Lds Church Subsidiary And Guns

[Duncan]

In the old west you did not need a carry permit and background check...but feel free to run down my country, it is quite vogue.

While I admit it is fashionable and sometimes always funny to poke fun at Americans I wasn't in this instance. I don't know if you knew but I served my mission in Los Angeles and a piece of my heart is still there. I BLED-literally drops of my blood, for the American people while preaching the gospel to them and I love you guys. Not in love with you but you get the point.

[thesometimesaint]

Duncan:

What area of LA did you serve in?

[Duncan]

Duncan:

What area of LA did you serve in?

I had the distinct pleasure and good fortune to serve in the California Arcadia Mission. I was 16 months in Glendale and Pasadena. Our mission was TINY. We covered basically the san gabriel mtn foothills area, so La Crescenta, Glendale, Pasadena, Glendora, East LA, Walnut, La Puente, Arcadia, La Verne, Hacienda heights, Diamond Bar, Chino, Pomona, areas around those areas. My second week in the field I nailed my head on an air conditioner and i bled, let me tellya (I still have the scar) and in Feb. 1999 I was biking and I hit an opening door of a car and very, very nearly got creamed by on coming traffic and I bled that time as well. One of the blessings too was being in the same stake that Pres. Howard W. Hunter had been the Bishop and Stake President in and called to be a member of the Twelve from and I came to hear some amazing spiritual stories from members that remembered him-so I learned to love that great man

[Libs]

That sounds like a rather HUGE area, to me!

I grew up, in part (my teenage years) at the base of Hacienda Heights. I'm very familiar with that area.

[Duncan]

That sounds like a rather HUGE area, to me!

I grew up, in part (my teenage years) at the base of Hacienda Heights. I'm very familiar with that area.

Numericallywise-huge!! haha! I never made it to Hacienda Heights, I was in Glendale, Pasadena and also San Marino, Glendora, La Puente, and La Verne/Pomona. One of the reasons I love the TV show Big Bang Theory is Wallowitz lives in Altadena and so did I! and so an ocassional reference to Pasadena is heartwarming!!!

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

While I admit it is fashionable and sometimes always funny to poke fun at Americans I wasn't in this instance. I don't know if you knew but I served my mission in Los Angeles and a piece of my heart is still there. I BLED-literally drops of my blood, for the American people while preaching the gospel to them and I love you guys. Not in love with you but you get the point.

My son is in Nothern CA...we can't pay for his mission anymore and I don't like accepting charity. He only has five months...I think I should call him home.

[Calm]

Pa Pa, his mission is not about you, it is about him. There are many of us who do not have children who can go on missions who love to contribute to help those who do. You should give those of us who desire to contribute to the work of God a chance to do so and not deprive us of the blessings.

[Duncan]

My son is in Nothern CA...we can't pay for his mission anymore and I don't like accepting charity. He only has five months...I think I should call him home.

I sincerely hope things turn out for all involved!

[Robert F. Smith]

Would you want people to always carry a weapon in the event they are somewhere where some nut goes off and shoots the place up? That sounds like the Old Wild West and I hope we are past those days-How was the theatre shooter caught anyways?-I don't know

Citizens who carry a concealed weapon should always be well trained and vetted before being issued a permit, but that permit should never be denied for political reasons (because it is "politically correct" not to issue permits). Utah, for example, does not require proper training before issuing a concealed-carry permit, and states which do require adequate training refuse to recognize the Utah permit (most states recognize each others permits, a rule known as "reciprocity"). Some counties in California refuse to issue any concealed-carry permits simply because it is politically unacceptable. The vast majority of states, however, issue concealed-carry permits to anyone who is qualified, and none of the "Old Wild West" fears which you have are apparent (you have been watching too many movies). Your concept of the average citizen as an irresponsible madman is simply not borne out by the evidence.

"Gun-free zones" such as the theater in Aurora, are really shooting galleries for bad people -- since criminals and the insane don't obey the rules.

