Christian Viewpoint On The Gun Debate

[Postvieww]

When they traveled they carried swords for self defense.

That is exactly the reason I carry a gun when I travel.

 

[WOFFER]

If we are going to let would-be criminals determine the nature of law, why have laws at all?

That makes no sense at all.

 

[WOFFER]

Not banned for all people but have adequate background check for real.

agree

 

[FireDragon76]

That makes no sense at all.

The argument seems to be, because people might procure assault weapons through a black market, we shouldn't have gun regulation at all. That would be like saying we shouldn't have laws against selling cocaine or heroin, because people might obtain them through a black market.

 

[Divide]

The argument seems to be, because people might procure assault weapons through a black market, we shouldn't have gun regulation at all. That would be like saying we shouldn't have laws against selling cocaine or heroin, because people might obtain them through a black market.

Oh no it's not. How are narcotics comparable to live saving tools? Lol! Wherin are they similar?

There should be no gun regulation at all. Gun regulation should be done in the courtroom when the punk is brought up on charges by locking the individual up so he can not be a danger to society. If they didnt release dangerous prisoners routinely then maybe we wouldnt even need guns to defend ourselves against these malefactors?

If a prisoner is safe enough to be released onto the street then he should be able to defend himself also. Is he not trustworthy with guns? Then dont parole him! It's really very simple.

Instead what we have is violent prisoners being released and the innocent public is penalized and put under tighter control by erasing our freedoms, how much sense does that make? If they want to be like that then who cares what laws they pass and what gun or stock is "legal" They can go do as they will but they are creating a new class of enemys by trying to take away peoples rights who have not committed any crimes.

 

[FireDragon76]

Oh no it's not. How are narcotics comparable to live saving tools? Lol! Wherin are they similar?

Life saving tool?

An assault weapon is literally a life-taking tool.

There should be no gun regulation at all. Gun regulation should be done in the courtroom when the punk is brought up on charges by locking the individual up so he can not be a danger to society. If they didnt release dangerous prisoners routinely then maybe we wouldnt even need guns to defend ourselves against these malefactors?

Alot of gun violence is done by "good guys with guns". The whole "good guys with a gun" mentality is part of the problem. People aren't good or bad like that, most human beings' behaviors are heavily dependent on the circumstances they find themselves in. Mental illness, for instance, can push otherwise good people to do bad things.

 

[dogs4thewin]

The argument seems to be, because people might procure assault weapons through a black market, we shouldn't have gun regulation at all. That would be like saying we shouldn't have laws against selling cocaine or heroin, because people might obtain them through a black market.

At this point though the black market is so big there are so many guns that even if we did anything it would take years to have any notable impact. Funny you should mention drugs as anything like that on the black market is more dangerous than if things are legal because people do not know what they are getting. This is why it is common now for places to focus more on harm reduction than into actually focus on the users because they have realized that it is a better use of resources and saves more lives that way, yet it is not legal, so just like with that what about instead of trying more gun regulations we enforce the ones we actually have as there are actually quite a few populations that are not legally allowed to process guns; although whether they are actually charged if caught has a lot to do with the DA, how they were found and what they were doing (if anything) with the gun at the time. For example, some DAS will not charge people with an illegal gun if they used said gun strictly in self defense.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Life saving tool?

An assault weapon is literally a life-taking tool.



Alot of gun violence is done by "good guys with guns". The whole "good guys with a gun" mentality is part of the problem. People aren't good or bad like that, most human beings' behaviors are heavily dependent on the circumstances they find themselves in. Mental illness, for instance, can push otherwise good people to do bad things.

sometimes you have to take a life to save a life.

 

[Divide]

Life saving tool?

An assault weapon is literally a life-taking tool.

Do you know how war works? One side begins attacking the other side with the intention of taking the most lives they can. People who do mass shootings are sort of similar. They might want to go attack the school and kill 50 or 60 people.

So he goes in and begins, he shoots someone dead in the hallway and goes off to find a room full of victims...but the Principal happened to have an AR15 in his office so goes and shoot the gunmen dead before the gunman can kill 60 people or whatever.

