Penn. Church leaders holding a blessing ceremony for guns

Church leaders took the event very seriously, warning that anyone who showed up without a weapon would be denied entry.

A number of couples said wedding vows while holding guns.

Many couples said wedding vows while holding AR-15 rifles.


Worshippers gathered yesterday at a Pennsylvania church to participate in a “mass blessing ceremony” for their AR-15 rifles. Attendees wore crowns fashioned from bullets, drank holy wine, and clutched firearms during the worship service.

The church holding the event, the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary, encouraged parishioners to bring in their AR-15 rifles to show support for the Second Amendment. In fact, church leaders warned that anyone who showed up without a weapon – or proof they were planning to buy one – would be denied entry.

The event also doubled as a mass wedding ceremony, with many couples saying marriage vows during the proceedings – all while holding rifles.

“As it is in Revelations”

The church believes that the Bible references rifles directly. Church leader Tim Elder explains that the AR-15 represents “the rod of iron, as it is in Revelations. Revelations talks about the returning Christ ruling with the rod of iron.”

Followers believe that guns have been bestowed upon the people by God, and it’s our duty to follow His wishes.

“People have the right to bear arms, and in God’s kingdom, you have to protect that,” said one parishioner. “You have to protect against evil.”

People gather to protest a church gun ceremonyProtesters Gather Outside

The event had apparently been planned months in advance. However, in the wake of the devastating mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida, it received extra scrutiny – even drawing small crowds of protesters uncomfortable with the idea of an entire congregation proudly waving their guns around.

Although each gun was checked at the door to make sure it was unloaded and zip-tied for safety, the event still caused many to feel uncomfortable. An elementary school down the street from the church even decided to move students to other campuses for the day as a safety precaution.

“It’s scaring people in the community,” one protester was overheard telling church members. “Are you aware of that?”

Lisa Desiena drove from Scranton to join the protest. She held a sign calling the church an “armed religious cult.” Desiena said she supports gun ownership, but “I don’t need a freaking assault weapon to defend myself. Only thing they’re good for is killing. Period. That’s all that weapon is good for, mass killing. And you want to bless it? Shame on you.”

Is It God’s Will?

Worshippers wearing bullet crowns

Some worshippers wore crowns made from bullets.

Critics point out that the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention guns (well, how could it?). But they also insist that religious folks who cite the Bible are simply clutching at straws in an attempt to connect the Second Amendment to Biblical values. Vague references such as a “rod of iron” don’t constitute an endorsement of modern firearms, they claim.

But it’s no secret that gun rights and religion are closely tied in America.

After the Charleston church shooting back in 2015, NRA President Wayne LaPierre referenced God’s will when arguing that widespread gun ownership was the only way to combat future violence:

“God would want guns in church. God wants his people safe. Catholics and Christians alike are called upon everyday by the Lord to prevent criminals and other miscreants from carrying out the Devil’s work.”

An Armed Population

We recently posed a simple question to our readers: is gun ownership a God-given right? We got a range of responses across the spectrum, though the majority of people who answered the poll said it was not.

On the surface, encouraging people to arm themselves might seem at odds with Christian ideals of peace on earth and good will toward mankind. But supporters of gun rights disagree, explaining that peace on earth requires certain measures of security – such as the ability to protect one’s family, should push come to shove. Does the future of worship include a gun in every pew?

 

292 comments

  1. Elder Freddie Bell says:

    1 Timothy 4
    The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.

    1. Carl Elfstrom says:

      I demand to know your age Freddie. How do you know you’re an elder to any of us.

      1. Carl Elfstrom says:

        I’ve been listening to B.T.O. so ” TRY, try, try to let it ride.”

        1. Carl Elfstrom says:

          I just heard Bob Seger say “Are you going to fire lake?” No thanks, man. I think I’ll pass,if I can help it, but I would like to see Her Strut again, wherever I go.

          1. Brother Michael Goldman says:

            Happiness is a warm gun mama

      2. DonBiase says:

        In many organizations “Elder” is a tile, not an age, and who are you to demand?

        1. James says:

          Elder is more a title than age.. BUT, Phaneron shall have it as YOU may see, interpret or cherry pick to benefit ones preset perspectives. If you not believe it you never would have see it.

    2. Barb Lanier says:

      When God returns he’s bringing Mighty angels prepared for battle to fight evil in this world. On Earth as it is in heaven!

