Why is the Catholic Church Anti-gun?

[Brendan]

Libero:

Do pro-gun people not do exactly the same thing?

Completely ignoring statements about accidents because they are apparently “above accidents” due to some precautions they have taken.

That is NOT what I, or any one else said at all. (see my post #127)

Sure there is risk of accident. There is a risk of accident from owning\driving a car, having steak knifes in the kitchen, owning a pool.

But the benefits of those outweigh the risks.

Statistically, one if FAR more likely to use a car to get to your destination safely, or use the pool for a nice cooling swim.

Likewise, one is FAR more likely to sucessfully defend oneself with a firearm than to be hurt by one.

FYI, deaths\injury requiring hospitalization from pools in the US were 12,340 per million households in 2000. Deaths\Injuries from firearms were 30 per million households.

Owning a Pool is FAR more dangerous than owning a firearm. Should the Church take a position against pools. Do you thing the government should outlaw them?

I do not feel that no one should have the right to do something they enjoy. If you like target shooting, then I would simply want people to leave their guns at the shooting range.

Pretty hard for a woman to defend herself from a violent ex-boyfriend if her gun is at a range, isn’t it. Or maybe you feel the woman should NOT be able to defend herself?

…rather allow people to see why I as a single person do not support the use of guns by civillians.

I’ll take that as a ‘yes’, you don’t want a woman to be able to defend herself.

If you don’t want to own a gun or have one in your house, fine. But why do you even care if I do?

 

[Libero]

Owning a Pool is FAR more dangerous than owning a firearm. Should the Church take a position against pools. Do you thing the government should outlaw them?

That is an acient thing people used to marvel over. We need water to survive, yet it can also kill us so easily.

Guns are not an essential requirement, nor, if they are being used for enjoyment must the person have to keep them.

Further more, swimming pools are not designed to kill people.

Pretty hard for a woman to defend herself from a violent ex-boyfriend if her gun is at a range, isn’t it. Or maybe you feel the woman should NOT be able to defend herself?

A gun is not the only way to defend oneself. Do you think that America is the only place where these incidents involving violent boyfriends occur? What about Ireland, the UK etc. We do not have huge cases of deaths involving violent boyfriends on the warpath.

Further more, this woman would be confronted in one room, either she has a gun that can be reached easily in everyroom, or she carries her gun around with her all the time. She could easily be overpowered by the boyfriend before she runs to get her gun, if she is carrying the gun around all the time, then she clearly is not preventing accidents to the best of her potential.

JPII’s would be killer was released this week, the pope was shot numerous times, yet he did not reach for a gun, nor did he subsequently have the asassin executed.

How do you think this woman is going to feel once she has just shot dead her ex boyfriend? As she sees his bleeding body lying on the floor?

 

[Melanie01]

2shelbys:

Probably the vast majority. Mine was. Also, the number of women arming themselves is growing at a far faster rate than that for men.

How terribly sad, where do you live? What is the Government of your country doing if it cannot maintain public safety?

Incompetent? and/or morally corrupt?

 

[Christus_Rex]

Black Jaque:

Kind of ironic for a person from the UK to be telling a person from the US that there’s nothing good about having a gun. Yes I suppose that is true for Britain, there was nothing good about colonists having guns (except for the fact that we brought our guns to your aid twice in the 20th century).

FOR GOD’S SAKE, WOULD YOU AMERICANS GET OFF YOUR PATHETIC HIGH HORSE OVER WWII? I’ve had this issue before with several posters before on here. Just because you helped, yes, HELPED us in World War II, doesn’t mean we have to agree with you all the time! What a pathetic attitude!
Who said NO? HUH?! BRITAIN. While the Nazis overan the entire continent we stood strong, a tiny little island the entire nation united against Nazism. HOW DARE ANYONE DISGRACE THE MEMORY OF THOSE BRITONS WHO FOUGHT IN WWII! America only really bothered to help when they were bombed themselves at Pearl Harbor.
I tell you, every last Briton would have died before Britain became Nazi. We would have carried on to the last man. We would have destroyed the Nazis and their ideologies by ourselves even if it ruined us.

