The other night I attended an Interfaith Dialogue which included a Priest, Rabbi, Muslim, and Baptist Preacher as the panelists. The topic for the evening was God and guns. The morality, acceptability, and religious opinion on self defense.
The general consensus of the entire panel was that guns are permissible to have, collect, and use if there comes a time when having a gun is necessary. The Rabbi and the Muslim were the only ones to say that guns for hunting purposes would be frowned upon considering the religious dietary laws and the form of slaughter necessary for the animal.
The Baptist preacher was posed a question on self defense against an intruder with an intent to harm his family. He told the story of the disciple cutting the ear off the soldier that came to take Jesus, peace be upon him, away. Yet Jesus healed the mans ear. I suppose, referring that violence was something that Jesus would not use as first option. That he would prefer to live his life as close to that of Jesus.
So it made me curious about the Christian view of guns. I have read the Bible, not completely nor in depth enough to know the common religious opinion. But as Christians, what is your view on gun ownership and using guns in self-defense. Does it go against the teachings of Jesus? Is there exceptions to the use of force when you are threatened? Does the opinion differ depending on each sect?
It would be interesting to hear from other religious backgrounds as well. What is your opinion on guns, and does it conflict with the general accepted religious opinion?
Full Version: God and Guns
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality, Religion and Beliefs
I am not certain if the Bible has any passages that answer this question but would not be surprised if it does. For me it is a cultural issue. Dang yep I am going to use self defense for me and my family if I fear for our lives. The several fire arms I have are part of that philosophy and the training I have in firearms proficiency will hopefully serve that purpose well. Responsible fire arm ownership is key and the core to this philosophy.
i think it also has alot to do if not more then relegion is on where you are raised,,take me for example i was raised catholic but first off and more importanlty i was raised in the south where guns are just a part of life and the culture,,,it would be harder to break into a house and not find a gun then to break into one and find one in parts of this state,,,and it has nothing to do with relegion but more with the culture of your suroundings,,,,my wife is from california and dosnt understand why we have 2 shotguns,4 rifles,and 2 pistlols. they all do the same thing but some are better for diffrent situations,some hunting some self defence and god never really comes into the picture its just the way of life,,we protect our own and hunting and fishing are and i qoute "my god given right" but people furthor north lok at things diffrently living in the city the culture is diffrent so the outlok on things will be...and i would bet that a southern preecher or priest and a yankee preecher or priest would have 2 diffrent views,
I know Father (God has sent Game my way in the past, and blesed me with a cleen shot, so that there is no suffering on the animals part.
I always bless the animal for giving up it's life that I can feed my Family, and bless its spirit To our Heaven.
As far as killing Humans , or killing/shooting animals not for food I'm against it. in self defense, The intent should not be to kill, But if it happens , with out this intent, Then it is an accident, and is understandable.
Love Omnaka
I always bless the animal for giving up it's life that I can feed my Family, and bless its spirit To our Heaven.
As far as killing Humans , or killing/shooting animals not for food I'm against it. in self defense, The intent should not be to kill, But if it happens , with out this intent, Then it is an accident, and is understandable.
Love Omnaka
The intent is only to stop someone by aiming at their body mass. As for hunting that is a good philosophy that can have other applications: take only what you need and not more.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 01:20 PM) 
The intent is only to stop someone by aiming at their body mass. As for hunting that is a good philosophy that can have other applications: take only what you need and not more.
if i point a weapon and pull the trigger my intent is to kill,im using deadly force to stop someone from harming me and my family.im puling the trigger and im pulling it more then once,,ill deal with guilt and self hate if any later,,but the bottom line without surgar coating anyhting my intint is to kill the person im my house with ill will to my family
We do not have guns in our home I do not believe in taking someone's life, however you come into my home & try to hurt my wife your not getting out of there alive. I promise. My background is security work nighclubs, security in warehouses & some bodyguard work for a while. I have more then enough experence with martial arts to stop most people but I would only use it to make sure my home stays safe. I do not believe in hunting animals for food unless it's your only source for food I was taught never to kill more then you can eat. To kill an animal & mount it on the wall is wastefull & stupid.
I do try to live my life in peace these days I am not the same person I was years ago but break into my home & you will meet that person. Unlike most here I wil not feel qulity about it either I have learned to seprate those feelings.
I do try to live my life in peace these days I am not the same person I was years ago but break into my home & you will meet that person. Unlike most here I wil not feel qulity about it either I have learned to seprate those feelings.
That's actually a good question lol, I like it. I am personally opposed to the taking of life, any life, except maybe the hideous spider on the wall, or something. Hell, Buddhists don't even think its right to do that. For me though, I guess, it comes down to the individual, like the question of intent from the other posters. I am opposed to hunting, and the wanton slaying of animals (although if you do, that is your right, I just couldn't), and I am wary of, though not necessarily opposed to people owning guns. Look if you want to buy a pistol to protect your family, that's fine by me. On the other hand, if you want to buy a gloc or an ak-47, you are insane. This is the real problem. Nobody outside of law enforcement or military should be able to obtain automatic weapons. The movie Bowling For Columbine comes to mind.
QUOTE (brahman1888 @ May 1 2008, 02:05 PM)
That's actually a good question lol, I like it. I am personally opposed to the taking of life, any life, except maybe the hideous spider on the wall, or something. Hell, Buddhists don't even think its right to do that. For me though, I guess, it comes down to the individual, like the question of intent from the other posters. I am opposed to hunting, and the wanton slaying of animals (although if you do, that is your right, I just couldn't), and I am wary of, though not necessarily opposed to people owning guns. Look if you want to buy a pistol to protect your family, that's fine by me. On the other hand, if you want to buy a gloc or an ak-47, you are insane. This is the real problem. Nobody outside of law enforcement or military should be able to obtain automatic weapons. The movie Bowling For Columbine comes to mind.
really michale more really thats the guy you want on your side,
i own a glock21 and a ak47,they are both semi-automatic and im not insane...besides self defence wich they both are highly capable of doing as long as the person holding them knows what they are doing,,,they are dependable and sound weapons, its irrational fear and tv or yes even michale more deluded and self serving mockumentary that fuel statements like that...
a glock is not one gun,there are many diffrent calibers urban hip hop made the glock 9mm a popular name because thats all most of then rap about,but the gun itself is no more dangerouse that any other hand gun...stop buying into fear mongers about civilians owning weapons for self defence
Columbine has more to do with the over prescription of medication by a medical industry more concerned with profit, hatred and bullying in school on anyone who is perceived as different, and irresponsible fire arm usage.
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 03:37 PM)
if i point a weapon and pull the trigger my intent is to kill,im using deadly force to stop someone from harming me and my family.im puling the trigger and im pulling it more then once,,ill deal with guilt and self hate if any later,,but the bottom line without surgar coating anyhting my intint is to kill the person im my house with ill will to my family
AMEN to that!
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 04:19 PM)
Columbine has more to do with the over prescription of medication by a medical industry more concerned with profit, hatred and bullying in school on anyone who is perceived as different, and irresponsible fire arm usage.
Columbine <> 'The System'
Columbine = BAD PARENTING - how the hell could you NOT know your child had all those weapons?
its just the country boy coming out in me,i was raised with firearms from a young age tought to respect them for hunting and self defence and yes for the fun of shooting target for fun and practice,,and hearing people make statments like you must be insane for owning a certain gun and using bfc as a example of crazy gun owners tees me off a little,,there was so much i wanted to say but just the 2 guns used for exaple lets me know their knowledge of firearms are limited to the news and anti gun orgs.
there is nothing wrong with owning any typ of fire arm as long as the person is law abiding citizen.
there is nothing wrong with owning any typ of fire arm as long as the person is law abiding citizen.
