Gun Control & the Catholic Church

[Man]

But I agree with you that there is an urgent need to de-escalate the current situation where it seems * what the stats are for firearms per head of population in USA and elsewhere.

I also fail to see how a licence holder should be regarded as mentally sick just because they own a firearm for recreational use. That said, I do not see how citizens in USA justify to themselves such scandalous and prolific possession of firearms. But then again we do not have your scandalously prolific murder rates [thank God] so who am I to say.

I do think there is a relationship between the number of firearms in the population and murder rates. It has long been established in UK that the possession of weapons does de-sensitize citizens attitudes towards the value of human life.*

There are blessings, also, to living on an Island. Also, see Japan…

 

[Ray_Scheel]

BTW, Sir Knight left a couple of zeros out earlier, that should have been per 100,000, not 1000, though admittedly, the homicide rate in the US is still about 3-4 times that of the UK, though the gap is closing rapidly.

That said, I do not see how citizens in USA justify to themselves such scandalous and prolific possession of firearms. But then again we do not have your scandalously prolific murder rates [thank God] so who am I to say.

I’ve found a great number of people in Europe have no concept of the lifestyle conditions of the majority of people possessing legal firearms (which tent to be either rural or travel to rural areas frequently. In particular, a lack of large predators and a lack of large patches of true wilderness extending back several centuries has eradicated the concept of “wild” land from the collective consciousness there.

Not only have I shot a coyote (approx the size of a German Shepherd) in my yard while the rest of the pack was circling through the woods to make another run at my chickens, but the wild hogs here are a menace (often topping 500 lbs) to the point that the coyotes have altered from thier natural pack sizes of 8-12 to groups from 20-80 in areas where the hogs (often tusked on top of being huge) are common for their own protection.

I do think there is a relationship between the number of firearms in the population and murder rates. It has long been established in UK that the possession of weapons does de-sensitize citizens attitudes towards the value of human life.

Do you have an explanation then for why your murder rate is catching up to that of the US despite the long standing and steadily tightening restrictions on legal gun ownership there?

 

[RobDH]

Then thank God I do not live in USA. In UK things are very much different. In our area murder rates are 1 per 60,000.

Just to let you know, your own Home Office reports the following…
homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb1203.pdf
(see page 10, table 1.1)
Homicides per 100,000 population average per year 1999 to 2001
England & Wales 1.61
N. Ireland 2.65
Scotland 2.16
(my math shows then that the UK average is 2.14
USA 5.56 (the US numbers specifically exclude the 9/11 numbers)
Russia 22.05

So, according to the Home Office in the UK, the average homicide (of all kinds) rate difference between the US and the UK is 2.6 to 1.

Though some of the large urban areas in the US have real problems, this certainly isn’t the huge number NATIONAL number some seem to think it is.

 

[Sir_Knight]

In UK among Catholics, possessing firearms on a licence is on a par with being a freemason and sex offender and treated with the same degrees of contempt, suspicion and dishonour.

Legal licence holders even if they do not have a criminal record, are regarded by most UK Catholics as Offenders and not given any positions of trust either in Church or in the work-place.

Just curious how they reconcile all of that with this …

" … the right of legitimate defense 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 … "

(Source: Vatican Website).​

… from the Vatican?

 

[melensdad]

I do think there is a relationship between the number of firearms in the population and murder rates.

Firearm rates are HIGHER in Switzerland than in the US. I believe Firearm rates are also higher in Finland than in the US. Both nations have murder rates.

Firearm rates are higher in some areas of the US than in others. For example the “South” has a higher rate of gun ownership than the “NorthEast” but the NorthEast has higher rates of murder.

 

[melensdad]

Clearly I did not have my morning caffeine jolt prior to my prior post.

What I wanted to say was the Switzerland & Finland have HIGHER OWNERSHIP rates of firearms per household than the US. Both also have LOWER murder rates than the US.

Clearly there is no direct relationship between the % of homes with firearms and the murder rate.

 

[Man]

Just curious how they reconcile all of that with this … … from the Vatican?

It’s a balance of risk. Which one is prudent? As implied by “This right can become a serious duty.” Thus, if you are more likely to get killed by friendly fire in the UK because someone has taken up arm, then the protection you have added, then they… may have done wrong.

 

[Man]

Clearly I did not have my morning caffeine jolt prior to my prior post.

What I wanted to say was the Switzerland & Finland have HIGHER OWNERSHIP rates of firearms per household than the US. Both also have LOWER murder rates than the US.

Clearly there is no direct relationship between the % of homes with firearms and the murder rate.

Required military service = respect for the responsibility of gun ownership

Respect and responsibility are not taught or required in the US.

 

[Sixtus]

Re: tight control of firearms certificates in UK.

Ray Scheel posted:

Do you have an explanation then for why your murder rate is catching up to that of the US despite the long standing and steadily tightening restrictions on legal gun ownership there?

Yes, in short, there are more and more gangsters carrying illegal guns.

In UK in my experience, the vast majority of firearm certificate holders are safety conscious sensible people who are level headed and inclinded to exercise great discretion under provocation. It is most unfortunate that it is these who are so tightly policed.

