Responsible Firearms ownership

[MHWH]

CJ wrote

"There is also a lot of talk about not allowing prayer in school, but if amendments give you the right to have a gun they also give you the right not to be subjected to somebody elses religion. Either you believe in the amendments or you don't, you can't pick and choose Cj"

They stopped prayer in school years ago. The supreme court opened their session that day, with a prayer, and then voted to stop
prayer in schools. Hmmmm.

Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to get across.

Mike

[Neil]

CJ wrote

"There is also a lot of talk about not allowing prayer in school, but if amendments give you the right to have a gun they also give you the right not to be subjected to somebody elses religion. Either you believe in the amendments or you don't, you can't pick and choose

Please read the 1st Amendment and then tell me that is what it says.

I understand it to mean that Congress cannot legislate religion. I don't think it has anything to do with public schools, that is just a Liberal interpretation. Not that I think any amount of prayer would overcome the evil in some.

Seperation of church and state is not even mentioned, that is a modern notion.

Just wondering.

[ezzy333]

Right on Neil. So many people have listened to the banter of the times and haven't ever bothered to read the Constitution.

Ezzy

[Ruffshooter]

Neil You are right.
It was not to restrict religion just to keep the State/Fed from instituting State religion and dictating your religious beliefs. Pretty simple as is most of the constitution and bill of rights.
Says nothing about public shools or public displays of religion. It is all the Libs that are pushing all the changes.

[DogNewbie]

Neil You are right.
It was not to restrict religion just to keep the State/Fed from instituting State religion and dictating your religious beliefs. Pretty simple as is most of the constitution and bill of rights.
Says nothing about public shools or public displays of religion. It is all the Libs that are pushing all the changes.

The issue when I was in high school was that the school board wanted to make creationism part of the science curriculum. IMO that's inappropriate. I grew up with religion in my household. There was no reason for it to be in school as well.

[Neil]

Neil You are right.
It was not to restrict religion just to keep the State/Fed from instituting State religion and dictating your religious beliefs. Pretty simple as is most of the constitution and bill of rights.
Says nothing about public shools or public displays of religion. It is all the Libs that are pushing all the changes.

The issue when I was in high school was that the school board wanted to make creationism part of the science curriculum. IMO that's inappropriate. I grew up with religion in my household. There was no reason for it to be in school as well.

You do know that evolution is a theory, right? Way should we not teach creationisom? Not sure what that has to do with gun rights. Other than the Libs want to rewrite the Constitution and the amendments.

[DogNewbie]

CJ wrote

"There is also a lot of talk about not allowing prayer in school, but if amendments give you the right to have a gun they also give you the right not to be subjected to somebody elses religion. Either you believe in the amendments or you don't, you can't pick and choose

Please read the 1st Amendment and then tell me that is what it says.

I understand it to mean that Congress cannot legislate religion. I don't think it has anything to do with public schools, that is just a Liberal interpretation. Not that I think any amount of prayer would overcome the evil in some.

Seperation of church and state is not even mentioned, that is a modern notion.

Just wondering.

Teachers are people of influence. That's why there are laws prohibiting teachers to have relationships with students that are 18+. Sure you can argue that the teacher is only practicing his right to pray if he wants, but when he does so with students he's influencing them in a way that some parents may not agree with. What would you say if your kid had a teacher that started class with a declaration of atheism and how there is no God? It's his right to do that but I'm sure you wouldn't be ok with it. Best just to keep things that are as personal as religion at home IMO.

[DogNewbie]

Neil You are right.
It was not to restrict religion just to keep the State/Fed from instituting State religion and dictating your religious beliefs. Pretty simple as is most of the constitution and bill of rights.
Says nothing about public shools or public displays of religion. It is all the Libs that are pushing all the changes.

The issue when I was in high school was that the school board wanted to make creationism part of the science curriculum. IMO that's inappropriate. I grew up with religion in my household. There was no reason for it to be in school as well.

You do know that evolution is a theory, right? Way should we not teach creationisom? Not sure what that has to do with gun rights. Other than the Libs want to rewrite the Constitution and the amendments.

Evolution is a scientific theory. It belongs in a science class. Creationism is not a scientific theory. It does not belong in a science class. We had a religion course at my high school that a few of my friends really enjoyed. It wasn't presented as science however.

[DogNewbie]

You do know that evolution is a theory, right? Way should we not teach creationisom? Not sure what that has to do with gun rights. Other than the Libs want to rewrite the Constitution and the amendments.

Evolution is a scientific theory. It belongs in a science class. Creationism is not a scientific theory. It does not belong in a science class. We had a religion course at my high school that a few of my friends really enjoyed. It wasn't presented as science however and it wasn't a required course like science class is.

