Michael Rupp on what happened in Colorado: Michael Rupp is a former Marine. Michael and I are both members of the Secular Biblical Studies group.
8:27am Jul 23
I think it’s a stretch to post that on this forum. I’m not a gun owner because they are very expensive, nearly useless and dangerous, but I believe that
“A 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,”
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, shall not be Infringed.
The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be Infringed.”
HOWEVER, I will give you that during the writing of that statement, they did not envision weapons of mass destruction. Any arms that a person could keep and bear then were obviously for personal protection and/or to get food from the wilderness. I would render the guess that 90% of all privately owned firearms today are not owned by people that need protection or kill wild animals for food.
If you need anything more powerful than a hand gun that holds 7 bullets for a legitimate reason of personal protection, you either require professional help by the authorities, or you need to be imprisoned by the authorities for what you did to require protection.
No private citizen should be allowed to own a rifle that can sniper people and armored vehicles at a 1 mile distance. The NRA is actually lobbying to make it legal to have a rifle such as that within the Washington DC city limits.
We do have much more dangerous things statistically than guns, but we do not regulate them in the same way because they don’t have the same drama. I think choking deaths are more prevalent than non-war related gun deaths. Nevertheless, I would like it to be easy for authorities to be notified when a person owns more than a box of ammo for non hunting use, and more that a seasons supply if they are a registered hunter. I’d also like it to be well known how many firearms each and every person has under their control.
You know what might be good, but not too infringe to pass through Congress? A psychological evaluation taken annually (ignore who pays for it now), that does not disqualify you from owning a firearm directly, but alerts any seller and the family and neighbors of your mental state, as well as current gun ownership. What ever you have to present to buy a firearm will also have that last result of the psych evaluation on it. And like Megan’s Law the neighborhood would get a heads up.
My grandfather, and many cousins on another branch of the family tree hunted, or continue to hunt, but they live out past the boonies when they did. Those people have a legitimate right to have rifles, guns and pistols; the rifles and guns are for specific hunting and the pistol is when you become the hunted out in the wild. They don’t use a lot of ammo because you really only get one clear shot, and after that the animals have made your position. Nobody needs a lot of ammo. One of my cousins though, bought a shit-ton of ammo recently cause the NRA scared him into thinking Obama was going to take away his ability to acquire it. Both of his kids target shoot for the schools team, but I don’t think he hunts anymore. I wanted to tell him he was an idiot for over spending on ammo, but I’m not afraid that he has some. He has a brother that we never see anymore that neither of us would trust with any firearm or even a pen knife. Thus the psych eval would differentiate the two cases. I know many former soldiers and marines who live in impoverished locations, and own a set of firearms that are safely stored and never used. They have some legitimate reason for needing personal protection without being able to name their perceived threat. I wouldn’t infringe them their ability to bear arms; I wouldn’t ever approve of a bazooka, grenades or any explosive or armor piercing devices, but personal firearms, no problem.
I have owned a .44 Mag Revolver and an assault rifle similar to the newer special forces M-16. Blame Clint Eastwood’s “Dirty Harry” and boot camp for those gotta-have-it affections. After buying them and target shooting once, I realized what a stupid investment it was. All that money tied up in a nearly non-transferable object (only diamonds are a worse investment). Traded the assault rifle to an alarm systems guy for some cash plus a car alarm, and sold the revolver to a co-worker that collected things like that and had a legal right to own in New York State. I lost a lot of value on those items; school of hard knocks moment there. My personal protection now is my wit, my compassion for my fellow man, and if needed, my balled up hands to bludgeon somebody; I’m very non-lethal deep down in my psyche.
I’ve been connected to a few people that used a gun for suicide, and had a best cousin murdered in Houston with a shotgun when I was young, and one friend with a self inflicted hand wound from a jammed pistol. I’m certain after much reflection, that if the guns were not present in those peoples lives who were shot on purpose, the deaths would still have occurred. What would have made a difference is if the mental state of the gun-holder was known in advance; I’m convinced that human intervention and discourse would have prevented the untimely deaths in every case, and improved the quality of their lives thereafter.
I don’t advise anybody to own a firearm, but I have a strong desire to have such things myself. Keith Olbermann once mentioned the fetishization of firearms, and I concur. I find the Desert Eagle pistol as attractive as a Lamborghini Countash. I would love to try firing most of the weird guns that history has produced, just to see what it feels like and to know how well I can aim them. I do think that the right to bear arms is a hedge against tyranny (not the best one, or even a reasonable one, but a hedge nevertheless), and that the story of “Red Dawn” however unlikely (0.000000000001%) is a plausible story with respect to firearms preventing an easy takeover of this country (if we had a military equal on the Earth). Those two beliefs are probably the strongest reason I tip towards approval of the right to bear arms.
So these are obviously pertinent observations and as I stated earlier Michael is a former Marine. The almost programmed from the NRA and Republicans in Congress do not take into consideration the murder rate as they parrot their own agenda. What is the religious significance to this? Well killing people was never advocated by Jesus and other religions also condemn it. We should be making it harder not easier. We need to limit access to these type of weoponds and we also need to utilize the possible mental evaluation to see why someone wants access to firearms. There needs to be a national dialogue to address this. Remember Jesus said that the great commandment was to love one another and to treat others as you would like to be treated yourself. George Zimmerman is in jail because he deserves to be. He followed a young man with his car at night, was repeatedly told by the police not to do it, got out of his car with a gun and the person he was followed supposedly attacked him. Now if you were walking at night and a car started following you and a guy you didn’t know got out of the car with a gun wouldn’t you try and defend yourself? Suppose you didn’t have access to a gun. Both people would be living normal lives today.