RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment ***

RE: ***Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment *** (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/30/2013 1:18:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound I was responding to the article you posted... which would lead some, without reading the bill, to believe the mentally ill are being issued licences. Yes that is exactly one of the things the bill accomplishes. More fruit loops with guns. quote: ORIGINAL: DsBound You cant put everyone into that category... I know people who've voluntarily entered hospitals for marijuana, food, alcohol... none of which I would deem mentally unstable. Once again and please read what I actually said this time: quote: I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. Having read the law the phrase unstable nutbar never appears. Further it does not remove the prohibition of people who have mental problems from getting permits or firearms. You must be getting your "information" from handgun control.

EdBowie -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/30/2013 7:10:34 PM)
That's pretty much the standard across the board. People who aren't convicted felons, but who are 'criminal' (such as misdemeanors) should get due process. People who aren't adjudicated a danger, but who do have a mental issue (bulimia, agoraphobia, Tourrette's) should get due process. People who are blind, but fall in the 'legally blind range of 'correctable to 20/40', should get due process. The propaganda to deny due process to people by smearing them with the broader label of 'nutjob', or 'crook', or 'handicapped', and conflate the whole category with a small section of it, is a denial of basic equality. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K.

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (9/30/2013 11:23:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie That's pretty much the standard across the board. People who aren't convicted felons, but who are 'criminal' (such as misdemeanors) should get due process. People who aren't adjudicated a danger, but who do have a mental issue (bulimia, agoraphobia, Tourrette's) should get due process. People who are blind, but fall in the 'legally blind range of 'correctable to 20/40', should get due process. The propaganda to deny due process to people by smearing them with the broader label of 'nutjob', or 'crook', or 'handicapped', and conflate the whole category with a small section of it, is a denial of basic equality. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. I would like to point out something "by a court", Cho, Alexis, Hoimes. Loughner were ever involuntarily hospitalized or adjudicated by a court prior to their shootings. One reason they got their guns legally.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 9:38:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie That's pretty much the standard across the board. People who aren't convicted felons, but who are 'criminal' (such as misdemeanors) should get due process. People who aren't adjudicated a danger, but who do have a mental issue (bulimia, agoraphobia, Tourrette's) should get due process. People who are blind, but fall in the 'legally blind range of 'correctable to 20/40', should get due process. The propaganda to deny due process to people by smearing them with the broader label of 'nutjob', or 'crook', or 'handicapped', and conflate the whole category with a small section of it, is a denial of basic equality. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. I would like to point out something "by a court", Cho, Alexis, Hoimes. Loughner were ever involuntarily hospitalized or adjudicated by a court prior to their shootings. One reason they got their guns legally. This from a man who spent several pages on another thread declaring that mental health information cannot be used because it would violate privacy.

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 9:48:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie That's pretty much the standard across the board. People who aren't convicted felons, but who are 'criminal' (such as misdemeanors) should get due process. People who aren't adjudicated a danger, but who do have a mental issue (bulimia, agoraphobia, Tourrette's) should get due process. People who are blind, but fall in the 'legally blind range of 'correctable to 20/40', should get due process. The propaganda to deny due process to people by smearing them with the broader label of 'nutjob', or 'crook', or 'handicapped', and conflate the whole category with a small section of it, is a denial of basic equality. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. I would like to point out something "by a court", Cho, Alexis, Hoimes. Loughner were ever involuntarily hospitalized or adjudicated by a court prior to their shootings. One reason they got their guns legally. This from a man who spent several pages on another thread declaring that mental health information cannot be used because it would violate privacy. He is right, under HIPPAA and the Disabilities Act, so the laws has to be changed.

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 9:50:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So you can bring a gun into a bar and a house of worship down in georgia now, and thats good, because that is where they are most needed. I am not religious, but I don't understand the need for a gun in Church. Wonder how God feels about it?

RottenJohnny -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 10:05:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So you can bring a gun into a bar and a house of worship down in georgia now, and thats good, because that is where they are most needed. I am not religious, but I don't understand the need for a gun in Church. Wonder how God feels about it? I don't either but God's already decided. He gave us free will to commit crime or defend ourselves. What matters is how the police, pastor, and other worshipers feel about it.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 10:11:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So you can bring a gun into a bar and a house of worship down in georgia now, and thats good, because that is where they are most needed. There is a church in Colorado where a person with a gun saved the lives of several of His followers. I am not religious, but I don't understand the need for a gun in Church. Wonder how God feels about it? It doesn't say you can carry in those places it says you can carry there if there is no objection from management. I can't see any bar not objecting. There is a church in Colorado where a member used a gun to protect the congregation. Remember Christ used a bullwhip on people in the temple.