[Neil]

I believe creationism is a scientic theory, it has just been rejected by the Libs. Are you unclear on the meaning of "theory" ?

I can and do accept many of the theories of evolution and still believe in a Creator.

[cjhills]

To me the first amendment gives one freedom from government mandated religion. Freedom of and from religion. If a child is required by law to attend school until 16 years of age, forcing him to be involved in prayer and a religion he may or may not believe in is a violation of his first amendment rights, just as much as taking our guns violates ours. IMO. I realize there may be alterative schools, but not for every one.
This is getting a bit off track. Cj

[DogNewbie]

I believe creationism is a scientic theory, it has just been rejected by the Libs. Are you unclear on the meaning of "theory" ?

I can and do accept many of the theories of evolution and still believe in a Creator.

Creationism is not science. It's a belief. It's based on faith, not factual evidence. It has it's place in my personal life, but not in science. Scientific theories are explanations of the natural world based on facts. These facts are extensively tested using the scientific method and either remain theoretical or are disproven. If a theory cannot be disproven time and time again, it eventually becomes accepted in the scientific world as fact, even though there will always be a minuscule probability that it could be false. That's the thing about theories. They can never be proven, only disproven. I think I have a pretty good grasp on the meaning of "theory."

[ezzy333]

I believe creationism is a scientic theory, it has just been rejected by the Libs. Are you unclear on the meaning of "theory" ?

I can and do accept many of the theories of evolution and still believe in a Creator.

Creationism is not science. It's a belief. It's based on faith, not factual evidence. It has it's place in my personal life, but not in science. Scientific theories are explanations of the natural world based on facts. These facts are extensively tested using the scientific method and either remain theoretical or are disproven. If a theory cannot be disproven time and time again, it eventually becomes accepted in the scientific world as fact, even though there will always be a minuscule probability that it could be false. That's the thing about theories. They can never be proven, only disproven. I think I have a pretty good grasp on the meaning of "theory."

You know you are right but there are way too many things we have learned about the stories of creation that are now being backed up as fact. Plus in my mind the two pretty much agree and help explain the other. So I think you better back off of the complete separation of the two and open your mind.

I also have a problem with your explanation of people who don't believe being offended if the teacher prays in school or where ever. Are you offended when you see a Jewish or Muslim inspired scene displayed on the Court House lawn? Do you feel that the government is putting pressure on you to change your religion? I doubt it very much but if you or anyone else feels that way it seems to me to be your problem and not the rest of us. It is another case of people unable to take responsibility for their own believes and/or actions so lets make a law that says you all need to do what I think is right. Same principle as gun control and way too much of everything the government is trying to do to us today.

I would guess you are a responsible gun owner and I know I am. I doubt if you would think so though, since I do not subscribe to the theory that I have to protect anyone who is tempted to break and enter or even trespass to steal my guns. My cars sit in my yard with the keys in them, my house doors are unlocked. Just a product of growing up in a house without locks and respecting my neighbors vehicles that sat in their yards and fields with the keys in them. Even when I go hunting the truck is left with the keys in it and unlocked normally. Rather do that than take a chance of losing the keys, which has happened but I haven't ever lost a thing from leaving things unlocked.

The best thing you can do to ease your mind is to quit listening to the news and start believing in people. There are a few bad areas but by and large people are still pretty honest and caring. We just don't hear about them on the news.

Ezzy

[DogNewbie]

You know you are right but there are way too many things we have learned about the stories of creation that are now being backed up as fact. Plus in my mind the two pretty much agree and help explain the other. So I think you better back off of the complete separation of the two and open your mind.

Can you elaborate on the learnings of the creation story that are now backed as fact? I never said I believe in a complete separation of the two, in fact I stated that there is a place for creationism in my personal life. But that lies in my faith not in logical explanations. My point is everyone has very personalized beliefs when it comes to this stuff and it's easiest to just keep it personal.

I also have a problem with your explanation of people who don't believe being offended if the teacher prays in school or where ever. Are you offended when you see a Jewish or Muslim inspired scene displayed on the Court House lawn? Do you feel that the government is putting pressure on you to change your religion? I doubt it very much but if you or anyone else feels that way it seems to me to be your problem and not the rest of us. It is another case of people unable to take responsibility for their own believes and/or actions so lets make a law that says you all need to do what I think is right. Same principle as gun control and way too much of everything the government is trying to do to us today.

I have zero problems with others practicing their religion in public. I say Merry Christmas to people I don't know and assume I won't be offending anyone. I'd never be offended by any of your examples above. Again, my point is that teachers are a person of authority and influence and so they are held to a different standard when at work.