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Oh please even the myths clearly outline that the 3rd of heavens host that sided with lucifer where equal in might to the remaining 2 thirds which is why god had to concede the domain now called hell to them because his remaining forces could not win the conflict.

        So in other words Luci left his daddy with the wimpy angels.

        And the line is as it is on earth so it shall be in heaven. Heaven will never take the mortal realm not as long as we have the Winchester Brothers! They sodomize angels with their own blades booyaa!

        But seriously Supernatural is a fun TV show and I love how often angels go bad in it and need to be shanked. I mean hell Lucifer is rather likable in it even if he is a wicked vile monster.

      2. Anita Rogers says:

        This cult is ok with you because of its weapons stance? I don’t care if you believe we should all have military weapons but damn don’t side with a cult

        1. Anita Rogers says:

          No not because of its good stance. This had been a cult for a long time. They were called the Moonies. Google them. Rev Moon was popular in the 80’s he did mass weddings of 1000’s of people all at the same time. If I remember correctly most meet on their wedding day.

          Blessing a military weapon during a non military action is different, but he is a long time nut case

          1. gary stevenson says:

            In Pensylvania the Conservative is against abortion but not for his mistresses while the demo is against but will support it legally. 200 women had their genetalia mutilated last year. They are humiliated by porno. Underpaid and don’t work at good paying jobs like finance and techno because their is too much sexism. Why doesn’t the Church denounce this instead of trying to take away their reproductive rights ?

    3. momonice says:

      Worship of guns boils down to idolatry. “Thou Shalt have no other gods before Me.”
      We need to feel the love,not cold hard steel.

      1. Francis Whitford says:

        Agreed.

    4. Anita Rogers says:

      Amen this is a old cult treating it’s head again. No matter if you are for military weapons in chocolate hands do not side with this group. They are abusing the biblical interrupting most things.

      Moonies are crazies

  2. angel722 says:

    All I got to say is that this country has lost it’s damn mind!!!

    1. angel722 says:

      But , for the record, I do support guns and our 2nd endearment!

      1. Minister Shelby Emory says:

        *amendment

      2. Rev. Rene L. says:

        I think the second endearment says something like: Love thy neighbor! Not shoot thy neighbor???

    2. Sara says:

      Yes, the country has lost its’ damned mind and religion isn’t helping.

      1. Carl Elfstrom says:

        Or is it some religious people have lost their minds, and our country is suffering from it.

        1. Barb Lanier says:

          Amen!

        2. David Griffith says:

          A minority of so-called Christian, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and others make so much noises that they block out the real religious people. That is what is happening now. When someone like Mike Pence is considered a good Christian it proves the ignorance of many about the teachings of Jesus. The New Testament should be read and re-read. It is the teachings of Jesus and The Old Testament is not important unless you are Jewish. Christian has the word Christ in it for a reason.

          1. Mitchell Halper says:

            Jesus only studied the old testament! So it may actually hold a few small bits of relevant wisdom. In fact Jesus did not make a single original statement nor did he ever claim to. Quite the contrary. Also the new testament contains very little of the actual teaching of Jesus since we have very little. There’s mostly other stuff in there that post dates his teaching by centuries and has no direct bearing on his teaching though it claims divine inspiration, much like Mike Pence!

          2. Sedonia Guillone says:

            “A minority of so-called Christian, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and others make so much noises that they block out the real religious people”– wow. Just. Wow. Not too ego christo centric, are we? Jesus was a jew not a christian though you folks want to claim him when it suits you.

          3. Anita Rogers says:

            Pence is a nut job

    3. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Are you sure it ever had one to lose?

    4. David Griffith says:

      That is so true. Every great civilization has fallen. The USA is well on it’s way.

    5. Sedonia Guillone says:

      Yep

  3. Miranda Allison Young says:

    This has to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard. I support the 2nd Amendment and the responsible use of guns, BUT, no one needs to own an assault rifle. They should be banned nationwide, including those idiots (I mean ban the guns, not the idiots).

    1. JOHN MAHER says:

      GOOD POST BUTT YEAH U COULD INCLUDE the IDIOTs ALSO ???

    2. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Or how about ban and close the churches that distort our laws and constitution as much as they distort the Bible. They can have their religious services in the same place where they should keep their guns, at home. I thought firearms were only supposed to be carried in public by individuals who have permits to do so. The police should go to that church during services and check for permits, then arrest everyone who doesn’t have one.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        One minor point in the favor of Gun Church in Pennsylvania.