The events that happaned at Columbine were horrible indeed & pointless. you can not blame the kids you should blame the parents they kids are issues to start with & thier parents didn't want to deal with it. Same can be said for those kids who listen to music & kill themselves they too had some mental issues the parents refused to deal with.
Like the old saying guns dont kill people, People kill people.
Like the old saying guns dont kill people, People kill people.
a man only need hunt for food.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
now i leave you with this question.
if the ones who are to protect you abuse power how do you oust them.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
now i leave you with this question.
if the ones who are to protect you abuse power how do you oust them.
But it is easier to become proficient in fire arms than it is to master a knife which can easily be turned against you more so than a firearm. Not that there is not an assortment of knives and machetes I have to rely on. I desperately need a katana but not sure I would even try to use it for self defense. The practice wooden one I have would work though but still not reliable as the cold steel a gun offers.
QUOTE (Nik Xues @ May 1 2008, 08:34 PM)
a man only need hunt for food.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
Hence why I have no guns....
QUOTE (Nik Xues @ May 1 2008, 02:34 PM)
a man only need hunt for food.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
now i leave you with this question.
if the ones who are to protect you abuse power how do you oust them.
as for home defence let them come into my home where i am strong.
knives better in close quarters
but a loud BANG could get neighbours involved.
Guns should not be needed in urban settings if you miss god knows where a bullet goes.
now i leave you with this question.
if the ones who are to protect you abuse power how do you oust them.
knives are better then guns,?? what they can be used as a tool but ill take my gun to a knife fight anyday,,hollow points are designed to not only expand and cause a lager and deeper wound with high shock trama to sourounding orgins but to also not go threw every wall in your house and the neighbors...
i have swat slugs for my shotgun that would drop a man one shot but not blow holes threw every wall in my house they are designed for exaclty urban areas,,,,the best gun control is hitting your target,,,,
and if there is no armed society then there is no one to try and fight agaisnt those that do,,i.e. huge abuse of power
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 08:42 PM)
knives are better then guns,?? what they can be used as a tool but ill take my gun to a knife fight anyday,,hollow points are designed to not only expand and cause a lager and deeper wound with high shock trama to sourounding orgins but to also not go threw every wall in your house and the neighbors...
i have swat slugs for my shotgun that would drop a man one shot but not blow holes threw every wall in my house they are designed for exaclty urban areas,,,,the best gun control is hitting your target,,,,
i have swat slugs for my shotgun that would drop a man one shot but not blow holes threw every wall in my house they are designed for exaclty urban areas,,,,the best gun control is hitting your target,,,,
It depends on the person you come it to my house with a gun I promise I'll get to you before you see me. What happens if you miss your target & you hit a family member? Using a gun in tight quarters is not always the anwser unless it's a handgun which still can be cumbersome.
QUOTE (EmpressStarXVII @ May 1 2008, 07:57 PM)
The other night I attended an Interfaith Dialogue which included a Priest, Rabbi, Muslim, and Baptist Preacher as the panelists. The topic for the evening was God and guns. The morality, acceptability, and religious opinion on self defense.
The general consensus of the entire panel was that guns are permissible to have, collect, and use if there comes a time when having a gun is necessary. The Rabbi and the Muslim were the only ones to say that guns for hunting purposes would be frowned upon considering the religious dietary laws and the form of slaughter necessary for the animal.
The Baptist preacher was posed a question on self defense against an intruder with an intent to harm his family. He told the story of the disciple cutting the ear off the soldier that came to take Jesus, peace be upon him, away. Yet Jesus healed the mans ear. I suppose, referring that violence was something that Jesus would not use as first option. That he would prefer to live his life as close to that of Jesus.
So it made me curious about the Christian view of guns. I have read the Bible, not completely nor in depth enough to know the common religious opinion. But as Christians, what is your view on gun ownership and using guns in self-defense. Does it go against the teachings of Jesus? Is there exceptions to the use of force when you are threatened? Does the opinion differ depending on each sect?
It would be interesting to hear from other religious backgrounds as well. What is your opinion on guns, and does it conflict with the general accepted religious opinion?
The general consensus of the entire panel was that guns are permissible to have, collect, and use if there comes a time when having a gun is necessary. The Rabbi and the Muslim were the only ones to say that guns for hunting purposes would be frowned upon considering the religious dietary laws and the form of slaughter necessary for the animal.
The Baptist preacher was posed a question on self defense against an intruder with an intent to harm his family. He told the story of the disciple cutting the ear off the soldier that came to take Jesus, peace be upon him, away. Yet Jesus healed the mans ear. I suppose, referring that violence was something that Jesus would not use as first option. That he would prefer to live his life as close to that of Jesus.
So it made me curious about the Christian view of guns. I have read the Bible, not completely nor in depth enough to know the common religious opinion. But as Christians, what is your view on gun ownership and using guns in self-defense. Does it go against the teachings of Jesus? Is there exceptions to the use of force when you are threatened? Does the opinion differ depending on each sect?
It would be interesting to hear from other religious backgrounds as well. What is your opinion on guns, and does it conflict with the general accepted religious opinion?
While I am not Christian, I feel compelled to answer for Jesus(PBUH), as I know him well.
Most religions say self defense is okay. Even killing. Even attacking and killing people in other countries for preventitive reasons. Even most Christian denoinations well support wars, the millitary and the police forces.
Out of all the religions, I have found Islam to have the most moral standards in regards to war. The story of Salah al-Din and Richard the Lionheart is an excellent example of how evil the European Christians were in light of the compassionate Eastern Muslims. Even in wartime.
However, I think Jesus(PBUH) is unique in the Abrahamic religions. He taught not to resist an evil person. If someone steals your coat, give him the shirt off your back(I'm sure we've all heard this saying before?). If someone asks from you, give to him, and don't ask for it back. Lend to others, expecting nothing in return. If someone slaps you on the one cheek, offer him the other. And in the passage quoted above, Jesus not only heals Malchus, but tells Peter: "Put your sword away. He who lives by the sword, will die by the sword."(a famous quote in English, eh?). Jesus(PBUH) taught that the way to peace(salam, shalom) and completeness, was having no care or worries of the items and posessions in this world, and to be entirely passive towards aggressors.
Why so many Christians are war-mongers, blood-thirsty, hostile, violent, and obsessed with riches is beyond me....
Personally, I agree with Jesus' stance on non-violence. Just as Leo Tolstoy, Dr. Martin Luther King, and Mahatma Gandhi before me.
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 08:37 PM)
if i point a weapon and pull the trigger my intent is to kill,im using deadly force to stop someone from harming me and my family.im puling the trigger and im pulling it more then once,,ill deal with guilt and self hate if any later,,but the bottom line without surgar coating anyhting my intint is to kill the person im my house with ill will to my family
Wow. The Love of God alive and well in the world
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 08:11 PM)
I am not certain if the Bible has any passages that answer this question but would not be surprised if it does. For me it is a cultural issue. Dang yep I am going to use self defense for me and my family if I fear for our lives. The several fire arms I have are part of that philosophy and the training I have in firearms proficiency will hopefully serve that purpose well. Responsible fire arm ownership is key and the core to this philosophy.