I would guess you are a responsible gun owner and I know I am. I doubt if you would think so though, since I do not subscribe to the theory that I have to protect anyone who is tempted to break and enter or even trespass to steal my guns. My cars sit in my yard with the keys in them, my house doors are unlocked. Just a product of growing up in a house without locks and respecting my neighbors vehicles that sat in their yards and fields with the keys in them. Even when I go hunting the truck is left with the keys in it and unlocked normally. Rather do that than take a chance of losing the keys, which has happened but I haven't ever lost a thing from leaving things unlocked.

The best thing you can do to ease your mind is to quit listening to the news and start believing in people. There are a few bad areas but by and large people are still pretty honest and caring. We just don't hear about them on the news.

Ezzy

I'd love to believe in goodness of strangers, but I guess there's a realist in me as well. I live in a city and while I would probably complain if my house or car got robbed when I left it unlocked, I'd still shoulder some of the blame for not taking the necessary precautions to help prevent the situation. It's just dumb not to do so in the city. I think it's great that you live in a community where your property is respected. I don't.

[Sharon]

American Stats . show that women are in greater danger if they have a gun in the house. (NOT saying everyone man who has a gun in the house will harm women .)

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/documents ... olence.pdf

edit : link fixed

[Brazosvalleyvizslas]

That statistic only means that a knife, bat or fists would have been used if the gun was not present. You won't stop domestic violence by getting rid of guns.

[Sharon]

That statistic only means that a knife, bat or fists would have been used if the gun was not present. You won't stop domestic violence by getting rid of guns.

That's a very true BUT a knife or a fist is less likely to kill. Studies have shown that women will fight back if it's a knife or a fist too.

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/docume...20Violence.pdf

[Neil]

I do not trust statistics given by a group with an agenda, neither from the left or right, Sharon.

I couldn't get your link to open, but often times those numbers include criminals shooting one another or even police shootings. Never do they say the gun in the household was the one used against the owner.

You can make numbers say whatever you want. I know my wife, daughter-in-law, and granddaughters are much safer with guns in our home, and I don't think others should infringe on that right.

[dan v]

That statistic only means that a knife, bat or fists would have been used if the gun was not present. You won't stop domestic violence by getting rid of guns.

That's a very true BUT a knife or a fist is less likely to kill. Studies have shown that women will fight back if it's a knife or a fist too.

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/docume...20Violence.pdf

So really what you're saying, is that it's far more dangerous for a woman to cohabit with a significant other that is abusive.

[wems2371]

I couldn't get your link to open, ...

Same here.

[ezzy333]

/We just had the second murder in our town of 18000 people in the past ten years I think I read. First one was smothered and this latest one was strangled. Sounds like a reasonable excuse to ban guns.

Ezzy

[Sharon]

That statistic only means that a knife, bat or fists would have been used if the gun was not present. You won't stop domestic violence by getting rid of guns.

That's a very true BUT a knife or a fist is less likely to kill. Studies have shown that women will fight back if it's a knife or a fist too.

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/docume...20Violence.pdf

So really what you're saying, is that it's far more dangerous for a woman to cohabit with a significant other that is abusive.

Of course, but if there is a gun in the home that woman's safety is more at risk. NOT saying every man with a gun is a risk to woman. I'd rather not offend every man on here.

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/documents ... olence.pdf

edit: link fixed

[Neil]

Sharon,

I fully respect your decision to not have a gun for whatever reason, even if from dubious statistics.

But please don't infringe on other's rights. Or support the governments attempts.

[cohanzick creek]

Why you guys arguing about religieon, Diane Finestien, and five other senators are trying to put through the biggest gun ban in our history. They're taking it a lot farther, then what was first thought. If you guys dont think our second amendment rights are not in jeopardy, then guys are mistaken. On a personal note, i do believe when we took God out of our schools, is what led us on the path we're out now. And no i dont wear my religieon on my Sleeve
cc

[Brazosvalleyvizslas]

A high percentage of those women are killed by their own gun which they acquired because they were staying in an abusive relationship. I can only speak for Houston because that is where I was a defense instructor. When women called the police department and asked for help they were usually given a few options and one of those was always to buy a gun and learn how to use it. The problem is that many of these women don't want out of the relationship for whatever reason. If they won't walk away from the relationship they surely aren't going to end it permanently by killing the abuser. I can't tell you how many women I instructed over the years but it's been alot. A few had future incidents where the gun and instruction prevented the crime and NONE have fallen victim to their own gun or anyone else's weapon. You can even see it in the way they walk. They refuse to be a victim.

