Gun ownership in this day and age

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sftyvlv1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The only Mass shooting I recall from those days was the U Texas tower incident. That wacko got put down by a cop with a shotgun.
 
Yeah lol those revolvers are probably fun and loud but unwieldy. And that’s a pricey plinking round, by comparison.
 
And yes, they made those Plainfields out of surplus USGI parts, up until the mid-70s. You could have one delivered to your door! (No porch pirates back then either)
 
Last edited:
Vonsalza said:
The second amendment as a tool preventing government tyranny became irrelevant when the modern battle tank became invented.

Where on a Abrams Main Battle Tank can a bunch of middle aged dudes with AR15s shoot to disable it?

Nowhere.
Click to expand...
Just because you are outnumbered and out-gunned by your enemy does not necessary mean you are doomed.

Once upon a time there was a rag-tag army made up of armed citizens with no formal military training who took on and defeated (not once but twice) the most powerful military empire in the world of the day. Perhaps you’ve heard of these little kerfuffles; they were The American Revolutionary War and The War of 1812.

First of all, a bunch of “middle-aged dudes with AR-15s” would not, in their right minds go up against a tank; it would be suicide. Any military strategist will tell you that you don’t go up against the enemy’s best weapons. Rather you seek out the enemy’s weak spots and try to exploit them.

You can’t stop a tank with a rifle but you can kill the people who operate them. You can kill the people who service them. You can blow up fuel supplies. You can blow up ammunition dumps. There is more than one way to make them inoperable.

In a strategic war that’s how you do things. Remember Nazi Germany? At the end of WWII they had lots of tanks and lots of airplanes but no fuel to make them go so they were essentially worthless.
 
In the 60s and 70s, these were all easily available, via dealer. Lethal. Yet nearly no mass shootings.(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
That is indeed the sort ad I recall. And even further back, from the 50s.
 
No I am not saying that. I am simply pointing out Catholic teaching on self defense. If one is being attacked with a deadly threat, one can respond with a means proportional to that.

I find it quite telling that the majority of my posts on this thread are being misrepresented over and over again. I happen to be a life long gun owner, I favor legal ownership of most fire-arms. I happen to think we need stricter gun control laws. That is enough to be demonized on a Catholic forum.
 
prayerrider said:
It’s the psycho suicide-shooter murders that are up today. I
Click to expand...
That’s because most of them are raised in single parents and single parent households are way up today and single parent households are way up because people reject Catholic Church teaching of not having children out of wedlock.

As an example, 26 of 27 of Deadliest Mass Shooters in U.S. History were raised without their biological father.

 
Here is a rough list of what I would propose:
  1. Gun owners require a license, which would require training and yearly background checks,
  2. All gun sales, even private sales, would require the purchaser to provide his license
    note: alternative to 1 & 2 might be mandatory background check for all purchases, even private purchases
  3. Handguns would require special license
  4. Prohibit semi-automatic weapons besides handguns and perhaps shotguns such as a Remington 1100 which as a 3 round capcity limit, allow for special collectors license for antique weapons
  5. Limits on magazine sizes
  6. Not for sure about this, but I think I would prefer no concealed carry license, and they be replaced with an open-carry license.
None of these would keep anyone who feels the need to be armed for self-defense from doing so. None of them would keep me from owning any gun I currently own.
 
Don’t like guns or knives (love to see your kitchen), then don’t buy one! By supporting ineffective and oppressive legislation (which applies only to those who voluntarily comply) you are only assisting pagan Caesar in oppressing the people. Consider: we are a nation whose thought are controlled and programmed by media. both social and commercial. Once you relinquish a freedom which was purchased with blood, it will only be recaptured at an even higher cost in blood.

Question: Did the British Crown reassert authority over American in 1812?

If not, why not? There was precious little structured US government. Oh, but that was that militia.
 
Apply the same to the First Amendment. You cannot cherry pick freedoms to shred. Where to start, and where to stop?

Has anyone ever considered the safe storage of criminals? In my 31 years on the job, I saw incarceration save lives.

Source? And if we are going to use potentially misleading numbers, is that raw numbers or percentage or what?
 
po18guy said:
You cannot cherry pick freedoms to shred.
Click to expand...
Quote me saying we should shred freedoms. I merely responded to assertion about murder rates
po18guy said:
Source?
Click to expand...
deathpenaltyinfo.org

Murder Rates

The Death Penalty Information Center is a non-profit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information about capital punishment.…
deathpenaltyinfo.org deathpenaltyinfo.org

look at bottom chart: murder rate 10.2 around 1980 and about 5 today.
 
I totally agree–its not toxic masculinity, it’s boys raised without a father.
Imagine how much worse it will be for boys raised by chance not just one, but two females.
 
Not fully informed about Canadian laws, but what do you take exception to?
 
The irony that these mass shooters were largely raised by single women? Its not ironic when you think about it. Most of them were bullied. When they go home and tell Mom they were bullied, she doesn’t hear him because she’s juggling so many things. If he had a father, then his father would go down to school and rip the bully a new one. Bullies pick their targets very carefully, since you don’t want blowback, so you pick someone who you know has no support system.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Not fully informed about Canadian laws
Click to expand...
You can start here for a rough idea.

Firearms regulation in Canada - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
tafan2 said:
Gun owners require a license, which would require training and yearly background checks,
Click to expand...
Don’t Like
tafan2 said:
Handguns would require special license
Click to expand...
Don’t Like
tafan2 said:
Prohibit semi-automatic weapons besides handguns and perhaps shotguns such as a Remington 1100 which as a 3 round capcity limit, allow for special collectors license for antique weapons
Click to expand...
Don’t Like
tafan2 said:
Not for sure about this, but I think I would prefer no concealed carry license, and they be replaced with an open-carry license.
Click to expand...
Don’t Like

Really, I don’t see any need for more Restrictions, Licenses, Paperwork, or Red Tape.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top