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 08:16 PM)
i think it also has alot to do if not more then relegion is on where you are raised,,take me for example i was raised catholic but first off and more importanlty i was raised in the south where guns are just a part of life and the culture,,,it would be harder to break into a house and not find a gun then to break into one and find one in parts of this state,,,and it has nothing to do with relegion but more with the culture of your suroundings,,,,my wife is from california and dosnt understand why we have 2 shotguns,4 rifles,and 2 pistlols. they all do the same thing but some are better for diffrent situations,some hunting some self defence and god never really comes into the picture its just the way of life,,we protect our own and hunting and fishing are and i qoute "my god given right" but people furthor north lok at things diffrently living in the city the culture is diffrent so the outlok on things will be...and i would bet that a southern preecher or priest and a yankee preecher or priest would have 2 diffrent views,
From what I gather from a lot of the posters here, it seems that protecting worldly things, and family holds more value than their beliefs, or doing what is right?
Why have any beliefs at all if they don't mean anything to you?
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 08:20 PM)
The intent is only to stop someone by aiming at their body mass. As for hunting that is a good philosophy that can have other applications: take only what you need and not more.
You said you had training in how to use firearms. You NEVER aim at their "body mass". I was trained with a variety of weapons when I was an officer. And you always aim for "outter extremities".
Depends on the type of training really. Some are trained for head shots too. I was in fact trained for body mass for the purpose of stopping someone, whether they survive or not is not factored into that. Here is a quick link I found that quickly touches that point. What is the reasoning for aiming at extremities? The differences and reasoning are quite interesting. There are also differences in posture, weaver if standing is my preference, and if to roll with one in the chamber (Israeli style) or not.
http://workingstiffs.blogspot.com/2008/03/...-week-four.html
QUOTE
Also, officers are NOT trained to shoot to kill. Or to shoot to injure. They are trained to SHOOT TO STOP THE THREAT. And, yes, they aim at the body mass, not the leg or arm. They want to hit their target. A miss not only means they haven’t stopped the threat, it means they have a stray bullet out there that might hit the wrong target.
http://workingstiffs.blogspot.com/2008/03/...-week-four.html
I'm a Quaker. This is an ultimately non-violent faith.
Opinions will vary by individuals within the group, the general consensous is ... Do no harm... ever.
Not in self-defense, not for fun, not for any reason. There are even ongoing discussions on whether or not it's ok to eat meat. Now, being that I was raised a vegan and know that this is NOT a healthy diet for me I will remain with my faith, but I will not stop eating meat. That's ok, my faith allows for not following the herd so to speak. But I AM very careful about only consuming what I need to stay healthy, never more.
Now, given that I am serious about doing no harm to the best of my ability, I can say what happened when I was attacked many years ago... I kicked thrashed, yes, but still, did no harm while still defending myself. I don't have to hurt someone else to defend myself. I'm not sure I could.
Gun ownership is a tough one because I live in the USA.
1. it's a constituational right that the supreme court has defined. I'm ok with that.
2. I don't begrudge anyone their right to legally own a gun. That is thier responsibility.
3. I do not allow guns in my household for any reason what-so-ever. I have asked friends to leave their firearms at home before coming to my house. It's a hard fast rule, in which I will not budge on. I have thrown people out of my house for bringing a gun into it.
It never keeps me from their homes, nor do I cast judgement on their decision to own a gun. I can even fire a gun, clean one, and have even on occasion shot clay pigeons for fun. I have no fear of them, I just have very clear ideas about when they are ok for me to be around, and when they are not ok for me to be around.
Do no harm...
Opinions will vary by individuals within the group, the general consensous is ... Do no harm... ever.
Not in self-defense, not for fun, not for any reason. There are even ongoing discussions on whether or not it's ok to eat meat. Now, being that I was raised a vegan and know that this is NOT a healthy diet for me I will remain with my faith, but I will not stop eating meat. That's ok, my faith allows for not following the herd so to speak. But I AM very careful about only consuming what I need to stay healthy, never more.
Now, given that I am serious about doing no harm to the best of my ability, I can say what happened when I was attacked many years ago... I kicked thrashed, yes, but still, did no harm while still defending myself. I don't have to hurt someone else to defend myself. I'm not sure I could.
Gun ownership is a tough one because I live in the USA.
1. it's a constituational right that the supreme court has defined. I'm ok with that.
2. I don't begrudge anyone their right to legally own a gun. That is thier responsibility.
3. I do not allow guns in my household for any reason what-so-ever. I have asked friends to leave their firearms at home before coming to my house. It's a hard fast rule, in which I will not budge on. I have thrown people out of my house for bringing a gun into it.
It never keeps me from their homes, nor do I cast judgement on their decision to own a gun. I can even fire a gun, clean one, and have even on occasion shot clay pigeons for fun. I have no fear of them, I just have very clear ideas about when they are ok for me to be around, and when they are not ok for me to be around.
Do no harm...
QUOTE (EmpressStarXVII @ May 1 2008, 07:57 PM)
The other night I attended an Interfaith Dialogue which included a Priest, Rabbi, Muslim, and Baptist Preacher as the panelists. The topic for the evening was God and guns. The morality, acceptability, and religious opinion on self defense.
The general consensus of the entire panel was that guns are permissible to have, collect, and use if there comes a time when having a gun is necessary. The Rabbi and the Muslim were the only ones to say that guns for hunting purposes would be frowned upon considering the religious dietary laws and the form of slaughter necessary for the animal.
The Baptist preacher was posed a question on self defense against an intruder with an intent to harm his family. He told the story of the disciple cutting the ear off the soldier that came to take Jesus, peace be upon him, away. Yet Jesus healed the mans ear. I suppose, referring that violence was something that Jesus would not use as first option. That he would prefer to live his life as close to that of Jesus.
So it made me curious about the Christian view of guns. I have read the Bible, not completely nor in depth enough to know the common religious opinion. But as Christians, what is your view on gun ownership and using guns in self-defense. Does it go against the teachings of Jesus? Is there exceptions to the use of force when you are threatened? Does the opinion differ depending on each sect?
It would be interesting to hear from other religious backgrounds as well. What is your opinion on guns, and does it conflict with the general accepted religious opinion?
The general consensus of the entire panel was that guns are permissible to have, collect, and use if there comes a time when having a gun is necessary. The Rabbi and the Muslim were the only ones to say that guns for hunting purposes would be frowned upon considering the religious dietary laws and the form of slaughter necessary for the animal.
The Baptist preacher was posed a question on self defense against an intruder with an intent to harm his family. He told the story of the disciple cutting the ear off the soldier that came to take Jesus, peace be upon him, away. Yet Jesus healed the mans ear. I suppose, referring that violence was something that Jesus would not use as first option. That he would prefer to live his life as close to that of Jesus.
So it made me curious about the Christian view of guns. I have read the Bible, not completely nor in depth enough to know the common religious opinion. But as Christians, what is your view on gun ownership and using guns in self-defense. Does it go against the teachings of Jesus? Is there exceptions to the use of force when you are threatened? Does the opinion differ depending on each sect?
It would be interesting to hear from other religious backgrounds as well. What is your opinion on guns, and does it conflict with the general accepted religious opinion?
............<<>> Jesus said to Peter in (Matt.26:52)- verse- Put your sword back in its place. Jesus said to Him, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. The didn't have guns in Jesus time. So i guess a sword and a gun could do the same thing. They can kill some one............Joey
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 03:08 PM)
From what I gather from a lot of the posters here, it seems that protecting worldly things, and family holds more value than their beliefs, or doing what is right?
