Why is the Catholic Church Anti-gun?

[thistle]

Sir Knight:

First off, nobody is going to get into my house while I’m asleep without me knowing about it. I’ve got a 120 pound Retriever who is an excellent watchdog. I live out in the country and he alerts me to anyone coming near the house with loud barking. Secondly, I have an alarm system where every entry point (including windows) are wired. The alarm system has a battery back-up which automaticlly kicks in, in the event of a power failure.

Anybody comes into my house, I’m going to know about it!

Two points. First off, I do carry at least one firearm on my person in either a pocket or holster. Secondly, I have a loaded firearm with an attached flashlight stored in just about every room of the house …

http://fud-files.netfirms.com/image/private/guns/f128.jpg

… So even if I am not carrying a gun, I have very quick access to one.

As I said, I have a loaded firearm in just about every room in the house. I have small children and I do not consider it to be dangerous in the least bit. Each gun is stored in a V-Line strongbox. It has a combination lock and it is bolted down out of plain sight. Kids can’t get to it but I can have my hands on a loaded firearm in a manner of seconds.

I would venture to say that you are the exception and not the rule, and may I ask is America really such a dangerous place to live and bring up children. Nobody in Europe is that paranoid.

 

[Sir_Knight]

thistle:

I would venture to say that you are the exception and not the rule

I would hope not.

thistle:

and may I ask is America really such a dangerous place to live and bring up children.

According to our own respective government’s statistics, London has nearly a 50% (49.3% to be exact) higher murder rate than Detroit (one of America’s more violent cities).

thistle:

Nobody in Europe is that paranoid.

Given the reality of the matter, maybe they should.

 

[Brendan]

Sir Knight:

I would hope not.

According to our own respective government’s statistics, London has nearly a 50% (49.3% to be exact) higher murder rate than Detroit (one of America’s more violent cities).

Given the reality of the matter, maybe they should.

I’d have to agree, the UK is a far more violent place than the US and the UK only became so when it banned firearms.

Much like Australia over the last several years.

It has a slightly lower murder rate, but incidents of other violent crime (armed robbery, rape, assault requiring hospitalization ect…) that are almost DOUBLE that of the US.

Is there something about the UK that inspires criminals to rape more, or could it be that the would be- rapists there know they won’t get shot by their victim?

 

[thistle]

With regard to murder statistics the UK has an average of 1000 murders annually, and 10% of murders are committed by guns.
With regard to London, the 11 months to November 2005 totalled 158 murders. These are the official numbers released by the Metropolitan Police.
Considering USA has a population 4.5 times the UK then America’s total annual homicides would have to be less than 4500 to be better than the UK murder rate.
Maybe somebody can give me the total murders annually in the USA and what percentage are committed by guns.

 

[Sir_Knight]

You’re missing the point. A 200-pound rapist can kill a 110-pound woman without a gun. A gun in her hands would place her on a level playing field. And the crime stats that you asked for have already been provided in this post.

 

[thistle]

Sir Knight:

You’re missing the point. A 200-pound rapist can kill a 110-pound woman without a gun. A gun in her hands would place her on a level playing field. And the crime stats that you asked for have already been provided in this post.

You are obviously a gun fanatic so it does not matter what I say. I sincerely hope you never have to shoot anyone, especially an innocent party!

 

[Sir_Knight]

So, supporting the Catholic Church’s position that we have a right and even a duty to own guns makes me a “gun fanatic”? And what does it make you when you are in disagreement with official church teaching?

I sincerely hope that you or a loved one never find yourselves in need of a gun when you don’t have one.

 

[Libero]

I’d have to agree, the UK is a far more violent place than the US and the UK only became so when it banned firearms.

Are you implying that the UK has only become violent because it has banned fire arms? What a silly insinuation.

Perhaps the fact that crime in general has risen is something to do with it, I personally believe it to be due to the fact that Britain is now effectively an atheist country, nobody values life anymore, we have no standards, there is a huge lack of love and the sense of a community. In general the UK is not that violent, Crime and violence thrives in all cities, this is a point to remember.

 

[Libero]

First off, nobody is going to get into my house while I’m asleep without me knowing about it. I’ve got a 120 pound Retriever who is an excellent watchdog. I live out in the country and he alerts me to anyone coming near the house with loud barking. Secondly, I have an alarm system where every entry point (including windows) are wired. The alarm system has a battery back-up which automaticlly kicks in, in the event of a power failure.

Anybody comes into my house, I’m going to know about it!

Nobody would come into your house with all those deterrents, unless of course it is one of those lunatics people here are trying to convince me are everywhere (these exist only in your imagination) and then you try to convince me that the UK is more violent than the US - ha

 

[thistle]

Sir Knight:

So, supporting the Catholic Church’s position that we have a right and even a duty to own guns makes me a “gun fanatic”? And what does it make you when you are in disagreement with official church teaching?

I sincerely hope that you or a loved one never find yourselves in need of a gun when you don’t have one.

