What you going to do about those guns?

Status
Not open for further replies.
We all want peace and security. We differ radically on how to achieve it.
Q: Do either one of you have any training or experience in criminology, legal justice, psychology/psychiatry?
Q: Has either of you dealt routinely with career criminals or the mentally ill?

As an addendum: Would either or both of you prefer that murderers and the suicidal find an alternative method of carrying out their mayhem?
 
Last edited:
po18guy said:
As an addendum: Would either or both of you prefer that murderers and the suicidal find an alternative method of carrying out their mayhem?
Click to expand...
Yes. Definitely. Absolutely! (nod to GF fans). Studies show that when the suicidal try other means of ending their life they are much more likely to fail, and therefore have more of a chance of getting the help they need. As for the homicidal, studies also show that more guns leads to more homicides.
 
Are you not thinking wishfully? If there was such a simplistic answer, it would have been taken decades ago. It would have a track record. It would be proven to work.

There is no such simplistic answer.

“Pass more laws!!!”

How is that not irrational?
 
po18guy said:
Are you not thinking wishfully?
Click to expand...
Yes. I wish there were no 2nd amendment.
If there was such a simplistic answer, it would have been taken decades ago.
Click to expand...
Given the power of the forces that support gun rights, nothing is every simple. They oppose the simple solution.
It would have a track record. It would be proven to work.
Click to expand...
The correlation between guns and gun violence has been proven.
“Pass more laws!!!”
Click to expand...
We have lots and lots of ineffective gun laws. The 2nd amendment, as it has been interpreted recently, prevents any effective gun laws. Here’s what Bishop Robert Barron had to say just today:


So if you think calling for effective gun restrictions is insanity, then you are calling a large proportion of the bishops insane.
 
Last edited:
For those reading, what I object to is radical “progressive” (leftist) ideas and ideologues who desire by force to restrict or remove the freedom of peaceful Americans. Peaceful Americans. Did you read that? The peaceful. There is an ulterior, an evil motive. A malevolent spirit at work.

As we see, this is accomplished via lies, deception and subterfuge. Ideologues driven by fierce emotion and woefully insufficient cognition, but all-consuming inner desire to force others into conformity. What form of aberrant psychology is that?

In the US, a mental health crisis, a criminal crisis, and a cultural crisis have been brewing for decades and little to nothing was done. Now the only solution proposed is massively expanded government power and control? AYKM?

I will be dead soon, but those who live on must realize that we are closer than ever to the apocalypse, as it is written. Radical “progressive” (there’s a lie!) politics have brought us to the point of destruction and now promise that if we just surrender our freedom, everything will be OK. Garden of Eden 2.0

What a bald-faced lie.

Fix the crime. Fix the mental health crisis.
 
po18guy said:
For those reading, what I object to is radical “progressive” (leftist) ideas and ideologues who desire by force to restrict or remove the freedom of peaceful Americans. Peaceful Americans. Did you read that? The peaceful.
Click to expand...
Almost all the perpetrators of the recent mass shootings were, according to the standards imposed by the 2nd amendment, peaceful. Do you object to restricting the freedom of the suspected shooter in the Highland Park incident? The Uvalde incident? The Buffalo incident? The vast majority of these murderers were peaceful enough to prevent anyone taking away their guns. It is a fallacy to presume that people who are peaceful today will remain peaceful tomorrow. We have seen that contradicted time and time again.
As we see, this is accomplished via lies, deception and subterfuge. Ideologues driven by fierce emotion and woefully insufficient cognition, but all-consuming inner desire to force others into conformity. What form of aberrant psychology is that?
Click to expand...
You are not talking about Bishop Barron, are you?
In the US, a mental health crisis, a criminal crisis, and a cultural crisis have been brewing for decades and little to nothing was done.
Click to expand...
Other nations also have worse mental health problems, but without the level of gun violence we have. And whenever someone says “solve the mental health crisis” they never say exactly how they propose to do that.
I will be dead soon, but those who live on must realize that we are closer than ever to the apocalypse, as it is written.
Click to expand...
If that is so, more guns will only accelerate the apocalypse, not prevent it.
Radical “progressive” (there’s a lie!) politics have brought us to the point of destruction…
Click to expand...
If we are at the point of destruction (and I’m not convinced we are), the far right politics have had at least a big a part to getting us there.
and now promise that if we just surrender our freedom…
Click to expand...
With fewer guns ordinary people can hope for more freedom. Having a gun is not all there is to freedom.
 
Last edited:
Anyone, US citizen or foreign national, retains the freedom and ability to seek a more acceptable nation to live in. If one of the greatest documents relating to human liberty is somehow offensive to them; if it violates the conscience of the objector, that person from conscience should/must seek a more acceptable nation to live in.

