News & Current Events
bill_coley — 2017-10-02T23:06:05-04:00 — #1
Once again an incident on American soil has prompted our national leaders to express their shock, sorrow, and, most importantly, their thoughts and prayers for incident victims and their families.
The incident, of course, is last night's shooting in Las Vegas, in which a 64 year old American, with the help of 20+ weapons and likely thousands of rounds of ammunition that he carried into a Las Vegas hotel, executed 59 Americans and injured 527 other Americans.
But our leaders responded quickly. They used the right words... or at least the words they always use: "tragic," "senseless," "horrific," and most important, their thoughts and prayers to the incident's victims and their families. That's most important because that's how we, as a nation, respond to mass shootings. We offer thoughts and prayers... and we buy lots more guns (gun manufacturer stocks rose today, as they always do after "thoughts and prayers" incidents).
We rarely actually do anything to make future such incidents less likely. That's not who we are. We're "thoughts and prayers" people. We're concerned - even "shocked" and "horrified" - by mass shootings, but never concerned enough to take corrective actions. In our national soul, we think - well, lots of us think - mass shootings are a sad but acceptable price to pay for the second amendment freedom to own and shoot the guns of our choosing.
So I hope you have expressed your thoughts and prayers for this latest shooting's victims. But if you haven't, don't fret. In the U.S.A. another "thoughts and prayers" incident is never very far off.
alex_vaughn — 2017-10-02T23:22:12-04:00 — #2
I agree. My thoughts and prayers are also with the families in grief today. It is clear though that it would be sinful and against life to stop there. Clearly the pro-life thing to do is to prevent these kinds of tragedies in the future.
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T00:25:59-04:00 — #3
THIS TWEET and the varied responses it has drawn make interesting reading. Most interesting to me are the thread-opening stats:
Americans killed on 9/11: 2,996
Days it took Congress to authorize war:3
Americans killed by guns in 2017: 11,652
Days in 2017 so far:275
and a comment later in the thread...
How painfully, embarrassingly true that is.
We really, really, really love our guns.
Lord, have mercy.
will_scholten — 2017-10-03T06:55:56-04:00 — #4
Here are some responses to the comment!
SprockDaddy @SprockDaddy 9h9 hours ago
So you believe "gun control" laws will prevent tragedies like this from happening? You're naive; check the murder rate in Chicago.
19 replies 3 retweets 62 likes
Reply 19 Retweet 3 Like 62
SprockDaddy @SprockDaddy 8h8 hours ago
Replying to @Georgeboretos @jwjunker and 2 others
Let me see the chart of "crimes/murder prevented by those legally carrying a firearm". Hard to fight terrorists/criminals without them.
Bill, thank you for putting this topic on here!!
We live in a sick world!
I am interested, how many of these killing are done by people who bought them legally?
It seems to me, the bad guy always has better fire power than the law enforcement, how can we keep those guns out of the public's hands.
How many abortions have been performed in the US in 2017?
Yes, we need to pray for all those hurting from this great tragedy!
So many innocent lives will be changed forever!!!!
But how do we stop it, I do not have the answer.
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T09:10:19-04:00 — #5
Way to politicize the tragedy, Bill....
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T10:00:19-04:00 — #6
In my view, David, the alternative to "politicizing" tragedies such as the Las Vegas shooting is to offer "thoughts and prayers." The point of my previous post was that to-date, the recurring outcome of our thoughts and prayers strategy when it comes to mass shootings has been more mass shootings.
I'm not satisfied with a strategy that apparently does little or nothing to stop or reduce the incidence of mass shootings. Are you?
dave_l — 2017-10-03T10:04:41-04:00 — #7
The guns are the means of the violence. But what is the cause? We need to identify that before we can fix it.
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T11:20:46-04:00 — #8
Gun control isn't the answer, trashing the 2nd Ammendment isn't the answer. See Chicago as a reference point.
That being said, a gun was used, the gun was not the problem. By your logic we should also ban cars/trucks/planes/knives as all of those things have been used in mass killings.
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T11:52:28-04:00 — #9
Until children are old enough to learn they shouldn't play with poisons, we keep poisons out of their reach. At some point in the future, those poisons return to their reach, but by then they have likely learned the dangers and have tamed their curiosities accordingly.
Though we can't and shouldn't ban possession of guns as a social policy (though, in full disclosure, I would ban handguns), it seems to me that inaction on this matter is tantamount to leaving poisons within reach of toddlers.
What can we do? Implementing universal background checks and closing the gun show loophole would be a start. Would those actions prevent all mass shootings? Of course not. But then again, laws against murder don't stop all murders. Does that mean we shouldn't have laws against murder? Of course not.
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T12:03:07-04:00 — #10
How many mass shootings would that have stopped in the past?
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T12:19:25-04:00 — #11
Then what IS the answer, David?
It wasn't just "a gun" that was used in Las Vegas. The killer had 23 guns in the room with him, and undoubtedly used more than one of them in his attack.
Where in the post to which you are responding here did I call for a ban on guns? (Granted, in a later response to Dave L. I said I personally would ban handguns, but that was a parenthetical addition to my assertion that we "can't and shouldn't ban possession of guns as a social policy.")
The "logic" of the post to which you responded was that a "thoughts and prayers" strategy has not been effective, so we should try something more than a "thoughts and prayers" strategy. Is it your view that our current strategy for combating mass shooting events has been successful, or at least sufficiently so?
