Christians and Guns?

[The_Patriot21]

Goju, firstly, im talking about rifles when hunting,as the chances of dropping one are far higher then a handgun in a holster. Second, I garentee I c as n unholster, chamber a round, and fire within a split second of the time it takes you to just draw and fire, and I dont have to worry about shooting myself in the leg when drawing, and that split second gives me enough time to make sure theres not a kid in the back ground

[GojuBrian]

Goju, firstly, im talking about rifles when hunting,as the chances of dropping one are far higher then a handgun in a holster. Second, I garentee I c as n unholster, chamber a round, and fire within a split second of the time it takes you to just draw and fire, and I dont have to worry about shooting myself in the leg when drawing, and that split second gives me enough time to make sure theres not a kid in the back ground

How can you gurantee that? You know how long it takes me to draw and shoot? Pretty bold statement from 1000 miles away with no possible way to prove otherwise, lol.

I gurantee there's no way you could do that, lol.

p.s. If you are afraid of shooting yourself, find another hobby. just my .02

[Fez]

I sometimes carry a .375 or a .458 in the course of my duties (sometimes what we have to shoot at is a bit bigger and faster than us, and all of them have bigger teeth or horns..) I always load one, and keep the bolt half cocked when I am going into a "situation'. I know of one case where this has saved my life.

[The_Patriot21]

I can garentee that because I practice. And im not afraid of shooting mysekf, but I know of plenty of experienced gunhands shoot their own foot off or a buddy on accident, who had that same attitude.

With that being said, I dont have much issue with holstered handguns, my main issue is with people traipsing around with a loaded rifle or shotgun while out hunting. Im sorry, but deer dont shoot back, and if you tell me you dont have time to chamber a round before the deer gets away then your not much of a hunter. Statistically, more gun accidents out in the field arnt from a holstered handgun-its the guy carrying a loaded rifle, and then dropping it or having it go off when their not ready, or getting in a hurry and taking a shot they shouldnt have

[The_Patriot21]

and in fezs case I understand-if your in a situation where what your after shoots back or poses risk for for life or limb, I can see a round in the chamber. But, in most cases theres no reason to be carrying a weapon with a round in the chamber, unless its holstered. And even then-while I dont mind it, Im not entirely certain its necessary.

[oldzimm]

I can garentee that because I practice. And im not afraid of shooting mysekf, but I know of plenty of experienced gunhands shoot their own foot off or a buddy on accident, who had that same attitude.

With that being said, I dont have much issue with holstered handguns, my main issue is with people traipsing around with a loaded rifle or shotgun while out hunting. Im sorry, but deer dont shoot back, and if you tell me you dont have time to chamber a round before the deer gets away then your not much of a hunter. Statistically, more gun accidents out in the field arnt from a holstered handgun-its the guy carrying a loaded rifle, and then dropping it or having it go off when their not ready, or getting in a hurry and taking a shot they shouldnt have

Mr Patriot , I guarantee if you hunt deer in my neck of the woods (Pa) and you don't have one in the chamber (specially on a deer drive), you won't get a shot off at a deer, It is plenty thick. I've been hunting for 46 years and when I'm in the woods hunting deer or in the field hunting rabbits, I'll have a round in the chamber. All it takes is a good gun handling practice and you can carry a loaded gun on any hunt (providing it is legal).

[OldShep]

range ncoic? shoot civilains run the targets now.

Sir: You are speaking in a code that I do not understand. I have never shot an unarmed person/civilians. Yes I was the NCOIC (Non-Commissioned Officer in Charge)

PS: The only shooting I do today is with my little camera.

Dennis

[The_Patriot21]

I can garentee that because I practice. And im not afraid of shooting mysekf, but I know of plenty of experienced gunhands shoot their own foot off or a buddy on accident, who had that same attitude.

