What's wrong with having background checks for gun ownership?

[starshiptrooper]

If you take that third option without giving widespread access to everyone else, you are claiming a different, but still immoral, position. The position that breaks the golden rule.

The assessment of morality requires consideration to be given to ALL the good and bad consequences. If the balance of consequences for all of widespread gun availability is bad, then it is immoral to act in favour of widespread gun availability. A “me, me, me” focus is not sufficient to evaluate the morality. There is no false dichotomy.

Your objections seem relatively similar so this answer will apply to both. I am only morally responsible for what I do with my weapon. Everyone else is an individual with free will. Given the same opportunities, they are responsible for their choices, I am not.

 

[Rau]

Your objections seem relatively similar so this answer will apply to both. I am only morally responsible for what I do with my weapon. Everyone else is an individual with free will. Given the same opportunities, they are responsible for their choices, I am not.

That response is irrelevant to the point I made. I express no views on what you do with your gun.

 

[starshiptrooper]

That response is irrelevant to the point I made. I express no views on what you do with your gun.

No, you claimed that I had moral responsibility for what other people do with their guns. I do not.

 

[Rau]

No, you claimed that I had moral responsibility for what other people do with their guns. I do not.

I did not. I stated that you have moral responsibility for your actions. The morality of your actions depend on their foreseeable consequences. Advocating for widespread availability of guns is moral only if you judge the foreseeable consequences as more good than harmful. This is an element of the moral theology of the Catholic Church. This does not make you responsible for the actions of others.

I can reference the section of the Catechism where this moral theology is outlined if that’s required.

 

[starshiptrooper]

I did not. I stated that you have moral responsibility for your actions. The morality of your actions depend on their foreseeable consequences. Advocating for widespread availability of guns is moral only if you judge the foreseeable consequences as more good than harmful. This is an element of the moral theology of the Catholic Church. This does not make you responsible for the actions of others.

I cannot predict what another individual will do with his weapon so this is irrelevant. I can only predict what I will do with my weapon. It advances my rational self interest and is therefore moral.

 

[Bradski]

You are getting into a chicken or egg discussion. For atheists** currently living,** they adopted the laws/legal code in place as their primary arbiter of what is deemed moral.

They did? Do you know anyone who might have claimed that? You do realise that people develop a sense of morality waaaay before they have any understanding of legal matters.

Laws are there to tell us what is legally allowed. Or not, as the case may be. They are not directly connected to morality at all. Some may share a common aim, but then my morality has a lot in common with Muslim values and Confuscian values and Christian values.

 

[Rau]

I cannot predict what another individual will do with his weapon so this is irrelevant. I can only predict what I will do with my weapon. It advances my rational self interest and is therefore moral.

Considering no one but yourself is not commendable, nor is it an option. You are asked to form a view about the consequences at large. Your decision to advocate for widespread gun availability is a statement that in your best judgement, the consequences for all are at worst neutral.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I cannot predict what another individual will do with his weapon so this is irrelevant. I can only predict what I will do with my weapon. It advances my rational self interest and is therefore moral.

That is straight out of Ayn Rand. She has no moral authority in a Catholic forum. Your last sentence is a perfect example of the worst of Randian philosophy. Your rational self interest is not sufficient for something to be moral. Which of the saints have been held up for admiration because they were driven by their “rational self interest”? Name one! On the other hand I can name numerous saints whose defining characteristic was that they were primarily concerned with the interests of others. We should strive to be like the saints and not like some avowed atheist whose views are very much at odds with Christianity. It is her twisted philosophy of self interest that lead her to be a strong supporter of abortion on demand. This is not philosophy we should emulate.

 

[BCole]

Background checks do not read what is in a person’s heart.

Even former felons have a right to life, which is the basis for the right of self defense.

 

[LethalMouse]

That is straight out of Ayn Rand. She has no moral authority in a Catholic forum. Your last sentence is a perfect example of the worst of Randian philosophy. Your rational self interest is not sufficient for something to be moral. Which of the saints have been held up for admiration because they were driven by their “rational self interest”? Name one! On the other hand I can name numerous saints whose defining characteristic was that they were primarily concerned with the interests of others. We should strive to be like the saints and not like some avowed atheist whose views are very much at odds with Christianity. It is her twisted philosophy of self interest that lead her to be a strong supporter of abortion on demand. This is not philosophy we should emulate.

Neither should we immate Stalin’s philosophies.

Based on your typical postings you here insult someone and say anything Rand is not worthy of commentary on CAF yet often say things in line with Stalin.

Note with all things there are good and bad, if we say all that Stalin would approve of is bad, then all that you advocate is bad.

So please do not apply that to others. Rand may at tines run to an extreme or make an error, but for sure no more error than Stalin, quite likely a lesser of evils if we compare

 

[Robert_Sock]

I believe that people are far more likely to die from a terrible disease than ever needing a gun to fight off a violent attack. It’s only wisdom that people would be far better off selling their mass of weapons and donating the money to disease research.

 

[LethalMouse]

I believe that people are far more likely to die from a terrible disease than ever needing a gun to fight off a violent attack. It’s only wisdom that people would be far better off selling their mass of weapons and donating the money to disease research.

Yet if we sport and hunt? You will never need that beanie baby or baseball card collection.

You will never NEED the many extra cars you collect.

you will never need a lot of things.

Though I say if you have a bad time financially and are hard up for food, you may just need a gun. I know quite a few families who eat quite well despite lack of funds. Just because you THINK everyone lives in a upper middle class apartment building, doesn’t make it true.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Neither should we immate Stalin’s philosophies.

