Gun Control & the Catholic Church

[melensdad]

You do know Gabriel Possenti isn’t the patron saint of handgunners don’t you?

Yes, he has not been named, however there is a movement to have him be officially named as the Patron Saint of Handgunners. The link in my signature line clearly shows that it is TRYING to get him named as the Patron Saint

,–^----------,--------,-----,-------^–,---------------------
| ||||||||| --------' | O ±--------------------------^----------|------------------
\_,-------, _________________________| / XXXXXX /| /
/ XXXXXX / \ / / XXXXXX /\______( / XXXXXX / / XXXXXX / (________( ------’
Jesus is the author of PEACE and NOT GUNS

I’m going to admit to being totally clueless, but what do all those symbols mean? Is it just jibberish or is there some code there?

As for the fact that Jesus is the author of PEACE to that I will totally agree. And I don’t think anyone else here will dispute that fact either. However, why would someone suggest that guns cannot be part of that peace and calm? Nobody here is advocating there should be offensive use of guns against other people! The main points by the pro-gun side seem to be that the Catechism of the Catholic Church deems it is a “grave duty” to defend your life. That guns are not inherently evil and can be used to bring families together when used in sporting activities (pictures of this were provided). That the Vatican allows for the defensive use of guns by citizens; further the Vatican even allows for the offensive use of guns under a ‘just war’ clause.

 

[Bennie_P]

That is NOT what I’ve stated. It is insulting to imply such. I stated that urban areas in the US have huge populations which are accompanied by high crime rates. This occurs in ANY highly compressed urban population ANYWHERE in the world. Those crime rates are due to social conditions that are the result of compression of large populations. Statistics constantly affirm this no matter what country or urban population is viewed.

I have not rejected gun regulation out-of-hand. The vast majority of sales “outside of the areas where strict hand gun laws exist” are done by those who are already prohibited from purchasing firearms and completed via “straw purchases” (where the buyer is not prohibited from a purchase, but is making it for someone who is). Such purchases are ALREADY illegal. When a legitimate firearms dealer knowingly facilitates such a sale I am all for throwing the book at them, and the perpetrators, with already existing laws and NO plea bargains.

I say again, we don’t need new gun restrictions, we need more money for law enforcement, we need to enforce the laws we already have.

Here in California I have already given up a great deal of convenience to own a gun. We have instant background checks and two week waiting periods for hand gun purchases.

We don’t need “gun registration”, we already fill out a federal form that includes name, address, social security number, as well as serial number identifying the gun purchased (this applies to ALL firearms, in ALL states, not just hand guns) which is defacto registration.

I am not permitted a concealed carry permit (this is not restricted by the state, but instead, by the majority of local urban law enforcement officials who simply refuse to issue them, because the state does not mandate their issue, as such states as Oregon do). So I don’t carry a concealed weapon, as I am a law abiding citizen, unlike the local gang members, who could care less about “gun control”, other than how many hands they use to control the gun. But I do not object to concealed weapons permits and training, which is a second level of defacto registration (because of form requirements), nor do I object to reasonable training requirements for gun ownership and hunter safety. In fact, I have required all of my family to take such training as children, as well as my wife, and my children have done the same with their children.

I have experienced the same requirements listed above in Washington, Arkansas and Kentucky with the only difference being that in AR and KY I did have a concealed carry permit, which I obtained by filing paper work that identified me by name, address, ssn and gun info (again, defacto gun registration) and passed training courses (as well as hunter safety training), all of which I was exempted from by virtue of prior military experience. Never-the-less I took and passed the training because I believe in gun safety.

Thank you, but I can due without the insulting sarcasm.

I do not intend to insult, but the same rhetoric is parroted over and over trying to justify the high rates of crime in the US and I don’t buy into it. The issue of Gun control needs not to be just passing new laws or strict enforcing of those we have,** but a reform of the laws across the board and to be more uniform across the nation.** It is still to easy to do “straw” purchase in many states and that is because the laws are not uniformed. You have admited that you have gone through the process of gaining a concealed weapon permit in two states, why then do you reject the idea that of Handgun registration for all handgun owners? We do it with our automobles? Which is one the false anologies that I heard dozon of times.(Why don’t we outlaw cars, more people die in auto accidents ) And with limitations on how many guns a person can make at a time, this would take the profit motive out such ‘straw purchase’ activities. There are too many Handguns out there that cannot be traced back to original owners or place of purchase. To require registration of all Handguns w/o any grandfather clauses are needed to help slow the flow of unregistrated Handguns. If you are willing to use a gun in self-defense then why don’t you want the police to know you have it?