With that being said, I dont have much issue with holstered handguns, my main issue is with people traipsing around with a loaded rifle or shotgun while out hunting. Im sorry, but deer dont shoot back, and if you tell me you dont have time to chamber a round before the deer gets away then your not much of a hunter. Statistically, more gun accidents out in the field arnt from a holstered handgun-its the guy carrying a loaded rifle, and then dropping it or having it go off when their not ready, or getting in a hurry and taking a shot they shouldnt have

Mr Patriot , I guarantee if you hunt deer in my neck of the woods (Pa) and you don't have one in the chamber (specially on a deer drive), you won't get a shot off at a deer, It is plenty thick. I've been hunting for 46 years and when I'm in the woods hunting deer or in the field hunting rabbits, I'll have a round in the chamber. All it takes is a good gun handling practice and you can carry a loaded gun on any hunt (providing it is legal).

thats what everyone says around here. -but its still possible to not have one in the chamber. I have literally gotten within 25 yards of a deer and still had time to chamber a round. it is possible, especially if you like those 300 yard shots that everyone where Im at prefers. ( I dont, that takes half the fun out of it) Now, by in the chamber I mean ready to fire-you can have the bullet basically in, but the handle only halfway up so its not all the way in-which only takes all of half a second, or if a lever action just leave the lever in the down position. I have a hard time believing you dont have time to chamber a round. And in my mind, any time your carring a loaded gun-especially in the back woods-its not safe hunting practice. Safetys fail-especially if the gun gets dropped, and if you want to tell me youve never tripped on a log, well then. . .now, if your sitting in a blind or something waiting for a deer, thats a different matter, but if your hunting with me, your chamber will be empty-and by empty, I mean by the above defintion-I dont mind if you have the bold slid forward so all you got to do is drop the handle down, thats fine-theres no way at all it will go off. I dont even do that-I can fully chamber a round in the same amount of time it takes me to raise the gun and aim, takes no longer.

[oldzimm]

I can garentee that because I practice. And im not afraid of shooting mysekf, but I know of plenty of experienced gunhands shoot their own foot off or a buddy on accident, who had that same attitude.

With that being said, I dont have much issue with holstered handguns, my main issue is with people traipsing around with a loaded rifle or shotgun while out hunting. Im sorry, but deer dont shoot back, and if you tell me you dont have time to chamber a round before the deer gets away then your not much of a hunter. Statistically, more gun accidents out in the field arnt from a holstered handgun-its the guy carrying a loaded rifle, and then dropping it or having it go off when their not ready, or getting in a hurry and taking a shot they shouldnt have

Mr Patriot , I guarantee if you hunt deer in my neck of the woods (Pa) and you don't have one in the chamber (specially on a deer drive), you won't get a shot off at a deer, It is plenty thick. I've been hunting for 46 years and when I'm in the woods hunting deer or in the field hunting rabbits, I'll have a round in the chamber. All it takes is a good gun handling practice and you can carry a loaded gun on any hunt (providing it is legal).

thats what everyone says around here. -but its still possible to not have one in the chamber. I have literally gotten within 25 yards of a deer and still had time to chamber a round. it is possible, especially if you like those 300 yard shots that everyone where Im at prefers. ( I dont, that takes half the fun out of it) Now, by in the chamber I mean ready to fire-you can have the bullet basically in, but the handle only halfway up so its not all the way in-which only takes all of half a second, or if a lever action just leave the lever in the down position. I have a hard time believing you dont have time to chamber a round. And in my mind, any time your carring a loaded gun-especially in the back woods-its not safe hunting practice. Safetys fail-especially if the gun gets dropped, and if you want to tell me youve never tripped on a log, well then. . .now, if your sitting in a blind or something waiting for a deer, thats a different matter, but if your hunting with me, your chamber will be empty-and by empty, I mean by the above defintion-I dont mind if you have the bold slid forward so all you got to do is drop the handle down, thats fine-theres no way at all it will go off. I dont even do that-I can fully chamber a round in the same amount of time it takes me to raise the gun and aim, takes no longer.

While hunting, the only time we do not put a round in the chamber, is when we are setting up our drives. When the watchers (standers) walk in to their positions (walking in a line) because as you mentioned, falling. The same goes for the drivers, nobody has a round in the chamber, except for the lead man. When you get to your post or where you will be starting the drive, then you chamber a round.

Three hundred yard shots , in the mountains here in Pa, the average distance a deer is shot is around thirty yards and most the time they are moving very fast, that is why we call them "speed beef"

[HAZARD]

To lighten up a little with some Aussie humor, and what I am posting, I love this picture a friend sent me. The Roman sword was the Whinchester 44 Magnum of Jesus's day. Or even the Remingtom Express 12 Guage Pump Action Shotgun, both firearms I have owned and both were excellent choices for close quater hunting and self defence, (Both Leagle to own but not legal for self personal defence?), in Aus! Our Government seems to know more about self defence, although they cannot defend us at all, than God Himself has revealed and commanded regarding personal self defence! What they who govern us, and who are at this time self confessed athiests, our current Prime Minister being one, dont know is this. They will all be held accountable by God on Judgment day!