        It looks like all the rifles were without magazines and hand the bolt locked back with an orange zip tie up through the magazine well and out the ejection port, rendering them unfireable.

        Within my faith, we do have ritual for lessing weapons, of self defense and for hunting.
        But, you won;t see a mass gaggle of modern firearms like that.

        The last blessing ritual I oversaw,there were a couple each of pistols, shotguns and “deer” rifles (similarly peace bonded) and several bows.

        1. DonBiase says:

          Very observant.

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            Thank you, I try to see the whole picture.

        2. Sedonia Guillone says:

          Yes it is good they were not lovked and loaded, but seriously blessing weapons in the name of jesus who obviously never carried a gun and in the wake of the Parkland shooting is beyond any kind of vioe mentality I could even try to dream up and I am a fiction author!

          1. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Sorry for the typos. I meant locked and loaded and vile mentality.

      2. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Actually Carl many states do allow for open carry. Its more often city and county laws that restrict those further.

        Here in Nevada for example I can go just about anywhere the public is allowed with a gun on my hip openly.

        There are caveats ofcourse. A clip fed pistol cant be chambered. A revolver has to have the chamber under the hammer empty( good common sense really, is called the cowboy safety for a reason).

        Ive actually seen main old over weight men at the grocery store driving around in the scooters for disabled people with ARs propped between their legs. Its quite pathetic.

        In fact I notice that very few who do feel the urge to use the open carry law are even close to what we might call physically fit. Most look like they would have a heart attack if a real reason to use the weapon arose.

        I think I read somewhere about 38 of the states have similar open carry laws. Which I do prefer open carry to CCWers. At least then I know who to go disarm if an emergency arose that made me need a gun.

        Funny fact the only CCWer I know is my uncle, an overweight 60ish year old with bad knees, who is a serious alcoholic and afraid of pretty much his own shadow. I honestly expect him to kill some poor kid for looking dangerous one of these days.

        As far as Im concerned people who wan CCWs should have to pass regular psyche evals every 6 months, have to use a breathalizer to start their cars to force sobriety while out with said gun, Perhaps more measures like dash cams etc.

        People who want to carry need to be subject to oversight plain and simple.

    3. John Owens says:

      You just contradicted yourself. You cannot support the 2nd Amendment and not know the difference between an AR15 and an assault rife. The AR15 is NOT an assault rifle. If you supported the 2nd Amendment you would know that, because you would know enough about firearms to know the difference between an assault rifle and an AR15.

      This is why there can be no such thing as “common sense” gun control measures– the left knows nothing about the subject except their agenda, and the ultra-hard-liners on the right insist there is no limit on that right, which is actually what the Amendment says–“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Left’s idea of “common sense” gun control DOES infringe on it.

      Those people are just trying to make liberals’ heads explode, and, while I think what they are doing is a sacrilege, they are succeeding in upsetting lefties.

      1. rich08854 says:

        John, I think you have missed the point… if a weapon (any gun) is used to murder 17 children,, whether it is an automatic or semi-automatic,, it becomes an assault weapon by the carnage it leaves in its wake… the current background check system is insufficient to keep guns out the hands of people with mental issues…

        1. wildbronco26 says:

          Actually the NCIC System worked just fine, the fault lies at the lap of the County Sheriff and the FBI, the Sheriff’s Department had over 39 Calls and responses to the home of Cruz for Domestic Violence, they and the FBI were also made aware of his statement that he wanted to shoot up the school, neither of them took any action to get this boy’s ability to have firearms removed under Title 18, USCA. In addition yes he used an AR 15 Style weapon but he did not have Magazines that held more then 10 rounds, in fact the evidence shows that the Magazines he used only held five rounds each, he simply dropped one and loaded another until his rifle jammed and he then dropped the rifle and walked out the door with the students who were evacuating the school. Four Deputy’s waited out side while he was inside killing students, and did not even go inside until after another Department said that the shooter was gone, those same Deputy’s prevented the Medics who responded to the call from entering to try and save lives until THEY gave the all clear in which case it was already to late. All of you who want to talk about the shooting in Parkland FL need to read up on the facts of it instead of listening to the MSM.

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            Interesting, the info I had from a friend who is a deputy next county over was 10 round magazines. Those 5 round capacity ones sound like the ones we had for DCM matches where we were limited to the capacity of the old 1903-A3.