Why have any beliefs at all if they don't mean anything to you?
Why have any beliefs at all if they don't mean anything to you?
i dont realy understand your question,am i realy to believe i should turn the other cheek,i should lay down the life of me and my family for some animal breaking into my home that would kill us so there is no witness,,,or worse beat and rape my wife and little girl i can only hope someon breaks into my house and just takes something and leaves,,but thats not always the case is it,,home invasion are violent attacks...its one thing to have my life in someone elses hands but not my familes i will defend then till no end,,god be damed ill take that punishemnt what ever it might be to keep my loved ones from being raped and murderd or worse raped and left to live with that pain,and fear..not me not on my watch,,,and not for someone that material things over his own life,,simply means he has nothing to lose and that is a dangerouse person.
in combat id say all you need weapon wise is a long rifle and a knife.
sure power and distance out does a knife.
you also can hit and run.
but remember aim time, reload time, plus bullets
with the ability of stealth.
sure power and distance out does a knife.
you also can hit and run.
but remember aim time, reload time, plus bullets
with the ability of stealth.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 09:37 PM)
But it is easier to become proficient in fire arms than it is to master a knife which can easily be turned against you more so than a firearm. Not that there is not an assortment of knives and machetes I have to rely on. I desperately need a katana but not sure I would even try to use it for self defense. The practice wooden one I have would work though but still not reliable as the cold steel a gun offers.
I am really shocked at one of the forum's few Christians seeming obsession with murderous weapons. How do you show the love and forgiveness of your God by killing people? Your Jesus said that if you live by the sword, you will die by it.
And yes, it is dangerous to use weapons in an urban setting. I fired a pistol indoors once, a 9x19mm para, and it went through 3 walls, 2 car windows, and went into the neigbor's house. Almost killing her son. I was lucky it just missed him. But tragedy was only seconds and inches away.
And incase people don't realize, as I have been around thousands of theives in prison and on the streets of California, 99% of the time, people break into houses to steal. Generally, they are drug addicts, and need money for drugs. They want to steal your stuff, and sell it for drugs. If you happen to be in the house, just tell them they can have your stuff. Most druggies are just looking for a fix. They have no intent of harming people. It's usually when people put the value of their TV or stereo over that of their family, and try to fight the theif off, that they become violent in self-defense.
Also, if you dial "911" on your telephone, they will send police to your house to take care of things so you don't have to worry about it.
And also, for those who are not aware, in the USA, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot and kill them-that's life in prison. And you'll never see your family again. Most states will not even give family visits to violent criminals. the only time one can use deadly force on someone breaking and entering, or even on one entering, is if they say clearly "I am going to kill your family", and demonstrate the reality of the threat by indicating with a deadly weapon that they are about to kill them. Only then can you use deadly force. But you still are not given free reign to kill them. it is expected that you will try to disable them. Such as shooting their outter extremities. There is NO LAW in the USA that allows people to kill others.
fun facts to ponder on and many many more found at
http://dailyadultjoke.com/gunfacts.htm
* Gun-free England not such a utopia after all. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.18 And according to a United Nations study, British citizens are more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States. The 2000 report shows that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.19
* Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. That?s right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In a recent three year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. (45), as compared with students who were murdered by firearms (22) during that same time period.6
A. General Death Rates
Cause
Number
Heart disease 710,760
Cancer 553,091
Stroke (cerebrovascular disease) 167,661
Chronic lower respiratory diseases 122,009
Doctor's negligence 98,329
Influenza and pneumonia 65,313
Motor-vehicle 43,354
Suicides (all kinds, including firearms) 29,350
Firearms (Total)*
Suicides
Homicides
Accidents
16,586
10,801
776
28,163
Accidents (six causes)
Falls
Poison (solid, liquid)
Choking on food or other object
Drowning
Fires, flames
Firearms
13,322
12,757
4,313
3,402
3,377
776
Homicides (all instruments) 16,765
Source: Except for the figure on doctor's negligence, the above information is for 2000 and is taken from National Safety Council, Injury Facts: 2003 Edition, at 10, 19-20, 129. The number of yearly deaths attributed to doctor's negligence is based on the Harvard Medical Practice Study (1990) which is cited in Kleck, Point Blank, at 43.127
*The total firearms death figure above is a summary of the "Suicides," "Homicides" and "Accidents" subcategories. The Total excludes two categories: Legal Intervention and Undetermined.
http://dailyadultjoke.com/gunfacts.htm
* Gun-free England not such a utopia after all. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.18 And according to a United Nations study, British citizens are more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States. The 2000 report shows that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.19
* Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. That?s right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In a recent three year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. (45), as compared with students who were murdered by firearms (22) during that same time period.6
A. General Death Rates
Cause
Number
Heart disease 710,760
Cancer 553,091
Stroke (cerebrovascular disease) 167,661
Chronic lower respiratory diseases 122,009
Doctor's negligence 98,329
Influenza and pneumonia 65,313
Motor-vehicle 43,354
Suicides (all kinds, including firearms) 29,350
Firearms (Total)*
Suicides
Homicides
Accidents
16,586
10,801
776
28,163
Accidents (six causes)
Falls
Poison (solid, liquid)
Choking on food or other object
Drowning
Fires, flames
Firearms
13,322
12,757
4,313
3,402
3,377
776
Homicides (all instruments) 16,765
Source: Except for the figure on doctor's negligence, the above information is for 2000 and is taken from National Safety Council, Injury Facts: 2003 Edition, at 10, 19-20, 129. The number of yearly deaths attributed to doctor's negligence is based on the Harvard Medical Practice Study (1990) which is cited in Kleck, Point Blank, at 43.127
*The total firearms death figure above is a summary of the "Suicides," "Homicides" and "Accidents" subcategories. The Total excludes two categories: Legal Intervention and Undetermined.
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 10:11 PM)
Depends on the type of training really. Some are trained for head shots too. I was in fact trained for body mass for the purpose of stopping someone, whether they survive or not is not factored into that. Here is a quick link I found that quickly touches that point. What is the reasoning for aiming at extremities? The differences and reasoning are quite interesting. There is also differences in posture and if to roll with one in the chamber (Israeli style) or not.
http://workingstiffs.blogspot.com/2008/03/...-week-four.html
http://workingstiffs.blogspot.com/2008/03/...-week-four.html
When you receive proper civil gun training, as it's obvious you have none, you will learn to only shoot at the outter extremities. The purpose, obviously, is to cause the least harm to the person. Which, at least is a semi-moral stance on shooting people.
QUOTE (MissMelsWell @ May 1 2008, 10:19 PM)
I'm a Quaker. This is an ultimately non-violent faith.
Opinions will vary by individuals within the group, the general consensous is ... Do no harm... ever.
Not in self-defense, not for fun, not for any reason. There are even ongoing discussions on whether or not it's ok to eat meat. Now, being that I was raised a vegan and know that this is NOT a healthy diet for me I will remain with my faith, but I will not stop eating meat. That's ok, my faith allows for not following the herd so to speak. But I AM very careful about only consuming what I need to stay healthy, never more.
Now, given that I am serious about doing no harm to the best of my ability, I can say what happened when I was attacked many years ago... I kicked thrashed, yes, but still, did no harm while still defending myself. I don't have to hurt someone else to defend myself. I'm not sure I could.
Gun ownership is a tough one because I live in the USA.
1. it's a constituational right that the supreme court has defined. I'm ok with that.