The problem with gun crimes is entirely due to illegal guns for which there is no record or police surveillance

Unfortunately illegal guns are

 

[melensdad]

Re: tight control of firearms certificates in UK.

Ray Scheel posted:

Do you have an explanation then for why your murder rate is catching up to that of the US despite the long standing and steadily tightening restrictions on legal gun ownership there?

Well I’ve been doing some digging into crime & violence in America. Just like your situation, we have “gangsters” who are carrying guns. Ours are apparently inner-city gangsters.

As a % most of the violent crime occurs in our cities. Our cities have violent crime rates that double, triple+ the national violent crime rates. Further, violent crime is (murder, etc) is nearly non-existent in rural areas.

Further, most of the violent crime in the cities occurs in minority areas of the cities. Minority areas of the cities have the highest rates of crime AND the highest rates of single parent families AND the highest rates of fatherless children AND the highest rates of poverty AND the highest rates of unemployment AND the highest rates of “gang” membership.

Further, most of the violent crime is minority-on-minority crime.

Clearly we need to ban urban dwelling minorities from having guns?

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I rearranged your paragraphs a bit to keep related issues together as I replied:

Yes, in short, there are more and more gangsters carrying illegal guns.
…
The problem with gun crimes is entirely due to illegal guns for which there is no record or police surveillance

From this, it sounds like you are admitting that simply keeping citizens from owning firearms was not in and of itself capable of preventing the attitudes from becoming desensitized towards the value of human life. If I recall correctly, there has been a problem with knife attacks over there for quite some time, which may have accelerated the move to firearms when not addressed aggressively as knifing someone is much more “personal” than pulling a trigger. At this point, it appears the desensitization has already taken root.

It also seems to admit that tight gun restrictions are not capable of keeping the criminal element from obtaining firearms fairly easily even with the benefit of geographic isolation on enforcement of imported weapons. That being said, machine tools are rapidly reaching the point where a “homemade” but effective and reliable revolver or even a simple automatic would be fairly straightforward for a skilled machinist.

In UK in my experience, the vast majority of firearm certificate holders are safety conscious sensible people who are level headed and inclinded to exercise great discretion under provocation. It is most unfortunate that it is these who are so tightly policed

~Indeed, that is unfortunate. Does it make sense to you to spend such an inordinate amount of resource policing those individuals who are perhaps more trustworthy in their possession of firearms than the typical bobby when it appears doing so is clearly not preventing the organized criminal elements from obtaining and using fireams anyway? Does it make any sense to you to continue to increase the difficulty for people to own guns legally when doing so has been accompanied there by a steady increase in gun crime that cannot be traced back to legally possessed firearms?

 

[FightingFat]

And being pro self defense, they can not be anti-gun either.

Utter nonsense.

 

[melensdad]

Utter nonsense.

Just curious, if faced with an armed attacker, how would a dis-armed citizen defend him/her self? At least here in the US, the police are NOT required/held liable for individual protection, but only for the collective safety of the general populace.

Its a serious question from someone who does believe that the church is basically an anti-gun organization, at least here in the US. The reality is that in many parts of the world bad people have guns. So if the church is pro-self-defense, and if the church is anti-gun, then **how do the two issues reconcile in a real world scenario?

**

 

[Bennie_P]

Just curious, if faced with an armed attacker, how would a dis-armed citizen defend him/her self? At least here in the US, the police are NOT required/held liable for individual protection, but only for the collective safety of the general populace.

Its a serious question from someone who does believe that the church is basically an anti-gun organization, at least here in the US. The reality is that in many parts of the world bad people have guns. So if the church is pro-self-defense, and if the church is anti-gun, then how do the two issues reconcile in a real world scenario?

You worry about yourself too much.
We cannot send our children out armed and they are in more danger from gun violence then grown adults whom (I’m starting to have my doubts) may be able to have the knowledge, skills and emotional maturity to use guns properly. How do we protect the children? Other then try to get the guns off the streets?

… be not conformed to this world: but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good and the acceptable and the perfect will of God.

 

[melensdad]

You worry about yourself too much. . .

No. Clearly you did not choose to answer the questions that I threw out to FightingFat. You chose to change the focus. I think my questions are both valid, and realistic.

I first asked a practical question. Then a theological one. Why not refocus your attention on the questions I ask? The questions do not focus on sending our kids out onto the streets armed, which you seem point your focus toward. The question does not refer to offensive use, concealed carry or anything other than a simple defense question and the first is not even specifically asking about guns, but just about defense in general. Please stay on topic.

• if faced with an armed attacker, how would a dis-armed citizen defend him/her self?
• if the church is pro-self-defense, and if the church is anti-gun, then how do the two issues reconcile in a real world scenario?

 

[Sir_Knight]

Utter nonsense.

Telling someone that they have a right and even a duty to defend themselves but denying them the means to do so is utter nonsense.

 

[melensdad]

Washington is the only one that has as strict and/or restrictive gun laws as compared to Chicago with the “15.6” rate per 100,000. and you just go outside the City the surrounding states have very lax gun laws compared to Washigton and Chicago.

