rights.

Funny you should say that – since abortion “rights” are based on twisting the 14th Amendment:

Amendment XIV

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

(My emphasis)

When you let them play games with the Constitution, that’s what you get.