        2. Michael Grace says:

          rich08854, so by your definition a black powder 6 shot revolver that lets you drop out and insert another pre-loaded 6 shot cylinder in about 2 or 3 seconds and fire another 6 shots then repeat as many times as you want would make that an “assault weapon” and it should be banned?

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            One can see a good example of that in the movie “Gettysburg” during the battle scenes on Little Roundtop. Colonel Chamberlain does just that.

          2. Anita Rogers says:

            You should look at the definition on dictionary. com for clarification. If I remember correctly it mentions specifically “magazine”

        3. John Owens says:

          Wrong rich. Your emotions do not change the definitions of different kinds of rifles. A person can drive a soccer-mom van like a sports car, but that won’t make it a sports car. I didn’t miss any point that was valid.

      2. JOHN MAHER says:

        HEREs JOHNNY BOOGER BUTTERFLY OWINS, Mr. KNOW it ALL of NOTHING of ALL, the AR-15 is and ALWAYS will be an ASSAULT RIFLE, KNOW NOTHING F..KTarD !!! JUST like UR DADDY DOTAR ORANGUtRUMP BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, SHEEP ALL !!!

        1. Rob says:

          AR stands for armalite the company that made them not assault rifle. Your an idiot. Assault rifles are fully automatic or 3 round burst.

          1. John Owens says:

            Thank you, Rob. Maher doesn’t even know how to type correctly, much less know anything about rifles.

        2. Sedonia Guillone says:

          John Maher yu ar funny and argue well. 😄

      3. John says:

        In 1956, a lightweight ASSAULT RIFLE was designed for military use by ArmaLite and designated the ArmaLite Rifle-15, or AR-15.[6] Due to financial problems, ArmaLite sold the design and the AR-15 trademark to Colt’s Manufacturing Company in 1959.[7] In 1964, Colt began selling its own version with an improved semi-automatic design known as the Colt AR-15.[8] After Colt’s patents expired in 1977, an active marketplace emerged for other manufacturers to produce and sell their own AR-15 style rifles.[1]

        In 2009, the term “modern sporting rifle” was coined by the National Shooting Sports Foundation for its survey that year as a marketing term used by the firearms industry to describe modular semi-automatic rifles including AR-15s.[9][10][11][12] Today, nearly every major firearm manufacturer produces its own generic AR-15 style rifle.[13][11] As Colt continues to own and use the AR-15 trademark for its line of AR-15 variants, other manufacturers must use their own model numbers and names to market their AR-15 style rifles for commercial sale.[14]

      4. Rev. Dr. Marion Ceruti says:

        You are correct.

        A typical response of the gun grabbers to crimes where people could not defend themselves, in this case, school employees, is to call for more gun control. The gun grabbers show their ignorance every time they argue against any aspect of guns and gun ownership. They know nothing about guns except that they look scary. They think that their feelings are more important than the constitution or self defense. The Bill of Rights is intended to stand as a curb on government tyranny. Gun control is unconstitutional because it infringes on this God-give right. Gun control is responsible for people dying because the victims could not defend themselves.

        The only “common sense” thing to do is to arm yourself so you can defend against attacks. The left wants to infringe on our rights to the point where no private citizen owns any guns. That is their goal. They elect candidates who propose gun laws that actually support criminals. Disarming a victim is a terrible crime and an infringement on our rights. It makes government complicit. Criminals are already armed and the government cannot stop it. They can stop only the potential victims of crimes from defending themselves.

        Whereas I do not agree theologically with the church in this article, I found the article amusing and entertaining. On a more serious note, one may observe that no crazy criminal stormed into the sanctuary and shot any of the worshipers. That would NEVER happen in this church. No unarmed victims here. Perhaps the ability to defend self, family, country, and the constitution is what annoys the left the most. They hate a situation where people are self sufficient and do not depend on government for everything.

    4. Rev paul says:

      To bad we can’t ban both it’s not the guns it’s the lack of morals

    5. sleep-gone-away says:

      The founding fathers didn’t include the 2A so that we could hunt, it was included so that “we the people” could defend ourselves against an oppressive government. No-one is saying that we should all own a nuke, just that we should have access to the same level of technologically advanced small arms that uncle Sam has. Be warned, this will eventually happen (oppressive gov.). I want a weapon at least comparable to the M-16’s that they will be coming at me with.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        Like it or not, every able bodied citizen who has reached the age of majority is a part of the Militia of the Whole, unless disbarred by adjudged mental defect, felony conviction or religious/philosophic moral scruple.