Anyone who keeps a gun in nearly every room of their house is either a gun fanatic or terrified all the time that someone might break into their house.
As for me only God knows if I will be mugged or murdered but I put my trust in God and do not live my life in fear.

 

[2shelbys]

[Continuation of above]

Comical. And where did you get this from?
When planes from Britain crashed in Ireland (If they did, which was rare), we sent them over the border. When Germans crashed, we locked them up. Both sides tried to tempt us, to no avail. Both sides threatened us, to no avail. The only time a German U-Boat had contact with Ireland was in WWI, when sending arms to the Irish partisans, which failed, as the men sent to retrieve the arms took a wrong turn and drove off a pier (Only in Ireland… But it was in complete darkness), the Aud was later captured, and scuttled…There was absolutely no record, or even suspician of Irish-German collaboration on the scale that you mentioned.

You are right about this. I sometimes throw that rumor out to someone who is Irish to ilicit their response because I have found over the years that what an Irish person thinks of the war seems to depend on how their parents or others around them felt about England. Most of them react as you did but about 3-4 out of ten kind of brag about helping the Germans. There are apparantly rumors floating around Ireland about everything from citizens bartering with German sailors to U-Boats being in port under cover of darkness. In over 30 years of studying the war I have seen no proof of either of these claims yet it is amazing how many people (even in Ireland) still believe them. One embarrasing fact though is that Ireland’s prime minister at the time, Eamon de Valera, was the only government leader to convey official condolences to Germany upon hearing of Hitler’s death.

Though I wonder, what if they had let Poland fall, and gave Germany Luxembourg and the Alsasce-Lorraine provinces - Would they have fought the Soviets? In my opinion, that’s doubtfull, but who knows?

The German-Soviet war would definitely have come because Stalin fully intended to attack Germany in 1942 or 1943. A little-known fact about the war is that Heydrich’s SD had discovered the plan in early 1941. Hitler beat him to the punch. If you look back through translations of the speeches and writings of Hitler and Stalin you find that it was Stalin who was bent on world domination, not Hitler.

They had very little production capability left. They may have discovered how to create an atomic bomb within six months, but to produce a nuclear war head, the rocket, assemble it, ship it over to Germany from Norway, build the strategic bomber, load it on… Their fuel levels were almost depleted. Their turbo-jet fighters were made of very weak alloys, and broke up easily.

They were within a few months of producing a bomb, not just knowing how. They already had the rocket, a larger version of the V2 with sufficient fuel to reach the U.S. in final testing, and they were about to begin production on the flying wing “Amerika Bomber”. They had begun production on a smaller version (the Gotha Go-229) and it was nearing completion when Patton’s third Army captured the facility. Claims of the Me-262 being prone to structural failure are not justified. There were isolated incidents but the most nagging problem was failure of the nose mounted landing gear and engine fires due to fuel leakage. You may be thinking of the problems they had with the He-162 “Volksjäger”. The metal tail section was actually glued on to the wooden fuselage and the failure rate was initially very high.

Germany’s days were numbered, they couldn’t have lasted another month, let alone six.

Hypotheses about the war lasting longer are obviously based on the situation being different. Had Hiler not made some of his more glaring errors the war could easily have lasted longer. Much longer. If Hitler had not insisted that the Me-262 be re-designed to carry bombs it would have entered service nearly a year earlier and in far greater numbers. It would not have been possible for the allies to continue the bombing of Germany on any effective scale. If he had not wasted over 100,000 troops (some of the best they had left) on the Ardennes offensive the defense of Germany would have been more fierce. And most importantly, if he had realized that those who thought that the enemy was reading the enigma codes were right and had ordered the design of a new encoding machine the entire war would have been much different. Most people do not realize the huge contribution made by a small group of people in Bletchley Park. If not for their operation Britian would have been crushed long before the U.S entered the war and long before the Soviets recovered from their initial defeats. It is amazing how the efforts of so few can have such a huge effect on world history. Anyway, all of this war talk is off-topic so we should get back to the subject at hand.

 

[Libero]

All of that can be overcome with proper training.

Never, some people just do not have the psychology to condone killing.

No, but he told us in the CCC that we have a GRAVE duty to protect ourselves from harm.

And that is supposed to be interpreted into a grave duty to own a gun?

No, it is not but in most cases, it is the most effective means of self defense.

It would also be the most effective way to end anothers life.

She won’t be feeling anything if she has no means of self defense and he kills her. She CAN get over seeing his bleeding body lying on the floor but it’ll be much harder for her to get over being dead if he kills her.

Do you not feel that you have overlooked the implications on actually ending anothers life, which is something that is never seen on your pro gun propoganda.

He’s less likely to shoot her if she is shooting at him because he will be seeking cover. Of course, if she doesn’t have a gun, then she’s a sitting duck and there is nothing to prevent him from shooting her.

De humanising this life into just a target or a duck is merely a way to overlook the Sanctity of ALL life, and also takes away the terrible nature of killing.