BamaD -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 10:16:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So you can bring a gun into a bar and a house of worship down in georgia now, and thats good, because that is where they are most needed. I am not religious, but I don't understand the need for a gun in Church. Wonder how God feels about it? I don't either but God's already decided. He gave us free will to commit crime or defend ourselves. What matters is how the police, pastor, and other worshipers feel about it. Bingo

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 12:40:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So you can bring a gun into a bar and a house of worship down in georgia now, and thats good, because that is where they are most needed. There is a church in Colorado where a person with a gun saved the lives of several of His followers. I am not religious, but I don't understand the need for a gun in Church. Wonder how God feels about it? It doesn't say you can carry in those places it says you can carry there if there is no objection from management. I can't see any bar not objecting. There is a church in Colorado where a member used a gun to protect the congregation. Remember Christ used a bullwhip on people in the temple. Wrong again, no surprise "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” 17 His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” John 2:13-17 New International Version. I still find it hard to understand that a place were love, understanding and compassion are suppose to be practice there are also guns. But I am agnostic, so much for christian love.

joether -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 1:34:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie That's pretty much the standard across the board. People who aren't convicted felons, but who are 'criminal' (such as misdemeanors) should get due process. People who aren't adjudicated a danger, but who do have a mental issue (bulimia, agoraphobia, Tourrette's) should get due process. People who are blind, but fall in the 'legally blind range of 'correctable to 20/40', should get due process. The propaganda to deny due process to people by smearing them with the broader label of 'nutjob', or 'crook', or 'handicapped', and conflate the whole category with a small section of it, is a denial of basic equality. quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel I'm not claiming that every idea in the bill is unreasonable just it's arm the unstable nutbars provision. (2) No weapons carry license shall be issued to... (J) Any person who has been involuntarily hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center or adjudicated by a court to be in need of involuntary outpatient mental health treatment within the five years immediately preceding the application... HB 512 K. I would like to point out something "by a court", Cho, Alexis, Hoimes. Loughner were ever involuntarily hospitalized or adjudicated by a court prior to their shootings. One reason they got their guns legally. This from a man who spent several pages on another thread declaring that mental health information cannot be used because it would violate privacy. A patient's medical history is between them and their doctor. This includes the mental and emotional health. HOWEVER, if someone treating the patient believes the person in question is about to do something destructive to themselves or others, they can notify authorities. This usually takes the form of the patient explaining enough details of motive, situation, experience, and time table to establish to their doctor/therapist that the danger is immediate or very close to it. Understand this, the grand majority of Americans have not even an ounce of understanding of mental or emotional issues when they need a pound! Most people have no understanding of Depression for example. Effects millions of people, yet, many informed on the deadly illness suspect twice the population is effected by it. Ranging from mild to severe condition. We individuals without advanced medical or psychology degrees are poorly equipped to make informed judgments on whether a person has Depression or not. And it takes a while to determine the issue. Unfortunately even a mild case of real Depression can lead an individual down a very dark road. There are plenty more mental or emotional issues than you really realize. But scapegoating mental or emotional suffering individuals for spreading mass shootings does more damage than it helps. For starters, someone that might have such an illness will be LESS likely to seek help than to find enough courage to seek out proper help. Right now, there are no tests to determine one's sanity level like there is with physical health (his leg is obviously broken for example). Even if one is found to have some issue, how do we as a society deal with any and all firearms they own or have access to? Over on another thread, some 16 year old girl shot herself in the head. While the OP and several others focused on events five or ten minutes after then event, the unanswered question remained: why did she do it? Mental or emotional illness doesn't care which political party your in, your age, economic status, how big your dick is, whether you have kids or not, the cars you drive, sport teams you cheer for, or plenty of other things. But such a condition is an ever present danger the longer it goes on for; with access to firearms, they are many times more likely to be used for suicide rather than deal with an intruder. Unlike other suicide methods, a firearm is quick, easy, and 90% chance of success. Our collective 'do nothing' attitude will not stop or lessen the mass shootings in the future. Singling out one group of people for mob justice will not help the issues we face either. Dealing with the issue of firearm access, the mental/emotionally ill, laws, and treatment are no simple hurdles to over come.