So in my scenario two lives were taken. The gunman and one victim. and when the principal came around the corner and killed the gunman...ok the gunman lost his life but the principal saved more lives than he took. So yes sir, it is a tool to save lives. Deranged individuals that would shoot up a school full of children need to be taken out of the gene pool.

Alot of gun violence is done by "good guys with guns". The whole "good guys with a gun" mentality is part of the problem. People aren't good or bad like that, most human beings' behaviors are heavily dependent on the circumstances they find themselves in. Mental illness, for instance, can push otherwise good people to do bad things.

No. Good guys with guns mentality is a response to criminal mentality. Most good guys with guns do not wind up shooting the bad guy. In many cases many of which are probably not even reported the mere presence of a gun by the intended victim is enough to frighten off the criminals without any shots fired.


All of the situations are dependant on circumstances of course. But what is our main objective? Survival. Nothing less. Using your logic, I do not have a gun mentality because in my several close calls in carrying a pistol for 38+ years with only two shots fired and zero people or animals shot, then I must not have a gun mentality like you imply about those who watch too much TV or something. And A "gun mentality" to me means survival. I could have easily shot the dig that attacked me. I gave it a warning shot in front of it and stopped his charge. (The owner heard the shot and was so ecstatic that his dog was alive that he bought the dog a new chain that very night because he was on it in the morning!

I could have shot the man who tried to do a home invasion on me. The Police said I shoud have shot him based on the evidence. (Broken glass in my screen door, evidence of violence. But that wasnt my objective! I only wanted to survive and not allow him access to my house.

Besides, I am well aware that shooting people affects on psychologically. Never in a good way either! (ever heard of PTSD?) So your gun mentality with the and blood shall flow in the streets may describe some people who have a Hollywood Mentality, but it doesnt come close to describing everyone.

 

[Aldebaran]

The argument seems to be, because people might procure assault weapons through a black market, we shouldn't have gun regulation at all. That would be like saying we shouldn't have laws against selling cocaine or heroin, because people might obtain them through a black market.

The actual argument is that since the laws being proposed to stop assault weapons from being gotten through a black market won't have any real effect on criminals getting guns, and only affects the people who are law-abiding, they make no sense to enact.
Nobody has proposed eliminating all existing gun regulations.

 

[Divide]

Nobody has proposed eliminating all existing gun regulations.

I came close to it when I said gun regulation should be done in the court room by locking up the offenders of innocents.

The other side of that coin would prolly be those with mental health issues. Almost the same? Are their mental health issues bad enough for them to be institutionalized? If yes then no guns for them. But if their good enough to be seen on an outpatient basis, then they have to walk around too in this dangerous world.

 

[Aldebaran]

I came close to it when I said gun regulation should be done in the court room by locking up the offenders of innocents.

The other side of that coin would prolly be those with mental health issues. Almost the same? Are their mental health issues bad enough for them to be institutionalized? If yes then no guns for them. But if their good enough to be seen on an outpatient basis, then they have to walk around too in this dangerous world.

That regulation about mental health is a bit ironic when it comes to military veterans who have seen combat and suffered mental health issues as a result. If they get treatment, they may risk giving up their gun rights.

 

[Divide]

That regulation about mental health is a bit ironic when it comes to military veterans who have seen combat and suffered mental health issues as a result. If they get treatment, they may risk giving up their gun rights.

I agree, that wouldn't be right. Man this is complicated. So now what? Back up a bit and get deeper. Ok how's this? Gun control must begin in the heart.

That sounds sort of far fetched because we have all been taught from birth to hate and fight. You have to fight to be a man, boy...and all that stuff. If he calls you a coward you have to kill him! Was that an accurate (Western) mentality? Maybe a little. Probably not if they call you a coward you have to kill them, that's hollywood. Everybody can fight very well and we all know how to hate. But the actual answer is the opposite and all of us Christians know this. That is in fact our secondary mission on earthh, to learn to love your neighbor as yourself. That can take some doing in a hateful world!

But learning matters of love and having a heart for people is almost portrayed as sissyfied or something, but it's not. Our attitudes shape our heart and how we think. Go out of your way to show your wife or someone a bit of love today rather than any form of hate. Even sarcasm? Geez most jokes are couched in hatred or a wrongness is involved if you think about it.

