halconero Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword... 1
pogi Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Guns are an improvement over the IED. You have to be very close to an IED(A few feet) for it to be effective while guns are effective to up to 2 miles.The worst shooting massacre on US soil, as far as amount of casualties goes, was Virginia Tech with 32 dead. Compare that to one IED in Oklahoma city that killed 168 and injured 680. A man with a gun is vulnerable, especially if good citizens are armed. It is not so easy to detect and stop a man with a bomb if there is no warning. Prohibiting fire arms will do nothing. We don't need less guns, we need less crazy's. 1
pogi Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword...Because someone who lives by love but caries a sword for protection prevented him from killing more people.
bdouglas Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) I've been robbed twice, once at gunpoint in a not very nice neighborhood of LA (I was on my knees and the robber/thug had a pistol to my head). I didn't have a gun either time, and I'm glad that I didn't. I think if I had (the time I was robbed at gunpoint), either I would have killed him, or he would have killed me.We all have our preferences, and this is mine (to live without guns).... Edited December 23, 2012 by bdouglas
pogi Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) duplicate Edited December 23, 2012 by pogi
halconero Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 Because someone who lives by love but caries a sword for protection prevented him from killing more people.I was interested to see how people would respond to this. Please continue. I haven't said anything but that verse. Read into it what you will.
pogi Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 I've been robbed twice, once at gunpoint in a not very nice neighborhood of LA (I was on my knees and the robber/thug had a pistol to my head). I didn't have a gun either time, and I'm glad that I didn't. I think if I had (the time I was robbed at gunpoint), either I would have killed him, or he would have killed me.We all have our preferences, and this is mine (to live without guns)....I respect that! However, just because you have a gun, doesn't mean that you should use it in every situation. I would let the thug steal my money without putting my life, or his, in danger. However, if I was in a movie theater and someone started shooting people, I would not hesitate to use my weapon in defense of my family and other innocent lives.
pogi Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 I was interested to see how people would respond to this. Please continue. I haven't said anything but that verse. Read into it what you will.Sorry if I misunderstood your intended message. I have read into it and have nothing more to say.
ERayR Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 But cars do. If we got rid of all cars, we would have cleaner air to breathe, less noise pollution as well, a healthier public, increased well being through exercise and vitamin D boost from being outside, not only would death rates from car accidents decrease but death rates from diabetes, heart disease and other health related causes of death would decrease as well. We would have dramatically reduced need to consume oil, no more $2000 car repairs, imagine the money that we all could save from not paying for cars, gas, and repairs. We don't need cars, we can get by with bikes and boost public transportation, we have almost every reason to do so, plus they kill people. Doesn't seem to matter how safe we make cars, they keep killing people, and yet we keep getting behind the wheel every morning. We can't justify banning guns for that reason if we do not do the same for cars. I can see far more reason to get rid of cars than guns, and almost wish that we would. I love my bike. But in the end, I love the idea of personal liberties more than my bike.What about all the horse poo on the streets?
ERayR Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 It is always a trade off. Henry Ford did more to liberate people than Samuel Colt.More people die each year from the ingestion of too much food than cars and guns combined, but I don't foresee a big push to outlaw food.A car has many purposes and contributes vastly more to our individual and country's economy than guns. While guns have but one purpose and that is to kill.Is it on purpose that you keep spouting the line that a guns only purpose is to kill?
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 I don't see how it be instructive to modern day Saints except as an example of what not to do if you want to be effective in fighting back. Joseph was out-manned, outmaneuvered, and outgunned from the start. There really was just no way for Joseph to have won that one. He really did go as a lamb to the slaughter.I think that it would be instructive to note that Joseph Smith, Taylor, and Richards did attempt to defend themselves. Taylor and Richards attempted to use walking sticks in order to deflect the guns as they were thrust inside the cell, from behind the door. Smith was armed with a gun, he used a small pepper-box pistol that Cyrus Wheelock gave him when Wheelock visited the jail earlier that day. Three of the six barrels misfired, but the other three shots injured at least three of the attackers.Lets also not forget about Joseph's faithful and armed body-guards that he kept around, like Porter Rockwell.
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 What about all the horse poo on the streets?I guess the automobile industry workers will now have a job. 2
Alan Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 For me, as a Christian and as a Latter-day Saint, I cannot see the need for a gun, and I personally question anyone's understanding of their faith if they have one. To me, it amounts to nothing less than trusting in the arm of flesh and is a form of idolatry. 1
Saints Alive Posted December 24, 2012 Author Posted December 24, 2012 For me, as a Christian and as a Latter-day Saint, I cannot see the need for a gun, and I personally question anyone's understanding of their faith if they have one. To me, it amounts to nothing less than trusting in the arm of flesh and is a form of idolatry.If I can't question your faith because you are a liberal, you can't question others faith for owning guns. 1
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 For me, as a Christian and as a Latter-day Saint, I cannot see the need for a gun, and I personally question anyone's understanding of their faith if they have one. To me, it amounts to nothing less than trusting in the arm of flesh and is a form of idolatry.I guess you have a lot to think about then if you question Joseph Smiths faith and conclude that he was an idolater.Saints have been armed from almost the beginning of time. They have used their weapons in defense of their families, religions, liberties, and nations. Do you really question Abraham's faith, David's faith, Nephi's faith, Captain Moroni's faith? Were they also idolaters like Joseph Smith?