Just0Us0Two -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 6:29:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It doesn't say you can carry in those places it says you can carry there if there is no objection from management. I can't see any bar not objecting. There is a church in Colorado where a member used a gun to protect the congregation. Remember Christ used a bullwhip on people in the temple. Wrong again, no surprise "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” 17 His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” John 2:13-17 New International Version. I still find it hard to understand that a place were love, understanding and compassion are suppose to be practice there are also guns. But I am agnostic, so much for christian love. I'm confused, how exactly does your quote somehow prove that he's "wrong again"? Bama said Christ used a bullwhip, your quote says he made a whip out of cord. Seems like semantics to me. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/la-pastor-shot-killed-church-service-article-1.1470490 As to why someone might choose to carry a gun in church, perhaps for the same reason that gun-free school zones don't work. Thugs like to prey on the unarmed. In the link I posted above, a former deacon of the church entered and shot the pastor dead during a sermon. Maybe if someone other then the killer had also been armed, the Pastor would still be alive. Love and compassion are all well and good, but Loving thy neighbor as you would yourself doesn't mean you have to allow yourself to be killed. The bible doesn't say you can't kill, it says that you can't murder. Subtle difference perhaps, but an important one when it comes to the right to self defense.

TheHeretic -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 7:38:20 PM)
The pastor had either fucked or raped the wife of the shooter, depending on which version you get. I wonder how Jesus would feel about that?

Just0Us0Two -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 8:21:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic The pastor had either fucked or raped the wife of the shooter, depending on which version you get. I wonder how Jesus would feel about that? And either one of those is grounds for summary execution? If he was having an affair with the ex-deacon's wife, then I'd say he wasn't much of an example to his congregation. If he raped her, then he deserved to be punished. However since so many of the folks commenting here don't think using violence is warranted, even when you're confronted with an armed individual, I fail to see how you can imply that this shooting was justified. As to how Jesus feels, I could care less. I'm not particularly religious. Actually, other then weddings and funerals, I haven't been in a church since I was 10. I wasn't the one to bring religion into the discussion, I just followed up on Nosathro's post. I think a person has the right to defend themselves where ever they are, the fact that they're at church isn't relevant. It was Nosathro who dragged Christian love into the mix.

TheHeretic -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 8:37:05 PM)
It's not my problem who you choose to engage with, or which translation of the Bible you like. If people want to make this dead preacher a poster child, and play the WWJD card, I'm perfectly happy to shove it back in their faces. [:D] (And if the rape allegation is true, I wouldn't convict from the jury box)

Just0Us0Two -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/1/2013 10:46:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic It's not my problem who you choose to engage with, or which translation of the Bible you like. If people want to make this dead preacher a poster child, and play the WWJD card, I'm perfectly happy to shove it back in their faces. [:D] (And if the rape allegation is true, I wouldn't convict from the jury box) Ok, I'll take the hit. It wasn't my intent to play the WWJD card, but I can see how it could be interpreted that way. Let's see if I can be more clear. Just because someone is in a building devoted to worship, they shouldn't have to give up their right to defend themselves. Just because someone considers themselves a good (insert religion of your choice here), that doesn't mean they are required to allow themselves to be abused/robbed/murdered. As far as the incident with the Pastor goes, I find your comment disturbing. Even if the rape allegation is true, this doesn't seem to be a spur of the moment, heat of passion event. The rape charge was filed 2 days before the shooting. The husband waited 2 days, (so he could confront him in church where the Pastor was an easy target?) then shot him once in the chest. He then walked up and put another round in the Pastor's head. That's an assassination. This doesn't even account for the evidence that the wife and Pastor had exchanged texts implying an ongoing sexual relationship.