rant over

1. I have no problem with your right to have a gun
2. I do think guns should be strictly regulated and ownly sold to poeple who pass strict checks
3. I support the right to hunt (IMO The ban on fox-hunting here was a way for the Labour townies to let the mostly Conservative countryside know whos in charge :tsktsk: )

 

[wabrams]

Libero:

That is an acient thing people used to marvel over. We need water to survive, yet it can also kill us so easily.

Guns are not an essential requirement, nor, if they are being used for enjoyment must the person have to keep them.

Further more, swimming pools are not designed to kill people.

We’re talking about swimming pools; last time I checked, it was a luxury not a nessecity.

Libero:

A gun is not the only way to defend oneself. Do you think that America is the only place where these incidents involving violent boyfriends occur? What about Ireland, the UK etc. We do not have huge cases of deaths involving violent boyfriends on the warpath.

What do you suggest she use, harsh language?

Libero:

Further more, this woman would be confronted in one room, either she has a gun that can be reached easily in everyroom, or she carries her gun around with her all the time. She could easily be overpowered by the boyfriend before she runs to get her gun, if she is carrying the gun around all the time, then she clearly is not preventing accidents to the best of her potential.

?

Libero:

JPII’s would be killer was released this week, the pope was shot numerous times, yet he did not reach for a gun, nor did he subsequently have the asassin executed.

It’s hard to draw a weapon after you have been shot numerous times. Besides, that’s why the Pope has bodyguards so he doesn’t have to carry a weapon around.

Libero:

How do you think this woman is going to feel once she has just shot dead her ex boyfriend? As she sees his bleeding body lying on the floor?

How do you think she will feel if she has been raped and bludgeoned?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Uk crime

look up London over 539 homicides --see table B.
homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hosb601.pdf
crimereduction.gov.uk/sta_index.htm?fp#Crime

In the about the same period, Detroit had only 361 homicides.
metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=5824

google.com/search?hl=en&q=crime+UK

google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=detroit+homicides+recorded
**
Bottom line, some cities in the UK are just as dangerious as some cities in the USA.
**

Violent crime
Violent crime as measured by the BCS has fallen by 43% since a peak in 1995, an estimated 1.8 million fewer incidents.

46% of all violent incidents reported to the BCS did not result in any injury to the victim. At least 48% of all police recorded violence against the person involved no injury in 2004/05.

Young men, aged 16 to 24, were most at risk of being a victim of violent crime - 14.6% experienced a violent crime of some sort in the year prior to their BCS interview in 2004/05.
**
There were 1,184,702 violent crimes recorded by the police in 2004/05, an increase of 7% since 2003/04. Part of this increase is likely to be due to the continuing impact of changes in recording and more proactive policing to counter violence problems.
**
Police recorded robbery fell by 12% between 2003/04 and 2004/05.

The number of homicides and recorded firearm offences increased in 2004/05, by 1% and 6% respectively.

Detection of crime

There were just over 1.4 million detected crimes in 2004/05. Some other crimes may have had a suspect identified, but not met the definition of detected crime. The number of recorded detections in 2004/05 was up by 2% on 2003/04 figures.

The detection rate in 2004/05 increased by three percentage points to 26%.

The proportion of recorded crimes that were detected through an offender being charged or summoned, cautioned, having an offence taken into consideration, receiving a fixed penalty notice or a formal warning for cannabis possession (‘sanction’ detections), was 21%; 5% of crimes detected were ‘administrative’, that is no further action was taken. The relative weight of sanction and administrative detections varied widely by force.