2. I don't begrudge anyone their right to legally own a gun. That is thier responsibility.
3. I do not allow guns in my household for any reason what-so-ever. I have asked friends to leave their firearms at home before coming to my house. It's a hard fast rule, in which I will not budge on. I have thrown people out of my house for bringing a gun into it.
It never keeps me from their homes, nor do I cast judgement on their decision to own a gun. I can even fire a gun, clean one, and have even on occasion shot clay pigeons for fun. I have no fear of them, I just have very clear ideas about when they are ok for me to be around, and when they are not ok for me to be around.
Do no harm...
Opinions will vary by individuals within the group, the general consensous is ... Do no harm... ever.
Not in self-defense, not for fun, not for any reason. There are even ongoing discussions on whether or not it's ok to eat meat. Now, being that I was raised a vegan and know that this is NOT a healthy diet for me I will remain with my faith, but I will not stop eating meat. That's ok, my faith allows for not following the herd so to speak. But I AM very careful about only consuming what I need to stay healthy, never more.
Now, given that I am serious about doing no harm to the best of my ability, I can say what happened when I was attacked many years ago... I kicked thrashed, yes, but still, did no harm while still defending myself. I don't have to hurt someone else to defend myself. I'm not sure I could.
Gun ownership is a tough one because I live in the USA.
1. it's a constituational right that the supreme court has defined. I'm ok with that.
2. I don't begrudge anyone their right to legally own a gun. That is thier responsibility.
3. I do not allow guns in my household for any reason what-so-ever. I have asked friends to leave their firearms at home before coming to my house. It's a hard fast rule, in which I will not budge on. I have thrown people out of my house for bringing a gun into it.
It never keeps me from their homes, nor do I cast judgement on their decision to own a gun. I can even fire a gun, clean one, and have even on occasion shot clay pigeons for fun. I have no fear of them, I just have very clear ideas about when they are ok for me to be around, and when they are not ok for me to be around.
Do no harm...
This is why I love the Quakers. I consider your group not only closer to what Jesus taught, but to what is truly, uiversally right, outside of religion. Very much respect to you and your faith. It is people like you that make me feel fond of Christians and Christ's teachings.
QUOTE (joeycastaneda56 @ May 1 2008, 10:21 PM)
............<<>> Jesus said to Peter in (Matt.26:52)- verse- Put your sword back in its place. Jesus said to Him, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. The didn't have guns in Jesus time. So i guess a sword and a gun could do the same thing. They can kill some one............Joey
Bravo. Thank you.
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 03:27 PM)
I am really shocked at one of the forum's few Christians seeming obsession with murderous weapons. How do you show the love and forgiveness of your God by killing people? Your Jesus said that if you live by the sword, you will die by it.
And yes, it is dangerous to use weapons in an urban setting. I fired a pistol indoors once, a 9x19mm para, and it went through 3 walls, 2 car windows, and went into the neigbor's house. Almost killing her son. I was lucky it just missed him. But tragedy was only seconds and inches away.
And incase people don't realize, as I have been around thousands of theives in prison and on the streets of California, 99% of the time, people break into houses to steal. Generally, they are drug addicts, and need money for drugs. They want to steal your stuff, and sell it for drugs. If you happen to be in the house, just tell them they can have your stuff. Most druggies are just looking for a fix. They have no intent of harming people. It's usually when people put the value of their TV or stereo over that of their family, and try to fight the theif off, that they become violent in self-defense.
Also, if you dial "911" on your telephone, they will send police to your house to take care of things so you don't have to worry about it.
And also, for those who are not aware, in the USA, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot and kill them-that's life in prison. And you'll never see your family again. Most states will not even give family visits to violent criminals. the only time one can use deadly force on someone breaking and entering, or even on one entering, is if they say clearly "I am going to kill your family", and demonstrate the reality of the threat by indicating with a deadly weapon that they are about to kill them. Only then can you use deadly force. But you still are not given free reign to kill them. it is expected that you will try to disable them. Such as shooting their outter extremities. There is NO LAW in the USA that allows people to kill others.
And yes, it is dangerous to use weapons in an urban setting. I fired a pistol indoors once, a 9x19mm para, and it went through 3 walls, 2 car windows, and went into the neigbor's house. Almost killing her son. I was lucky it just missed him. But tragedy was only seconds and inches away.
And incase people don't realize, as I have been around thousands of theives in prison and on the streets of California, 99% of the time, people break into houses to steal. Generally, they are drug addicts, and need money for drugs. They want to steal your stuff, and sell it for drugs. If you happen to be in the house, just tell them they can have your stuff. Most druggies are just looking for a fix. They have no intent of harming people. It's usually when people put the value of their TV or stereo over that of their family, and try to fight the theif off, that they become violent in self-defense.
Also, if you dial "911" on your telephone, they will send police to your house to take care of things so you don't have to worry about it.
And also, for those who are not aware, in the USA, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot and kill them-that's life in prison. And you'll never see your family again. Most states will not even give family visits to violent criminals. the only time one can use deadly force on someone breaking and entering, or even on one entering, is if they say clearly "I am going to kill your family", and demonstrate the reality of the threat by indicating with a deadly weapon that they are about to kill them. Only then can you use deadly force. But you still are not given free reign to kill them. it is expected that you will try to disable them. Such as shooting their outter extremities. There is NO LAW in the USA that allows people to kill others.
you are wrong wrong wrong,,,louisiana passed a bill saying ANYTIME YOU LIFE IS ENDANGER YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO USE DEADLY FORCE,,you can legally shoot ANYONE that enters your house or trys to car jack you,seeing how under napolianc law your car or coach is an extention of your home,,,,the only rules are,cant shoot them in the back means they are fleeing and your life wasnt in danger and you cant shoot them in the head first shot,thats premedtated murder...louisiana is a right to protect state..
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 10:21 PM)
i dont realy understand your question,am i realy to believe i should turn the other cheek,i should lay down the life of me and my family for some animal breaking into my home that would kill us so there is no witness,,,or worse beat and rape my wife and little girl i can only hope someon breaks into my house and just takes something and leaves,,but thats not always the case is it,,home invasion are violent attacks...its one thing to have my life in someone elses hands but not my familes i will defend then till no end,,god be damed ill take that punishemnt what ever it might be to keep my loved ones from being raped and murderd or worse raped and left to live with that pain,and fear..not me not on my watch,,,and not for someone that material things over his own life,,simply means he has nothing to lose and that is a dangerouse person.
You have a very skewed and scary outlook on the world.
And I apologize for assuming you were a spiritual person. You mentioned it. I did not realize you were not. I can only call people who claim to believe in peace, love and all that, who contradict it. Obviously there is no moral code you stick to. So that's fine. I can't argue that.
But I've never heard of animals breaking into people's houses to kill people. Usually people do that. But if an animal does, call animal control....
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 10:34 PM)
you are wrong wrong wrong,,,louisiana passed a bill saying ANYTIME YOU LIFE IS ENDANGER YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO USE DEADLY FORCE,,you can legally shoot ANYONE that enters your house or trys to car jack you,seeing how under napolianc law your car or coach is an extention of your home,,,,the only rules are,cant shoot them in the back means they are fleeing and your life wasnt in danger and you cant shoot them in the head first shot,thats premedtated murder...louisiana is a right to protect state..
Someone entering your house is not defined as putting your life in danger. I have friends over all the time, and never felt the need to kill them....
