Gun Totting Catholic? Disagree with The Church on Gun Control

[shipwrkd]

From the catechism.

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.66

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

This is the important part, and the fact that Jesus allowed Simon Peter to bring a sword with him to the Garden of Gethsemane. I don’t think he brought it to peel grapes as a sword was used either for combat or defense and was the most advanced weapon of the time. If guns were available, Peter may have carried a Smith and Wesson.
The laws stating that a police officer has no duty to protect and serve were passed to protect the government from frivolous law suites. When my son became a Cop, he took an oath to place himself between danger and any citizen needing protection and he takes that oath seriously.
The Bishops can only give an opinion on gun control and it’s ironic that, in all likelihood, guns gave them the right to that opinion.
So, “Gun Totting Catholic”, keep those guns in good conscience and remember that true gun control is “using both hands”.

 

[The_Wizard]

I am kind of glad we don’t let convicts run around with guns.

First, it should say ex-convicts (by definition a convict is a person still in prison). Yes, we DON’T LET ex-convict run around with guns but they do it anyway.

Operalan said “I also believe that there are certain guns that should be banned as far as private ownership. This is only common sense.”

What criteria would you use to define what firearms we should not own? And using your “common sense” are there certain cars we should not be allowed to own, certain book we can’t read, certain foods we can’t eat or certain believes we can’t hold?

 

[tabycat]

In high school, the pastor of the church that my family belong to had at least one rifle. I grow up around long guns (rifles).

 

[shipwrkd]

So I’m having a hard time with this…
This and the economic lean to the left of the Church in recent times as left me questioning some of our leaders, not Gods instrument on earth, but those who are leading her.

If I believe and abide by the Constitution of The United States, I can disagree with the religious beliefs of it’s leaders and still be a good American. Likewise, if I believe and abide by the religious truths of the Catholic Church, I can disagree with it’s leaders political views and still be a good Catholic.
I own several firearms, one specifically to defend myself, if needed. I see this no differently then Simon Peter owning and carrying a sword. If Jesus didn’t forbid Peter, then I’ll pray for the Bishops who’s opinion on a civil matter seems to differ from the Vatican’s and continue to enjoy my guns with a clear conscience. Ironically, it is probably the firearm that gave them the right to their opinion in the first place.
Seems the hidden question in your post is regarding Church leadership rather then totting a gun. Please don’t judge Catholicism on a minority of it’s leaders, rather pray that one day we’ll all unite in our Faith and beliefs…just my opinion.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

First, it should say ex-convicts (by definition a convict is a person still in prison). Yes, we DON’T LET ex-convict run around with guns but they do it anyway.

Operalan said “I also believe that there are certain guns that should be banned as far as private ownership. This is only common sense.”

What criteria would you use to define what firearms we should not own? And using your “common sense” are there certain cars we should not be allowed to own, certain book we can’t read, certain foods we can’t eat or certain believes we can’t hold?

ibid. the current administration, especially the First Lady.

 

[vera_dicere]

I live in a country with quite strict gun control laws, sure you can get one, and sure criminals can get them and use them. But generally its not easy to get them and our gun crime is quite low.

Of course, we have a good amount of bludgeonings, burnings, stabbings, a couple of murders with a samaurai sword.

People don’t need guns to kill people.

Gun control should be used to stop mornons and maniacs getting them. I’m in the process of getting my gun license. However, if you put down “self defense” in the application form, you won’t get one, not here.

Don’t worry about it. I do think a shot gun probably wasn’t the best bet for your issue.

 

[LilyM]

This is the important part, and the fact that Jesus allowed Simon Peter to bring a sword with him to the Garden of Gethsemane. I don’t think he brought it to peel grapes as a sword was used either for combat or defense and was the most advanced weapon of the time. If guns were available, Peter may have carried a Smith and Wesson.
The laws stating that a police officer has no duty to protect and serve were passed to protect the government from frivolous law suites. When my son became a Cop, he took an oath to place himself between danger and any citizen needing protection and he takes that oath seriously.
The Bishops can only give an opinion on gun control and it’s ironic that, in all likelihood, guns gave them the right to that opinion.
So, “Gun Totting Catholic”, keep those guns in good conscience and remember that true gun control is “using both hands”.

Sure, Jesus allowed Peter to bring a sword, but what did He do and say when Peter used it?

 

[Moore11]

At myt parish a few years ago we had a young priest. This man was well liked, orthodox and is on his way to a great vocation. He loves the outdoors and is very active. He owns several guns and goes shooting with some of us regularly. He also has a fast motorcycle and gets tickets a lot.
I own several guns, I have a CWP and am very educated and trained with firearms.
I have no problem with others owning and using weapons.
But we Americans need to understand that our gun culture is not understood by other western countries.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Sure, Jesus allowed Peter to bring a sword, but what did He do and say when Peter used it?

Jesus told Peter to put his sword back into his sheath, not to throw it away and never use it again.

 

[Moore11]

Sure, Jesus allowed Peter to bring a sword, but what did He do and say when Peter used it?

Yeah yeah, it took longer than I thought for someone to bring that up. Didn’t Jesus say something else about swords?

 

[LilyM]

Yeah yeah, it took longer than I thought for someone to bring that up. Didn’t Jesus say something else about swords?