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 For me, as a Christian and as a Latter-day Saint, I cannot see the need for a gun, and I personally question anyone's understanding of their faith if they have one. To me, it amounts to nothing less than trusting in the arm of flesh and is a form of idolatry.I'm sure that as a Christian and a Latter-day Saint you would not judge an armed man who saved your life and your families lives in a theater from being massacred by a crazy. You would not judge that man to be a faithless idolater would you? I would judge that man to be a hero who just saved many lives.
Alan Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 If I can't question your faith because you are a liberal, you can't question others faith for owning guns.Please don't use your polarising American political terms on me. You have no idea of my political views.I am opposed to guns because their use is contrary to the gospel of Christ....... it's as simple as that. 2
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) You have no idea of my political views.And you have no idea of our faith.I am opposed to guns because their use is contrary to the gospel of Christ....... it's as simple as that.I respect your belief, but disagree. Guns are not sin, murder is. Killing in defense of family, religion, nation, and liberties is not contrary to the gospel of Christ. In fact, it seems to be one of the predominant themes throughout all of scripture. Edited December 24, 2012 by pogi
Alan Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 I guess you have a lot to think about then if you question Joseph Smiths faith and conclude that he was an idolater.Saints have been armed from almost the beginning of time. They have used their weapons in defense of their families, religions, liberties, and nations. Do you really question Abraham's faith, David's faith, Nephi's faith, Captain Moroni's faith? Were they also idolaters like Joseph Smith?And guns did the early saints a lot of good didn't they. Did guns prevent the Hauns Mill Massacre, the expulsion from Missouri, the extermination order, the flight from Nauvoo? Joseph discharging his weapon at Carthage made no difference to the outcome whatsoever. It is my view that the cause of Zion has been repeatedly thwarted by the saints refusal to follow Christ's teachings in this matter.God fights our battles my friend and we will never establish Zion until we understand that. 3
Alan Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 I'm sure that as a Christian and a Latter-day Saint you would not judge an armed man who saved your life and your families lives in a theater from being massacred by a crazy. You would not judge that man to be a faithless idolater would you? I would judge that man to be a hero who just saved many lives.Good for you. 1
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) God fights our battles my friend and we will never establish Zion until we understand that.Yes, but God fights our battles through us, like he did the stripling warriors, who owned weapons, used them, and were still pure in heart to the point that they were preserved by God through their faith of action.Did God fight Abraham's battles, David's battles, Helaman's battles, Captain Moroni's battles? Or did he command them to take up arms and fight? Did God kill Laban, or did he tell Nephi to kill him?Faith is dead without works. You cannot expect God to save you if you refuse to lift a finger. It's like praying for help when you are drowning, and then when a boat comes to save you, you send him away because you know that God is going to save you. Who do you think sent the boat? Edited December 24, 2012 by pogi 3
Garden Girl Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 And guns did the early saints a lot of good didn't they. Did guns prevent the Hauns Mill Massacre, the expulsion from Missouri, the extermination order, the flight from Nauvoo? Joseph discharging his weapon at Carthage made no difference to the outcome whatsoever. It is my view that the cause of Zion has been repeatedly thwarted by the saints refusal to follow Christ's teachings in this matter.God fights our battles my friend and we will never establish Zion until we understand that.I mistakenly... very mistakenly... gave you a rep point here and I don't know how to erase it. I meant only to see who the person was that actually gave you one, and I hit the arrow in error. I've read your posts and absolutely diasgree, but they are your opinions and you are entitled to them of course. But don't judge my faith and call me an idolator because I happen to own a hand gun and have a different view than you. According to you, "God fights our battles" so are we to do nothing to protect ourselves?? To do so is not having faith?? but relying on the arm of man? So if someone intrudes into my home with intent to do me physical harm, even death, I'm to do nothing to protect myself in your view? To lift my hand to defend myself would be lacking faith that God was going to fight that battle for me? What difference does it make if my raised hand is a fist or holding a baseball bat, or holding a gun?... hmmmm... GG 1
pogi Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 (edited) And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, their country, and their rights, and their religion.(Alma 43:47)And Moroni said unto Zerahemnah: Behold, that we do not desire to be men of blood. (Alma 44:1)Behold, we have not come out to battle against you that we might shed your blood for power; neither do we desire to bring any one to the yoke of bondage. But this is the very cause that ye have come against us. (Alma 44:2)But behold that the Lord is with us; and ye behold that he has delivered you into our hands. (Alma 44:3)Note that he gives credit to the Lord for fighting their battles, even though it was through them....And now I would that ye should understand that this is done unto us because of our religion and our faith in Christ. (vs.3)Alan, do you really question their faith here?Now ye see that this is the true faith of God; yea ye see that God will support, and keep, and preserve us, so long as we are faithful unto him, and our faith, and our religion; and never will the Lord suffer that we shall be destroyed except we should fall into transgression and deny our faith. (vs. 4)Note that when Moroni says that God will support, keep, and preserve us, ("fight our battles") it was by taking up arms. He did not expect God to strike down all of the Lamanites for him. On the contrary, God expected them (commanded them) to use active faith by defending themselves and not leaving all the work up to God.But I guess that Captain Moroni was just a faithless idolater, so we should just ignore this part of scripture. Edited December 24, 2012 by pogi 1
DavidB Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 And guns did the early saints a lot of good didn't they. Did guns prevent the Hauns Mill Massacre, the expulsion from Missouri, the extermination order, the flight from Nauvoo? Joseph discharging his weapon at Carthage made no difference to the outcome whatsoever. It is my view that the cause of Zion has been repeatedly thwarted by the saints refusal to follow Christ's teachings in this matter.God fights our battles my friend and we will never establish Zion until we understand that.Very misguided in my opinion.
Recommended Posts