Jump to content
IGNORED

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


Guest shiloh357

Recommended Posts

Guest shiloh357
Just now, just_abc said:

um....  I think one difficulty is that the internet is an international media.  ..For example.. I don't know about the article's original site.. but worthy has members from different parts of the world.. and I am guessing might possibly be sometimes read too by other folk....

If the title implies that Christians all over the world do not support laws on guns.. then that is not accurate..  Because in many many countries around the world including my own.. the vast majority of people including Christians.. likely actually support having some laws or controls regarding guns in their countries. 

If the title had made it clear it was specifically refering to some / many Christians in the USA..  I think that would perhaps have been less likely to cause confusion?

Just my personal opinion that's all.

No offence intended brother.

Thanks.

Christians in the US generally  support the gun laws and regulations on the books.   We don't support the current leftist notion of gun control, which amounts to banning this and that.

And frankly, more gun regulation won't stop mass killings.  Many of the mass killings we see around the world are not accomplished by guns.

The worst mass in killing in US history was 9/11.   9/11 would have still happened if not a single person in America owned a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  7
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  893
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   527
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  12/06/2002
  • Status:  Offline

15 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Christians in the US generally  support the gun laws and regulations on the books. 

hi Brother

My difficulty is specifically with how the thread title was worded ...  If someone does not read the whole article.. an impression they might perhaps get from the title is that all or most Christians [around the world ] do not support controls on guns.  Because the title does not mention the word USA etc.

In many countries the vast majority of Christians actually do support having some controls or regulations etc regarding guns.  So if the title unintentionally implies that they don't.. then it might not be accurate..

Sorry brother.   Not meaning any offence.   Just explaining how the title might possibly be misunderstood. 

Thanks again.

Edited by just_abc
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

59 minutes ago, just_abc said:

um....  I think one difficulty is that the internet is an international media.  ..For example.. I don't know about the article's original site.. but worthy has members from different parts of the world.. and I am guessing might possibly be sometimes read too by other folk....

If the title implies that Christians all over the world do not support laws on guns.. then that is not accurate..  Because in many many countries around the world including my own.. the vast majority of people including Christians.. likely actually support having some laws or controls regarding guns in their countries. 

If the title had made it clear it was specifically refering to some / many Christians in the USA..  I think that would perhaps have been less likely to cause confusion?

Just my personal opinion that's all.

No offence intended brother.

Thanks.

Agreed, it seems the title is trying to pick an argument that even we in the USA shouldn't even be having, let alone internationally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

59 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Christians in the US generally  support the gun laws and regulations on the books.   We don't support the current leftist notion of gun control, which amounts to banning this and that.

And frankly, more gun regulation won't stop mass killings.  Many of the mass killings we see around the world are not accomplished by guns.

The worst mass in killing in US history was 9/11.   9/11 would have still happened if not a single person in America owned a gun.

Agreed, gun legislation isn't going to address the root of the problem. People can find other types of guns easily enough. What do you think of properly enforcing the gun laws that we already have? To me, that seems to be causing more of the issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  552
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   104
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/24/2016
  • Status:  Offline

4 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I did get a chuckle out of this, Scott, but you have to admit that the analogy falls apart when making an actual comparison. President Trump says raising the age requirement for purchasing an AR-15 is "on the table", not a ban on AR-15s. What are your thoughts on the actual discussion of raising the age requirement?

It is an appeasement, and I don't like appeasements. It is a band aid, and what is need is surgery, and I don't mean gun control, I mean what is needed is social rehabilitation. That is the problem we are dealing with, and this is all just the symptoms. We need to learn how to walk and talk all over again. We have lost our way. But this is his (Trump's) chess move - I hope it works and doesn't backfire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

14 minutes ago, ScottA said:

It is an appeasement, and I don't like appeasements. It is a band aid, and what is need is surgery, and I don't mean gun control, I mean what is needed is social rehabilitation. That is the problem we are dealing with, and this is all just the symptoms. We need how to walk and talk all over again. We have lost our way. But this is his (Trump's) chess move - I hope it works and doesn't backfire. 