        This is different than the Organized Militia, which includes, but is not limited to, the National Guard. Some states do have State Militias separate from the Guard. This is because the Guard can be Federalized and thus is no longer under control of the State. The State Militias are under the aegis of the “…security of a free state…” wording in the 2nd Amendment.

        In the writings of the authors of our constitutional republic, it appears pretty clearly that the “security” clause is subordinate to the “right of the people” clause.

    6. Gary says:

      If the 2nd amendment is to defend against a terinous government shouldn’t your arms be of equal value?

      1. John Owens says:

        tyrannous, and yes.

        1. Tom says:

          To think you are going to have an arms race with the government is just an exercise with rhetoric…you have to get people elected, not killed…this arm-chair second Amendment talk is just verbal exercising….

          1. im1nur12ic says:

            Tom
            March 20, 2018 at 12:53 pm
            ” …you have to get people elected, not killed… ”

            Agreed, and much to logical for some here.

          2. Tom says:

            Thank you…Peace…Tom

          3. GARY says:

            Exercise or not. The God given right that is protected by the constitution is already infringed upon. If we want to be true to the constitution all Arms bans should be repealed. From swords to ICBM’s.

          4. Sedonia Guillone says:

            The Constitution is arguably a living document that needs interpretation as society grows. Even Thomas Jefferson made that argument. The second amendment wording provides for the “lawful use” of firearms. If someone violates their constitutional obligation to use firearms lawfully then they forefeit their right. People with your view point Gary argue for your right to bear arms with no apparent consideration of your obligations and responsibilities. What about the inalienable rights of their victims to life? That goes completely, conveniently ignored.

          5. Jim D says:

            Sedonia, you claim the Constitution is “arguably a living document that needs interpretation as society grows.” Well, I’ll argue it with you (politely, of course). I don’t believe it is meant to be interpreted any differently than when it was written. The idea here is to interpret the Constitution’s meaning from the time of enactment, not with the understanding of what those words might mean in today’s parlance. For example, we hear the word “militia,” and we conjure an image of a bunch of camouflage-wearing yahoos running around in the woods in some backwater place stockpiling weapons and MRE’s. That’s not what the word “militia” meant in the late 18th century.

            I’m not sure where you were going with the example of a person that uses a firearm for unlawful purposes. Yes, absolutely, that person should lose his/her rights to possess firearms in the future. But it would be immensely wrong to punish 100 million law abiding firearm owners because the the actions of a few criminals. In 2016, there were 10,497 deaths caused by drunk driving. That’s nearly 29 people every day. Yet, no one is talking about banning alcohol and/or motor vehicles. Everyone seems to be satisfied with the laws we currently have on the books. Why isn’t the same true for firearms? We have laws that prohibit the use of firearms for unlawful purposes. Why isn’t that enough? Nearly the same number of people died from gun violence as from drunk driving. I don’t see protests against cars and alcohol. Why the double standard?

          6. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Jim, i will try to address your points as you made them so as to clarify. First you said that you don’t believe the constitution was meant to be interpreted differently than when it was written. This is a very arguable point in the regard that even that statement is a speculation on your part. I think it would be naive of us to think that the incredibly intelligent framers of the constitution of our nation would not have the foresight to understand that the society they were drafting the blueprint for was not going to grow and change. They would have been wute foolish not to anticipate change and growth and wouldn’t change and growth be something they would want in establishing a new nation and providing us with a very specifically structure government? unless we can ask them face to face ourselves, then we cannot know for certain. All we can do is try to interpret the amendments as best we can in order to protect our inalienable rights and yet keep law and order.
            Where i was going with my example of unlawful use of a firearm is exactly what i said in my comment, nothing more. The framers of the constitution used the phrase “lawful use” concerning the bearing of arms. Do you sincerely believe our forefathers would agree that someone who is unstable enough to mass murder a bunch of people still have the right to bear arms? I do not think the framers of the constitution would agree for one second that such a person should be able to hav access to firearms.
            The gun control laws in effect are intended to insure lawful use of firearms and it seems to me from all the deer hunting i see going on around me that peole are not exactly being deprived of their firearms. I had a neighbor who hd a personal arsenal of guns of all different kinds. If he wanted to supply a standing miilitia he certainly could. Peole are not being deprived of licenses to buy firearms but they are having to prove their ability to use them lawfully. That seems reasonable to me considering that someone can get a firearm and then go into a concert or school and kill scor of people in a few minutes. Just as In the case of drunk driving, there are laws defining blood alcohol levels and also a stringent process people must go through to show they will drive responsibly is not punishing everyone because of the drunk drivers. I do not see any double standard in effect. And there have been protests about drunk driving. What do you think MADD is? An organization that fights for stricter drunk driving laws and haa marched on Washington. Banning alcohol will not work. The nation learned its lesson during Prohibition. Thanks to prohibition, we have had to ontend with organized crime ever since. So, reasonable laws regarding the purchase of alcohol and driving drunk is totally appropriate and only those with dui’s have to have a soecial breathelizer machine installed in their car and breathe into or else their car shhuta off and becomes undrivable. It’s not like everyone is suffering for their drunk driving. The ones who suffer are the families of the people they kill.

