Why Christians Don’t (and Won’t) Support Gun Control

[Guest shiloh357]

26 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

17 dead at from "concentration and a steady hand" at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School at Parkland Florida.   

The very problem is most anyone can have concentration and  a steady hand! What is needed is  love for fellow man, the gospel of Jesus, and a helping hand for widows and orphans.

The advocates of gun ownership, of which I am one, need to be of a much better mindset than to think it is okay to lose 17 lives to a minion of the evil one at a school just as long just as I can have my gun.

 

It was not a gun problem.   As long as it continues to be seen as a gun problem, personal accountability will evade us.   The problem was with the man holding the gun, not the gun.

 

[Neighbor]

51 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

It was not a gun problem.   As long as it continues to be seen as a gun problem, personal accountability will evade us.   The problem was with the man holding the gun, not the gun.

 

Yes and so the answer is anyone and everyone gets any weapon they want? Do people really see teachers as armed instructors?

Right now they are not even allowed to discipline students or  defend themselves from students.Are they to be passive and  given weapons?  To me that seems like a formula for teachers  to go postal.

[Neighbor]

55 minutes ago, Cobalt1959 said:

You are placing the emphasis on the wrong thing.  Point to anyone here who thinks it is "OK" for someone to murder these people.  That is an ill-advised thing to say because no one here feels that way.  The gun is not the problem, in the hands of this mentally disturbed person or a legal gun owner.  The gun has never been the problem.  The gun will never be the problem.  Every time someone even implies that the gun is the problem they display that they have no clear understanding as to what the actual problem is.

The problem is clear. Clear as 17 are dead today, and some want to say it is not as bad as abortion or car wrecks or pressure cooker bombs.

[Guest shiloh357]

9 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

Yes and so the answer is anyone and everyone gets any weapon they want? Do people really see teachers as armed instructors?

An AR-15 isn't an assault rifle and yes, as long as it a gun that is legal to own, you can buy any gun you want.  That's what the Constitution allows. 

Why not have armed instructors and armed guards?  There are plenty off retired police and military willing to volunteer to stand guard.   What's wrong with that?

Quote

Right now they are not even allowed to discipline students or  defend themselves from students. Are they to be passive and  given weapons?  To me that seems like a formula for teachers  to go postal.

It would probably not be every teacher and not every teacher would not want to be armed. 

But in a situation like you had in parkland, someone in the school with a gun could have stopped him.  And saved some lives.  Having armed guards and even some teachers and making sure people know that the school is not a soft target would deter many of the mass shootings.   Unarmed, unguarded schools, are target rich environments for these guys and they usually flee when the police show up.   So armed and trained personnel would like make these guys think twice before going in.

[Neighbor]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

It was not a gun problem.   As long as it continues to be seen as a gun problem, personal accountability will evade us.   The problem was with the man holding the gun, not the gun.

 

Hi, That too seems to be a fraudulent argument. Personal responsibility, and proving that one is responsible is a problem. That problem   needs to be resolved, because there are guns and individuals quite excited to use them on other people as they are filled with a great evil. If there were no guns then perhaps the problem of the evil person would be lessened some, but ot say there is no reason to see guns as a problem is a fools presntation. Sorry but only a fool continues to make that argument in the face of the deaths of those that otherwise would b alive today.

To all the Rambo wannabe's and those that think they have some special claim  to expertise because they  were once  in combat, I ask  are you up to date and proficient  with the weapons you own? Have you practiced weekly making sure to have consistant repeatable skill action when needing the weapon? Or is it just  in a closet or gunsafe needing to be cleaned, and never used weekly? If it is not being used each week then isn't the owner negligent for aren't they  likely fail to use it properly when they try?

 No training - no gun, no testing -no gun. No one would allow their local police force to be so negligent as to not train  and not be reviewed for suitability  to have a gun.

Anyway I do pray for the families that have sufferd such great loss as to have their child shot to death. I do pray that  there will be a resolve to this crisis.

[Guest shiloh357]

7 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

Hi, That too seems to be a fraudulent argument. Personal responsibility, and proving that one is responsible is a problem. That problem   needs to be resolved, because there are guns and individuals quite excited to use them on other people as they are filled with a great evil. If there were no guns then perhaps the problem of the evil person would be lessened some, but ot say there is no reason to see guns as a problem is a fools presntation. Sorry but only a fool continues to make that argument in the face of the deaths of those that otherwise would b alive today.

That is a pretty pathetic line of reasoning.   First of all, there are 60 million gun owners (that we know of) in the US and they own roughly  300 million guns, and trillions of rounds of ammo.   If guns were a problem, we would know.   

The whole notion that we need tighter gun laws completely ignores the fact that criminals don't obey law.   You can pass gun laws until you're blue in the face, and it will not change anything because criminals will continue on as they always have while law-abiding Americans are saddled with additional laws simply for having the Constitutional right to own and carry a gun.  