This is certainly something to consider, and I believe you are absolutely right about the social issues that are the true root of the problem. But how do you distinguish between what is an appeasement and what just makes common sense shortly after a tragedy? If we look solely at raising the legal age of purchase for AR-15s to 21, or banning of bump stocks, can the merits of these be considered by themselves? Right now and for the foreseeable future, the NRA is way too powerful to allow any sort of snowballing banning or limitation to take place.

In other words, instead of saying "X is a bad idea because it could lead to Y and that could lead to Z, and we don't want Z to happen", is it possible to directly address why "X" is a bad idea in and of itself? Or is it only argued that X is bad because it could lead to Y and Z?

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  552
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   104
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/24/2016
  • Status:  Offline

51 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

This is certainly something to consider, and I believe you are absolutely right about the social issues that are the true root of the problem. But how do you distinguish between what is an appeasement and what just makes common sense shortly after a tragedy? If we look solely at raising the legal age of purchase for AR-15s to 21, or banning of bump stocks, can the merits of these be considered by themselves? Right now and for the foreseeable future, the NRA is way too powerful to allow any sort of snowballing banning or limitation to take place.

In other words, instead of saying "X is a bad idea because it could lead to Y and that could lead to Z, and we don't want Z to happen", is it possible to directly address why "X" is a bad idea in and of itself? Or is it only argued that X is bad because it could lead to Y and Z?

Yeah, I think that Trump would do well to present his ideas to the NRA with a similar appeasement showing how the concession does not go against the 2nd amendment, but does address the youth issue, then the idea would have merit. Otherwise, he is looking at giving away the next election for going against the NRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357

"If govt institutions can't stop a shooter after
- he threatens to kill his fellow students
- says he's gonna be a school shooter
- the FBI is warned by family
- he's reported to the Sheriff for violence 23 times

Don't come near my right to defend myself from madmen like that." ~ Liz Wheeler, One America News

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
10 hours ago, just_abc said:

hi Brother

My difficulty is specifically with how the thread title was worded ...  If someone does not read the whole article.. an impression they might perhaps get from the title is that all or most Christians [around the world ] do not support controls on guns.  Because the title does not mention the word USA etc.

 

Well, if they don't read the article, then it is their fault for getting the wrong impression.   I can't help that.   It is their responsibility to read the article. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
9 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Agreed, gun legislation isn't going to address the root of the problem. People can find other types of guns easily enough. What do you think of properly enforcing the gun laws that we already have? To me, that seems to be causing more of the issues.

That's the thing...  The current gun regulations need to enforced and maybe some things need to be tweaked because people are different now than they were when those laws were first put into place.   There are ways to strengthen enforcement of existing laws that don't infringe on anyone's freedom.

Secondly,  this kid was able to actually walk across school grounds while carrying an AR-15 and be unnoticed is problematic.  He was able to get into the school unnoticed with an AR-15.   There was a failure of the school to report him to the authorities for carrying weapons into school and threatening other students some time back.   His home was visited by the police 39 times for violence, such as assaulting his mother.   The FBI was tipped off about him at least twice.    So, this is a real failure of the school officials and law enforcement.

If the school officials had reported him bringing weapons on campus illegally, that would likely have prevented him from passing the background check to buy an AR-15.  He should have been taken into custody and questioned and examined for mental illness.   

I mean, the problem isn't that we have AR-15's.   The problem is a failure to adequately deal with a crazy, deranged person who was demonstrably dangerous and was known to the school, to the police and FBI.

Instead of dealing with the real breakdown of those in authority, who failed to do their jobs, everyone wants to ban bump stocks.   This kid didn't use a bump stock.  It was used one time in Las Vegas.  That is hardly cause to ban it. 

Banning bump stocks will have zero effect on stopping the next mass shooting or mass killing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...