Bennie P, this one sort of slipped past me. But it is completely untrue to suggest that* “you just go outside the City the surrounding states have very lax gun laws compared to Washigton and Chicago.” *

In fact, Illinois is one of the “model states” for restrictive gun laws in the eyes of the Brady Campaign. Wisconsin, as rated by the Brady Campaign is “above average” with a grade of C+. Indiana, which does flank Illinois does have lax gun laws, but that does not seem to explain how the guns from Mississippi seem to end up in Chicago? Last time I checked it was a very long drive to go from Mississippi to Chicago.

Further, if you look at Washington DC, you will notice that Virginia is rated a “C-” by the Brady Campaign, so it is about average for state laws on gun restrictions, but Maryland is a very strict gun law state, bordering on draconian gun legislation.

I think you dramatically overstated things when you said that the areas around the cities have very lax laws.

I’m also still curious about these questions:

• if faced with an armed attacker, how would a dis-armed citizen defend him/her self?
• if the church is pro-self-defense, and if the church is anti-gun, then how do the two issues reconcile in a real world scenario?

 

[Ray_Scheel]

I think you dramatically overstated things when you said that the areas around the cities have very lax laws.

But what else would we expect based on his prior defense of Brady et all and constant emulation of their claims and tactics even while feigning to distance them from himself. He’s reached the point of so many un-retracted, repeated and intentional misrepresentations that we can only presume that he is posting in bad faith until he starts to take a firm stand on something other than wanting additional restrictions on firearm possession by the generally conservative law abiding folks who understand the Constitution, especially while he is steadfastly refusing to comment clearly about why additional restrictions are more important than enforcing the existing gun regulations, enforcement that would just coincidently target populations centered in liberal political strongholds…

I’m fairly confident that the reason Bennie refused to answer whether his idea of sensible gun restrictions would correspond with those areas withhte lowest levels of violence was that he knew then that the claims he was maiking about the reative strengths of gun laws was bogus. It was a poorly accomplished attempt at a snow job of trying to flood out essentially random citations claiming they supported his point hoping no one would notice there wasn’t a case there (though I dunno why he still thinks the gun possession advocates here would not catch and call him on that).

 

[Bennie_P]

Well the people that have to face the death and pick up the children’s bodies are getting frustrated with the gun lobby’s rethoric also. Gun control may not be the solution, but many believe it has to part of it.

“I’ve seen war up close and there is no mistaking what’s going on in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. War zones have a certain look. A certain feel. There’s even a smell to it.” http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/07/23/couricandco/entry3088881.shtml

“After spending several days in Philadelphia, I must admit there are striking similarities.”

*Byron Pitts is National Correspondent for CBS News. *

Many of the people we spoke with blamed the surge in shootings and death on illegal handguns. Commissioner Johnson made this observation: “Illegal guns are a big problem in Philadelphia and across the country. But guns are only a symptom of a deeper sickness.”

By all accounts, Commissioner Johnson is a “cop’s cop.” He started his career as a beat cop and worked his way up the ranks to commissioner. He’s familiar with every kind of crime imaginable. He says the real danger in Philadelphia is the rising unemployment and school drop-out rates, the collapse of families and the growing divide between the haves and the have-nots. “When people are frustrated they get angry, and anger leads to violence. Add in a gun and you a recipe for disaster.”

Commissioner Johnson isn’t alone in that view. We also spent time with Miami Police Chief John Timoney. **Timoney’s the former Philadelphia police commissioner and he started his career in New York. Like a number of police chief’s across the country, Timoney is a harsh critic of the National Rifle Association and the NRA’s influence over the gun lobby in Congress. **He points out the recent rise in the murder rate of police officers across the country. Not only are there more guns on the streets of America; there are more powerful guns. “I faced when I was a young cop somebody with a Saturday night special, probably held together by tape,” he told us. “Now we have these young kids going around with AK-47’s with 30-round clips. They’re spraying a (street) corner.”

I’m fairly confident that the reason Bennie refused to answer whether his idea of sensible gun restrictions would correspond with those areas withhte lowest levels of violence was that he knew then that the claims he was maiking about the reative strengths of gun laws was bogus. It was a poorly accomplished attempt at a snow job of trying to flood out essentially random citations claiming they supported his point hoping no one would notice there wasn’t a case there (though I dunno why he still thinks the gun possession advocates here would not catch and call him on that).

I have answered the question, you just refuse to read it, and apparently unable to understand the truth or evaulauted very basic information. I gave you the links to where you can look up the crime rates of all the major cities in USA and the link which gives you state gun laws and look up the crime rates, look up the gun laws and you will see it isn’t that complicated to figure out yourself. Or you can allow yourself to be spoon feed by the Gun Lobby.

When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. But, when I became a man, I put away the things of a child. 1Co 13:11

http://www.exileimages.co.uk/JimH/Majority/T.JIH.ASI.227.jpg

 

[Bennie_P]

Further, if you look at Washington DC, you will notice that Virginia is rated a “C-” by the Brady Campaign, so it is about average for state laws on gun restrictions, but Maryland is a very strict gun law state, bordering on draconian gun legislation.

WV is less then an hour from DC Rated F, or maybe the got a D -