What, ‘he who lives by the sword shall die by it’? Not terribly approving or consoling for those who own weapons for self-preservation.

I’d love to see some statistics as to how many instances of violent crime are prevented because private citizens (as opposed to law enforcement or military) employ weapons, as opposed to the number of instances where a citizens own weapons are either stolen (and thus almost certainly used in the commission of other violent crimes), or end up being used by household members against each other in domestic incidents, or injure those same householders in accidents or otherwise.

 

[reconman]

How can the Bishop who made the above statement say that the police and military should be the only ones to have guns?

Because most of the Bishops are liberals.

This and the economic lean to the left of the Church in recent times as left me questioning some of our leaders, not Gods instrument on earth, but those who are leading her.

I pay zero attention to the USCCB on political issues.

They are enthusiastic supporters of illegal immigration, they were all in favor of obamacare until the contraception issue arose, and most of them are fans of a punishing, unjust income tax system, in addition to gun control.

The USCCB is big on government control and holds a rather dim view of personal liberty.

 

[benjohnson]

Yeah yeah, it took longer than I thought for someone to bring that up. Didn’t Jesus say something else about swords?

Luke 22:36

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

 

[LilyM]

Luke 22:36

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

OK - so it’s fine to buy them but heaven forbid you use them. He indicated His horror of violence to Simon the Zealot as well as Simon Peter, so it wasn’t a one-off thing of His disliking it on that one occasion.

By the way, He told them to buy swords knowing that He was imminently to be arrested with extreme prejudice by the Romans, and His Apostles would have their lives directly threatened in similar fashion - and in fact would all but one die as martyrs.

When I have such a likely threat of imminent martyrdom hanging over my head, I might consider buying a gun - but never using it

 

[reconman]

The Bishops should stick to Faith and morals. If they need to make political statements how about statements encouraging liberty.

lol. slim chance of that my friend.

 

[bearer]

To clear up a common misunderstanding, let me first say that when Christ told His disciple to sell his cloak and buy a sword, he was speaking metaphorically, alluding to the need to arm oneself for the fight for one’s soul in the face of evil. That’s why Christ said, “It is enough”, when the disciples misunderstood Him and said that there are two swords there. ‘It is enough’ in conversation today would be something like ‘that’s enough’.

Now, am a faithful Catholic, loyal to the Magisterium, loyal to the U.S. Constitution, and frankly very pro-gun. Faith and arms are not mutually exclusive, and the Church does not teach that they are. As the Church teaches in the CCC, we are obligated to protect and defend the lives of those under our care, including ourselves. I know some people seem to think that the Fifth Commandment (“Thou shall not kill”; in Hebrew: ‘lo teer tsakh’) prohibits deadly force, but the Commandment in fact refers to murder and manslaughter, not justifiable homicide.

If you are a responsible, law-abiding adult who is of sound body and mind, I say arm yourself. The criminals, from street thugs to international terrorists, will whether you do or not. Don’t let them get the upper hand.

Besides defensive uses, guns are useful for hunting and pest control, quite sporting in competitive settings, and just plain fun to shoot.

Regarding crime and gun control, one thing to consider is that in the U.S., there are over 80 million gun owners who own an estimated 250 million guns between them. The BATFE could spend the next century confiscating them and they won’t even get the half of it. Criminals will always buy, steal, or manufacture guns illegally, no matter how much gun control is on the books. Last time I checked there was something like 20,000 federal, state, and local laws in the country relating to firearms, and we see how well they’ve worked.

 

[bearer]

I’d love to see some statistics as to how many instances of violent crime are prevented because private citizens (as opposed to law enforcement or military) employ weapons, as opposed to the number of instances where a citizens own weapons are either stolen (and thus almost certainly used in the commission of other violent crimes), or end up being used by household members against each other in domestic incidents, or injure those same householders in accidents or otherwise.

Gary Keck, who has extensively researched the use of firearms in the U.S., estimated that there are upwards of 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms per year. The overwhelming majority of the time, simply brandishing a weapon is enough to prevent a deadly attack by a criminal assailant. The reason that there are only estimates is that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies simply don’t track lawful use–they only record criminal use.

On the other hand, for both children and adults, there is a greater chance of accidentally falling in the home and dying than of being shot and killed. Not to mention that most of the gun deaths in this country are from suicide, not murder or accidental shootings.

 

[Just_Thomas]

Two weeks ago sitting on a porch on a wonderful afternoon enjoying the company of my God Son, I sat and listened to this wonderful 27 year old tell me of those whose lives he ended while stationed in Afghanistan. Not a tear, not a stutter, he just spoke of the whole situation of that day.

His weapon has a purpose, and it was used for that purpose.

Gun totting Catholics, why? If you think you need a gun for personal protection, then it may be time to pray and re evaluate your decisions that make you feel that you can kill or be killed, after all thats what guns are for.

 

[corsair]

I hope some of you are not offended but I am licensed to carry concealed and I do.

 

[reconman]

His weapon has a purpose, and it was used for that purpose.

Are you implying that is a bad thing?

Gun totting Catholics, why? If you think you need a gun for personal protection, then it may be time to pray and re evaluate your decisions that make you feel that you can kill or be killed, after all thats what guns are for.

Would I simply then allow anyone to abuse me in any manner, since guns are bad?

How about the cops? Do they need guns?