          7. Tom says:

            Sedonia (re: March 26/5:21)…nicely thought out and written…your model would also be fully applicable to drugs…in our America concept, there should be reasonable compromises to sustain our Republic, as unilateral government does not endure…it is almost as though the advocates of no gun control consider school shootings as collateral damage, and that is not spiritual…Peace…Tom

          8. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom yes. They do seem to feel that way about school shootings. Like that horrible and seditious Bill O”Reilly said, “gun violence is the price of freedom.”
            There is a huge difference between freedom and license. With freedom comes responsibility and these second amendment abusers want it all. They want to be licentious and never pay any consequences. Our forefathers certainly cannot have envisioned a society where everyone can just do what they want without regard for anyone else. That was the wild west and even there they attempted some form of law and order.

          9. Tom says:

            Jim D…my 2 comments are (1) the concept of “strict construction”, which is what you apparently advocate, does not gibe with the very real facts that words and concepts clearly change over time…and (2) much of the reasons for there not being stronger controls over gun violence are the millions of dollars the NRA wastes on lobbying; that money could be used so much better to feed out starving people…guns are a sub-issue; the real issue is the welfare of all of us…Peace…Tom

          10. Tom says:

            Sedonia…i agree…the issue of guns within the concept of freedom is used to “stack the deck”…the overall issue to consider, in my opinion, is how to love and care for people, including feeding and providing housing, medical care and other real necessities; not just how you defend yourself with guns…to me, this is a “forest/trees” issue…keep writing, as you seem to be a compassionate person, and compassion should be the basis for all action…Peace…Tom

          11. GARY says:

            Tom, I can see were your confused. The government was never to be a means to feed, house or care for the citizens. The Constitution was to keep the government out of our lives so we could be free to express our compassion and love as we see fit. If a group of people want to believe that blessing there guns will make them feel safe its not our place to stand in there way. same as a group of people who want to provide for there fellow man.

          12. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom, thank you for your kind feedback. Our society is obviously polraizing in a way that is formed of two distinct groups that are completely irreconcilable. Humanitarianism and compassion are beclming pitted against fear and reactionism, the conflict playing itself out in this issue of the Second Amendment. No doubt you can see tat yourself since you have an eye to the larger picture of what it means to be a human being.

          13. Tom says:

            Gary…respectfully, I am not confused…while we can agree to live by Constitutional principles, it is more important to live a life of love and caring…our lives are not to be based on a Constitution, or a bible, or any other writing of man…my understanding of Christ is that he wanted us to live in a loving manner; not just basing our lives on laws or man-made concepts of self-defense or “scholarly” interpretations of anything…we are in this world, repeatedly, to resolve our karma, through many lives, and being a gun and/or violence advocate, whether for offense or defense, does not help our souls…a majority or a dictatorship can pass any laws; they never reach the importance of love…Peace…Tom

          14. Tom says:

            Sedonia…thank you…i feel that while it seems there are 2 polarized sides, it is because they are the most vocal…there are tens of millions of Americans that are not concerned about this issue (especially those that are starving and/or sick)…unfortunately, our video game/tv/movies society is pushing violence as a way of life, and for this way of life people need/want guns…we are not at the level of Mad Max and Road Warrior, but we could get there, and that is sad…Peace…Tom

          15. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom, all sadly true. The creation of Fox News has served to cultivate that reactionary and vocal population, which technically is sedition and not freedom of the press. It is serving as a catalyst to the ever growing rift. No, we are not yet at Mad Max level yet but unfortunately such a vision is now not inconceivable to me.

