Christian Viewpoint On The Gun Debate

[FenderTL5]

This does bring us to a fundamental question though: what's more important - safety or freedom? I personally say freedom.

[re-reads the thread title]
As long as you are willing to accept public shootings and the deaths of children (or anyone) as collateral damage for your politics, we really have no common ground for discussion.

 

[Aldebaran]

Canada shows us how the "sensible" gun control is a slippery slope. They recently banned basically every semiautomatic weapon now. This happened only a few years after they passed a less restrictive gun law that still banned a large portion of rifles.

And I'll bet that a large portion of the population in Canada approved of that less restrictive gun law because they felt that it got rid of the worst offenders of gun violence. Little did they know what it would lead to, and what kind of government they would end up with.

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm not anti-gun, I own guns myself. Like most Americans, including gun owners, I want to see stricter gun laws.

Can you provide a list of all semi-automatic rifle models that are available on the market today so we can see if the majority would be affected by the ban that was proposed in Virginia or the one that passed in Washington state? It would be interesting to see just what percentage of semi-automatic rifles would actually be banned. Either way, there would still be plenty of semi-automatic rifles available for purchase under either of those bans.

For the one in Washington State, the majority of them are being banned: Washington state bans sale of most semi-automatic rifles
So much for just being the "assault" variety, whatever that is.

 

[JosephZ]

For the one in Washington State, the majority of them are being banned: Washington state bans sale of most semi-automatic rifles
So much for just being the "assault" variety, whatever that is.

Depends on where you get your news.

New Washington law bans sale of some semi-automatic rifles

There are 62 models of semi-automatic rifles and their variants on the list as I mentioned earlier in the thread. To find out which headline is most accurate, we need to know the total number of semi-automatic rifle models there are.

 

[dogs4thewin]

[re-reads the thread title]
As long as you are willing to accept public shootings and the deaths of children (or anyone) as collateral damage for your politics, we really have no common ground for discussion.

You will always have people that abuse anything. Guns, cars, prescription drugs and other drugs for that matter. You cannot ban something just because a small percentage of people abuse it. In fact, drugs are an example of how banning something can sometimes just make the problem worse.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The morals of most secular people in the West are Christian in origin regardless of how much they may want to deny it. Secular humanism is just a version of Christianity without God, for the most part. Atheists and agnostics in the West are quite different from the same groups in places like Turkey, for example.

So, you can't really divorce the Enlightenment from Christianity. The Enlightenment itself wouldn't exist, were it not for Christianity. There's a good reason it didn't derive from the Islamic World, for example.

It doesn't "betray the sanctity of Christianity" to connect the Constitution with Christianity. If anything, denying its influence downplays how important Christianity has been for the development of the US. And the way that this society has declined in morality is precisely because of how much mainstream society wants to discard that influence in favor of materialism, collectivism, race Marxism, gender theory, feminism, and the LGBT nonsense. It's fallen precisely because of how we have let our government, media, and academia dilute and discard faith.

Here's where we clearly differ. You conceive of Christianity to be about culture; I don't. I conceive Christianity to be about faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God.

I don't believe in the existence of a Christian culture or Christian civilization.

That's simply not my religion.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[yeshuasavedme]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That's it.... that is my viewpoint

Amen!

 

[Aldebaran]

Depends on where you get your news.

New Washington law bans sale of some semi-automatic rifles

There are 62 models of semi-automatic rifles and their variants on the list as I mentioned earlier in the thread. To find out which headline is most accurate, we need to know the total number of semi-automatic rifle models there are.

Just what I'd expect from PBS.
There is no set number of existing semi-auto models and variants because it would depend on whether you're talking about all models ever made, or just current production, and then you'd have to define what a variant is compared to a distinct model. Also, if AR15 was banned, that would encompass many different brands and models. That's because AR15 is a platform rather than a particular model. Same goes for other rifles.