I've lived in Louisiana. And despite their lack of health codes, they are not a totally barbaric state. Their laws are generally sane, like most states.
know your rights before you tell someone else theres,,,louisiana does have sane laws just like these other states,,,and the def,of what justifiable homicide is,,,please dont make up things and tell people they dont have a right to defend themselves without fear of punishment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. Outside of the United States, the Castle Doctrine is sometimes pejoratively referred to as a "Make My Day" law [1] [2], a reference to Dirty Harry.
Since the enactment of the Florida legislation, Alabama[6], Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas have adopted similar statutes, and other states (Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wyoming) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own. These statutes create a presumption of innocence for people who use deadly force whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business and also provide civil immunity from possible lawsuits arising from the use of force in these contexts. Links: 1 2
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78338
§20. Justifiable homicide
A. A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. Outside of the United States, the Castle Doctrine is sometimes pejoratively referred to as a "Make My Day" law [1] [2], a reference to Dirty Harry.
Since the enactment of the Florida legislation, Alabama[6], Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas have adopted similar statutes, and other states (Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wyoming) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own. These statutes create a presumption of innocence for people who use deadly force whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business and also provide civil immunity from possible lawsuits arising from the use of force in these contexts. Links: 1 2
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78338
§20. Justifiable homicide
A. A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
Well
I don't believe it should be a question for religion, but for morality. In my opinion if any religion condoned the use of guns, or any other weapon for that matter it would be a global excuse for violence.
And what is it with you people who own firearms and won't hesitate to use them? Firing a gun at someone is easy, killing them with it is easy, a gun and its range makes the whole process so detatched from the reality of a situation that its a wonder owners of guns don't cause more trouble than they already do. Add to this the fact that just carrying a firearm generally gives an individual a sense of immense power anyway. It is easy to teach someone how to use a gun, to disassemble clean and reassemble, to load the weapon, prime it and finally discharge it, but it is a lot more difficult teaching people the responsibilty that comes with it.
You should try being shot by a gun then re-evaluate your eagerness to discharge your own firearm, I would not wish that experience on anyone, there are easier ways to deal with situations, that generally mean talking, an art lost on some people I realise, or cooperating.
That said I agree that there may be some situations that would require quick decisive action, but for general home defence, well a cool head, a quick call to the police and a decent insurance policy should see you right, oh and that will save your court appearance having exceeded reasonable force by taking a gun to knife fight.
Thats just silly and if you believe your own press you will be in serious trouble. ''ANYTIME YOU LIFE IS ENDANGER YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO USE DEADLY FORCE'' so if I were in an unstable building during an earth quake and a someone was trying to get through the only exit but struggling, effectively blocking my escape, by your definition I would be entitled to shoot the person and kick the corpse out of the way. Your back and headshot analogy doesnt work either, as headshots are not always fatal, in fact its quite common for someone shot in the head to survive, but by your reckoning you could fire into the air, then shoot them in the head on the second shot. And a criminal could just simply turn their back on you. I also think that an intruder breaking into your house and getting shot could find a good lawyer and turn your bloodthirsty confidence against you.
Oh and this is the definition of premeditated murder: Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension. You will notice it says nothing of how many bullets are fired, or even the means of attack.
I don't believe it should be a question for religion, but for morality. In my opinion if any religion condoned the use of guns, or any other weapon for that matter it would be a global excuse for violence.
And what is it with you people who own firearms and won't hesitate to use them? Firing a gun at someone is easy, killing them with it is easy, a gun and its range makes the whole process so detatched from the reality of a situation that its a wonder owners of guns don't cause more trouble than they already do. Add to this the fact that just carrying a firearm generally gives an individual a sense of immense power anyway. It is easy to teach someone how to use a gun, to disassemble clean and reassemble, to load the weapon, prime it and finally discharge it, but it is a lot more difficult teaching people the responsibilty that comes with it.
You should try being shot by a gun then re-evaluate your eagerness to discharge your own firearm, I would not wish that experience on anyone, there are easier ways to deal with situations, that generally mean talking, an art lost on some people I realise, or cooperating.
That said I agree that there may be some situations that would require quick decisive action, but for general home defence, well a cool head, a quick call to the police and a decent insurance policy should see you right, oh and that will save your court appearance having exceeded reasonable force by taking a gun to knife fight.
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 09:34 PM)
you are wrong wrong wrong,,,louisiana passed a bill saying ANYTIME YOU LIFE IS ENDANGER YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO USE DEADLY FORCE,,you can legally shoot ANYONE that enters your house or trys to car jack you,seeing how under napolianc law your car or coach is an extention of your home,,,,the only rules are,cant shoot them in the back means they are fleeing and your life wasnt in danger and you cant shoot them in the head first shot,thats premedtated murder...louisiana is a right to protect state..
Thats just silly and if you believe your own press you will be in serious trouble. ''ANYTIME YOU LIFE IS ENDANGER YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO USE DEADLY FORCE'' so if I were in an unstable building during an earth quake and a someone was trying to get through the only exit but struggling, effectively blocking my escape, by your definition I would be entitled to shoot the person and kick the corpse out of the way. Your back and headshot analogy doesnt work either, as headshots are not always fatal, in fact its quite common for someone shot in the head to survive, but by your reckoning you could fire into the air, then shoot them in the head on the second shot. And a criminal could just simply turn their back on you. I also think that an intruder breaking into your house and getting shot could find a good lawyer and turn your bloodthirsty confidence against you.
Oh and this is the definition of premeditated murder: Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension. You will notice it says nothing of how many bullets are fired, or even the means of attack.
QUOTE (joeycastaneda56 @ May 1 2008, 05:21 PM)
............<<>> Jesus said to Peter in (Matt.26:52)- verse- Put your sword back in its place. Jesus said to Him, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.
Lu 22:36
And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 05:30 PM)
When you receive proper civil gun training, as it's obvious you have none, you will learn to only shoot at the outter extremities. The purpose, obviously, is to cause the least harm to the person. Which, at least is a semi-moral stance on shooting people.
I have to side with Clovis.
If and when I aim at someone it is to tag them (and I have in the past) it can be hard to hit a moving target....the bigger the target the better the chance to hit it.
Consistently 1 - 1 1/2 inch spacing at 600yds
QUOTE (asc.rudeboy @ May 1 2008, 09:45 PM)
know your rights before you tell someone else theres,,,louisiana does have sane laws just like these other states,,,and the def,of what justifiable homicide is,,,please dont make up things and tell people they dont have a right to defend themselves without fear of punishment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. Outside of the United States, the Castle Doctrine is sometimes pejoratively referred to as a "Make My Day" law [1] [2], a reference to Dirty Harry.
Since the enactment of the Florida legislation, Alabama[6], Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas have adopted similar statutes, and other states (Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wyoming) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own. These statutes create a presumption of innocence for people who use deadly force whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business and also provide civil immunity from possible lawsuits arising from the use of force in these contexts. Links: 1 2
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78338
§20. Justifiable homicide
A. A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine.
Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. Outside of the United States, the Castle Doctrine is sometimes pejoratively referred to as a "Make My Day" law [1] [2], a reference to Dirty Harry.
Since the enactment of the Florida legislation, Alabama[6], Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Texas have adopted similar statutes, and other states (Montana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wyoming) are currently considering "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own. These statutes create a presumption of innocence for people who use deadly force whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business and also provide civil immunity from possible lawsuits arising from the use of force in these contexts. Links: 1 2
http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=78338
§20. Justifiable homicide
A. A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
Even though you didn't quote any Louisiana law at all, do you realize you just backed up everything I said, and attacked your own stance? You quoted:
"whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business"
and:
"When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger"
and:
"(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing."