Seriously, From what I have learnt in my study of God's book, He's all for self defence, in fact if a man failes in defending his own life and the lives of his family God says he's nothing more than a poisoned spring! "A troubled fountain, and a corrupt spring." (Proverbs 25:26).

Proverbs 25:26

26 A righteous man who falters before the wicked is like a murky spring and a polluted well.

1 Timothy 5:8

8 But if anyone does not provide (protection) for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

It seems to me, the religious politicians of this world, people like former Prim minister of Australia, John Howard for an example seem to know more than God has revealed to mankind in general in His book the Bible, and so John Howard and his aids decided God does'nt know what He is talking about regarding self defence and decided to over rule the God he believes in, and he Ruled Over us, the people who elected him to rule the country only, and banned all weapons of self defence and made self defence illegal.

For those interested, here is what John Howards God says about armed self defence. Its a good read, I agree with God, a man has every right to defend himself in any and every possible way.

A biblical view of self defense.

Rick Martin | A Biblical defense of this misunderstood doctrine

- - - - -

I can find nothing in Scripture which prohibits lawful self defense against physical attack, even to include the defensive use of deadly weapons. I offer the following Biblical defense of this misunderstood doctrine.

When Nehemiah was rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem and was under threat of attack, notice his reaction in verse 14. We see from verses 16-18 that their defense was with deadly weapons. There is no condemnation of his defense in Scripture.

Nehemiah 4:7-18

7 Now it happened, when Sanballat, Tobiah, the Arabs, the Ammonites, and the Ashdodites heard that the walls of Jerusalem were being restored and the gaps were beginning to be closed, that they became very angry,

8 and all of them conspired together to come and attack Jerusalem and create confusion.

9 Nevertheless we made our prayer to our God, and because of them we set a watch against them day and night.

10 Then Judah said, "The strength of the laborers is failing, and there is so much rubbish that we are not able to build the wall."

11 And our adversaries said, "They will neither know nor see anything, till we come into their midst and kill them and cause the work to cease."

12 So it was, when the Jews who dwelt near them came, that they told us ten times, "From whatever place you turn, they will be upon us."

13 Therefore I positioned men behind the lower parts of the wall, at the openings; and I set the people according to their families, with their swords, their spears, and their bows.

14 And I looked, and arose and said to the nobles, to the leaders, and to the rest of the people, "Do not be afraid of them. Remember the Lord, great and awesome, and fight for your brethren, your sons, your daughters, your wives, and your houses."

15 And it happened, when our enemies heard that it was known to us, and that God had brought their plot to nothing, that all of us returned to the wall, everyone to his work.

16 So it was, from that time on, that half of my servants worked at construction, while the other half held the spears, the shields, the bows, and wore armor; and the leaders were behind all the house of Judah.

17 Those who built on the wall, and those who carried burdens, loaded themselves so that with one hand they worked at construction, and with the other held a weapon.

18 Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me.

In the Garden of Gethsemene, when Jesus was being arrested, Jesus indicates that it is permissible to come after a robber with swords and clubs. The rationale is that a robber may be armed, therefore, if we pursue a robber it is a good idea to be armed.

John 10:10

10 "The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly."

Matthew 26:55

55 In that hour Jesus said to the multitudes, "Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs to take Me? I sat daily with you, teaching in the temple, and you did not seize Me."

In the beginning, Jesus disciples were well received and needed no protection.

Luke 9:3-5

3 And He said to them, "Take nothing for the journey, neither staffs nor bag nor bread nor money; and do not have two tunics apiece.

4 Whatever house you enter, stay there, and from there depart.

5 And whoever will not receive you, when you go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them."

But, before Jesus' arrest, Jesus told the disciples that there would be much hostility towards them and they would need protection, for since He would be considered a transgressor, as His followers, they would be considered transgressors.

Luke 22:35-38

35 And He said to them, "When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?" So they said, "Nothing."

36 Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.

37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end."

38 So they said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." And He said to them, "It is enough."

Some say that the swords mentioned here are spiritual swords that Jesus is talking about. I guess that the ear of the high priest's servant that Peter cut off was a spiritual ear.

Luke 22:49-50

49 When those around Him saw what was going to happen, they said to Him, "Lord, shall we strike with the sword?"

50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his right ear.