[DogNewbie]

Why you guys arguing about religieon, Diane Finestien, and five other senators are trying to put through the biggest gun ban in our history. They're taking it a lot farther, then what was first thought. If you guys dont think our second amendment rights are not in jeopardy, then guys are mistaken. On a personal note, i do believe when we took God out of our schools, is what led us on the path we're out now. And no i dont wear my religieon on my Sleeve
cc

In your opinion, how would God in school change the way things are?

[brad27]

Why you guys arguing about religieon, Diane Finestien, and five other senators are trying to put through the biggest gun ban in our history. They're taking it a lot farther, then what was first thought. If you guys dont think our second amendment rights are not in jeopardy, then guys are mistaken. On a personal note, i do believe when we took God out of our schools, is what led us on the path we're out now. And no i dont wear my religieon on my Sleeve
cc

In your opinion, how would God in school change the way things are?

Morals.

[Sharon]

Sharon,

I fully respect your decision to not have a gun for whatever reason, even if from dubious statistics.

But please don't infringe on other's rights. Or support the governments attempts.

Absolutely not . No reminder needed. Actually I have 2 shotguns.

link fixed:
http://www.seesac.org/uploads/documents ... olence.pdf

[DogNewbie]

Why you guys arguing about religieon, Diane Finestien, and five other senators are trying to put through the biggest gun ban in our history. They're taking it a lot farther, then what was first thought. If you guys dont think our second amendment rights are not in jeopardy, then guys are mistaken. On a personal note, i do believe when we took God out of our schools, is what led us on the path we're out now. And no i dont wear my religieon on my Sleeve
cc

In your opinion, how would God in school change the way things are?

Morals.

Simply by praying before class? Or would God be more involved in school? Aren't morals being taught in other ways such as the golden rule, which I would argue is essentially the equivalent to Christian teachings but without God. I guess I'm curious as to how one would use God in schools to teach morals?

[ezzy333]

Simply by praying before class? Or would God be more involved in school? Aren't morals being taught in other ways such as the golden rule, which I would argue is essentially the equivalent to Christian teachings but without God. I guess I'm curious as to how one would use God in schools to teach morals?

The obvious answer is NO.

Ezzy

[brad27]

Simply by praying before class? Or would God be more involved in school? Aren't morals being taught in other ways such as the golden rule, which I would argue is essentially the equivalent to Christian teachings but without God. I guess I'm curious as to how one would use God in schools to teach morals?

The obvious answer is NO.

Ezzy

+1

[cohanzick creek]

Respectfully, i said on a personal note, is what i believe. that this country has been going down the tubes since the 60's. You cant say one nation under God in schools, there seems to be an attack on Christianity, Cant say Merry Christmas, and im not going to get into an argument about God, but for the second amaendment is another story
cc

[JKP]

I'm all for religion, morals and ethics...BUT....when I was a kid growing up in dairy farm country, there weren't anymore folks in church then there are now...and most had gray hair like now....and the Lone ranger and Bat Masterson were killing folks on the TV every night and the only good Indian was a dead one. Heck...Chuck Connors was pumping off 4 rounds a second and no one complained. So trying to say that religion and violence in the public media are contributing to this is BUNK...IMHO. After doing chores after school, I grabbed a pop gun and went out to play with the other kids with weapons....and we usually wound up arguing who shot first and who was dead.

I am willing to bet that the BIG difference today is the media....the need for a news cycle...and the fact that what happens in Oshkosh goes viral in 3 minutes around the world...painting the fringe as the normal.

[DogNewbie]

Simply by praying before class? Or would God be more involved in school? Aren't morals being taught in other ways such as the golden rule, which I would argue is essentially the equivalent to Christian teachings but without God. I guess I'm curious as to how one would use God in schools to teach morals?

The obvious answer is NO.

Ezzy

I apologize, but it's not obvious to me what you're saying no to. Are you saying no it's not as simple as praying before class? No God wouldn't be more involved? No, morals aren't being taught in schools?

[Garrison]

It seems odd to want Government out of your personal lives in most all regards, such as gun ownership and at the same time want them in the most personal aspects of your lives such as teaching your children about religion at school. If you don't trust them to do one why would you trust them with the other?

[ezzy333]

It seems odd to want Government out of your personal lives in most all regards, such as gun ownership and at the same time want them in the most personal aspects of your lives such as your teaching children about religion at school. If you don't trust them to do one why would you trust them with the other?

Nobody said teach. We do say that history, prayer, respect, responsibility needs to be and that is where religous principles come in. Problem is most of today's parents have already graduated without knowing those things and now their children are experiencing the same thing.