The shooter in Aurora, Colorado, was caught by police at the scene trying to get into his car and make his getaway. As you may know, he had booby-trapped his apartment, hoping to kill investigators.

Are you really so callous that you don't care what happens to innocent people, and that you would deny them the right to defend themselves?

[Robert F. Smith]

he was arrested without much fuss out behind the theater. In my opinion,he wore armor so that it would have been difficult to stop his killing time. After that, he gave up to the police without serious resistance because his work was done. ( I am not a psychologist,nor do I play one on TV )

The body armor worn by the shooter might have saved his life, but the impact of a .45 slug from a typical pistol would have taken his breath away and rocked his world, spinning him and possibly even incapacitating him temporarily -- so that many could have made their escape from the theater unmolested, and enabling the guy with the .45 time to put several more rounds into the perpetrator, striking exposed body parts, including the facial area. A good shooter could have rendered the perp dead or incapable of further action in very short order. He wouldn't have needed a magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds in order to do it. Those on this Board who know weapons, tell me it ain't so!!

[blackstrap]

Are there states that allow for the carrying of a gun if it is NOT concealed? Vermont??

Also,is there a typical handgun choice that would have been present at the theater if the 'no guns' rule was not in effect? Seems to me a .45 might be unusual as a casual firearm,perhaps a 9mm.

[Anijen]

Actually no. A good start would be to close the gun show exemption. Where anyone can buy as many guns as they want without any sort of background check.

There it is! I was wondering when it was going to show up. This is a lie (not you TSS). This idea that there is "a gun show exemption" has been flooded into the media. Buyers and sellers at gun shows are under the same laws as every other firearm sale. It is very interesting that those who are for stricter gun control laws have to refer to extorting fact. If you attend a gun show to buy a new or used gun you will be required to fill out a federal Form 4473 and under go a National Instant Criminal System NICS background check.

Another is the prevention of straw sales. Where guns shops sell firearms to someone who resells soon afterwards.

Another lie. TSS I would use a different web site for your information. A go between also called a "strawman" is a felony offense.

The NICS system is for most guns, one such example would be very old guns (pre 1890) do not have to go through a NICS. All must have to wait the mandatory waiting period before taking possession.

Another is banning the sale of high capacity magazines. None of those involve the infringement of rights and still allow for hunting and self defense purposes. No self respecting hunter is going to use an AK-47 against a deer let alone a rabbit for his dinner table.

When people use machine guns for hunting they are stupid. However most hunting guns can look like assault weapons (automatic), but they are not. I posted two picture earlier of a simple Rugar 10/22 (a twenty-two rifle) in one looks like the rifle I own, in the other picture were two of the exact same rifle I own, except for their additions make them look like assault rifles, they are not, they shoot exactly the same as my twenty-two. Besides it is very hard to get a class three (machine guns) licence if you are not in the military or in law enforcement. Of course criminals don't care how strong the gun control laws are, it will not stop them from acquiring a gun illegally.

The gun laws we have are more like screen doors on a submarine. Interesting to look at but not very effective.

I agree 100%, all they do is restrict honest people at the same time do nothing against stopping criminals from getting a gun.

Washington DC ...

Yet the folks in Washington has allowed the drug cartels to purchase guns (Fast and Furious). This was solely to blame deaths on gun sales except it backfired on them and innocent people were killed so that certain govt officials could say look at all this violence. IMO these people from Holder on up (whoever was involved should be prosecuted.

The LDS prohibit the bringing of firearms into its buildings. Should we expect high murder rates in the Chapel simply because of that prohibition?

This is a ridiculous statement. The church is place where we can go and worship and renew our covenants. No we should not expect any high murder rates (or any murder rates) in our chapels or in any other place of worship. I feel like you are trying to say since guns are not allowed in chapels the church is implying guns should be illegal. When the Lord returns there will be no need for guns. But until then times will get worse, there will be wickedness in all parts and it will grow.