There was an increase in the proportion of crimes resulting in a sanction detection between 2003/04 and 2004/05, equivalent to a two percentage point increase in the sanction detection rate.

crimereduction.gov.uk/statistics40.htm

Sounds like you have a recording problem to me.

crimereduction.gov.uk/sta_index.htm?fp

met.police.uk/crimestatistics/

It is interresting the games one can play with numbers.

 

[Libero]

We’re talking about swimming pools; last time I checked, it was a luxury not a nessecity.

I know, I wish I had a pool, it would be so good. However I don’t really feel left out, swimming pools aren’t very common here.

What do you suggest she use, harsh language?

She could just run, she may be doing that anyway, even if she had her gun. And what if he had a gun? He could shoot her> I most certainly would not want to take a 50:50 chance of being the one to get the best shot in some bizarre shoot out in my kitchen.

How do you think she will feel if she has been raped and bludgeoned?

Bad, but which is worse? That depends on your own personal perception.

 

[Libero]

It is interresting the games one can play with numbers.

Exactly, you can use statistics for any cause you want. Ultimately they arent that good for proving your point. Here are some I found.

Over 3,500 students were expelled in 1998-99 for bringing guns to school. Of these, 43% were in elementary or junior high school. (U.S. Department of Education. Report on State Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act: School Year 1998-99. October 2000, p. 2.)

ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS/GFSA/

A 1999 survey conducted by the Center for Disease Control found that 4.9% of high school students reported having carried a gun at least once in the last 30 days.

cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/schoolvi.htm

Students carrying guns!! High school students. Does this not sounds alarms for you?

 

[siamesecat]

Well these posts have lent a little credibility to the argument that if all civilians carried guns it could stop that guy on the subway etc. And I’m no fan of John Kerry by the way so don’t shove that in my face just because I’m from MA. Of course there are people here that have guns, but I’ve never seen one in my life. No one I know has a gun, at least not that they’ve ever spoken of My point is, no one here wants guns. I think if anything there new crusade would be to launch ahuge attack on illegal guns. My dad says he feels they have no point here in regular life, but he feels people have the right to have them in case of some kind of disaster or crisis, because when regular law breaks down criminals can do stupid things (releasing criminals in New Orleans for example.) But if there werent any legal guns, illegal guns would be a lot easier to spot, and harder to get. I dont know…maybe its hard for me to understand because around here I’ve never seen a situation besides police related that a gun was put to any good use.

 

[2shelbys]

Libero:

Do pro-gun people not do exactly the same thing?

Not at all. You are saying (wrongly) that guns are bad an have no legitimate purpose. Guns are inanimate objects. They are neither good nor bad. We are not saying that there are not bad things that happen with them. But if you want to ban everything that poses a potential accident threat you will find yourself sitting around in the middle of an awfully big empty space.

Completely ignoring statements about accidents because they are apparently “above accidents” due to some precautions they have taken.

We are not ignoring anything. How many posts have you seen urging education. Education is always the best course of action.

I do not feel that no one should have the right to do something they enjoy. If you like target shooting, then I would simply want people to leave their guns at the shooting range.

What if I shoot in my own yard? The vast majority of gunowners I know do not shoot at an official shooting range. That is called freedom.

I am not entirely sure that I am being arrogant and tyrannical, as I am not trying to impose my beliefs upon the entire world, but rather allow people to see why I as a single person do not support the use of guns by civillians.

Sorry if I have confused you

In this one sentence you have claimed that you are not trying to impose your beliefs on the whole world and have also stated that you do not think we should have the right to do something you disagree with. No wonder I am confused.

 

[2shelbys]

Melanie01:

How terribly sad, where do you live? What is the Government of your country doing if it cannot maintain public safety?

Incompetent? and/or morally corrupt?

That sounds funny coming from an Austrailian. If you look at the crime statistics published by your own government (and ours) you find that in the years since your gun bans went into effect the crime rates in the U.S. has fallen markedly while the crime rates in Austrailia have skyrocketed. No government can protect all of it’s people from crime. It is impossible. Your false sense of security may make you feel good and I pray it is never shattered, but I would rather have a gun and not need it than need one and not have it.