After this, Jesus tells Peter to put away his sword, because it is foolish to try to oppose the Jews and the Romans by force (often the priests were armed since they were the guardians of the temple). They would surely be cut to pieces. Therefore, if they try to build Christ's kingdom with the sword, they would surely lose the battle and pay with their life. We should live at peace with all men when it is possible. The kingdom of Christ is a spiritual kingdom. Notice, however, that Jesus does not command Peter to throw away his sword, but put it away where it belongs, in it's scabbard at Peter's side, only to be used for lawful self defense.

Matthew 26:51-53

51 With that, one of Jesus' companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.

52 "Put your sword back in its place," Jesus said to him, "for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?"

Jesus did not want to be defended because He had come to be crucified. If He needed to be defended, God's legions of angels would handle the matter.

John 18:10-11

10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

11 Then Jesus said to Peter, "Put your sword into the sheath. Shall I not drink the cup which My Father has given Me?"

In fact Jesus stated that His kingdom was not an earthly kingdom which needed to be defended physically. If it were an earthly kingdom He said that it would be perfectly just to defend it with physical force.

John 18:33-36

33 Then Pilate entered the Praetorium again, called Jesus, and said to Him, "Are You the King of the Jews?"

34 Jesus answered him, "Are you speaking for yourself about this, or did others tell you this about Me?"

35 Pilate answered, "Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered You to me. What have You done?"

36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here."

It is clear that Jesus' disciples were armed and He knew it.

In the following verses, Jesus spoke of spiritual matters, but used principles which he and his audience accepted as true (I cannot believe that Jesus would use as a teaching example something which was not lawful)

Luke 11:21-22

21 "When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace.

22 But when a stronger than he comes upon him and overcomes him, he takes from him all his armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoils."

And how can the master of the house prevent his house from being broken into except that he use deadly force?

Luke 12:39

39 "But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into."

Which leads us back to Exodus 22:2

Exodus 22:2

2 "If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed."

Many have said that when physically assaulted, we should turn the other cheek.

Matthew 5:38-41

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'

39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also.

41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two."

The context of these verses relate to the teaching that we should not trade injury for injury; insult for insult. If the teaching here means that we should respond to physical assault by inviting more physical assault, then Jesus and Paul would have done the same when under physical assault. Did they?

John 18:19-23

19 The high priest then asked Jesus about His disciples and His doctrine.

20 Jesus answered him, "I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing.

21 "Why do you ask Me? Ask those who have heard Me what I said to them. Indeed they know what I said."

22 And when He had said these things, one of the officers who stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, "Do You answer the high priest like that?"

23 Jesus answered him, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike Me?"

Acts 23:1-3

1 Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, "Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day."

2 And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.

3 Then Paul said to him, "God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?"

Some additional verses for consideration -

Proverbs 25:26

26 A righteous man who falters before the wicked is like a murky spring and a polluted well.

1 Timothy 5:8

8 But if anyone does not provide (protection) for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Many countries, Australia being one have abolished the death penalty, many people cite the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." They ignore or dont know all other Scriptures which gives men in authority the authority to put to death those who ignore the very commandment "Thou shalt not kill," ie. those who deliberately comitt murder. They say the death penalty is barbaric, cruel, inhuman, whilst at the same time totally ignoring the pain, the suffering the victims families have to endure for the rest of their lives.

The last person executed in Australia was Ronald Ryan in 1967.

Australia is a federation of States. The Federal Government abolished the death penalty in 1973: Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 (Cth). All Australian States and Territories have abolished the death penalty.

It seems the government of Australia has decided it knows more about how to deal with crime, criminals in general, and murderers than God has not only taught, but commanded.

This is why rapists, drugged and drunken thugs and murderers are now roaming our streets night and day, bashing, robing, raping and murdering, and many getting do away with it. Some are caught, spend a short time behind bars and are released only to rape and murder again!

We live our lives totally under the control of, and at the whim of whatever government of the day is in power. No God, no fundamental rights, just whoever is in government having the final say as to how we live our lives.

The majority of Australians want a Bill of Rights and they want a say about whether it belongs in the Constitution. Even though Australia has signed all five international treaties that make up the the International Bill of Human Rights, none of these treaties are legally binding in Australia. Nor is there is a Bill of Rights in the Australian Constitution. This means that the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Australia are not protected by the law.

