Guns for self defense - Martin Luther King lady's ad

[po18guy]

I don’t think the catechism mandates that everyone get a gun.

Who on earth said, or even suggested this? You seem to be parsing the sentences like an attorney looking for something hidden in there(?)
The catechism justifies rather than mandate in such a case.

I posted the catechism paragraphs to show that lawful self-defense is 100% in accord with Church teaching. Defense of others equally as much.

 

[Brendan]

Let me see if I can present some evidence. According to this, there were about 760 unintentional deaths (accidents) with guns per year just prior to 2010. .

That statistic includes criminal use of firearms, such as when a gang fires into the house of a rival, but hits a small child instead.

To compare apples to apples, how many of those deaths came from instances of legal carry, which is where the 283 incidents come from.

Part of the problem is that it takes researches quite a bit to sift through the FBI data. Case in point, the last full survey of FBI data happened in 1995 Crime Victimization Survey. That listed 258,460 cases of crime stopped by a privately held firearms. Of course, crime rates were higher then in the US than they are now ( even though firearms sales have increased remarkably)

You are correct in that some of that crime might have been restricted to rape or theft, not murder. But cases of bodily harm alone constitute defense of self. And in most US jurisidicitons, defense of property does not justify discharge of a firearm.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use#National_Crime_Victimization_Survey

But we must add at least some of the 18,000 suicides at the feet of civilian gun ownership.

Why? The persons, by definition, were intent on suicide. If some of them chose asphyxiation via Carbon Monoxide, would that justify the prohibition of autos or deny their role in transpiration?

 

[JonNC]

In post #9 I did explain that in some cases it might be morally necessary for a citizen to procure a gun for the defense of his family or himself. But I also explained that this responsibility is predicated on a reasonable expectation of a threat. For the vast majority of people, the threat posed by having a gun in the house outweighs the imagined threat for which the gun was procured.

For the vast majority of people, having a gun in the home neither poses a threat, real or imagined, nor is necessary to deter a threat. It is estimated that 100 million citizens own firearms in the United States, and both tragic accidents and the necessity for self defense are a fractional amount.
Having a firearm jus in case is prudent

 

[LeafByNiggle]

For the vast majority of people, having a gun in the home neither poses a threat, real or imagined, nor is necessary to deter a threat. It is estimated that 100 million citizens own firearms in the United States, and both tragic accidents and the necessity for self defense are a fractional amount.

Those two fractional amounts are the only ones that enter into the cost/benefit calculation, which is as it should be. If more people die from having guns than from not having guns, it would not be prudent to own one, unless you are in a situation that alters the odds.

 

[JonNC]

Those two fractional amounts are the only ones that enter into the cost/benefit calculation, which is as it should be. If more people die from having guns than from not having guns, it would not be prudent to own one, unless you are in a situation that alters the odds.

If the vast amount of people who own a gun don’t die from that gun, then this too must factor into the analysis. They may;

enjoy target shooting or competition, improving their lives
feel safer having one, particularly females, or those who live in crime prone areas, improving their lives.
collect them, something they enjoy.

 

[Memaw]

In post #9 I did explain that in some cases it might be morally necessary for a citizen to procure a gun for the defense of his family or himself. But I also explained that this responsibility is predicated on a reasonable expectation of a threat. For the vast majority of people, the threat posed by having a gun in the house outweighs the imagined threat for which the gun was procured.

That may not be true. One NEVER knows when something will happen. It was 9 am when a tall, 200 lb man tried to break into my back door first, then my front door. Thank GOD both are old strong doors, (Oak) and he couldn’t get in. I live on a quiet street in a pretty quiet neighborhood, don’t know of anyone ever having any trouble before. I had my 3 yr. old grandson with me that day. Who knows what might have happened if he had gotten in. I had NO reasonable expectation of this threat. Was never afraid to work in my yard while home alone before, but I sure haven’t done it since. Police got him a block away. Something like that scares the tar out of ya!! God Bless, Memaw

 

[2_RollinStoned]

That may be what Thomas Jefferson said, but it is not what the catechism says. My comment was specifically in response to the citation of those paragraphs of the catechism to explain what they meant. It is clear that the catechism makes a distinction between a legitimate authority and a self-appointed vigilante

.Nowhere have I ever espoused or even inferred the idea of vigilantism so I don’t know where you come off with that.