Ezzy

[cohanzick creek]

10 4 ezzy
cc

[Garrison]

It seems odd to want Government out of your personal lives in most all regards, such as gun ownership and at the same time want them in the most personal aspects of your lives such as your teaching children about religion at school. If you don't trust them to do one why would you trust them with the other?

Nobody said teach. We do say that history, prayer, respect, responsibility needs to be and that is where religous principles come in. Problem is most of today's parents have already graduated without knowing those things and now their children are experiencing the same thing.

Ezzy

History, prayer, respect, responsibility needs to be what "Taught"? Shouldn't that be the job of strong Fathers and Religious leaders? I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just don't understand the disconnect between a Government run school and a Government run anything else.

[Dan Buchman]

American Stats . show that women are in greater danger if they have a gun in the house. (NOT saying everyone man who has a gun in the house will harm women .)

http://www.seesac.org/uploads/documents ... olence.pdf

edit : link fixed

I checked out the link and they didn't have data to back up their claims so I did some digging. What I found was the average death by domestic violence in France is 1 for every 164,076.7 people and in the US it is 1 for every 241,472.3 people. What the data shows is that in the US with much higher guns per person our rate of murder by domestic violence is 47% lower than France. So even though guns are used more often to murder somebody in the US in domestic violence cases we still have a lower rate over all.

[Neil]

Until recently they were public schools ran and funded locally, by ad volorum property taxas and local school boards. Then they accepted federal funds, only about 6% and with it comes all the left's agenda. Another area we should have never allowed Fed involvement.

Honestly, I have little problem with cities and states inacting some gun control, if I don't like it, I can move and still remain an American. But I cannot abide the Feds dictating to state and local government in violation of the Constitution and the amendments, not guns, schools, or much of anything save National security, treaties, currency and little else.

[millerms06]

In what way can the argument of upholding the second amendment move away from the gun? May sound like a weird question, but just think about it: when was the last time you heard someone effectively argue gun control without ever highlighting guns in the argument? The antithesis of any counter argument is the effect of the thesis of an argument. Most studies concerned with analyzing "peace" measure the following:

Teenage birth rates, teenage death rates, life expectancy at birth, percentage of people without health insurance, percentage of people with at least a high school degree, labor force participation, basic access to things needed for well-being, percentage of children in single parent families, poverty rate and income inequality.

I can pick out a couple from the above that both republicans and democrats have agreed are the most important issues to work on. I find it absolutely mind boggling that no one can create an effective argument that these social constructs create violence. It has been tried by this guy, well kind of :

CONSTITUENT: My question is regarding the guns and is Washington at all aware of the psychotropic drugs that these children are taking? I guarantee it 100 percent that’s our big problem. [...]
LANKFORD: I agree with that. I think there’s a bunch of issues that, quite frankly, most liberals are afraid to talk about. [...] Where are we on all those psychiatric drugs? We’ve overmedicated kids. Quite frankly some of the overmedication of kids are because welfare moms want to get additional benefits and if they can put them on SSI through maintenance drugs, they can also put them on Social Security disability and get a separate check. That is wrong on every single level. Not only is it fraudulent to the government, but it also tells a kid with great potential, “don’t try because you’re disabled.”

And this guy never tried at all:
Rep. Steve Stockman of Texas: “Gun bans and anti-gun laws have always led to one thing — more gun violence.”

This is probably the closest quote I have come across of getting the idea:
“[We] should not blame a gun itself for any crime or any acts of violence, any more than we can blame a pen for misspelling a word.” - Senator Wallace F. Bennett (R-UT), Congressional Record, 5/16/68

I truly believe the day you can create an argument the other side cannot disagree on, while sounding sane and non-condescending, the argument is already won. Problem is nobody in the political realm has been able to effectively do that, or maybe I missed a time when someone did with this whole gun debate.

[birddogger]

Until recently they were public schools ran and funded locally, by ad volorum property taxas and local school boards. Then they accepted federal funds, only about 6% and with it comes all the left's agenda. Another area we should have never allowed Fed involvement.

Honestly, I have little problem with cities and states inacting some gun control, if I don't like it, I can move and still remain an American. But I cannot abide the Feds dictating to state and local government in violation of the Constitution and the amendments, not guns, schools, or much of anything save National security, treaties, currency and little else.

Exactly right and a point I have been trying to make for years.

And I have to say Neil, you along with others, have nailed it with everyone of your posts on this subject.

Charlie

[ACooper]

Worth a watch:
http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/ ... 5#50208495

[cohanzick creek]

Thanks A Cooper, it was worth the watch. It just goes to proove, its all about taking all the guns they can get. It has nothing to do with Assualt Riffles
cc