In 1991-1992 the Research School of Social Sciences at ANU conducted a national survey of 1522 Australians and asked them about their attitude to rights. The report Rights in Australia 1991-1992 found that 70.6% of Australians want a Bill of Rights (7.4% were against and 21.8% were undecided). The Survey also found that 85.9% supported a referendum to determine whether a Bill of Rights should be put in the Constitution.

The majority of Australians (57.8%) also believe that a Bill of Rights would strengthen our national identity.

Nevertheless, Australia's politicians continue to deny Australians a Bill of Rights to protect our rights and freedoms.

Why? Is it simply because a Bill of Rights would be an effective check and balance on their power? That would explain why Prime Minister Howard supported a Bill of Rights for Iraqis, but not for his own people.

GOD also INSTITUTED THE DEATH PENALTY.

We, as Christians should ask ourselves, Is the Death penalty lawful in this age? Do men have the right to change the Law's of God? Does God condone the Death Penalty.

When God instituted human government by law after Noah's flood, He gave Noah certain laws by which to govern the human race, and man was then held responsible for self-government (Gen. 9:1-7).

There are six very important laws which God gave Noah and his decendants. These Laws were:

(1) "Be fruitful and multply, and replenish the earth" (Gen. 9:1, 7).

(2) "Into thine hand are they [animals] delivered" (Gen. 9:2).

(3) "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have i given you all things" (Gen. 9:4).

(4) "The blood thereof shall ye not eat" (Gen. 9:4).

(5) "WHOSOEVER SHEDDETH MAN'S BLOOD, BY MAN SHALL HIS BLOOD BY SHED: for in the image of God made he him" (Gen. 9:5-6).

And last but not least;

(6) "I have established my covenant with you . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . FOR PERPETUAL GENERATIONS . . . the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the "EVERLASTING COVENANT" between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth" (Gen. 9:8-17).

These few laws have been the basis of all laws of God and man in every age since the flood of Noah.

It was at this time God constituted capital punishment, and God has never revoked this particular law, "Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, BY MAN shall HIS BLOOD BE SHED (Gen. 9:5-6)." This law will continue as an eternal law, and as is revealed in (Isiah 11:4-9; 65:20-25) it will be in force even during the Millennium.

That this law will be in force during the Millennium is plainly reaffirmed in (Rom. 13:1-6), in which the apostle Paul taught that even in this age of grace, law-enforcement officers are ordained of God, and that they are His ministers to bear "not the sword in vain" but that they are supposed to "execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

It is totally necessary for human governments to punish criminals according to the crimes committed. Human governments are part of the moral government of God. That God has instituted human governments to help Him secure this end is not only clear in Gen. 9 and Rom. 13, but also in many other passages (Dan. 2:21; 4:17-25; 5:21; 1 Pet. 2:13-14).

All administrators of human government, when they rule contrary to the law of God will be punished in due time by God for mismanagement of their authority. God never sanctions selfish and wicked administration of authority, and if such continues long it will be overthrown. Men are under obligation to obey human government when, and as long as the requirements are not inconsistent with the moral law's of God.

Christians must always obey "every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the King, as supreem; or unto govenors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well. For such is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men" (1 Pet. 2:13-17).

Many Christians argue that it is sinful to partake in politics, that it is contrary to the Bible because human government is maintained by force, and that force is contrary with the spirit of the gospel. These are false theories. Human government was instituted by God as shown above, and Christians are commanded in the New Testamen to pay taxes and otherwise support government (Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Pet. 2:13-17).

Some argue the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill" (Deut 5:17), prevents government from administering capital punishment. The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" means exactly what it says, that men shall not kill any other human being; but, if man sheds another mans blood, in other words, if a man ignores Deut 5:17, the everlasting covenant law, "whosoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed," comes into being.

This same principle applies to mobs, insurrections, rebellions, and all wars that endanger the best good of being and of the universe. It is the right of government and all of its subjects, to use every possible means to suppress all rebellion and wars, which are merely crime turned loose on a massive scale. That war is necessary under certain circumstances is clear from the fact that moral law permits it and God has commanded it. Earthly governments are God's ministers to execute law upon the ungodly and to preserve moral law and government for the good of all, and they are under obligation to make war, if this is the only way to preserve the best public good for all. We know that elfish and unjust war is wholesale murder and the administrators of such wars will be punished by God in due time.

God, in replenishing the human race after the flood of Noah instituted human government and capital punishment for serious crime involving murder. He has never changed this "everlasting covenant" and so, this is still God's will for men and human governments.