I'll say this, when I started walking with the Lord seriously, that is what I was directed and instructed to learn and experience. Over time it is noticeable. This may be the spiritual war that we speak of. Not only are we to refrain (repent) from doing harm, but to also elevate our spirit and heart unto God by doing good deeds for people! Out of Love.

But they dont think like that in the secular world.

 

[FireDragon76]

The actual argument is that since the laws being proposed to stop assault weapons from being gotten through a black market won't have any real effect on criminals getting guns, and only affects the people who are law-abiding, they make no sense to enact.
Nobody has proposed eliminating all existing gun regulations.

What do you mean by people that are "Law abiding"? Nobody seriously argues that a driver's license punishes the law abiding, so why would regulation of guns punish the law abiding? People that obey the law don't get punished, that's what it means to be law abiding. Or are there some kind of potentially racist or classist assumptions behind the notion that there is a particular group of people that are "law abiding" by nature?

 

[FireDragon76]

Do you know how war works? One side begins attacking the other side with the intention of taking the most lives they can. People who do mass shootings are sort of similar. They might want to go attack the school and kill 50 or 60 people.

I suppose you think war is a life-saving tool, too?

No. Good guys with guns mentality is a response to criminal mentality.

Is there really such a thing? Peoples' motivations for committing crimes are complex, as complex as the motivations for obeying laws.

 

[Divide]

I suppose you think war is a life-saving tool, too?

Hamas is asking themselves the same question right now. And what Israel is doing to them will save many Israeli lives in the future.

It's not my fault that most people have a bad attitude on this planet.

Is there really such a thing? Peoples' motivations for committing crimes are complex, as complex as the motivations for obeying laws.

So I think you just said that there's no such thing as a person who fights back the criminal who is attacking them. No such thing as a response to someone handing me violence? Haha! Surely you jest!

And who cares what the criminals motivation is! I aint there to psychoanalyze the guy, I'm just there to survive. And when someone hands you violence, the only reasonable response is to hand it back to him expotentially increased to the point that he wants to stop his attack and go home to lick his wounds.

Or maybe you think I should not resist and have compassion on the man to try to psychoanalyze the man to try to understand his motivations? That's one of the most absurd notions that I've ever heard put forth.

So is that what you would do if you were attacked or had a home invasion?

 

[dogs4thewin]

I suppose you think war is a life-saving tool, too?



Is there really such a thing? Peoples' motivations for committing crimes are complex, as complex as the motivations for obeying laws.

Civilians die in war it is that simple and sad, but sometimes when violence is the only thing people understand lives in the short term are taken for peace. Think about how many people died in World War II and yet think about how much worse it would have been had there NOT been the war how many more people would likely have died if Hitler had been allowed to simply keep on like that.

Civilians die in war, but sometimes more would die without it.

 

[Aldebaran]

What do you mean by people that are "Law abiding"? Nobody seriously argues that a driver's license punishes the law abiding, so why would regulation of guns punish the law abiding? People that obey the law don't get punished, that's what it means to be law abiding. Or are there some kind of potentially racist or classist assumptions behind the notion that there is a particular group of people that are "law abiding" by nature?

Law abiding citizens buy their guns through methods that involve paperwork and background checks. If modern sporting weapons are banned, it's the law abiding that wouldn't be able to buy them. The criminals get guns through other methods (Think: Chicago), and don't have to go through the regulatory hoops that the law-abiding go through, and therefore are able to obtain guns even if they're banned.

 

[Aldebaran]

Is there really such a thing? Peoples' motivations for committing crimes are complex, as complex as the motivations for obeying laws.

Should that also be the response when someone does a mass shooting?

 

[YorkieGal]

Should that also be the response when someone does a mass shooting?

I'm so sick of people psychoanalyzing people. Who cares. Actions have consequences. Learn how to aim, learn how to shoot, learn how to defend yourself, learn that these things are things that need to be learned and get on with your day.

Pretending to be Dr Phil all day is pointless! Grown ups are living in reality and everyone can thank us later.