Real gun control or reform of gun laws will not happen that will protect the gun owner in the long run, if they are not the ones willing to sacrifice convenience and be part of the solution.

I have been told if I want to keep something then I need to be willing to give it up, for the thing I try to hold on to too tight will be the first thing God will take away from me. And if you look into the OT in history of Isreal, he will allow your enemies to do the taking.

 

[Bennie_P]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cceerpp

Come on, can’t you see it it is a Handgun? pretty creative I think.

<>

 

[melensdad]

Come on, can’t you see it it is a Handgun?

Well now that it is pointed out, I can see it. I guess I was trying to look at the characters and not at the whole image.

I’m not sure I understand the point of the image in the context of the thread. Here is a photo of a custom built target pistol. Is this any more or less relevant?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
A simple image of a gun does nothing to further the discussion, at least not that I can tell. The gun is simply an object. In the case of the gun in the photo, its never been pointed at another human, it is designed and built for accurate high speed shooting, and it was purchased with the intent of sharing/showing love. Yup, you read that correctly, LOVE. This is one of the guns that I had built for my wife and gave to her as an anniversary gift many years ago. . . she didn’t shoot me with it, and we are still married (17 years after she received this as a gift) so I think it has actually been something that brought us closer together as we spent many weekends shooting together over many years as family sport.

There is also no doubt that it COULD cause great harm, it throws a bullet that is 45 caliber (just under 1/2") and just a little smaller in diameter than the “evil” and “dreaded” 50 caliber weapons that the politicians are bent on banning despite the fact that NONE has ever been used to commit a crime.

If you are willing to use a gun in self-defense then why don’t you want the police to know you have it?

Because, as has been seen time and time again, all around the world, we may need to protect ourselves from our own governments.

Further, as has been shown time and time again, all around the world, registration of guns is a prelude to confiscation.

Further, even the Vatican’s report on international small arms recognizes that there are times when governments are unjust and may need to be thrown off, and further that there is a legitimate need for small arms for defensive purposes.

 

[Bennie_P]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bennie P

It fooled me at first too.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… He said it (carry concealed) does significantly reduce violent crime (which includes murder), but has the unfortunate side effect of leading to increased murders of friends in emotional situations…

… The gun possession advocates are here to discuss gun control in light of facts and reality, not wishful thinking. What is your purpose?

My purpose? Just enjoying a friendly discussion.

Don’t get too emotional; The post just above implies emotional situations and guns don’t gel too well.

 

[melensdad]

The post just above implies emotional situations and guns don’t gel too well.

Maybe its because the Pro-Gun advocates feel very much like the Pro-Life advocates. Both advocates share a lot of similarities from the lies spread about them to the favoritism of the press shown to their opponents. Personally I’m tied of having to constantly correct people who believe lies as if they are gospel.

 

[Sixtus]

Originally Posted by FightingFat
I think the point is (as is the case with all laws) we are making a societal statement that guns are unacceptable.

Who has the right to dictate what sports I pursue?

I am pro-firearm [never possessed or fired a gun in my life ]
I am also committed pro-life.

I have never killed a living organism with a firearm, nor have the desire to do so. I shoot at paper targets. Why should my sport be unacceptable?

If guns are unacceptable then so to the motor car, gardening tools, knives and all cutting implements including the humble pen-knife.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

The issue of Gun control needs not to be just passing new laws or strict enforcing of those we have,** but a reform of the laws across the board and to be more uniform across the nation.** It is still to easy to do “straw” purchase in many states and that is because the laws are not uniformed.

This is the real question Bennie: are you willing to endorse uniform gun laws across the nation that mirror the laws in place where violent crime is the lowest, even though that would just happen to mirror that places you criticize as being too easy to make straw purchases?

The fact is, you’ve got the facts and missed the obvious conclusion because of your predetermined conclusions that legal gun possession is the problem. The practice in high-crime areas of going to another location to make a straw purchase rather than buying locally and reselling is that is proof positive that high crime location has made it too hard to buy guns legally, so the crooks know they have the upper hand over the law abiding folks if they go get one elsewhere.

