Let me first begin by stating that I do not own any guns, nor do I have a desire to own any guns. I put my full faith and trust in The Lord, and to me the scripture is clear: those who live by the sword, shall die by the sword. In this there is no debate. When I listen to and read the differing opinions concerning gun control, especially in the light of massacres such as Sandy Hook, I think of the story in the book of Luke were Jesus asked if your ox or ass had fallen into the pit, which one of you would not go straightway and pull him out on the sabbath day? Like the beast in the pit, there is no one that denies that the beast is in the pit, but like gun control, they can't even bring themselves to agree whether the beast in the pit is an ass or an oxen, and so they do nothing to save the beast until it dies; and likewise there are others who don't really care what kind of beast it is, but the second amendment is the second amendment, just like sabbath is the sabbath, so we can do no work, so the beast remains in the pit and dies. Then there are those who have compassion on the beast, and would move heaven and hell to rescue that beast even if it were on the sabbath, only to find that those who would call themselves your brethren would accuse you of blasphemy against the law and ultimately crucify you for your beliefs.
Indeed,those who live by the sword die by the sword,but youre applying the proper context to the wrong people.The armed criminals who we wish to defend ourselves against with arms of our own are the ones who live by the sword.They are the ones committing murders,doing the drive-bys,participating in armed robberies and invading homes at gunpoint.If you choose not to arm yourself or protect your family if/when that time comes then by all means act on what you think is best.But it makes no sense to criticize those who have the courage to stand up to criminals who would do their family harm,or protect their lives if they were in danger.Us protecting our families with guns is in no way different than you calling the police who are armed with the same,if not better,firearms.
As for your analogy of the beast in the pit I think you might benefit from a re-examination of who the beast in the pit is.That beast is not only the children we lost,but the multitude of other citizens who are victimized every day through the growing number of criminals and the under-equipped and over-legislated population of average joes.It could also be stated that by advocating a ban that would remove this capability,that you are the one refusing to help the beast and in a very direct manner contributing to its suffering.We all thank the military for doing what they do overseas,and noone here would remove the police from our streets who all carry guns and are forced to use them daily.Why,then,is the common man repeatedly demonized for his desire to protect his family and be prepared to do so with similar equipment?I have seen nothing in the bible that suggests I would be morally deficient for defending myself or family from a criminal(s) in a violent encounter.It sounds then as if you,sir, are the one accusing gun supporters of blasphemy while we attempt to move heaven and hell to protect and defend whats ours.
Further,if we truly want to help the beast in the pit why are we not focusing on the true problems in society.The number of alcohol-related deaths in this country alone are staggering.Drinking and driving is not the only culprit here,as it is often involved domestic battery,arguments that spill over into blood and reckless actions that contribute directly or indirectly to deaths.Worldwide the estimated toll claims more victims than AIDS,TB or violence.Why then are we not advocating another prohibition?We see how well that worked.Drugs claim their toll on our citizens and children.Where is the legislation against this atrocity?My bad,its already there.Strangely enough,the number of dealers and addicts keep growing despite the fact.Its funny how we choose to move heaven and hell against the things we dont like,all the while ignoring the elephant in the room which causes more deaths,suffering and problems than the mouse were chasing in the corner.
But I find that the guns rights activists and the NRA continue to deny any form of responsibility for the rights they wish to exercise, and in fact I was rather appalled by the statements issued by the NRA and their call for more guns in schools. Where is the responsibility in asking for a teacher who would wet her pants at the sight of a mouse to carry a fire arm in class? Demand that every school in the country have an armed guard on duty? With nearly 140,000 schools in this country, with an estimated cost at $100,000 per year per school for just one armed guard, that is at a minimum a cost of $14 Billion a year. Whose going to pay that cost? The NRA? Didn't we just go through a political season where those who would now advocate for armed guards at all schools also wanted to eliminate federal funding for all schools?
Oh really?Thats a rather foolish claim,every bit of it.Several gun supporters have spoken here and we have all testified to the fact that the responsibility needs to be upheld.I uphold my responsibility through moral refusal to commit a crime with the guns I own.I also support much stiffer penalties for the criminals who refuse to play by the rules,namely immediate capital punishment for those justly convicted of any murder (gun involved or not),child molesters and other applicable offenders.I seem to find that anti-gunners have the delusional outlook that banning guns and ammo will make them magically disappear from the streets,as if they cant be imported through black market means..just like the drugs that were sought to be controlled through legislation and are still here.