          16. Tom says:

            Sedonia…and to say that guns, video games, movies etc do not kill people, is just begging the issue…of course they do not directly kill people, but immersing our children in them, almost like A Clockwork Orange, is no different than the Stockholm Syndrome…if all you hear and are taught is violence, there is little likelihood you will challenge it as a way of life…Peace…Tom

          17. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom, again, what you are saying is sensible. I would go a step further, however, to say we have a chicken and egg situation he. What comes first, the type of education or the type of mind that puts forth that mentality of guns and video games and a culture of brutality? If it is the type of mind that precedes the education, then we have a whole larger situation here of human evolution, or rather devolution versus a population that is evolving toward non violence and intelligence and critical thinking rather than fear and violent reactionism. My husband has been putting forth a theory that this is happening just as once the more peaceful Neanderthals were taken over in evolution by the more aggressive cro magnon.

          18. Tom says:

            Sedonia…what you are saying is a consideration…from my point of view, everything that takes place was meant to take place, to resolve our karma…but what you and your husband are theorizing makes sense in considering what may be a kind of group karma…uncomfortably, that may be the basis for the Holocaust…and the long-term trends in “civilization”, which involve millions of people, may constitute that group karma…it is interesting, but not necessarily knowable in this “existence”…Peace…Tom

        2. Tom says:

          Gary…respectfully, the Constitution is not a religious document…and even though everything is a God-given right, that does not mean that God-given rights should be used for violence…for an organization that has mainly Christian members, it is interesting that so many ignore or distort the words of Christ…Peace…Tom

          1. GARY says:

            I never claimed the constitution was a religious document. It’s a legal document agreed upon to protect the rights we were born with. The Founders knew the flaws of mankind. They learned the difference between a free and equal citizen and a subject to a crown.
            And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said, Nothing.Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough. Luke 22:35-38

          2. Tom says:

            Gary…no one is born with “rights”…we are, however, born with the ability to make choices, so that we can be dedicated to compassion and love, or not…there is no need to quote from bibles, scriptures, etc, as they are man-made…as is the Constitution…people are free to form governments, groups, communes, etc,; people are free to protest, support, ignore etc…people are free to be empathic, compassionate, caring, loving….that freedom is your “right”…any of us can quote any writing or speech; those of us who “get it” simply lead loving lives…Peace…Tom

          3. Gary says:

            Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration states, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness….”

          4. Tom says:

            Gary…it is too easy to quote abstractions…I do not see the Constitution has advocating
            violence, at any level…what I feel it actually means is that everyone has the “right” to be a loving, compassionate person…I am disappointed that no one has commented on why so many ignore or distort the words of Christ…Peace…Tom

          5. Tom says:

            Joseph…please explicilty explain the method of choosing which comments are subject to “moderation”…please…this is a reasonable request, and the ULC should have nothing to hide…thank you…Peace…Tom

          6. Gary says:

            Tom… it’s hard to have a conversation with you. You keep contradicting yourself. First you want to talk about distorting the words of Christ,then you say his words in the bible are man made. When I quoted the declaration of independence to back up my point that you are boarn with God given rights you call it an abstraction. The declaration cold not be a more concise letter of intent.
            Then you say “I feel what the constitution actually meant.”not what is writen but what you feel it meant.
            The constitution was laid out to protect our freedom to think and speak how we feel. Whether that is loving kindness or your a selfish meanyface. It does not guarantee happyness, prosperity,or safety. Only the freedom to thrive or fail by our own hand.

        3. Tom says:

          Joseph…are my comments making you uncomfortable? please let me know the basis for review; i see no reason for you not to respond…thank you…Tom

    7. Mark says:

      I disagree, a gun is an inanimate object, leave an AR15 fully loaded with the safety off on your table over night and it will still be there in the morning. If you allow a single gun to be banned you will find politicians redefining every weapon as an assault weapon and banning them all. Look at California, they started with the SKS rifle and worked their way through every semi-automatic out there.
      We did not have this mass shooting problem in the past and maybe we should ask ourselves what changed. Could it be the society we have created is to blame. Perhaps we need to be banned.

  4. Steven P Robinson says:

    When my ancestor, Mathias Farnsworth, was shipped to the Plymouth Colony as resupply cargo in 1622, one was expected to bring one’s firearm to church services. One could be fined for not doing so.

    However, I think (and hope) our situation has advanced from the “frontier” society in which he grew to manhood. Mathias was 10 when he came to America.

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      I, too, am a firearms owner. My dad started me off at age 5 with safety training, and after a year of that, I got to shoot a single shot .22 for the 1st time.

