next »

CatholiChat

Bible

Catechism

Catholic Encyclopedia

Today's Readings

Advanced search

[Rich PA]

Guns don't kill, people do. Passing strict anti-gun possession laws will only keep guns out of the hands of honest people. Those with evil intent will always be able to obtain guns no matter how many years you want to send a person to jail for having one. Passing strict gun laws such as you propose, Terence is no deterent in the same way that the death penalty has been proven to be ineffective in detering murder. Illegal hand guns are readily obtained on the streets of NY City and many other major US cities if you know where to go.

About the only thing you want to do is try to delay access to guns to help cut down on crimes of passion. "Saturday Night Specials" where people get mad at their spouse or another person and go out and buy a gun and shoot them, -that sort of thing.

The constitutional right to "Bear Arms" came about because ordinary citizens who owned guns for survival by hunting and for self defense banded together to protect our young country in the eighteenth century and thus formed militias. Today, almost no one needs a gun to hunt for food on a normal basis and certainly we have a powerful army. However hunting for sport or to put extra food on the table remains a legal right. That leaves the question of whether a person should own a gun for protection and defense of property.

I think Bruno just gave you a sustainable argument for the right to own a gun. Perhaps your laws work in Europe because of a cultural difference. For one thing, some European countries are smaller than some of our states in size. All the western european countries combined that you mention would fit within the United States. Removing a temptation (out of sight out of mind) will not prevent one from committing a sin if a person is bent on committing one. Alcohol for example, used in moderation by responsible adults is good. Alcohol does not ruin families, lives, careers etc. It is the abuse of it that does. Prohibition proved useless and ineffective to stop alcohol consumption. The same goes with gun possession. I don't think anyone has the right to tell another person what they should or should not legally own. Some people own guns for target practice, others for defense of livestock, others for self protection who routinely carry large sums of money such as armored money carrier companies who supply banks. Others still, simply like to collect guns. Some hunt for sport or as I have said, to put extra food on the table. And there is nothing wrong with any of those examples.

As far as the bible and the Church goes,(if I am not mistaken) you probably won't find anything against inanimate/created objects nor any of Creation, really. This is because "...And God saw all that He created and it was good". But you will find plenty in the bible, and in Church teaching against the improper use of God's creation.  Murder,adulteriy, drunkeness, just to name three.  "Thou shalt not kill"  for starters. Not living by the sword, does not mean you cannot own one or that God forbids it. Look at the latest shootings at VA Tech, the gunman is dead. This is how it is meant. You can't take that biblical passage to mean that all hunters will die by gun accidents.

What needs to be done is preserve and promote gospel/family values, morals and common decency. Abolishing gun ownership will not remove a parents duty to teach their children responsiblity and consequences of their actions. Nor will it teach children non violence, peace and love for one another, nor re-enforce right from wrong.

I would wonder why this is such a hot topic, when millions of innocent babies are being slaughtered every year. And even worse, when God is systematically being removed from society. I want to talk about erosion of the freedom of the right to life, the freedom of worship. I don't see many postings on those topics. All of this is happening all over the world, not just the US.

The disintegration of family is the root of many of society's problems. And all that we are talking about is the result.  The family is the basic unit of a stable and civilized society. Without it, civilization is doomed

"If you want Peace, work for Justice." (Pope Paul VI)

[Edward Michael]

There is reliable data that well over a million Americans defend their own lives and others every year with guns they own. 

The question is never if there are guns but who has them...
John Lott, PHD, at the University of Chicago has written an interesting book called:  More Guns, Less Crime.  The title says it all.

[Terence IRL]

If strict gun laws are not a deterrent, then perhaps you might explain how 500 million people in Europe can safely walk the streets in the sure knowledge of not being shot - or how the same 500 million can sleep safely in their beds without the need of a gun in the house?

You say that people enjoy hunting and target practising - that too happens in Europe and around the world - but the possession of those guns are strictly controlled. Unlike the US, no one can simply walk into a gun store and purchase deadly weapons, yet some people can still enjoy hunting and target practising.

People keep on about the "Constitutional Right to bare arms" - as though this is cast indellibly in stone. Constitutional rights are not absolute rights and can from time to time, and in certain circumstances, be suspended.

The example of 'prohibition of alcohol' is not a comparable example.

However, what does amaze me to a large extent is the argument, that because it is a constitutional right, this justifies the continuance of gun possession, because it is a "Right". Even the argument to take life is defended under this "Right" - yet the same proponents of this sacred "Right" deny the Constitutional "Right to choose" because it denies life.

Just as a mother has the choice to kill an unborn, the gun owner has exactly the same choice, if put in that position - to end life.

As clearly proven throughout this entire post - there are plenty of weak excuses, but not one sustainable argument, which defends the necessity or logic of a citizen possessing a gun.

As for John Lott, PHD - it might serve him well to look at the crime statistics again - I'm sure he'll be surprised that the US has the highest crime rate in the world - more guns less crime!!! yeah right.

[Bruno]

Luke 11:21,22 "When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things are in peace which he possesseth.  But if a stronger (better armed) than he come apon him and overcome him; he will take away all his armor wherein he trusted, and distribute his spoils."
 
Sigh, It has always been thus. The bad guys do not obey any gun laws. Therefore it is only prudent that the good guys  be armed as well in order to fulfill their duty to defend their families from those who would attack them.

The weak  invite attack (easy prey). The strong usually avoid it all together.

[Rich PA]

You can't use the argument about constitutional rights being upheld and denied  using abortion as an example. Our Faith teaches us the difference between obeying just laws and abolishing unjust laws.