Laws are subject to change. Rights, have their genesis in God, and impose upon the recipient the responsibility to act in a legal and morally acceptable manner. Laws must defend those rights or they are unjust laws. A system of courts is provided to determine justice for those who violate the God-given rights of others. It is when those courts fail that freedom is threatened.

The solution is judicial reform for those willing to remain in the USA, and expatriate status for those who believe otherwise.
 
Canada is right next door. England just across the pond. Australia further away. All English-speaking and those who harbor a potentially unhealthy hatred for the US are well advised to relocate for their own good and for the good of fellow citizens. .
 
po18guy said:
A system of courts is provided to determine justice for those who violate the God-given rights of others. It is when those courts fail that freedom is threatened.
Click to expand...
" Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves." - Romans 13.

If the authority bans AR-15s, that authority, being established by God, is to be obeyed. God did not carve out a special exemption for AR-15s, indeed for any weapon. So calling gun rights “God-given” rights is not Catholic.
po18guy said:
Interesting since the current majority party in the US enacted anti-gun laws post-bellum specifically to prevent blacks from possessing weapons and defending themselves from the Ku Klux Klan.
Click to expand...
Also interesting is that the 2nd amendment itself was placed in the US Constitution to ensure that slave owners could quickly crush any slave rebellion or resistance from those whom they had enslaved, which was a distinct fear, since slaves outnumbered free people by 2 : 1, and slave uprisings had already occurred.

Notice, if anyone is following this thread, that although I have cited numerous Catholic sources for support of gun control, po18guy has only cited right-wing secular sources and has not attempted to address any of my Catholic sources. This is a Catholic forum, right?
 
Hate to write so much, but I must address the logical, theological and factual errors in “opposing” posts here. Everyone wants a decrease in violence - except radicals who use the violence and bloodshed to further their political goals. That is so obvious that it is beyond denial. Was under Clinton, was under Obama, is under Biden. Only one side of the political spectrum is so heartless as to desire bloodshed for their personal benefit.
  1. Remove qualified immunity from firearm manufacturers and they will no longer exist. “Fine”, you say with delight. OK, but they make the US military’s and police weapons and systems. What then? We beg the Taliban to sell our own weapons back to us? We beg the Chinese Communist Party or Vladimir Putin to arm our military and police? AYKM?
Simplistic answers are not answers. They are dangerous fantasy.
  1. So-called gun laws are contributing to crime. Crime has continuously increased since the horribly misguided and simplistic idea of “gun control” appeared. Yet, cultural and societal responsibility has decreased. A recipe for destruction of both life and freedom.
  2. Guns are certainly used for evil, as are your car, knives, blunt objects, fertilizer and keyboards. Does anyone ask why suicide and homicide are the choices of so many? NO! It is not because they are easy. They have always been “easy” but no one chose them. Look a little deeper. Give it some thought.
  3. Is prevention better than cure? Not to the radical, as prevention stands in the way of social makeover. If violent crime drops, laws oppressing the population will not be needed. A civil society blocks the radical reformer.
  4. Hatred is self-consuming. Hatred of inanimate objects is irrational and may indicate a need for psychological help. Fear indicates a lack of faith. Choose one.
  5. The designed-in responsible possession and use of arms in America have created and sustained the greatest nation in human history. Radicals are trying to destroy that.
  6. 100 years ago, kids took their rifles to school, as they hunted on the way home for food. No one was shot. What has changed? Is that not the area we should focus on? Should we not pause even one minute to consider what has changed?
Again, simplistic buzz phrases are not solutions. Good requires hard work. Evil is easy. Passing unjust and harmful laws is easy.
  1. There were no Todd Beamers in Highland park. No heroes. Why? Unjust gun laws disarmed any heroes. Unjust gun laws made sure that the deranged killer had free reign. “Gun control” helped Robert Crimo to kill.
“Oh, but we don’t need guns! We can call 911!”

Nonsense! The police were already there and neither prevented, stopped nor captured the killer at the scene. Only 8 hours later (after he could have killed scores more) did they locate him. The police failed by timidity, by de-funding, by media character assassination, by fear of punishment for doing their job.

Point: Federal court decisions made it clear decades ago that the police bear no responsibility for your life or safety. What now?

Disarming those who could have stopped this is the answer? Once again, AYKM?

Simplistic ideas and buzz-phrases kill. They did in Highland Park.

Suggested sources: On Liberty by John Stuart Mill. More Guns Less Crime by Prof. Gary Kleck. The research of John Lott. The Proper Role of Government in a Free Society by Prof. Walter Williams. Section 2265 and following in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

It is so much easier to scream “ban all guns!”

Impossible. Unrealistic. Dangerous. Simplistic.

In return, I am not looking for arrogance, condescension or snippy replies. I much prefer careful thought.
 
Last edited:
Simply put, neither Salvador Ramos nor Robert Crimo should have been in possession of any type of weapon. The conundrum is: how to vet them before the sale or possession without simultaneously trampling on the rights of psychologically stable Americans?