 

[Eschatologist]

Just what I'd expect from PBS.
There is no set number of existing semi-auto models and variants because it would depend on whether you're talking about all models ever made, or just current production, and then you'd have to define what a variant is compared to a distinct model. Also, if AR15 was banned, that would encompass many different brands and models. That's because AR15 is a platform rather than a particular model. Same goes for other rifles.

Joseph sounds like the kind of guy who would argue that it isn't banning most guns when even the law itself specifically calls out semiautomatic functions just because there are technically a lot of bolt-action rifles that exist. And then if they banned those, he'd point out that pump action, lever action, flintlocks, and muskets are still allowed.

 

[Eschatologist]

[re-reads the thread title]
As long as you are willing to accept public shootings and the deaths of children (or anyone) as collateral damage for your politics, we really have no common ground for discussion.

I figured as much. As long as you want to give the state a monopoly on force, we have nothing in common. You seem to worship the state as much as you do God.

 

[Eschatologist]

Here's where we clearly differ. You conceive of Christianity to be about culture; I don't. I conceive Christianity to be about faith in Jesus Christ the Son of God.

I don't believe in the existence of a Christian culture or Christian civilization.

That's simply not my religion.

-CryptoLutheran

That stance sounds more Unitarian than Lutheran.

I believe there are Christian cultures just as much as I believe that there are Islamic cultures and Jewish ones. It would be rather odd to acknowledge all of the other cultures of the world while pretending that a Christian culture doesn't exist, unless you're suggesting that these other religious cultures are nonexistent as well.

 

[FenderTL5]

I figured as much. As long as you want to give the state a monopoly on force, we have nothing in common. You seem to worship the state as much as you do God.

I see.
What gives you that impression?

 

[JosephZ]

Joseph sounds like the kind of guy who would argue that it isn't banning most guns when even the law itself specifically calls out semiautomatic functions just because there are technically a lot of bolt-action rifles that exist.

Earlier in the thread you said Virginia attempted to ban all semi-auto rifles, which is not true. You also said that Washington is about to pass a ban on sales and importation that covers basically all semi-automatic rifles, which is debatable since it's hard to determine just how many models of semi-automatic rifles and variants of each there are. That law did in fact pass, and even if it does ban most semi-automatic rifles, there are still plenty of semi-automatic rifles available for people living in that state to purchase.

 

[Eschatologist]

I see.
What gives you that impression?

Because you assume that giving more power to the state (banning guns or at least some of them) would somehow save children. It won't. School shootings still happened during the Assault Weapons Ban that passed in the 90s. Even if you banned all handguns and all rifles, school shootings would still happen, because people can still get guns illegally, and because a ban doesn't address the root causes of shootings.

And as I've mentioned multiple times in this thread, there are numerous countries where legally getting a gun is extremely difficult but gun deaths and gun homicides are still high.

So, to push for bans basically means you have faith in the government being able to do what clearly isn't happening in a lot of other countries with bans and restrictive policies. That takes a lot of faith in government.

And this is only the side of it pertaining to children. To give the government more of a monopoly on force means you have faith in the integrity of our officials, which isn't well founded at all. Our government has a long history of being corrupt and abusive in its use of power.

What's particularly funny among some on the left is how they want to defund police yet also ban guns. It doesn't make any sense. If you can see the corruption and tyranny of police, the last thing you want to do is create a situation where cops are the only ones who can readily access guns legally.

 

[Eschatologist]

Earlier in the thread you said Virginia attempted to ban all semi-auto rifles, which is not true. You also said that Washington is about to pass a ban on sales and importation that covers basically all semi-automatic rifles, which is debatable since it's hard to determine just how many models of semi-automatic rifles and variants of each there are. That law did in fact pass, and even if it does ban most semi-automatic rifles, there are still plenty of semi-automatic rifles available for people living in that state to purchase.

I'll cut to the chase here. Would you support a ban on every type of semiautomatic rifle? I'm explicitly referring to a law that calls out every single model that exists that is semiautomatic.

 

[JosephZ]

Would you support a ban on every type of semiautomatic rifle? I'm explicitly referring to a law that calls out every single model that exists that is semiautomatic.

No.

 

[Eschatologist]

No.