[Anijen]

My son is in Nothern CA...we can't pay for his mission anymore and I don't like accepting charity. He only has five months...I think I should call him home.

Papa I love you man, but that is selfish. Do you think he wants to come home? Your Elders Quorum will help him. I was on my own since I was barely 16 years old. When I went on my mission I had enough for about a year. My Bishop told me not to worry and let the ward and the Elders Quorum help, and when I get back if I feel still inclined then just donate back to the mission fund.

[Stargazer]

Murder is rarely more than a one off thing. Just two individuals. Such a ban would be ineffective in such cases. However the murder of more than a very few individuals becomes more problematic without the ready availability of high capacity firearms.

Several years ago, the US Congress banned the manufacture and sale of so-called "high capacity magazines" for the civilian market. This legislation has since expired, and an examination of statistics does not reveal any effect whatsoever of the ban or its expiration. But the talking heads and the driveling politicians are talking again about reinstituting it. Talk about screen doors in submarines! Please watch this video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp's testimony to Congress about her experience during the Killen, Texas massacre In particular, note her testimony about magazine capacity, which occurs within the first 2 minutes.

Actually no. A good start would be to close the gun show exemption. Where anyone can buy as many guns as they want without any sort of background check.

There is no "gun-show exemption" -- I say this because the word "exemption" implies a legal loophole, where there is none in actuality. This is because most states do not regulate the private sale of firearms, and unless the seller has a Federal Firearms License, the sale is private, and it takes place as if it were taking place in a private home. Just to make my position clear, be aware that I once held a Federal Firearms License, meaning that I could buy wholesale firearms for re-sale. I did in fact attend gun shows, but I could not sell any of my firearms without going through the required paperwork, and in the case of pistols I was required to deal also with state-mandated registration of pistols, including waiting periods. To close that so-called "gun show exemption" you'd have to declare every private instance of firearms sale to be a gun show. Good luck with that.

Another is the prevention of straw sales. Where guns shops sell firearms to someone who resells soon afterwards.

Straw sales are already illegal. But how are they to be prevented? As a firearms dealer, I had no means of reading my customers' minds as to what they would do with their firearms after they bought them. The only way to prevent a straw sale is to know the customer's intent. I did see an instance of this once, though. Two people came to a sporting goods store where I was browsing, and the one man presented a rifle to the clerk to buy it, but he was clearly buying it in his name to give to his companion. The clerk saw this and cancelled the sale and refused to sell the man any firearm, which made him quite angry.

Another is banning the sale of high capacity magazines. None of those involve the infringement of rights and still allow for hunting and self defense purposes. No self respecting hunter is going to use an AK-47 against a deer let alone a rabbit for his dinner table.

Are you a hunter? I am not. But keeping in mind that an "AK-47" is a full-automatic rifle, and is illegal to own without a special ATF license, there is nothing shameful about hunting deer with a semi-automatic Kalashnikov-pattern rifle. Some states have laws restricting how many rounds a hunter is permitted to carry in a magazine while hunting, and in recognition of this there are some manufacturers who make limited-capacity magazines. A deer is just as dead when shot with a Kalashnikov-pattern hunting rifle as with a Remington Model 750, both semiauto rifles that are gas-operated. You might find some purists who insist that no "self-respecting hunter" would use a rifle with a mag capacity of 10 rounds, and who pride themselves on one-shot-one-kill, but this sounds more like Ye Olde No True Scotsman logical fallacy than any objective standard.

Rabbits are generally taken with shotguns, not rifles, btw.

I'm not suggest that we can, even if I wanted to, and I don't, put that genie back in the bottle. But common sense says that we don't need 300,000,000 genie's running around making havoc in the USA.

Extrapolating from 70,000,000 gun owners to 300,000,000? We'd have to arm babies, and we'd still not have enough. What if everyone wanted to become a mathematician? There wouldn't be enough mathematics-related jobs for them all, and they'd all starve! That's some kind of logical fallacy, I'm just not sure which one. I challenge your assumption that the more people own guns the worse things may get. Where's the ideal mix? 25% of the population? 33%? 45%?

The gun laws we have are more like screen doors on a submarine. Interesting to look at but not very effective. Further 30,000 deaths and lord knows how many injuries from firearms each year in the USA should tell us far more than Wayne LaPierre.

As to screen doors on submarines, that's your opinion, a value judgment if you will. What does Wayne LaPierre tell us, by the way? How'd he get into the conversation?

Well, 30,000 deaths is a marvelous figure to toss around, and what year are you talking about? Are you also aware that about 55% of the firearms deaths in 2000 were suicides? How are you going to stop those suicides? You think that a suicidal person is going to be stymied by firearms availability? There is a high bridge over Interstate 5 near my home that people used to kill themselves by jumping, until they put up tall fences on it. Didn't stop suicides, just stopped them in that place.

Are you aware that the national crime rate has been going down, and the murder rate for example, is at its lowest value in 30 years? Despite a larger number of firearms in private hands? Just what are you complaining about?

And the number of gun-related accidental deaths is extremely low. There are lots of non-fatal accidents, however. People who treat firearms stupidly.

Washington DC is an open city with virtually unregulated means of entry. See http://www.supremeco...7pdf/07-290.pdf

Try bringing firearms into Japan.

So is Seattle, with much more lax gun laws. And nowhere near the crime rate. Go ahead, try to make correlation into causation, especially where there is no correlation.

The LDS prohibit the bringing of firearms into its buildings. Should we expect high murder rates in the Chapel simply because of that prohibition?

You seem to make a habit of trying to correlate apples and oranges. And how do you know that no-one is carrying concealed at Church? The first time the Church, so far as I know, ever said you can't bring firearms into its buildings was after Utah passed a concealed-carry law a few years ago, and they were careful to specify "in Utah." Before then, the church never said a word about it. I asked a member of our singles branch presidency today, a former bishop and retired police officer himself if he had ever heard anything about a general prohibition to bringing firearms into church buildings, and he said he had never heard of any such thing.

[Anijen]

I want to put this sign in my office;

[Stargazer]

There it is! I was wondering when it was going to show up. This is a lie (not you TSS). This idea that there is "a gun show exemption" has been flooded into the media. Buyers and sellers at gun shows are under the same laws as every other firearm sale. It is very interesting that those who are for stricter gun control laws have to refer to extorting fact. If you attend a gun show to buy a new or used gun you will be required to fill out a federal Form 4473 and under go a National Instant Criminal System NICS background check.

Jeff, in the interests of accuracy, I must contradict you. While it is true that all firearms laws still apply at a gun show, it is not true that in all cases you have to fill out a FFL 4473. If the seller is a FFL licensee, then yes, this must be done. If the seller is not a licensee (in other words, a mere collector and not engaged in firearms sales as a principal business), then no form need be filled out, nor NICS check be made. Although even private sellers are forbidden under federal law from selling firearms to persons they have reason to believe are felons or otherwise prohibited from purchasing firearms.

That being said, it is true that currently "...17 states regulate private firearm sales at gun shows. Seven states require background checks on all gun sales at gun shows (California, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oregon, New York, Illinois and Colorado). Four states (Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) require background checks on all handgun, but not long gun, purchasers at gun shows. Six states require individuals to obtain a permit to purchase handguns that involves a background check (Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Iowa, Nebraska). Certain counties in Florida require background checks on all private sales of handguns at gun shows. The remaining 33 states do not restrict private, intrastate sales of firearms at gun shows in any manner." Quoted from Wikipedia at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show

[Stargazer]

Are there states that allow for the carrying of a gun if it is NOT concealed? Vermont??

Also,is there a typical handgun choice that would have been present at the theater if the 'no guns' rule was not in effect? Seems to me a .45 might be unusual as a casual firearm,perhaps a 9mm.

Arizona is the only state that permits open carry. Vermont is the only state that permits concealed carry without a permit.

Why would a .45 be unusual as a "casual firearm"? 9mm's stopping power is less impresive than the .45, but the physical dimensions of two common models, namely the M1911 .45 Browning and the M9 Berretta, are very similar. Empty, the Berretta is 5.6 ounces lighter, and about the same length in barrel and receiver.

Besides, there are smaller .45's than the M1911. Just as there are smaller 9mm's.

[Robert F. Smith]

Stargazer:

I never said such a ban would be easy. Plus at this point it would probably be useless if not counterproductive to try to impose such a ban for the entire US.

Actually it is quite easy to execute an effective ban in prisons, but I'm not sure the public would be willing to pay the added financial cost associated with its enforcement. No need to apologize most people have no clue as to how easy it is to control a prison population, if we ignore the financial costs.

Prisoners make weapons regardless of how often the guards search and inspect, so I'm not sure what you suggest by ignoring financial costs.

Actually no. A good start would be to close the gun show exemption. Where anyone can buy as many guns as they want without any sort of background check. Another is the prevention of straw sales. Where guns shops sell firearms to someone who resells soon afterwards. Another is banning the sale of high capacity magazines. None of those involve the infringement of rights and still allow for hunting and self defense purposes. No self respecting hunter is going to use an AK-47 against a deer let alone a rabbit for his dinner table.

Perhaps you could tell us where any "gun show exemption" applies to background checks. CFR

Prevention of straw sales is like preventing any other crime, and the reseller can be arrested and imprisoned right along with the buyer.

Most people have no problem with restricting the sales of high-capacity magazines, but don't like it when such restrictions are accompanied by illegitimate denial of the right of self-defense.

An AK-47 is a semi-automatic rifle which serves very well as a hunting weapon, especially if you mount a scope on it. It is light, very dependable, easy to care for, and similar to the very popular semi-auto AR-15 (M-16).

By the way, the 2nd Amendment is not a provision protecting the use of firearms for sport or hunting. It is designed to protect martial use by the individual citizen.

I'm not suggest that we can, even if I wanted to, and I don't, put that genie back in the bottle. But common sense says that we don't need 300,000,000 genie's running around making havoc in the USA.

The gun laws we have are more like screen doors on a submarine. Interesting to look at but not very effective. Further 30,000 deaths and lord knows how many injuries from firearms each year in the USA should tell us far more than Wayne LaPierre.

Your scare stats here make no sense at all, and I'm not sure you have made a point about anything. Suggesting that the population of the USA (300 million) represents 300 million individuals making havoc is complete nonsense.

In what way do you find our local and federal gun laws deficient or ineffective?

Washington DC is an open city with virtually unregulated means of entry. See http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Try bringing firearms into Japan.

The LDS prohibit the bringing of firearms into its buildings. Should we expect high murder rates in the Chapel simply because of that prohibition?

States differ on the laws permitting business establishments the right to prevent entry to weapons. In Utah, for example, a concealed weapons permit allows one to take his gun to Church, any church, or onto a university campus. In Arizona, a sign on some establishments forbidding weapons means that you must leave your weapon in the trunk of your car.

Not long ago in Utah, a wanted criminal came into the local LDS Church for sacrament meeting carrying a concealed weapon. Several U.S. Marshals who knew he'd be there, came in and politely sat in the back. At end of meeting they took him into custody and disarmed him without incident.

[blackstrap]

Youtube has a 9min video of the best gun fail of 2011. It just shows you can't fix stupid. Most of the silliness happens in the first 5 min with extraordinary examples of poor and dangerous gun handling,sometimes in homes with children present.There are also clips of supposed experts who shoot themselves accidently. People do stupid stuff all the time on skateboards,bikes,etc. Adding a gun to the mix,however,expands the danger area considerably.