Please, let’s stop this nonsense of throwing out long held guarantees of liberty for for the sake of childish revenge or fear-driven power grabs. Find another nation to live in! Violent, repeat felons and the mentally unstable must be controlled - guns or not!

I worked the mean streets among the mentally ill and crazed meth and crack heads for 29 of my 31 years carrying badge and gun. I dealt with them face to face. I carry surgical scars because of it. I am no hero - I knew all of this when I signed up. However, I saw what works and what fails. I know that incarceration saves lives and ultimately is compassionate, despite how it appears at first.

The violent offenders must be segregated from society for their good and for society’s good. The exact same with those suffering from mental illness. So-called “mainstreaming” of such individuals for the sake of cost cutting is an utter and tragic failure.

The constitution has not failed. The legal and mental health systems have failed us. We must not make the “cure” worse than the disease. Fix those broken systems. First.

If one simply hates or fears a certain type of weapon, the American Psychiatric Association is a valuable reference for help. We must act soberly and earnestly, taking responsibility for those in our lives who are exhibiting danger signals. Every single tragedy of this type could have been prevented if only one person had reported their concerns about the offender, and if meaningful action had been taken.

No one did.
 
po18guy said:
Simply put, neither Salvador Ramos nor Robert Crimo should have been in possession of any type of weapon. The conundrum is: how to vet them before the sale or possession without simultaneously trampling on the rights of psychologically stable Americans?
Click to expand...
That is indeed the conundrum. There was a way to keep Crimo from having his gun, and that is Illinois’ Red Flag law, which allows family members or law enforcement to quickly get a court order to temporarily take away the weapons pending a further evaluation. But no one in Crimo’s family acted on this option, and law enforcement had no way of knowing he was a risk. There is no way to force family members to report someone, or enforce any punishment for not reporting someone. So we are at the mercy of the good will of family members to report such things. And that is only in states that have red flag laws. Only 19 states have such laws. So please tell us what measures are available for keeping weapons out of the hands of these people before they commit their crimes, and without repealing the 2nd amendment. People do have civil rights, even those that have mental problems. Current law only allows action if someone has committed a crime, or has been committed to a mental institution. That would not apply to Crimo, as he did neither. Please tell us what policy we could enact, consistent with all these requirements.
Violent, repeat felons and the mentally unstable must be controlled - guns or not!
Click to expand...
Most of the mass shootings were not by repeat felons or by people who had been medically certified as mentally unstable. So that policy only scratches the surface of the problem.
The violent offenders must be segregated from society for their good and for society’s good. The exact same with those suffering from mental illness.
Click to expand...
True. But mass shooters were not violent offenders - until they were.
The constitution has not failed. The legal and mental health systems have failed us.
Click to expand...
The legal system has failed because of the limitations imposed by the 2nd amendment. Other nations with much less gun violence are not hampered by such restrictions in their constitutions.
We must act soberly and earnestly, taking responsibility for those in our lives who are exhibiting danger signals.
Click to expand...
Does that mean you would support holding Crimo’s father criminally responsible for signing off his son’s gun permit a few days after he said he wanted to kill himself, and then not reporting on his mental state using the available red flag laws? Crimo’s father says he bears no responsibility and it totally innocent.
Every single tragedy of this type could have been prevented if only one person had reported their concerns about the offender, and if meaningful action had been taken.
No one did.
Click to expand...
That is only true for states with red flag laws, but it would not have prevented the shooting in Uvalde Texas because Texas (like most red states) does not have red flag laws.
 
How little we know about human nature, the establishment of liberty and the price of maintaining it. How quickly we are willing to surrender our liberty because a tiny minority abuse freedom. How unwilling we are to hold violators responsible, because it’s not really their fault. How little thought we give to the unintended consequences of drastic governmental action. How ignorant we are of history - even recent history.

So many pat answers that are utter nonsense.

For those reading, where have progressive ideals ever worked? Ever?
 
Highland Park has strict gun control. Not even the police could stop or catch the killer at the scene. Uvalde? The police administrators chose to let the murderer continue on his rampage. Japan? No doubt. Still neither nation of laws prevented murderers from acting out. In the US, crime is out of control - literally. Time to discern, time to pray, time to ponder if partially or completely disarming in the face of an unprecedented criminal onslaught is prudent.

Don’t like weapons? Perfect. Do not own one, and rid your residence of obvious weapons. But, please do not support politicians and oppressive laws which punish the law-abiding and reward the criminal. That is national suicide.

We already have the laws. Tens of thousands of them nationwide. And in the high-crime cities, they are rarely enforced. What we need is punishment of the violent and treatment of the psychologically unstable BEFORE the next violent event.

Simple solutions fail to have effect and lead to oppression. We all want peace - how to best achieve it is the debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top