Nosathro -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/2/2013 8:05:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Just0Us0Two quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD It doesn't say you can carry in those places it says you can carry there if there is no objection from management. I can't see any bar not objecting. There is a church in Colorado where a member used a gun to protect the congregation. Remember Christ used a bullwhip on people in the temple. Wrong again, no surprise "When it was almost time for the Jewish Passover, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14 In the temple courts he found people selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 To those who sold doves he said, “Get these out of here! Stop turning my Father’s house into a market!” 17 His disciples remembered that it is written: “Zeal for your house will consume me.” John 2:13-17 New International Version. I still find it hard to understand that a place were love, understanding and compassion are suppose to be practice there are also guns. But I am agnostic, so much for christian love. I'm confused, how exactly does your quote somehow prove that he's "wrong again"? Bama said Christ used a bullwhip, your quote says he made a whip out of cord. Seems like semantics to me. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/la-pastor-shot-killed-church-service-article-1.1470490 As to why someone might choose to carry a gun in church, perhaps for the same reason that gun-free school zones don't work. Thugs like to prey on the unarmed. In the link I posted above, a former deacon of the church entered and shot the pastor dead during a sermon. Maybe if someone other then the killer had also been armed, the Pastor would still be alive. Love and compassion are all well and good, but Loving thy neighbor as you would yourself doesn't mean you have to allow yourself to be killed. The bible doesn't say you can't kill, it says that you can't murder. Subtle difference perhaps, but an important one when it comes to the right to self defense. First of all a bull whip is not made of cord, I know a person who makes bull whips and that not how it is made. You are sighting a single incident so I fail to see justification for guns, also you have a lot of assumptions. Perhaps you are confused between religion and movie Zardoz?[;)]

slavekate80 -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/2/2013 8:31:40 AM)
People have been murdering other people for about as long as people have existed as our own species. Heck, in the Christian and Jewish traditions, it happened in the second generation of humanity, and the weapon of choice was a rock. See Genesis. (There's also an incident where a guy killed another guy claiming it was over a rape, but it turned out the killer was at least as nasty a person as the rapist, and brought grief to many more people, seeing as his next few moves involved starting a war and trying to take over. And sleeping with women who likely did not consent and weren't legally available to him. Hypocrisy isn't a flattering color on anyone. See 2 Samuel. No guns were involved.) Guns can certainly be dangerous in the wrong hands, and I hate the damn things except for necessary-for-food hunting purposes, but it's incredibly naive to think that guns are the cause of violence or that restricting legal access to guns is going to reduce violence. Someone who is either cruel or unbalanced enough to think that shooting people outside self-defense is a good idea is unlikely to be swayed by legal issues regarding getting a particular weapon. For one-on-one murders, you have a vast array of other weapons available, from crossbows to knives to poison. Mass killings can be accomplished via bombs or some chemical weapons. Suicide also can be done many, many other ways. Gang members, would-be murderers, and the like aren't going to go "Well, I can't buy a gun at the gun store, guess I'd better be nice and pet kittens today." Prohibition didn't work on alcohol. It isn't working on other drugs. It's not going to work on guns, either - you'll get a small reduction in crimes commited with legal weapons and exchange it for a bigger black market. You'd get a much bigger reduction in violence by tackling the root causes than by making getting a particular type of weapon a little harder. That takes a lot more work and won't be accomplished in a single year via a bill passed through Congress, but unlike putting more restrictions on who can legally obtain firearms, it would actually do something beyond create the false appearance of giving a damn to get votes.

PeonForHer -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/2/2013 9:50:36 AM)
quote: As to why someone might choose to carry a gun in church, perhaps for the same reason that gun-free school zones don't work. Thugs like to prey on the unarmed. In the link I posted above, a former deacon of the church entered and shot the pastor dead during a sermon. Maybe if someone other then the killer had also been armed, the Pastor would still be alive. Love and compassion are all well and good, but Loving thy neighbor as you would yourself doesn't mean you have to allow yourself to be killed. Yep, schoolkids should go to school armed. After all, the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention a lower age limit, does it? Also, forget neighbours that aren't all that 'loving' - more people get killed by members of their own families. So, all mothers and fathers, and all their children, should be armed at all times when at home. It's the only way forward to a mature, Godly and civilised society.

Yachtie -> RE: *Unmoderated Gun rights debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment * (10/2/2013 11:46:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Yep, schoolkids should go to school armed. Once upon a time kids would go to school and leave their, most often, .22 cal rifles in their lockers as to go hunting after school. And here.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1054688