However, in today’s America we Catholics have to pray with our eyes open and the church seeks to speak truth to power on all the moral issues and we face the possibility of reprisals…not to mention possible civil unrest and the more common criminal activity as described below. The dear lady is fortunate that the man didn’t get in her home and had she been armed it may have been resolved much quicker if she announced from out of sight that she was armed.

Frankly you can opt to sit there and be victimized or see your loved ones so done. That is certainly your prerogative but church teaching and the writings of the founding fathers indicate a different view that allows us all to stand ready to defend ourselves, our families, and our freedoms.

But even taking what Jefferson said and considering it for a moment, the comment by Jefferson does not say what you are hoping it says. Saying that “every citizen should be a soldier” could simply mean that every citizen should offer his service in the military by submitting to that lawful authority.

Really? I suggest that you are not as familiar with the writings of the founding fathers as you think. Let’s have a look for some context.
***“For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.”

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

***"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." All 3 are from Thomas Jefferson.

The teaching of the church has already been offered and I have no problems with it at all.

That may not be true. One NEVER knows when something will happen. It was 9 am when a tall, 200 lb man tried to break into my back door first, then my front door. Thank GOD both are old strong doors, (Oak) and he couldn’t get in. I live on a quiet street in a pretty quiet neighborhood, don’t know of anyone ever having any trouble before. I had my 3 yr. old grandson with me that day. Who knows what might have happened if he had gotten in. I had NO reasonable expectation of this threat. Was never afraid to work in my yard while home alone before, but I sure haven’t done it since. Police got him a block away. Something like that scares the tar out of ya!! God Bless, Memaw

May God grant you peace and freedom from all anxiety.

 

[mikekle]

Really? I suggest that you are not as familiar with the writings of the founding fathers as you think. Let’s have a look for some context.
***“For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.”

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

***"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." All 3 are from Thomas Jefferson.

I agree 100%, but the problem is, RECOGNIZING tyranny when it exists. That is imo how our modern govt has sort of gotten around this, they simply make it difficult for people to determine if a govt is tyrannical. All they have to do to convince most people is use the ‘due to national security’ statement, and many folks will just take their side on the matter.

Think about it, if a tyrannical Govt was such, would it actually announce itself to be tyrannical…of course not, it would seek to muddy the water, create controversy, make it harder for people to recognize what they are. That is their best way to ensure a revolution never happens again.

For their to be a revolution, the people would have to agree and recognize tyranny exists, there are far too many people today that have been brainwashed/ conditioned by our modern Govt so they can not even see whats going on.

 

[2_RollinStoned]

I agree 100%, but the problem is, RECOGNIZING tyranny when it exists. That is imo how our modern govt has sort of gotten around this, they simply make it difficult for people to determine if a govt is tyrannical. All they have to do to convince most people is use the ‘due to national security’ statement, and many folks will just take their side on the matter.

Think about it, if a tyrannical Govt was such, would it actually announce itself to be tyrannical…of course not, it would seek to muddy the water, create controversy, make it harder for people to recognize what they are. That is their best way to ensure a revolution never happens again.

For their to be a revolution, the people would have to agree and recognize tyranny exists, there are far too many people today that have been brainwashed/ conditioned by our modern Govt so they can not even see whats going on.

Again, we can turn to the Founding Fathers (and Mothers) for counsel and context

***“I am more and more convinced that man is a dangerous creature and that power, whether vested in many or a few, is ever grasping, and like the grave, cries, ‘Give, give.’” Abigail Adams

---

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” This was first written by Benjamin Franklin for the Pennsylvania Assembly in its [Reply to the Governor](http://frankl(name removed by moderator)apers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=6&page=238a) (11 Nov. 1755)

"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion. " -Thomas Jefferson

“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.” - Thomas Jefferson

“Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best stage, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.” - Thomas Paine

There’s a lot that we should deeply meditate upon here and we are wise to keep these things in mind.

Scripture also informs our thinking and I was reading Jeremiah 9 the other day and was surprised and distressed to see how much verses 1-9 could be applied or our own nation. As Catholics we will definitely have to continue to speak truth to power.

Also,each of us has the right and responsibility for being the first line of defense for ourselves and our families and both the church and the state teach that. Moreover, every nation that has ever fallen to tyranny and even genocide has always had its populace disarmed first,