 

[Libero]

I want them to feed the chickens and sheep that we’ll be slaughtering for our food (and don’t tell me that this is traumatic for kids, I grew up on a farm, and my sister has a farm now, and her children have no discomfort about slaughter-time.)

That is merely your experience though, my grandad also grew up on a farm, his mother killed some ducks one day (for Christmas), and he was mortified, he ate just cabbage and potato for dinner, he has also never eaten duck since, he now has 12 little ducklings in a duck pond in one of his fields. Just be sure you know how your children may react.

 

[2shelbys]

Zerith:

The Maginot Line was build on the French-German border, they sent a request to the Belgians to construct it through their territory, which was denied. This gave insufficient time to construct it along the, longer, French-Belgian border. When Germany declared war on Belgium, they went straight through to France.

Germany never declared war on Belgium. They simply used them as a stepping-stone to France by invading with no warning or declaration.

It was Patton who said quite correctly that “static fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man”. Fortifications like the Maginot Line are always breached or more often avoided completely. The main German assault came through the Ardennes forest (something they later tried to re-create) where no fortification could have been built anyway.

 

[2shelbys]

she_he:

Read your history the polish Military at that time was one of the most powerful in the world,
that is the reason why Germany moved so fast to conquer them when they learned they were not readying themselves

Poland’s army was large in numbers but obsolete. The main reasons that Hitler invaded Poland were twofold and are not generally recognized in “official” accounts of the war. First, Nearly a third of what was then Poland had been taken from Germany after WWI in spite of Wilson’s promise to the Kaiser that Germany would not be held responsible for starting the war (which they did not). Germany saw this as stolen land and wanted it back. They also wanted passage by land between Germany and East Prussia through the narrow polish corridor.

Second, German nationals were still living in the lands lost at Versaillles and atrocities committed against them by the Poles were common. Although this is not acknowledged by western sources it was documented by the press from many countries and in diplomatic coorespondence of the time. Germany had made repeated requests for international oversight of the situation but these requests were always blocked by Poland (go figure) and Britian.

In today’s world where anything negative said about Hitler (no matter how ridiculous) is just accepted as fact and anything positive (no matter how well documented) is considered as neo-nazi lies it is hard to admit that Germany was not completely unjustified in their invasion of Poland but it is true. The treaty of Versailles all but guaranteed another European war. It was just a matter of time.

 

[wabrams]

Libero:

Nobody would come into your house with all those deterrents, unless of course it is one of those lunatics people here are trying to convince me are everywhere (these exist only in your imagination) and then you try to convince me that the UK is more violent than the US - ha

Sounds like a some people here who diregard the facts to what private ownership of guns do, which is save lifes and prevent crime.

 

[wabrams]

thistle:

You are obviously a gun fanatic so it does not matter what I say. I sincerely hope you never have to shoot anyone, especially an innocent party!

Be careful how you use the term fanatic:

Main Entry: fa·nat·ic [m-w.com/images/audio.gif](javascriptopWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?fanati01.wav=fanatic’))
Pronunciation: f&-‘na-tik
Variant(s): or fa·nat·i·cal [m-w.com/images/audio.gif](javascriptopWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?fanati02.wav=fanatical’)) /-ti-k&l/
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin *fanaticus *inspired by a deity, frenzied, from *fanum *temple – more at FEAST
: marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion <they’re fanatic about politics>

• fanatic noun
• fa·nat·i·cal·ly [m-w.com/images/audio.gif](javascriptopWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?fanati03.wav=fanatically’)) /f&-'na-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb
• fa·nat·i·cal·ness [m-w.com/images/audio.gif](javascriptopWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?fanati04.wav=fanaticalness’)) /-k&l-n&s/ noun

I’d say the “intense uncritical devotion” are the anit-gun folks, due to them ignoring the facts of the positives of private gun ownership.

The pro-gun folks here have acknowledged the dangers of ownership, but have proven that the positives far outweigh the negatives.

 

[Libero]

Sounds like a some people here who diregard the facts to what private ownership of guns do, which is save lifes and prevent crime.

I dont disregard them, I just do not feel that they are compatible with my personality, they don’t convince me, as if one were to try and pick an object that would not seem appropriate for me as a person, a gun would be a very good choice. I think I discussed this earlier, - pages back.

 

[wabrams]

Libero:

I dont disregard them, I just do not feel that they are compatible with my personality, they don’t convince me, as if one were to try and pick an object that would not seem appropriate for me as a person, a gun would be a very good choice. I think I discussed this earlier, - pages back.

If you personally don’t want to own a gun, no problem! But don’t tell the rest of us we’re crazy becuase we want to own one and can prove the effectiveness of owning one.

 

[Brendan]

Libero:

Crime and violence thrives in all cities, this is a point to remember.

Agreed, but why exactly does it thrive twice as much in London as it does in New York, or Detroit?

Is New York less athiestic than London, or perhaps those in the Bronx value life more than those in Soho?