Alright, so would you support a ban on the majority of semiautomatic rifle models that exist? You seemed to be ok with that idea, since in a previous post you excused Washington's ban by saying that "even if it does ban most semi-automatic rifles, there are still plenty of semi-automatic rifles available for people living in that state to purchase." So, I'd like to know what percentage of rifle models you find acceptable to ban.

 

[JosephZ]

Alright, so would you support a ban on the majority of semiautomatic rifle models that exist? You seemed to be ok with that idea, since in a previous post you excused Washington's ban by saying that "even if it does ban most semi-automatic rifles, there are still plenty of semi-automatic rifles available for people living in that state to purchase."

I answered this question earlier in the thread when you asked me if the semi-automatic rifles banned under Washington state's new law appeared reasonable to me. See post #342

I don't know the exact number of semi-automatic rifle models that exist, but if most happen to fall into that category, then I'm fine with it.

So would I support a ban on the majority of semiautomatic rifle models that exist? Yes, if they happen to meet the criteria found in the Washington state law, or other similar state laws where "assult style" rifles have been banned.

As for what else I would like to see at the federal level in addition to a ban on "assault style" weapons and high capacity magazines:

• Universal background checks on all gun purchases and transfers, including private transfers and sales at gun shows;
• Require a 10 day waiting period on all gun purchases;
• Require registration and a license for each gun that a person owns;
• Have a minimum age limit of 21 to purchase a handgun and require a hunting license for purchases of rifles or shotguns by adults under 21 who are not in the military or law enforcement; and
• Require training and a proficiency test for the type of gun being purchased.

None of the above would take away a person's right to keep and bear arms and they will still have the ability to purchase guns for hunting, target shooting, and protection.

 

[FenderTL5]

Because you assume that giving more power to the state (banning guns or at least some of them) would somehow save children. It won't. School shootings still happened during the Assault Weapons Ban that passed in the 90s. Even if you banned all handguns and all rifles, school shootings would still happen, because people can still get guns illegally, and because a ban doesn't address the root causes of shootings.
So, to push for bans basically means you have faith in the government being able to do what clearly isn't happening in a lot of other countries with bans and restrictive policies. That takes a lot of faith in government.

And this is only the side of it pertaining to children. To give the government more of a monopoly on force means you have faith in the integrity of our officials, which isn't well founded at all. Our government has a long history of being corrupt and abusive in its use of power.

(again re-reads the title of the thread)
You seem obsessed with secular power.
Romans 13 says, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation..
..Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
I don't have a problem with that, do you?

And as I've mentioned multiple times in this thread..

What you have posted in this thread is a spurrious mix of fact and fiction that has nothing to do with a Christian perspectve on anything.
It's all about your perception of secular power and the gun lobby's view of it.
Before you accuse others of idolatry, it would be wise to check for a speck in your own eye.

 

[ViaCrucis]

That stance sounds more Unitarian than Lutheran.

Lutherans are kind of big on faith in Jesus. You may have heard of that whole Reformation thing that happened about five hundred years ago. So I don't know how you see that as "Unitarian" rather than "Lutheran".

I believe there are Christian cultures just as much as I believe that there are Islamic cultures and Jewish ones. It would be rather odd to acknowledge all of the other cultures of the world while pretending that a Christian culture doesn't exist, unless you're suggesting that these other religious cultures are nonexistent as well.

Culture is not religion. An Islamic culture is not Islam. And it is also very likely the case that many practicing Muslims themselves have problems with the culture. Muslims, the world over, are some of the harshest critics of how things are done in a lot of historically Muslim nations.

So no, I don't believe "Christian culture" is Christian.

Christianity is not defined by culture, Christianity is not the predominant attitudes, feelings, and beliefs among a nominally Christian populace. Christianity is Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Incarnate Logos, God made flesh, born of the Virgin, who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, buried, and who rose on the third day, ascended into heaven, is seated at the right hand of the Father, and is coming again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

I don't care about "Christian culture", I care about Christianity. I care about the spiritual health of the Church. I care about the Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran