Gun Rights / Gun Control And The Church'S View.

[DH]

As far as I know, the Church doesn't have a position on this matter. Which is just fine--they don't have to have a view on everything.

Personally, I don't have strong feelings either in favor of or against guns. But it does seem sensible to have some common sense regulations, like not selling guns to violent criminals, and that sort of thing.

[thesometimesaint]

Duncan:

Southern Canada is still the northern US.. TOO darn cold.

Canada has about 1/2 the gun ownership rate of the US, but a much lower murder with firearms rate. Further the US has about 1/20 the worlds population but over 1/2 the mass murders happen here. Sometimes I think we're just a bunch of nuts.

Edited December 22, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Duncan]

Duncan:

Southern Canada is still the northern US.. TOO darn cold.

Canada has about 1/2 the gun ownership rate of the US, but a much lower murder with firearms rate. Further the US has about 1/5 the worlds population but over 1/2 the mass murders happen here. Sometimes I think we're just a bunch of nuts.

haha!! It's true, most of the Canadian cities and towns border the border, now that Target is coming here my yearly pillage trip to Grand Forks, North Dakota will have to be modified slightly. Although I did take in the sights and sounds of Wisconsin this past summer

Edited December 22, 2012 by Duncan

[Kenngo1969]

...I can't tell you how much better I feel, as a widow living alone, knowing I have my weapon and how to use it safely. I hope the Church never comes out against gun ownership... I won't give mine up...

GG

I can't imagine why the Church ever would, especially (and no, I'm not trying to take the thread in this direction, and won't engage anyone else who does) considering how many times Church members (and, by extension, the Church itself) have been victimized by those using deadly force against them.

P.S.: Garden Girl, I have a new respect for you: "Revolver-packin' Mama!" I'll be sure to loudly announce my presence and my intentions, and to otherwise avoid causing undue alarm, if I ever come for a visit!

[Kenngo1969]

I'm neither a pro-gun nut nor an anti-gun nut. But I am against the nut behind the trigger.

ALWAYS obey all the laws governing gun possession and use wherever you live. Learn how to properly maintain, safely store, effectively use, and practice target acquisition on a regular basis. ALWAYS remember firearms are deadly weapons. Life is not a movie set. We don't get to call "cut" and all the actors get up and walk away after the scene. Death is final. Never pick one up if you don't intend to use it, and don't use it unless you intend to kill. Be prepared to accept full legal, emotional, financial, and moral responsibility for the use of that gun.

As to keeping a gun as part of your food storage plans. Forget about it unless you live in a very rural area(and most of us live in cities). Anything larger than a rabbit, or chicken takes considerable skill and resources to properly dress, and preserve.

Can't disagree.

[Kenngo1969]

... [W]e don't think the average citizen needs military style weapons at all.

Neither do most people in the U.S.

[Calm]

I probably wasn't very clear about what I meant exactly. Anybody is justified in defending himself--or any group is justified in defending itself from another group if need be. The key word here for me is "defense". The examples I cited were both "offensive", pre-emptive. Every group needs a Porter Rockwell or Lyman Johnson or a David Petraeus. Just be sure that if you are going to take the life of another human being, or require someone else to do so, you are doing for so purely defensive reasons.

From the link to Brother Hiller's article I gave above:

We need to be absolutely clear that there is such a thing as justified self-defense. You have the right to protect yourself against physical harm if you are attacked. You have a right to use physical force to protect virtue, family, freedom. But—

One of the lessons we learn from men like Nephi, Moroni, and Mormon is that the righteous only fight as a last resort. They do it reluctantly and never enjoy fighting....That great fighter Ammon? The Nephites urged him, “Let us take up arms against [the Lamanites] that we destroy them and their iniquity out of the land, lest they overrun us and destroy us” (Alma 26:25). In other words, “Hey, enough’s enough. Let’s get ’em before they attack us again.” But what did Ammon do instead? He went on a mission to the Lamanites. He preached the gospel, while the Lamanites spit on him, and stoned him, and threw him in prison.

One of the biggest myths about violence is that “good guys” can use violence against the bad guys casually, with no regrets. This myth is taught in every action adventure movie on the screen today. The hero—let’s call him Arnie Sly—blows away one bad guy after another, steps over the bodies, and goes to lunch as though nothing had happened.

The truth is this: Even police officers who have had to kill a criminal in the line of duty may struggle with their feelings afterward. According to Sergeant Jim Faraone, a 20-year veteran with the Salt Lake City Police Department, “It is hard on a person emotionally.” In fact, he says, “we’d be concerned if it didn’t affect them. They are going to see it again in their sleep, and play it over and over again [in their mind]. I think many officers probably put themselves in greater jeopardy, realizing the finality of letting a bullet go. It could not be a casual thing.”

A person who can casually take the life of another—even that of a violent criminal—is not the kind of person you want on your police force. And it is not the kind of person a follower of Christ would want to be.

Consider the experience of Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve. Some years ago, Elder Oaks was living in Chicago when one night he was confronted by a young robber with a gun. Elder Oaks had no money to give him, no watch, nothing of value except his car—and his wife was in the car. Both Elder Oaks and his wife were at great risk. During the encounter, Elder Oaks had an opportunity to grab the gun without the likelihood of being shot. “I was taller and heavier than this young man,” Elder Oaks explains, “and at that time of my life was somewhat athletic. I had no doubt that I could prevail in a quick wrestling match if I could get his gun out of the contest.

“Just as I was about to make my move, I had a unique experience. I did not see anything or hear anything, but I knew something. I knew what would happen if I grabbed that gun. We would struggle, and I would turn the gun into that young man’s chest. It would fire, and he would die. I also knew that I must not have the blood of that young man on my conscience for the rest of my life.” (See New Era, Mar. 1994, 4.)

Even acting in defense does not necessarily justify violence. Edited December 22, 2012 by calmoriah

[Sky]

I think we would do well to remember the example of the Anti-Nephi-Lehites in the Book of Mormon who buried their weapons of war deep in the earth, and covenanted with God that they would never kill again.

[Calm]

I think we would do well to remember the example of the Anti-Nephi-Lehites in the Book of Mormon who buried their weapons of war deep in the earth, and covenanted with God that they would never kill again.

Not a bad idea, but I do think one needs to remember the context. The ANLs were a people who had delighted in violence and killing or sacrifice prior to their conversion. Perhaps they were concerned that due to their heritage that any future choice might end up being swayed by their past attitudes so better to err on the side of caution and forswear any chance of wrongful death (much like an alcoholic might forwear all future opportunities to drink, knowing the possibility that they lacked the control not to revert to old habits of excuses, etc.) More likely since much, if not all of the killing they had done had been in a religious context, their total rejection of killing was a way of demonstrating they had turned their backs on their 'old god' and fully embraced their newfound faith.

I am not sure someone who views life as sacred already needs to make that sort of covenant or at least to that degree because they will be like Elder Oaks and use violence that might result in a death only as a last resort.

Edited December 22, 2012 by calmoriah

[blackstrap]

There are many good arguments on both sides. I can see the point that had there been a couple of well trained and armed people in the theatre or the school there probably would have been fewer deaths.Had the perps been aware that there were likely to be armed people in the theatre or the school they may have not chosen to enter there that day. Then there is ,however the problem that there is truly a gun culture in the US that exacerbates all situations where violence is possible.The recent Chinese school knifings show the magnitude of the difference in outcomes if a gun is not available.

The NRA suggestion to put armed guards at each school is a bit silly. We do that at banks and guess who is the first one shot. If the shooters have no idea who is armed then I think they have to be much more careful what place is attacked.That is why air marshalls don't announce their presence to all on board.

Edited December 22, 2012 by blackstrap

[bdouglas]

From the link to Brother Hiller's article I gave above:

Even acting in defense does not necessarily justify violence.

Amen, and amen!

[Calm]

Just remembered the OPer didn't want this to be political...and I think it is going that way with this subtopic so will delete my comment.

Edited December 22, 2012 by calmoriah

[Garden Girl]

I am not sure someone who views life as sacred already needs to make that sort of covenant or at least to that degree because they will be like Elder Oaks and use violence that might result in a death only as a last resort.

In my previous posts where I speak about having a weapon, being trained to use it, and feeling more comfortable as a widow living alone... let me make it perfectly clear that part of the training I received was that the LAST thing anyone wants to do or should do is to have to shoot someone. And that's the way I feel and would behave... even our instructor (my former bishop and chief of police) told us that it was a difficult thing to live with the emotional stress of having to shoot someone. And to be very clear to oneself about whether one is able to deal with the reality if forced to do so. So while I'm comfortable and confident in my ability, I am in no way cavalier about the seriousness of the situation of wounding or killing a person even in self defense. However, I would not hesitate if left no choice.

GG

Edited December 23, 2012 by Garden Girl

[blackstrap]

Unfortunately,he who hesitates is.....dead.

[treeface]

I think we would do well to remember the example of the Anti-Nephi-Lehites in the Book of Mormon who buried their weapons of war deep in the earth, and covenanted with God that they would never kill again.

Yes, that's a touching story. Would you bet your family's lives on the mercy of those bent on doing them harm? Or would you call the cops, just in case?

What if there's no way the cops could get there in time? What's the average police response time, assuming you have your cell phone handy and can use it?

Of course deadly force is the last resort. A show of deadly force is the second-to-last resort, and is usually sufficient.

For most people on this board, I'm guessing this is all hypothetical. For me, it has not been. Those of you who expect the Lord to protect you (or help protect you), learn how to maintain situational awareness, and listen to your gut feeling. If something doesn't look right or feel right, take it seriously - THAT is your cue to start moving.

Edited December 22, 2012 by treeface

[Duncan]

gobsmacked at how can people support more guns in the US. How many more massacres have to happen before my very beloved Americans (and I hold no ill will against anyone here) wake up and realize that guns and mental health services are needed? no more military style weapons-hunting rifles only-with proper background checks and permits

[blackstrap]

There is another factor in the increase of mass murder in recent years, and that is the increase in the use of psychopharmaceuticals.They have been present in most perpetrators systems.Whether there is a cause and effect connection I'm not sure. It does seem to be similar to the idea that 50%+ of all traffic deaths are alcohol related.

[pogi]

gobsmacked at how can people support more guns in the US. How many more massacres have to happen before my very beloved Americans (and I hold no ill will against anyone here) wake up and realize that guns and mental health services are needed? no more military style weapons-hunting rifles only-with proper background checks and permits

If it wasn't guns it would be improvised explosive devices. Take your pick. I agree with the mental health services comment however.

America would be Britain if it were not for guns in the hands of the people.

[Duncan]

If it wasn't guns it would be improvised explosive devices. Take your pick. I agree with the mental health services comment however.

America would be Britain if it were not for guns in the hands of the people.

I guess, but as me Mum used to say if you can't play nicely i'm taking it all away and you get nothing!

[pogi]

I think we would do well to remember the example of the Anti-Nephi-Lehites in the Book of Mormon who buried their weapons of war deep in the earth, and covenanted with God that they would never kill again.

I think that we would also do well to remember captain Moroni who upheld and defended the title of liberty, and the sons of Helaman that battled to preserve the lives, freedoms, and the peacefull lifestyle of the ANLs. Though the ANLs were opposed to battle themselves, they can hardly be considered pacifists, as they were not opposed to war and sent their sons off to battle. They actually wanted to take up their arms to battle, but were pacified by Helaman who protected their oath.

Edited December 23, 2012 by pogi

[ERayR]

I'm just curious if there are any statements from church leaders about gun rights / gun control or is this one of those issues that the church chooses to remain neutral in?

(please keep this as apolitical as possible)

They support the constitution, including the 2nd amendment.

Edited December 23, 2012 by ERayR

[Sky]

Yes, that's a touching story. Would you bet your family's lives on the mercy of those bent on doing them harm? Or would you call the cops, just in case?

What if there's no way the cops could get there in time? What's the average police response time, assuming you have your cell phone handy and can use it?

Of course deadly force is the last resort. A show of deadly force is the second-to-last resort, and is usually sufficient.

For most people on this board, I'm guessing this is all hypothetical. For me, it has not been. Those of you who expect the Lord to protect you (or help protect you), learn how to maintain situational awareness, and listen to your gut feeling. If something doesn't look right or feel right, take it seriously - THAT is your cue to start moving.

What if a person with a gun shoots me before I have a chance to blink, let alone load a gun and shoot back at him? What if I accidentally shoot at the wrong person? There are all sorts of hypotheticals. But I've never had a gun, and never saw a big need for one. Call me naive or a weakling or careless or whatever. I don't know exactly what you experienced, but I'm glad the outcome seemed to work out okay for you.

The way I see it is, the more guns = the more death. The Lord said "Thou shalt not kill", and there are very very few exceptions to this. So if the need arises to shoot somebody, we'd better be absolutely sure it's the right thing to do. I don't trust myself enough make that determination, especially in a moment of haste with so very little time to think. Once a person's life is gone, it's gone, and nobody can bring them back.

I came across a statistic that some of you might find interesting.

[ERayR]

School massacres typically happen in smalller towns and not in big cities-City massacres happen elsewhere I say ban guns altogether, take them out of the unstable person's and stable person's hands. I know it's unrealistic. Canada is strict in gun laws and the enforcement thereof and because of recent events, even more so

Can you show me how the gun was to blame for the violence?

[Saints Alive]

Can you show me how the gun was to blame for the violence?

Statistically cars kill far more people than guns, maybe we should ban cars?

[blackstrap]

Funny thing about statistics, you gotta know the questions that were asked. I suspect that the states with the most skateboards per 100,000 have the most skateboard injuries.I just listened to a spokesman for the gun owners of American wherein he claimed that the States with the least gun laws have the lowest incidence of gun crime .Gun deaths vs gun crime. Seems like the same thing but not.

Edited December 23, 2012 by blackstrap