 

[Libero]

Not at all. You are saying (wrongly) that guns are bad an have no legitimate purpose. Guns are inanimate objects. They are neither good nor bad. We are not saying that there are not bad things that happen with them. But if you want to ban everything that poses a potential accident threat you will find yourself sitting around in the middle of an awfully big empty space.

Surely that is opinion though? After all, good and bad is merely a perception of events. Further more, does explicit good ever come from guns?

We are not ignoring anything. How many posts have you seen urging education. Education is always the best course of action.

But that education is not in place, and if it is, one can see that it is not working properly. When concerning an issue as important as guns, surely before guns are legalised, the education about them should be completely effective.

What if I shoot in my own yard? The vast majority of gunowners I know do not shoot at an official shooting range. That is called freedom.

Shooting in your own yard, does that not disturb the neighbours and the wildlife? And surely it cannot help the police. What if an officer hears a gun being fired, and goes to investigate, that is wasting police time. What if a neighbour or passer by hears the gun going off, then calls the police, that too is wasting police time.

In this one sentence you have claimed that you are not trying to impose your beliefs on the whole world and have also stated that you do not think we should have the right to do something you disagree with. No wonder I am confused.

Yes, confusing people is one of my specialities. To be clear, I do not think guns should be open to the pbulic, I do not feel that they are a right, but I would not want to impose my views on others, knowing that I am merely one person, and with that, one who does not (yet ) hold a position of authority.

 

[2shelbys]

Christus Rex:

Just because you helped, yes, HELPED us in World War II

You are correct to be flustered if you feel someone is belittling the courage displayed, and role played, by the British during the war but do not belittle the U.S. role by saying something like that either. Without Lend-Lease and American convoy protection of convoys made up mostly of American-built liberty ships (all of which was in violation of international law before December 1941), and without America’s vast industrial capacity and manpower Britain would never have survived.

 

[2shelbys]

Libero:

Exactly, you can use statistics for any cause you want. Ultimately they arent that good for proving your point. Here are some I found.

Students carrying guns!! High school students. Does this not sounds alarms for you?

An excellent example of your own statement would be to see a breakdown of how many of them had REAL guns. I can not tell you how many times I have heard stories on the news of kids being expelled for having toy guns in school. The school officials always cite that official “no tolerance” nonsense.

 

[2shelbys]

Libero:

She could just run, she may be doing that anyway, even if she had her gun. And what if he had a gun? He could shoot her> I most certainly would not want to take a 50:50 chance of being the one to get the best shot in some bizarre shoot out in my kitchen.

You would rather have NO chance? Interesting.

 

[StinkyyyT]

thistle:

I’m British but it seems an odd question you ask.
Everybody in every country should be anti-gun. There is nothing positive about having a gun. Pretending they are needed for self protection is not a valid argument.
In the UK nobody is allowed guns yet gun related murders and crimes are less in our entire country than a major city in the USA.

I think America should be anti-gun. Everything ive ever heard about them is bad. Hunting- your just killing life with it how is that a sport i can understand if you did it more for food though. and My friend from School’s Dad recently shot a man and killed him and then shot himself. I go to a small school and we all are really close in my class. It affected all of us. It hurt me especially caseu i was the one to find out at school becasue he text-messaged me and told me. And also the man that got shot was a close friend of my family’s. I taught his son ccd for 2 years. To me only bad things come out of the use of guns. If it affected my friends and familly and just all over people that mush then what is the point of them. i Wish our contry was like yours. It would be a whole lot better. God Bless

 

[2shelbys]

Libero:

Surely that is opinion though? After all, good and bad is merely a perception of events. Further more, does explicit good ever come from guns?