You’ve also ignored one thing common among the high-crime areas that happens to be one of the sacred cows of the same political groups that push for gun control: over dependence on socialist-style government welfare programs that are themselves ineffective at getting people on their feet and working again. People who are busy with legitimate work tend not to get into as much trouble. Unlike the conventional wisdom touted by the “gun control” crowd, the old saying “Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop” does have factual legitimacy, as the stats are clear that crime rates follow unemployment rates. There isn’t a good reason we should be paying people to sit around when those running construction and agriculture operations keep having to turn to immigrant labor.

why then do you reject the idea that of Handgun registration for all handgun owners? We do it with our automobles?

Actually, we don’t require registration for all our automobiles, you only have to register one to drive it down the road, just like you only have to register a handgun to carry it in public (in the places that allow that). Its getting rather tiresome to repeatedly have to correct the premises from which you are drawing additional conclusions only for you to just jump to a new set of flawed premises to try to reach the same conclusion - its rather obvious that you are working backwards from what you want to prove and selectively pulling ideas together to try to back that up rather than starting with an objective look at all of the facts available and drawing your conclusions from that.

There are too many Handguns out there that cannot be traced back to original owners or place of purchase. To require registration of all Handguns w/o any grandfather clauses are needed to help slow the flow of unregistrated Handguns.

Why? Do you have any evidence at all that requiring registering handguns in a region reduces violent crime in that region? (That is pretty much a rhetorical question, as we both know the answer is a resounding “NO” and that you posed this just to slide in another repetition of one of the popular gun control mantras.)

 

[Bennie_P]

This is the real question Bennie: are you willing to endorse uniform gun laws across the nation that mirror the laws in place where violent crime is the lowest, even though that would just happen to mirror that places you criticize as being too easy to make straw purchases?

The fact is, you’ve got the facts and missed the obvious conclusion because of your predetermined conclusions that legal gun possession is the problem. The practice in high-crime areas of going to another location to make a straw purchase rather than buying locally and reselling is that is proof positive that high crime location has made it too hard to buy guns legally, so the crooks know they have the upper hand over the law abiding folks if they go get one elsewhere.

You’ve also ignored one thing common among the high-crime areas that happens to be one of the sacred cows of the same political groups that push for gun control: over dependence on socialist-style government welfare programs that are themselves ineffective at getting people on their feet and working again. People who are busy with legitimate work tend not to get into as much trouble. Unlike the conventional wisdom touted by the “gun control” crowd, the old saying “Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop” does have factual legitimacy, as the stats are clear that crime rates follow unemployment rates. There isn’t a good reason we should be paying people to sit around when those running construction and agriculture operations keep having to turn to immigrant labor.

Actually, we don’t require registration for all our automobiles, you only have to register one to drive it down the road, just like you only have to register a handgun to carry it in public (in the places that allow that). Its getting rather tiresome to repeatedly have to correct the premises from which you are drawing additional conclusions only for you to just jump to a new set of flawed premises to try to reach the same conclusion - its rather obvious that you are working backwards from what you want to prove and selectively pulling ideas together to try to back that up rather than starting with an objective look at all of the facts available and drawing your conclusions from that.

Why? Do you have any evidence at all that requiring registering handguns in a region reduces violent crime in that region? (That is pretty much a rhetorical question, as we both know the answer is a resounding “NO” and that you posed this just to slide in another repetition of one of the popular gun control mantras.)

Go ahead hold on tight while you watch it all go away.

 

[Sixtus]

Bennie P posted:

welfare programs that are themselves ineffective at getting people on their feet and working again. People who are busy with legitimate work tend not to get into as much trouble.

the stats are clear that crime rates follow unemployment rates.

There isn’t a good reason we should be paying people to sit around when those running construction and agriculture operations keep having to turn to immigrant labor.

Well said Bennie P I agree with everything you have said.

You are obviously talking about YOUR side of the Pond. I can tell you that it applies equally to MY side too!

Working in the Criminal Justice System I can vouch for what you have said.

A lot of offenders and potential offenders do have real problems why they cannot find work. Parents did not make them go to school so cannot read and write. It is virtually impossible to get a legitimate employment if you cannot read.

