SITE NOTICE | MORE..Outreach Business Cards .. Improved! We've made it so easy to order ready-to-use quality business cards printed with your church information. Now with more options! Be sure to check it out! .. click for more info!
The Oregon gunman who lined up his victims and asked specifically which ones were Christians before shooting them execution style had a special interest in â€śmagickâ€ť and â€śspiritualismâ€ť and had joined a dating website called â€śSpiritual Passion.â€ť
On the site, Christopher Harper Mercer, 26, who killed nine people and injured seven at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg before he was shot and killed by police, describes his politics as â€śRepublicanâ€ť and his interests as â€śkilling zombies,â€ť meditation, the occult and punk-rock music.
He also made clear that he had a disdain for organized religion. Using the handle â€śIronCross45,â€ť Mercer describes himself as a â€śnot religious,â€ť man who lives with his parents. He belonged to a group on the site who shared common interests in â€śmagick and the occult.â€ť Under the category of â€śReligious Views,â€ť Mercer wrote that he is not religious but is â€śspiritualâ€ť and was...
Hi Wayfarer, I think any boys who are raised, say, out in the country, have a good chance of becoming men, and girls, women. I think the closer that line gets to any suburbs and cities, those chances become very limited and even nonexistent. I think the more we live off the land, the grid as much as possible, and keep the family unit as safe as possible distance wise, as we put in a fair days work, value family time, and raise our children in the ways of the Lord, I think there's a good chance that the boys will become real men, and girls, fine ladies with values and morals they'll take with them through life, passing on to their familys. I know this scenario is becoming increasingly difficult and there are no guarantees, but I think it's a healthy solution, mentally and spiritually that would still breed promising, lasting results (if it were possible for all).
Thank you Christipher000 if RI, When I was younger I worked in a sporting goods store and sold duck decoys, ammo, shot guns and hunting and fishing licsences , etc to sportsman and hunters alike. But now a days the cost and urbanization has made that hobby or lifestyle very expense and the " passage" from father to son is in many cases a thing of the past. Gun ownership in my family was a rite of passage for boys becoming men. Our country doesn't make boys to men. We just have large grown boys raised by mothers abandoned by fathers, who themselves are big boys wearing baggy shorts and caps worn backwards.
I agree, Wayfarer. I have no problem with extremely strict gun control laws with deep background checks, and even psychological evaluations prior to ownership being required. Problem is that we never know what's in someones head or what they're potentially capable of so there will always be risk involved. I think if every single gun owner could be trusted to use gun locks or safes with every weapon, this would cut down on gun related deaths as well. Again, and ad nauseum, but taking away all guns from law abiding citizens will still leave the thugs arsenal intact.
I have worked in the mental health field for 30 years. And quite honestly just like not everyone deserves a drivers license, or a college degree, people with a medically proven incapacitated mental illness do not deserve a fire arm. How that is filtered needs to be a state by state issue. My biggest fear is if we don't apply the laws in place, screen for local crime and review mental competency, the US Supreme Court could revoke gun ownership for everyone. If they were bent on throwing out marriage, they will remove many other rights without cause or reason. All it takes is 5 votes on the Supreme Court and the 2nd amendment can be repealed, and if we have a generational democrat congress due to illegal immigrants being made good democrats , welcome to the North American continent of China.
Whatever happened to crimes being chalked up to the criminal's evil sin nature? It seems like we've all bought the mental illness excuse hook, line and sinker. Just my $0.02, and something that's been bugging me recently.
Wayfarer pilgrim wrote: The killer bought his guns legally. Most likely by his mom, as did the Sandy Hook killer. Mental health background check as well as any local crime violation needs to be part of a background check. But, we've entered Nutland when people " talk "of gun violence and how best to deal with this.
The age of onset of mental health disorders is mixed and various in the community. Diagnosis is invariably later on in life in many cases. Many MH cases do not necessarily suggest a danger to the general public and therefore may go unheeded by patient as well as family and medical professionals. For example you may have no obvious indication of MH problems today but tomorrow you might suffer a break down which might not be diagnosed as a danger to self or others. However down the line somewhere you could move into a psychotic and unstable area where you loose contact with reality. Nearly one in five Americans it is reported suffer from a MH illness - Do you suggest removing their guns? If so on what basis?
The killer bought his guns legally. Most likely by his mom, as did the Sandy Hook killer. Mental health background check as well as any local crime violation needs to be part of a background check. But, we've entered Nutland when people " talk "of gun violence and how best to deal with this.
"Tie your background checks to include local law enforcement, a financial credit check"
Do you ACTUALLY THINK he acquired all his 17 or whatever guns legally!!! ha. You must think people acquire their heroin, pcp, meth, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. legally too? If someone wants to kill someone or do something "illegal" they will find a way to make it happen, all you can do is be armed at the site to kill him just prior or just afterwards to potentially lower the numbers of his victims (in case of a shooter, not a drug user, drugs should be made legal and people only punished for crimes they commit while on them) and have his killing be a warning to others, you cannot stop someone who has a death wish except by giving him what he desires. Also it should be illegal to post the name of the killer in the media, it should be a legal blackout as judges do under threat of prison unto journalists for certain court cases.