We need punish the perps who commit these crimes, not go after the millions of law-abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong.   60 million gun owners will go to bed tonight and have not shot a single person in their life.   So there is no reason to penalize their rights just because of a few nuts who misuse guns.   You're the one being foolish, not me.  I actually choose to think and not drink the Liberal Kool-Aid.

[Neighbor]

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

An AR-15 isn't an assault rifle and yes, as long as it a gun that is legal to own, you can buy any gun you want.  That's what the Constitution allows. 

Why not have armed instructors and armed guards?  There are plenty off retired police and military willing to volunteer to stand guard.   What's wrong with that?

It would probably not be every teacher and not every teacher would not want to be armed. 

But in a situation like you had in parkland, someone in the school with a gun could have stopped him.  And saved some lives.  Having armed guards and even some teachers and making sure people know that the school is not a soft target would deter many of the mass shootings.   Unarmed, unguarded schools, are target rich environments for these guys and they usually flee when the police show up.   So armed and trained personnel would like make these guys think twice before going in.

 

I have no idea why your mind jumped to discussion of an AR-15 which unless modified for civilian use certainly is an automatic weapon that has many configurations, barrels and sights available to make it anything from  a sniper weapon,  down to a spraying automatic fire assault machine firing up to 13 rounds per second. BUT it is all irrelevant which weapon that can cause massive damage in short order to multiple targets or how. That is again a bit of a fool's argument to enter into.

The argument  and the encouragement needs to  be over how much more can be done to limit a person from being able to kill innocents. I personally think a lot more than is being allowed today is the beginning answer to that question. As most all people  are in grief for the dead of this latest shooting of 17, may we all at least pray to God for relieve from this onslaught of evil against us all?

[walla299]

16 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

An AR-15 isn't an assault rifle and yes, as long as it a gun that is legal to own, you can buy any gun you want.  That's what the Constitution allows. 

Why not have armed instructors and armed guards?  There are plenty off retired police and military willing to volunteer to stand guard.   What's wrong with that?

It would probably not be every teacher and not every teacher would not want to be armed. 

But in a situation like you had in parkland, someone in the school with a gun could have stopped him.  And saved some lives.  Having armed guards and even some teachers and making sure people know that the school is not a soft target would deter many of the mass shootings.   Unarmed, unguarded schools, are target rich environments for these guys and they usually flee when the police show up.   So armed and trained personnel would like make these guys think twice before going in.

Exactly what I've been saying for years. The "Weapons Free Environment" signs where I used to work basically said to any potential evildoer: "Target Rich Environment."

[Neighbor]

5 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

That is a pretty pathetic line of reasoning.   First of all, there are 60 million gun owners (that we know of) in the US and they own roughly  300 million guns, and trillions of rounds of ammo.   If guns were a problem, we would know.   

The whole notion that we need tighter gun laws completely ignores the fact that criminals don't obey law.   You can pass gun laws until you're blue in the face, and it will not change anything because criminals will continue on as they always have while law-abiding Americans are saddled with additional laws simply for having the Constitutional right to own and carry a gun.  

We need punish the perps who commit these crimes, not go after the millions of law-abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong.   60 million gun owners will go to bed tonight and have not shot a single person in their life.   So there is no reason to penalize their rights just because of a few nuts who misuse guns.   You're the one being foolish, not me.  I actually choose to think and not drink the Liberal Kool-Aid.

Well we are supposed to  avoid personal attack on each other; but if there is something that is pathetic, I think it is the lame thinking behind the statement that the problem is too overwhelming because there are so many gun owners.

There is such obvious need to regulate gun ownership  just as we regulate car ownership, drinking alcohol, and drug use, that I must change my own mind to advocate much stronger regulation  rather than none, even though my own personal fear is the  growing potential for great oppression by government itself.

[Guest shiloh357]

16 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

Well we are supposed to  avoid personal attack on each other; but if there is something that is pathetic, I think it is the lame thinking behind the statement that the problem is too overwhelming because there are so many gun owners.

No, that is not what I said.  What's lame is penalzing law-abiding citizens for the actions of a few.   It's like penalizing people who drink because one person gets behind the wheel when drunk and hits an innocent person or plows into a group of people.    

In any other context, we hold the criminal, alone, as responsible for his actions, but when someone commits murder with gun, suddenly, we go after the gun manufacturers and gun owners and the NRA, as if they are responsible.   It's really crazy.   Sorry, but the lame thinking is on you, not me.

Quote

There is such obvious need to regulate gun ownership  just as we regulate car ownership, drinking alcohol, and drug use, that I must change my own mind to advocate much stronger regulation  rather than none, even though my own personal fear is the  growing potential for great oppression by government itself.

Gun ownership is already regulated.   There are already  laws on the books.   The reason this guy was able to do what he did is because the FBI fell down on their job even thought they had a ton of information on this guy.