And let's pay attention to the "logic" of your post: In its first paragraph, you say "gun control isn't the answer." In its second paragraph, your focus is not "control" but rather bans, and your examples are "cars/trucks/planes/knives." I've already noted that I didn't call for bans of anything. So by the logic of MY post, your examples are moot. HOWEVER! By the logic of YOUR post, we need to ask, whether cars/trucks/planes/knives are currently controlled (not banned). It turns out that we DO control cars and trucks - we register/license them in states. And we control planes - via the FAA's inspection and regulations process.
I don't know of any knife controls, but I think the point is made. You say gun control is not the answer, but then cite examples of things we DO control!
And it's valuable to recall that ALMOST ANYTHING can be used as a weapon. But NOT almost everything is a weapon by design and purpose. Cars, trucks, and planes are not weapons by design and purpose. Guns are. If the intention is to manage/control weapons, then guns would receive attention, but vehicles would not.
Again I ask: In your view, what IS the answer?
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T12:50:10-04:00 — #12
That's irrelevant Bill.
No. Laws aren't going to fix this problem.
And we already have gun control laws on the books. Therefore that isn't the solution. And it has been proven that stricter control doesn't curb gun crime.
And notice those things are still used to kill even with control. That's my point.
Doesn't that mean it wouldn't have stopped any in the past? You didn't answer the question.
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T13:24:08-04:00 — #13
And while we wait for the Gospel to end mass shooting events in the U.S. (that don't happen with NEARLY the frequency or ferocity in other countries as they do here) what should we do?
Since laws against murder don't stop people from committing murders, do you recommend that we not have laws against murder?
And people still commit murder, even though the law bans it. So... no murder laws?
I know of no way to figure out how many, if any, mass murders would have been stopped by those changes. But I don't recommend them only, or even primarily, because I think they would stop mass shooting events. I recommend them because they're they make sense and are the right thing to do.
We register cars and trains and planes and their owners and operators. We should register all guns and their owners and operators. No exceptions. Gun owners who have complied with the law have nothing to fear from universal registration. Those who have not complied with the law need to be identified and held to account. Do you agree?
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T13:34:35-04:00 — #14
Don't have an answer for you Bill. If people want to kill they are going to do it regardless of laws and regulations.
Other countries also don't have the populations and resources that we do so once again it is an Apples to Apples thing...
There is a difference between gun control laws and murder punishments don't you think?
Can I just say your line of reasoning is stupid? Literally stupid? It's not the same thing Bill.
I can't think of one mass shooting they would have stopped. That being said, what exactly makes them the right thing to do Bill?
Why don't we just register everything that is purchased that could possibly be used as a weapon? I guess I need to register when I buy a ballpoint pen next week....
bill_coley — 2017-10-03T14:16:57-04:00 — #15
The stats quoted in the CNN charts are per capita stats, a fact which creates "apples to apples" comparisons.
And your contention is that we kill each other with guns more per capita in this country than residents of other countries do because we're better off than they (we have more resources)? So our higher per capita murder rate is simply a product of our success?
I take it that your answer is no, that you don't believe we should do away with laws against murder just because they don't accomplish their purpose?
That's the "literally stupid" point I was trying to make, David. The fact that gun laws might not stop every (or most, or even any!) mass shootings is not an argument against having gun laws.
To give police and other investigative authorities as much information as possible as to the history of the weapons used to commit crimes - including but not limited to mass shootings - in this country. Why don't you want police and other investigators to have that information?
We don't register cars, planes, trains, and their owners and operators because those machines "could possibly be used as a weapon." And the reasons we DO register them have applicability to ball point pens or your use of them.
As I noted previously, we should register guns because not only is it true they "could possibly be used as a weapon," but in fact they ARE weapons.
david_taylor_jr — 2017-10-03T14:23:05-04:00 — #16
Putting words in my mouth as you so often do....
What I am saying is that the guns are a red herring to the actual issue. People.
Apples and Oranges Bill.
Because I believe in freedom. I believe there is such a thing as government overreach. In the words of the great Benjamin Franklin:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither. He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.
The founders didn't think a registry was necessary to bear arms....
dave_l — 2017-10-03T14:53:50-04:00 — #17
Should we look into US foreign policy as possibly being a main instigator of Middle Eastern terrorism? Not only preach disarmament of Americans, but also preach against interventionist foreign policy and especially the preemptive strike doctrine found in the neoconservative defense planning guidance?
gao_lu — 2017-10-03T19:25:56-04:00 — #18
I suppose you would say God is the cause. Not much to fix there.
dave_l — 2017-10-03T19:43:00-04:00 — #19
It is interesting you should say this. In the bible, God motivates people two ways. He motivates his elect through the New Birth giving them a nature that hungers and thirsts after righteousness. But he motivated (controlled) the wicked unbelievers in Israel externally. By sending severe judgements. I hope he is motivating and bringing about a better America in this way. Sort of a national repentance.
“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” (Isaiah 45:7)
“If the trumpet blasts in the city, are not the people frightened? If there is disaster against a city, is it not the LORD who has done it?” (Amos 3:6)
“Yet He also is wise and will bring disaster and will not call back His words, but will arise against the house of the evildoers and against the help of those who work iniquity.” (Isaiah 31:2)
“When He gives quietness, who then can make trouble? And when He hides His face, who then can behold Him, whether it is done against a nation or against a man only?” (Job 34:29)
“When a man’s ways please the LORD, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him.” (Proverbs 16:7)