My question is how did a student, who had been discharged from the Army due being unfit for duty, a former special education student with Aspergers be provided a sold that many weapons. You want mass gun violence to to drop? Tie your background checks to include local law enforcement, a financial credit check, and a mental health medical check. And if you pass the these then you can buy what ever gun you buy yourself. Mom's don't buy your mentally incompetent son a AR-15 or a desert eagle or whatever helps you feel like a man so your son can go a kill children.
While our gun crime rate is large, it is no larger than many other countries. In fact, as I stated earlier, the U.S.'s gun crime rate actually is more mid range on the scale. And these aren't "excuses" for so called "huge" crime rates. More guns in just about every observable case has reduced crime. You are the one making excuses for disarming responsible citizens, while criminals can still get guns through the black market.
One thing I find rather hypocritical about your comment is that while you say "I am sure we will be able to discuss them all over again...", you have a history of being the first one here to make a shooting political. Just a month ago when two reporters were murdered on live television, all you could think of was banning guns and peddling your anti-gun rhetoric.
And you have yet to use many statistics and/or scripture to support your stance. Just one statistic, and a handful of badly twisted Bible verses.
"Guns are protected by the Second Amendment. This is the heart of the argument. Why do politicians act as if the Second Amendment is not part of the Bill of Rights? To suggest that it refers only to an organized military organization is an abdication of reality. The â€śmilitiaâ€ť of the Second Amendment was simply thousands of farmers with a gun in the corner of the house or over the mantle.
The Second Amendment is there to protect us against the tyranny of government. Our founding fathers were well aware of governmentâ€™s propensity to evolve into tyranny and they knew a well- armed citizenry mitigated against that possibility. Politicians donâ€™t just hate guns but they hate and fear guns in the hands of an aroused citizenry.
As knees begin to jerk all across America (left ones, of course) let me make it clear that I am saying what our founding fathers knew might someday be required: that our government might someday become so despotic that citizens must do again what they did in the 1700s! Yes, it could be that Americans might have to defend themselves against their government and that could only be possible if those Americans are armed! That is the reason that non-principled politicians whine..." Boys
root of the problem wrote: iamen keeping weapons for their service." (theprogressivecynic.com)
history shows this to be totally false, you think the military of the day armed the soldiers of the Confederacy? They don't even know the history behind why the 2nd amendment was added. During the time period involved it would have been hard to find a house without a gun. The progressives are just distorting the truth for their own purposes by sprinkling truth with error and drawing very inaccurate conclusions. They are liberals, truth does not matter to them, what do you expect.
text of the 2nd Amendment. â€śA well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.â€ť
"Gun enthusiasts and gun lobbyists love to cite the 2nd amendment to the constitution as the catch-all defense to their right to carry any weapon that they can get their hands on (ex. assault rifles). In order to do this, these gun owners/sellers have hopelessly perverted the original intent of the 2nd Amendment and have expanded its guarantee of the right to â€śkeep and bear armsâ€ť far beyond its original bounds.
From its passage and until the late 20th century, the 2nd Amendment to the constitution was interpreted to protect the rights of states to maintain militias and for militiamen to sustain arsenals. In the early years of our country, there was no standing federal army (the founders were afraid of a national standing army consolidating power) and the states were expected to sustain a state militia in order to contribute to the national defense; this expectation necessitated protections for militias that would facilitate militiamen keeping weapons for their service." (theprogressivecynic.com)
"Liberals removed God from the schools: no prayer, no Bible reading, no Ten Commandments, no teaching based upon the Bible. No speaking of Christ. After all, kids might really take those teachings to heart. They may decide not to lie, steal, fornicate, rape, and kill! They might honor and obey their parents, the law, and school officials. They might become kind, gracious, fair, honest, and principled! Heavens, we canâ€™t have that can we? After all, progressives demanded a secular society. Well, we have it and our schools have become ignorance factories, sex clinics, self-esteem laboratories, sports clubsâ€“and killing fields. Furthermore, homes have become poorly run bed and breakfasts and our churches have become unprincipled, unbiblical, and unnecessary social clubs.
I am weary of hearing radical leftists whine about how guns are corrupting young people (but the violent and sexual Hollywood movies arenâ€™t bad!) and are a deadly threat to all our citizens especially those in schools. However, guns are inanimate while people are initiators so the problem is not with guns but with people. Anti-gun parents are horrified to see their small children playing with guns and â€śshootingâ€ť each other. Has the world gone insane?" Boys:cf:link
Geff wrote: Actually, America doesn't have the highest
That's some really great excuses for the huge gun crime massacre rate which you justify in the US. I am sure we will be able to discuss them all over again at next months American school massacre???
In the mean time, here is how other nations have cut the gun crime rate and massacre sequence. Quote; Other countries all over the world play the same video games and have the same mental health problems as the United States, but manage to avoid a sky-high gun murder rate and frequent public shooting massacres.
The differences are due, in part, to the way that the different countries regulate gun ownership.
Here's how several other prosperous nations deal with the issue:" http://www.businessinsider.com/canada-australia-japan-britain-gun-control-2013-1?IR=T
ps: I still believe that America should put its school children before gun sales. But convincing America is the problem which Sandy Hook and Roseburg have.