Just how do you infer from your own quotes that someone being in your house is grounds to kill them? You're contradicting yourself....
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 04:30 PM)
When you receive proper civil gun training, as it's obvious you have none, you will learn to only shoot at the outter extremities. The purpose, obviously, is to cause the least harm to the person. Which, at least is a semi-moral stance on shooting people.
Do not presume so much my friend. I have trained and qualified for a concealed handgun license in the State of Texas.
As far as living by the sword....I do not consider being prepared to self defend yourself and family as living by the sword.
As far as bullets going through several walls...aim properly.
As far as having weapons to self defend as not being Christ-centered...preserving the lives of myself and my family does not interfere with my Christianity. For me not doing all I can to self defend myself and family is akin to relying on prayer only when medicine is available.
QUOTE (zandore @ May 1 2008, 10:34 PM)
Lu 22:36
And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
Just a few passages before Jesus says "put your sword away. Whoever lives by the sword will die by the sword". Jesus was obviously setting them up for a teaching lesson a few fassages ahead. Either that, or Jesus can't make up his mind.And He said to them, "But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.
QUOTE (zandore @ May 1 2008, 10:34 PM)
I have to side with Clovis.
If and when I aim at someone it is to tag them (and I have in the past) it can be hard to hit a moving target....the bigger the target the better the chance to hit it.
Consistently 1 - 1 1/2 inch spacing at 600yds
And what department do you work for that supposedly gave you this illegal training?If and when I aim at someone it is to tag them (and I have in the past) it can be hard to hit a moving target....the bigger the target the better the chance to hit it.
Consistently 1 - 1 1/2 inch spacing at 600yds
QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 10:55 PM)
Do not presume so much my friend. I have trained and qualified for a concealed handgun license in the State of Texas.
And what does that prove? Really. Anyone can get a concealed weapons permit. How many weapons have you been trained with, and at what agencies?QUOTE (Clovis @ May 1 2008, 10:55 PM)
As far as living by the sword....I do not consider being prepared to self defend yourself and family as living by the sword.
As far as bullets going through several walls...aim properly.
As far as having weapons to self defend as not being Christ-centered...preserving the lives of myself and my family does not interfere with my Christianity. For me not doing all I can to self defend myself and family is akin to relying on prayer only when medicine is available.
Sure just love people by shooting them in the name of God. Great. As far as bullets going through several walls...aim properly.
As far as having weapons to self defend as not being Christ-centered...preserving the lives of myself and my family does not interfere with my Christianity. For me not doing all I can to self defend myself and family is akin to relying on prayer only when medicine is available.
When does using medicine when you're sick kill others?
I just wanted to say that I am sorry guys. I just can't be more open-minded about killing people.
As one with no religion, I love all people, and view all as my brothers and sisters. And I just can't see ever wanting to kill one of my brothers or sisters. The only thing I want to bring to the world is Love and Peace.
Killing people is just too contrary to that for me. And I'm sorry I can't explore and consider the idea more.
As one with no religion, I love all people, and view all as my brothers and sisters. And I just can't see ever wanting to kill one of my brothers or sisters. The only thing I want to bring to the world is Love and Peace.
Killing people is just too contrary to that for me. And I'm sorry I can't explore and consider the idea more.
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 06:02 PM)
And what does that prove? Really. Anyone can get a concealed weapons permit. How many weapons have you been trained with, and at what agencies?
Sure just love people by shooting them in the name of God. Great.
When does using medicine when you're sick kill others?
Sure just love people by shooting them in the name of God. Great.
When does using medicine when you're sick kill others?
No one said to it was shooting people in the name of God. Hardly. It is using measures in self defense...nothing more or less. Calling 911 or even animal control will take too long in most cases. The city is a high crime area and I pray to God I never have to use a weapon for self defense. It is not about being blood thirsty but being proactive instead of reactive. Proactive in that I would rather be prepared to use self defense measures than be reactive and deal with myself or family getting hurt at the hands of others. Medicine, maybe I did not explain well, but if someone does not take or is given medicine when available and dies it is the same as someone not self defending themselves or another when their life is in danger. This does not take into factor anything else, including the person who intended to harm another, but only considers the preservation of your life and the innocent lives of others.
I definitely subscribe to the castle doctrine.
BTW what exactly is the reasoning to aim at the outter extremities?
Here is another link:
QUOTE
If you follow the "center mass" aiming philosophy, it would be appropriate to target both suspects on the solar plexus/abdomen regardless of the circumstances. Considering what we know about impact round tissue displacement, and the fact that the most common round in American policing will deform the tissue five to six inches, do the suspects face equal risk of internal injury? Not hardly.
http://www.policeone.com/writers/columnist...ticles/1266889/
QUOTE
I definitely subscribe to the castle doctrine.
Interesting, I do too. This is why I do not allow firearms in my house. My castle, my rules.
Now, that being said, if someone intrudes, and tries to do me or my daughter bodily harm, we will defend ourselves in a non-violent way. This might include struggling, running, talking, subterfuge, lying... whatever.
BUT, I believe in gun safety. I believe in keeping them locked up, away from burglers, children, drunk friends, whatever... locked up. If someone invades my home, they can have my stuff, I dont' care about that, it's all replacable and while I have a few nice things, it's still all crap. If they're looking to harm me or my kid, there is no way I'd be able to retrieve my safely locked up firearm, load it, and fire it before they did me harm. So, a firearm is of no use to me at all.
Zip.
Nearly 20 years ago, I was brutally attacked in my car. My face completely broken and smashed. In that case, even if I'd had a concealed in my purse or car, it would have done NO good. More than likely, I'd have had that weapon used against me. As events would have it, I was able to thrash hard enough to get the jerk to loosen his grip for a fraction of a second so I could scream and run. It was quite effective. Sure, I was hurt, but he was going to hurt me no matter what. I have no need to hurt him back.... hurting him back would have gained me nothing... I don't believe in an "eye for an eye".
Sorry you had to experience that. All I can do is be very cautious at all times. Look at my surroundings, try not to go into places I can be cornered, I even scan the areas under cars when walking through a parking lot just in case someone is crouching behind a car, and of course looking through the small gap between the door hinges and the frame when opening a door. I would rather run away from danger when I sense it than confront it. Likewise though I would rather be prepared to use a firearm responsibly and within the statute of the laws within my state than not have that option. Perfectly understandable though for those who do not choose that option or would be better off without it. It is admirable when someone can be like will as well and completely feel very passionate about not using self defense in honor of his beliefs.
I guess my point is that I see guns as tools. I won't use a knife to harm, I won't use a bomb to harm, I won't use my hands to harm etc... all these things are tools.
I can handle and use a gun to skeet shoot, I even enjoy it. I'm a dart player, it's not that much of a stretch to consider that I like throwing stuff at a target. However, I WON'T shoot at a paper man target. I wont' do it. A round bulls eye target? Yes, that would likely not bother me. I know it sounds silly, I understand that, but it's simply part of my life philosophy, my own self-imposed sense of morality for ME.
I'll use a knife to slice bread, cut roses in my garden, or open a package. But I won't plunge a knife into a living being.
You get my point. A gun in and of itself is simply just a tool... I just have rules for myself about what that tool will and will not be used for. Killing or hurting someone is not one of its uses in my book.