As far as teachers carrying guns,why not?Not all teachers or women are as incapably helpless and/or fearful as you paint them to be.I recall quite a few teachers going through school that if allowed would gladly have done so,and come to the defense of the children if need be.Would you demonize them too if they chose to act?Which is it here,call them cowards or killers?
I would also like to see where this estimate of 100k/year for 1 armed security operative per school comes from.Many of the schools in my area have a sheriffs deputy or PD assigned to that school,armed.I know full well that none of these guys even make half of that in a year,and most normal armed security make even less.Were discussing people who normally work 2-3 jobs or regularly pick up extra shifts and details just to make it above water.So I really dont see where this 100k cost is figured.Even if it were,I thought that we were trying to move heaven and hell to save the beast?Why should we be worried about cost if the cause is that noble?I guarantee it could be done if the money were allocated more efficiently and the proper things trimmed away,but that is an age-old problem will never be solved until the second coming.I also have full faith that if called on there are multiple military vets or other willing citizens who would be glad to fulfill this role,even for minimum wage and some who would do it for free.
Can anybody truthfully and honestly say that more guns in the hands of irresponsible citizens is a solution to the senseless violence that pervades our society? When much of the gun culture and many of the gun advocates display an unseemly amount of paranoia, especially toward the government, and while others who are appalled with gun violence at all levels, including the real or perceived excessive use of force by the police in many cities throughout this country, because of a tendency to shoot first and ask questions later Dirty Harry mentality; are more police or more armed guards really going to instill confidence in a distrustful public that they can act responsibly and control themselves as well as the situation? There is a perception that having a fire arm in ones possession can create a false sense of bravado, and can make a warrior out of a simple coward.
This gets more ridiculous with every paragraph.Here you go so far as to issue an obvious blanket statement that we have no responsible citizens or none at least in your eyes.Here again you repeatedly ignore statistics,history and simple fact to make your case against the absolute evils of owning a firearm and the willingness to brandish it against a criminal willing to do physical harm.If the citizens are irresponsible conspiracy theorists,and the police corrupt and bloodthirsty who then would you have hold the criminals in check?Go ahead and share that point of view with the responding officer the next time you need on or happen to spot one on patrol.What distorted reality do you live in that makes it acceptable for police and civilians to lay down arms and stand idly by while the criminals run through our streets?The more you speak on the matter the more ridiculous the claims become.At this point it is painfully obvious that based on personal preference alone,you consider anyone with the courage to pick up arms and defend the people around them to be villains,killers and totally irresponsible.Talk about leaving the ox in the well.
Further,noone here ever said owning a gun would make you an instant hero.This is yet another foolish rant,completely from left field.None of us claim to be heroes or compare ourselves to Rambo.We simply acknowledge the present threat of a growing criminal population coupled with the fact that this very group continues to better arm themselves,thus aiding in the crimes they commit.People suffer daily due to this and some of us have decided not to play the part of the helpless victim.You claim us to be paranoid,but were not here issuing names or insults because you decide not to arm yourself..all of that typically comes from the anti-gunners interestingly enough.Interested in peace?Try showing it.
So what happens if you do shoot someone? Are you ready to deal with all of the unmeasured consequences for shooting a suspect? Would you be ready for the media scrutiny and the legal implications that would surely result after you kill someone? How may cops, trained professionals at that, have to go through some sort psychological counseling after they shoot someone or kill someone for the first time?
You make this out as if any of us are wanting to live through this scenario.I dont ever want to pull a gun,much less the trigger.But if someone enters my home with the intent of harming my wife or stepdaughter then dont think for a minute I would hesitate.Ill deal with remorse later.I could care less what you,the media or any politician thinks of me afterwards.In a state with home defense laws there would be no legal implications in a clear cut case of defense.The better question would be how would any man feel if he were to survive a scenario in which his wife or children died and he was unable to do anything to stop it?Most of you likely wouldnt admit it,but if a gun appeared on the table in front of you during such a struggle you wouldnt debate it for any longer than I would.It is a hard-wired response to defend those you love,even when others around you would paint you as the villain for doing so,and despite any possible consequences.
