Opinion about weapons?

Status
Not open for further replies.
EXdrinker said:
No. Using a firearm does not mean that there is intent to kill. The intent can be to stop an attacker. By using a firearm one does accept that death may be a result but it does not have to be, and should not be the intent in most civilian self defense situations.
Click to expand...
I get what you’re saying. Yes, the intent is not to kill, per se. The intent is usually to aim for the center of mass, meaning the chest/torso. Your intent, strictly speaking, is to incapacitate, but by shooting someone in the chest you’re accepting that it’s very likely to be lethal.

What I meant is that no one teaches “shoot to wound”. Sometimes people say “well, I’d use a gun, but only to shoot them in the leg or something.” It’s the quickest way to identify someone who has never fired a gun and is basing their ideas on video games.
 
Jesus could have called upon 12 legions of angels. Using that whip was merciful and the Divine version of reasonable force.
 
Lucy_1 said:
I keep my guns for home defense, but I don’t think I could take another life to save my own, and that’s what they teach in self-defense gun classes. However I could probably take another person’s life to save the lives of my family.
Click to expand...
But, have you considered how it goes with the welfare of your family if you do not take life to defend your own?
I am a responsibly armed, legally carrying citizen, and I know the law surrounding lethal force VERY well in my state, and check for variances in other states when I travel to them. I would use lethal force to protect a total stranger in a case where it was legal to do so, and am well aware of when that is.
And when we get to home + family defense, well, this forum is not the place to declare how far I will take defending home & family…but, let’s say they’re pretty well guarded.

And, as I was saying, I will protect myself by using lethal force not only because it is just, but because I have a wife and LD son whom depend on me being around.
 
Well, my kids are grown. I’m sure my husband and kids would be devastated, but, I at least know and love God. The person I would kill probably doesn’t.
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
What I meant is that no one teaches “shoot to wound”. Sometimes people say “well, I’d use a gun, but only to shoot them in the leg or something.” It’s the quickest way to identify someone who has never fired a gun and is basing their ideas on video games.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I am not saying shoot to wound. Shoot to stop the attacker. Obviously killing is possible and wounding quite likely.
 
Some bishops support gun control, and the USCCB seems to support it. HOWEVER, there have been multiple popes that have said that “proper authorities” using arms in self defense, can be legitimate. What they failed to note, is who those proper authorities are. Personally, I think Catholics can own firearms if they choose (I have a gun in my house), and use them in self defense if necessity dictates that. THAT being said, I think you can be a completely orthodox Catholic and support a complete ban on firearms (although I don’t think that would be wise). I have more than a few knives. Remember, the catechism does talk about legitimate means of self defense.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
Personally, I think Catholics can own firearms if they choose (I have a gun in my house), and use them in self defense
Click to expand...
Of course this sounds as though it could be reasonable. Until the logical extension seems to be the easy and widespread availability of guns as we see in the US. Perhaps it is a kind of paradox where what works for the one becomes problematic for the many. They fall into the wrong hands. They become so commonplace that they are too easily reached for… etc.
 
Last edited:
I have a Sig 365, loaded, in the drawer of my nightstand. I pity the poor soul who comes in uninvited and threatens me or my family. My kids know how to use it too. Go ahead, make my day.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
I have lived seventy one years in the UK, and have felt totally at peace without a gun.
 
Eric_Hyom said:
I have lived seventy one years in the UK, and have felt totally at peace without a gun.
Click to expand...
You have to understand, when guns were readily available to the average person, America was still pretty wild. There were huge, sparsely populated areas, where government or police response would have been slow if it came at all. There were tons of wild animals, hostile native tribes, etc.

It’s not surprising that America developed a bit of a gun culture. During our formative years as a nation, the average person in huge chunks of the country had to be prepared to protect themselves because the government presence was so thin.

I know there are sparsely populated areas of the U.K. too, but at the same time in history the U.K. had long since been “civilized.”
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
If you’re shooting at someone, you’re shooting to kill them. That “I’d just shoot them in the leg” stuff only happens in movies.
Click to expand...
If your aim is that bad, maybe it’s not a good idea to own a gun.

It happens in real life. Not just movies. But shooting someone in the leg can be lethal.
 
Last edited:
Ever had to shoot someone? I have while serving in the military. Yes people get shot in the leg. I’ve never known anyone good enough to purposefully shoot someone in the leg while that person is running or otherwise moving. If you can do it you’ll make Chris Kyle look like a rookie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top