Based on your typical postings you here insult someone and say anything Rand is not worthy of commentary on CAF yet often say things in line with Stalin.

Note with all things there are good and bad, if we say all that Stalin would approve of is bad, then all that you advocate is bad.

So please do not apply that to others. Rand may at tines run to an extreme or make an error, but for sure no more error than Stalin, quite likely a lesser of evils if we compare

You have misunderstood my posting. I was not saying everything Rand is bad. For all know, Rand may have said some things that are quite good and in line with Catholic teaching. But the specific Rand position cited above was not one of them.

I mentioned Rand’s anti-Christian position merely as a means of countering the claim that her quote was commendable because she said it, as if she were an authority to be followed because of who she is. I definitely was not attacking that bad philosophy of hers just because she said it. I was attacking that philosophy because it was just bad. I hold up the philosophies of the saints as a preferable alternative.

 

[LethalMouse]

You have misunderstood my posting. I was not saying everything Rand is bad. For all know, Rand may have said some things that are quite good and in line with Catholic teaching. But the specific Rand position cited above was not one of them.

I mentioned Rand’s anti-Christian position merely as a means of countering the claim that her quote was commendable because she said it, as if she were an authority to be followed because of who she is. I definitely was not attacking that bad philosophy of hers just because she said it. I was attacking that philosophy because it was just bad. I hold up the philosophies of the saints as a preferable alternative.

Fair enough

I suppose we can all disagree on who’s philosophies better represent those saintly one

Will be a wonderful thing the final days to see what the actual way the City of God with the only truly just ruler looks like

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Fair enough

I suppose we can all disagree on who’s philosophies better represent those saintly one

Will be a wonderful thing the final days to see what the actual way the City of God with the only truly just ruler looks like

Here is what “Saint Rand” said about Christianity:

*Christ, in terms of the Christian philosophy, is the human ideal. He personifies that which men should strive to emulate. Yet, according to the Christian mythology, he died on the cross not for his own sins but for the sins of the nonideal people. In other words, a man of perfect virtue was sacrificed for men who are vicious and who are expected or supposed to accept that sacrifice. If I were a Christian, nothing could make me more indignant than that: the notion of sacrificing the ideal to the nonideal, or virtue to vice. And it is in the name of that symbol that men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their inferiors. That is precisely how the symbolism is used.
*
So, Rand is “indignant” of Christ’'s salvation through his death on a cross.

 

[Mi3hael]

Speaking from the UK, the concept of just being able to go and get a gun with minimal or no checks seems so scary.

If you are of the mindset that the current situation is fine, how do you feel when you see on the news any of the 442 children under 11 who have been killed or injured by guns so far this year. How do you feel about protecting your ‘freedom to own a gun’ when you saw the 64 school shootings in 2015 on the news? I really don’t understand, honestly.

Surely 2 min on Google, looking at the figures for shootings in America would prove to anyone that something is not right - how can anyone argue that more guns are the answer.

Comparing the UK to the USA shows (in the last a direct comparison can be made). Taking into account the population size you still had 30 times more gun deaths than here in the UK.

Without getting into the whole ‘no fly list’ argument - if the government thinks you are to much of a risk to fly on an aeroplane, how can you be judged allowed to own a gun. I really don’t understand

 

[LethalMouse]

Here is what “Saint Rand” said about Christianity:

*Christ, in terms of the Christian philosophy, is the human ideal. He personifies that which men should strive to emulate. Yet, according to the Christian mythology, he died on the cross not for his own sins but for the sins of the nonideal people. In other words, a man of perfect virtue was sacrificed for men who are vicious and who are expected or supposed to accept that sacrifice. If I were a Christian, nothing could make me more indignant than that: the notion of sacrificing the ideal to the nonideal, or virtue to vice. And it is in the name of that symbol that men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their inferiors. That is precisely how the symbolism is used.
*
So, Rand is “indignant” of Christ’'s salvation through his death on a cross.

What did saint Stalin say?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

What did saint Stalin say?

I don’t know. I never used him as a moral authority.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Speaking from the UK, the concept of just being able to go and get a gun with minimal or no checks seems so scary.

If you are of the mindset that the current situation is fine, how do you feel when you see on the news any of the 442 children under 11 who have been killed or injured by guns so far this year. How do you feel about protecting your ‘freedom to own a gun’ when you saw the 64 school shootings in 2015 on the news? I really don’t understand, honestly.

Surely 2 min on Google, looking at the figures for shootings in America would prove to anyone that something is not right - how can anyone argue that more guns are the answer.

Comparing the UK to the USA shows (in the last a direct comparison can be made). Taking into account the population size you still had 30 times more gun deaths than here in the UK.

Without getting into the whole ‘no fly list’ argument - if the government thinks you are to much of a risk to fly on an aeroplane, how can you be judged allowed to own a gun. I really don’t understand

The reason is we would rather indulge our superhero fantasies than trust our safety to professionals who dedicate their whole lives to our safety.

 

[LethalMouse]

I don’t know. I never used him as a moral authority.

A rose by any other name.

Also, fyi I am limitedly familiar with Rand. I am aware of and saw the Atlas Shrugged movie. Never went about reading her works only second hand general idea of the overal political ideas.

The point I am making is that when you attack those for agreeibg with her you destroy your own stance because yours is as much stalin’s as mine would be hers.

So is to say if what I share with her is inherently bad then what you share with Stalin is inherently bad.

And I am sorry to say there is little left to be good with the exception of God since those two both didn’t approve of Him.

Gladly being the most important thing, at least Leaf, you and I agree on the last point