[thesometimesaint]

http://www.justicejournalism.org/crimeguide/chapter11/sidebars/chap11_xside1.html

http://www.gunshowundercover2009.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpContent&htmlKey=sales3&s=gunshow

[Duncan]

Citizens who carry a concealed weapon should always be well trained and vetted before being issued a permit, but that permit should never be denied for political reasons (because it is "politically correct" not to issue permits). Utah, for example, does not require proper training before issuing a concealed-carry permit, and states which do require adequate training refuse to recognize the Utah permit (most states recognize each others permits, a rule known as "reciprocity"). Some counties in California refuse to issue any concealed-carry permits simply because it is politically unacceptable. The vast majority of states, however, issue concealed-carry permits to anyone who is qualified, and none of the "Old Wild West" fears which you have are apparent (you have been watching too many movies). Your concept of the average citizen as an irresponsible madman is simply not borne out by the evidence.

"Gun-free zones" such as the theater in Aurora, are really shooting galleries for bad people -- since criminals and the insane don't obey the rules.

The shooter in Aurora, Colorado, was caught by police at the scene trying to get into his car and make his getaway. As you may know, he had booby-trapped his apartment, hoping to kill investigators.

Are you really so callous that you don't care what happens to innocent people, and that you would deny them the right to defend themselves?

John Wayne movies did me in for the movies comment, but no I am not Callous. I want innocent people not to get hurt and I don't feel like a small-arms race is a good thing for society. If few if any people have guns then there wouldn't be gun violence OR teaching people to love each other and not exact revenge or hurting other people. I could go on right now about the US but in deference to my friends I have made on here I shall refrain

[ERayR]

John Wayne movies did me in for the movies comment, but no I am not Callous. I want innocent people not to get hurt and I don't feel like a small-arms race is a good thing for society. If few if any people have guns then there wouldn't be gun violence OR teaching people to love each other and not exact revenge or hurting other people. I could go on right now about the US but in deference to my friends I have made on here I shall refrain

Just a question of logistics. How would you keep it confined to the right few?

[Duncan]

Just a question of logistics. How would you keep it confined to the right few?

military and the police-ideally but again I know that in practice you'll have the criminal element and people snapping and taking lives-but long story short I don't want more gun violence or any violence and we learn nothing from past horrific experiences. I just wonder how long and how many more lives will be lost until we learn

[ERayR]

Citizens who carry a concealed weapon should always be well trained and vetted before being issued a permit, but that permit should never be denied for political reasons (because it is "politically correct" not to issue permits). Utah, for example, does not require proper training before issuing a concealed-carry permit, and states which do require adequate training refuse to recognize the Utah permit (most states recognize each others permits, a rule known as "reciprocity"). Some counties in California refuse to issue any concealed-carry permits simply because it is politically unacceptable. The vast majority of states, however, issue concealed-carry permits to anyone who is qualified, and none of the "Old Wild West" fears which you have are apparent (you have been watching too many movies). Your concept of the average citizen as an irresponsible madman is simply not borne out by the evidence.

"Gun-free zones" such as the theater in Aurora, are really shooting galleries for bad people -- since criminals and the insane don't obey the rules.

The shooter in Aurora, Colorado, was caught by police at the scene trying to get into his car and make his getaway. As you may know, he had booby-trapped his apartment, hoping to kill investigators.

Are you really so callous that you don't care what happens to innocent people, and that you would deny them the right to defend themselves?

I have had a permit to carry for over 10 years now. Sometimes I carry, sometimes I don't. But as I remember when I got my permit there was a background check and some kind of proof of training. Since in the past I had been a hunter safety instructor it wasn't a problem with me.

[thesometimesaint]

ERayR:

I have had a permit to carry for over 10 years now. Sometimes I carry, sometimes I don't. But as I remember when I got my permit there was a background check and some kind of proof of training. Since in the past I had been a hunter safety instructor it wasn't a problem with me.

I haven't carried for years now. Not sure as I want to anymore. I don't hunt for food except for bargains at the grocery store.