My old business partner stopped a rape in progress with his gun. I’ll bet you his neighbor thought that was “explicit good”. I’ll also bet that she would have some unpleasant words for you if you said it was not.

But that education is not in place, and if it is, one can see that it is not working properly. When concerning an issue as important as guns, surely before guns are legalised, the education about them should be completely effective.

That education was in place in decades past when crime was nowhere near the problem it is now.

Shooting in your own yard, does that not disturb the neighbours and the wildlife? And surely it cannot help the police. What if an officer hears a gun being fired, and goes to investigate, that is wasting police time. What if a neighbour or passer by hears the gun going off, then calls the police, that too is wasting police time.

No it does not bother anyone and no, the poilice take no notice of it. In rural (and even suburban to some extent) America hearing gunfire is not uncommon and is no cause for alarm. At a friend’s farm where I used to shoot the sound of gunfire often resulted in one of the neighbors coming over to join us.

Yes, confusing people is one of my specialities. To be clear, I do not think guns should be open to the pbulic, I do not feel that they are a right

Well, I understand. In your country that right of the people is not allowed. In our country it is and is guaranteed in our Constitution.

 

[2shelbys]

StinkyyyT:

I think America should be anti-gun. Everything ive ever heard about them is bad. Hunting- your just killing life with it how is that a sport i can understand if you did it more for food though. and My friend from School’s Dad recently shot a man and killed him and then shot himself. I go to a small school and we all are really close in my class. It affected all of us. It hurt me especially caseu i was the one to find out at school becasue he text-messaged me and told me. And also the man that got shot was a close friend of my family’s. I taught his son ccd for 2 years. To me only bad things come out of the use of guns. If it affected my friends and familly and just all over people that mush then what is the point of them. i Wish our contry was like yours. It would be a whole lot better. God Bless

Sorry but you are sadly mis-informed and you are letting emotion rule over logic. Read through the statistics of the effect that gun-control and gun bans have on crime. If everything you have heard about them is bad then you need to listen to someone else. Over 1.4 million crimes are stopped each year by American citizens with guns. If your wishes were granted all of those crimes would have been successful.

 

[StinkyyyT]

2shelbys:

Sorry but you are sadly mis-informed and you are letting emotion rule over logic. Read through the statistics of the effect that gun-control and gun bans have on crime. If everything you have heard about them is bad then you need to listen to someone else. Over 1.4 million crimes are stopped each year by American citizens with guns. If your wishes were granted all of those crimes would have been successful.

Okay so there are pros and cons about guns. I’ve just had bad expiriences like my grandfather dying becasue he got shot too. Your entiltled to your opinon. I’ve only had bad expirences. And I dont think im mis-informed becasue i agree with you to a sense that they can help. Just in my case they never have.

-Katie

 

[Libero]

My old business partner stopped a rape in progress with his gun. I’ll bet you his neighbor thought that was “explicit good”. I’ll also bet that she would have some unpleasant words for you if you said it was not.

It was a good deed, but a deed that could just have easily have been acheived without a gun, couldn’t your colleague just overpower the man?

Also, what if this attacker had some how gotten your colleagues gun, he would have been in a bit of a pickle then. And what if he actually killed the man, he missed and shot the woman? We cannot contemplate the horrible effects of actually destroying life until we do it for ourselves. I remember an interview with an American soldier in Iraq who claimed that he hated the experience, and would never do it again his words were, “when you kill someone, you kill a peice of your own soul aswell - I never want to do this again” (I think, note may not be 100% accurate)

That education was in place in decades past when crime was nowhere near the problem it is now.

Yet the irresponsible use of guns continues.

No it does not bother anyone and no, the poilice take no notice of it. In rural (and even suburban to some extent) America hearing gunfire is not uncommon and is no cause for alarm. At a friend’s farm where I used to shoot the sound of gunfire often resulted in one of the neighbors coming over to join us.

Wow, the response here would be very very different, which is another reason why introducing this “human right” in England would never work.