Most employers require some sort of reading competency in order to understand Health and Safety requirements. In our litigation culture, someone who cannot read a health and safety notice is a financial liablilty to employers and will not be employed.

Welfare payments should be conditional upon attendences at schooling in order to gain re-gain lost skills geared towards finding sustainable employment.

Gun control does not eradicate poverty or gun crime. Lessons learnt from UK, where there is very tight gun control, gun-crime is increasing exponentially year on year. Which proves legislation does not prevent those criminally minded from obtaining illegal firearms

 

[Man]

It was given that man was to live through his blood and sweat…

Like it or not… man should work.

 

[Bennie_P]

Bennie P posted:

That’s great but I didn’t say it.

 

[Sixtus]

Most humble apologies Benny P.

Should have referenced Ray_Scheel
Senior Member

Thanks for your kind understanding

 

[Bennie_P]

abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=ontv&id=5356601

Stop the Violence: A Search for Solutions

Please watch the video, then comment: the stoy is 30 minutes long so any post about this story before 30 minutes past, well you cheated and didn’t watch the video.

 

[Brendan]

Bennie P
Bennie P:

why then do you reject the idea that of Handgun registration for all handgun owners? We do it with our automobles?

There is no legal requirement for a person to be a licensed driver, or to register a car is the car is used on their own personal property. There are also no legal limits as to what type of car a person may own, from a Chevette to a top fuel dragster, or any use restrictions on their use on personal property.

Would you support any person owning any type of gun without registration, as long as they kept that car on their own property?

 

[melensdad]

abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=ontv&id=5356601

Stop the Violence: A Search for Solutions

Please watch the video, then comment: the stoy is 30 minutes long so any post about this story before 30 minutes past, well you cheated and didn’t watch the video.

I did not watch the video link, but I did watch much of it when it was televised on Chicago’s Channel 7. What a pile of anti-gun garbage it was!!! Yes there was plenty of non-gun discussion, but everything regarding guns was anti-gun rhetoric and emotion based or skewed ‘facts’. It was also lovely to see the Fr Pfleger on TV and not in handcuffs So no thank you, I don’t care to waste the bandwidth on that video.

 

[Bennie_P]

I did not watch the video link, but I did watch much of it when it was televised on Chicago’s Channel 7. What a pile of anti-gun garbage it was!!! Yes there was plenty of non-gun discussion, but everything regarding guns was anti-gun rhetoric and emotion based or skewed ‘facts’. It was also lovely to see the Fr Pfleger on TV and not in handcuffs So no thank you, I don’t care to waste the bandwidth on that video.

Only a small portion was about guns and gun control, most of discussion was about the issues you have raised in previous post.

If your not willing to listen to all of the discussion and only focus on your ‘one’ issue how are the areas of need you pointed out be addressed? You dissmissed it all because of one issue:shrug: listen to it until it gets past the “gun” part, then listen to it until the end and plus the bonus clip.

 

[melensdad]

I agree that only a portion was about gun control. I stated that in my reply! Please go back and re-read it. I clearly did not dismiss it because of ONE issue. But the show was clearly very one sided (the liberal side) on topic discussions.

As for the rest of it, that is irrelevant to THIS thread because they did not discuss it within the context of gun control and the Catholic Church, which is what this thread was supposed to be all about. Yes, I admit that I brought up many of the same points, specifically to point out that violence is not CAUSED by guns. But this thread is about “Gun Control & the Catholic Church” and if we want to even be close to staying on topic then it doesn’t make sense to discuss every possible cause of violence that has nothing to do with guns or Catholics.

 

[RobDH]

Only a small portion was about guns and gun control, most of discussion was about the issues you have raised in previous post.

If your not willing to listen to all of the discussion and only focus on your ‘one’ issue how are the areas of need you pointed out be addressed? You dissmissed it all because of one issue:shrug: listen to it until it gets past the “gun” part, then listen to it until the end and plus the bonus clip.

Alright, I listened to it, including the 15 minute “web extra” portion and after the typical anti-gun rhetoric, it seems to agree with what I and others have pointed out about the issues behind high crime rates.

In the web extra portion in particular I found nothing I didn’t agree with. Basically, they all agreed that the social situation in the urban, inner-city areas is the problem.

So, they agree with me, I agree with them that guns don’t cause the problem. Social issues do. So I see no need for additional gun control. Why do you?