I can handle and use a gun to skeet shoot, I even enjoy it. I'm a dart player, it's not that much of a stretch to consider that I like throwing stuff at a target. However, I WON'T shoot at a paper man target. I wont' do it. A round bulls eye target? Yes, that would likely not bother me. I know it sounds silly, I understand that, but it's simply part of my life philosophy, my own self-imposed sense of morality for ME.
I'll use a knife to slice bread, cut roses in my garden, or open a package. But I won't plunge a knife into a living being.
You get my point. A gun in and of itself is simply just a tool... I just have rules for myself about what that tool will and will not be used for. Killing or hurting someone is not one of its uses in my book.
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 10:27 PM)
I am really shocked at one of the forum's few Christians seeming obsession with murderous weapons. How do you show the love and forgiveness of your God by killing people? Your Jesus said that if you live by the sword, you will die by it.
And yes, it is dangerous to use weapons in an urban setting. I fired a pistol indoors once, a 9x19mm para, and it went through 3 walls, 2 car windows, and went into the neigbor's house. Almost killing her son. I was lucky it just missed him. But tragedy was only seconds and inches away.
And incase people don't realize, as I have been around thousands of theives in prison and on the streets of California, 99% of the time, people break into houses to steal. Generally, they are drug addicts, and need money for drugs. They want to steal your stuff, and sell it for drugs. If you happen to be in the house, just tell them they can have your stuff. Most druggies are just looking for a fix. They have no intent of harming people. It's usually when people put the value of their TV or stereo over that of their family, and try to fight the theif off, that they become violent in self-defense.
Also, if you dial "911" on your telephone, they will send police to your house to take care of things so you don't have to worry about it.
And also, for those who are not aware, in the USA, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot and kill them-that's life in prison. And you'll never see your family again. Most states will not even give family visits to violent criminals. the only time one can use deadly force on someone breaking and entering, or even on one entering, is if they say clearly "I am going to kill your family", and demonstrate the reality of the threat by indicating with a deadly weapon that they are about to kill them. Only then can you use deadly force. But you still are not given free reign to kill them. it is expected that you will try to disable them. Such as shooting their outter extremities. There is NO LAW in the USA that allows people to kill others.
And yes, it is dangerous to use weapons in an urban setting. I fired a pistol indoors once, a 9x19mm para, and it went through 3 walls, 2 car windows, and went into the neigbor's house. Almost killing her son. I was lucky it just missed him. But tragedy was only seconds and inches away.
And incase people don't realize, as I have been around thousands of theives in prison and on the streets of California, 99% of the time, people break into houses to steal. Generally, they are drug addicts, and need money for drugs. They want to steal your stuff, and sell it for drugs. If you happen to be in the house, just tell them they can have your stuff. Most druggies are just looking for a fix. They have no intent of harming people. It's usually when people put the value of their TV or stereo over that of their family, and try to fight the theif off, that they become violent in self-defense.
Also, if you dial "911" on your telephone, they will send police to your house to take care of things so you don't have to worry about it.
And also, for those who are not aware, in the USA, if someone breaks into your house and you shoot and kill them-that's life in prison. And you'll never see your family again. Most states will not even give family visits to violent criminals. the only time one can use deadly force on someone breaking and entering, or even on one entering, is if they say clearly "I am going to kill your family", and demonstrate the reality of the threat by indicating with a deadly weapon that they are about to kill them. Only then can you use deadly force. But you still are not given free reign to kill them. it is expected that you will try to disable them. Such as shooting their outter extremities. There is NO LAW in the USA that allows people to kill others.
............<<>> I have always trusted in Jesus to protect Me and My family. In (Matt.4:6)- verse- 6- He shall give His Angels charge over you. Angels are there to protect the (Saints). I would like to share a true story with everyone. A couple came to our Church and gave their lives to Jesus. After about six months the man left the Church. His wife continue to come to Church. He started drinking and doing drugs again. The wife didn't want to be with him anymore. Because he was also abusive to her. So she left him. My wife and I continue to help her and her three children. He started calling me and accusing me of sleeping with his wife. He would tell me he was going to come and kill me and my family. This went on for several months. One day he called me and said he was sorry and wanted to talk to me about coming back to Church. I told him to go ahead and come over. I could feel in my Spirit that something was not right. My wife and I started praying and asking God to send Angels to protect us from any harm. When He got to my house we sat in the kitchen across from each other. He look at me and said that he had a gun and he was going to kill me and my family. As he started to stand up, he started to pull out his gun. But then he stop and in his tracks. He then looked about 4 foot above my head. He looked terrified. I then said "Vincent what is the matter do you see something that scares you". He turn and bolted to the door and knocked my screen door off the hinges, jumped over my fence and ran down the road. He never bothered us again. The sad thing is that five years later he killed Himself. And in my own convictions about guns I don't want one ever. Just to let you know I am not against guns I just choose not to have one.................Joey.
Very encouraging Joey and not the first time I have heard in casual conversation a first hand account of a believer who was shielded from danger posed by another.
QUOTE (will_1835 @ May 1 2008, 03:50 PM)
Even though you didn't quote any Louisiana law at all, do you realize you just backed up everything I said, and attacked your own stance? You quoted:
"whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business"
and:
"When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger"
and:
"(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing."
Just how do you infer from your own quotes that someone being in your house is grounds to kill them? You're contradicting yourself....
"whenever they are threatened with violence in their home, car, or place of business"
and:
"When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger"
and:
"(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing."
Just how do you infer from your own quotes that someone being in your house is grounds to kill them? You're contradicting yourself....
now your just playing word games since the start of the conversation it was about someone breaking into your house,even from the start i said someone in my house to hurt me or my family..you said there was no law that would back up leathal force,,and there is,, that was the point of me showing you that,,,second link i posted is the fisrts 2 sections of louisiana law on Justifiable homicide..
and if you read the entire page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
louisiana is listed as a state with the castle doc law..with a link to the tottal written law and all clauses,,,i dont understand how you say i messed up my own defence??this backs up everything i stated..
and as far as shooting in the back and the head thats right out of the cops mouth that worked the shooting at the tattoo shop i worked at..man came in at closing time (my day off) hudled the women that were there closing the shop at gun point...on of the artist pulled her gun from her concealed holster fired one round into his stomach the intruder fell,,got up ran away and was later arrested bleeding out hiding at a friends house,,,,the cops exact words were as long as you didnt shoot him in the back running away from you or shoot him in the head first you wont be in any trouble...if you shoot him in the head first you were trying to kill hm not simple defend yourself,if you shoot him in the back you were not indanger because he was leaving the situation...she got in no trouble after the trial they called her and asked her to pick up her hand gun,,,no fuss no muss,,Justifiable homicide say is all in the tittle,,there are laws that protect you when shooting someone in self defence as i stated before,,your words were there are nor laws that protect you from shooting someone..
but hey man im not hear to argue what i know,,live your life as you see fit and i hope if someone ever breaks into your house all they want is your tv and not hurt you or your family...but me i would rather have a gun and not need it then need a gun and not have it..or i would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6..or what ever fun little saying you want to listen to,, they all say the same thing...
The law in Texas allows for you to legally shoot someone fleeing who has vandalized or robbed your property after sunset only and only if you feel you will not be able to get them to stop and return said property or pay for said damages. It has been used several times. Two that I know of. One time someone was tagging private property with spray paint and took off running and got shot in the back. Another was when two people stole prize chickens that had value and took off running and one of them was shot in the back and died. Not that I agree with that but there are other things which are legal that I do not agree with either (abortion when the mother's life is not in danger for one).
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.