      In 2 weeks, I will mark the 43rd anniversary of buying my 1st rifle (a .22). Have never felt the need, or desire, to use it on another person.

    2. Carl Elfstrom says:

      They were shooting arrows at us back then Steve, but nobody is shooting at us now. There have been some isolated cases of mass murders in churches, but those murderers were stopped. It’s not happening now. It could happen again, but there’s no reason to think it will. Anyone who thinks otherwise is probably paranoid, and might need a medication change, or they should quit smoking crack. For one reason or another their realities are distorted.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        Carl (except for calling me Steve, it’s Steven, please) it looks like our thinking is running on parallel tracks.

        As I indicated above, I’ve been handling firearms for several decades and have never felt the need or desire to have one in public save for hunting or non-hunting shooting sports. I have had to face down armed intruders in my home twice, once when I lived near Omaha in the late 80’s and once when I lived near Dayton in the early 90’s.

        I have also not had the need or desire to shoot at a fellow human, save one time in the military, and they shot first.

        1. Carl Elfstrom says:

          Steven, My bad, as they say these days.Perhaps I didn’t say enough about myself. You have certainly said a lot about yourself,and your training,sir. I currently own a firearm, and am a former member of the NRA. I was proudly wearing an NRA cap when I was nineteen, In 1982. I was a gung – ho security guard back then, after spending my last year of high school in R.O.T.C.. Back then I owned a 410 bolt action, and carried it on the job, as well as a machete. I was quite an avid reader of Soldier Of Fortune Magazine back then too. I did security work for seven years. I only had to shoot at someone once on the job. I don’t know if I hit him, but he never came back and complained. Besides having had weapons training with R.O.T.C. I had firearms training with the University Of Houston Security Academy in 1985,and my father, who had been a sniper scout in Recon, in the U.S. Marine Corps taught me a few things. I too hope I never have to shoot or kill anyone, but will defend myself and others, when need be. I’m now 55, and thinking seriously about joining the NRA again, as well as AARP. But it doesn’t make any sense to me to have guns in church. I can’t see anything spiritual about it. If it’s only symbolic, why not toy guns? What about those plastic BB rifles like we had as kids that fired rubber BBs?

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            I have followed a modern reconstruction of the beliefs and practices of my northern European ancestors since July 1988. I will on occasion have an inclusion in a worship service for one of the warrior gods a blessing of carry weapons (I know several police officers and licensed security guards within our community), home defense and hunting implements for those who chose to bring them into the Worship Stead. All such are unloaded and “peace bonded.”

          2. John Owens says:

            This is just a publicity stunt. It is really not that big of a deal.

        2. wildbronco26 says:

          After having the lives of myself, my wife and sister-in-law who resided with us at the time threatened and on the advice of my local Chief of Police I got my CCW, this also followed an attack on my person where I was severally injured resulting in a torn left rotor cuff. I retired from the US Army with over 40 years of Military Service, and I have owned firearms since I was 21 years old and carried them in the service of my country since I was 17. I am certified expert with numerous US and more then a few Foreign made Military shoulder fired weapons, as well as handguns revolver and semi-automatic. My Concealed firearms goes every where I do, up to and including my College Classes, and to pick up my Grand daughter from her Middle School. Would I defend others at that school should the need arise, you better believe it, the same goes for at the College. I believe in God I also know that Christ told his disciples to sell their cloak and buy a sword, I believe that my rights under the Constitution are Natural Rights, some call them God given others call them Natural Rights regardless of which you choose the Framers knew what they were doing, the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, or in defending your self and family, it is about defending this great nation of ours against all enemy’s foreign and DOMESTIC, and in my humble view Criminals who seek out unarmed victims are the DOMESTIC enemy’s of this nation, a well as those who seek to turn the Citizens of this nation into unarmed victims for the criminal to prey upon.

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            Even such a personage of peace as the Dalai Lama has made statements in favor of having firearms to defend one’s self and family.

      2. claude says:

        Speaking of medication it appears that this article is in its own way, identifying some of the 10% of Americans who live with serious mental health issues. Regardless of 2nd amendment privileges they should never be armed. If there is so much ‘faith’ in their cult, why bring a gun to protect yourself??

        1. C0315 says:

          The Constitution doesn’t grant us any RIGHTS (not privileges). It tells the government what it can’t take from us. Piece of paper or not, these RIGHTS are given to us by God.

          1. claude says:

            …. and how did your god explain that it is okay to do these things to innocent children, in places where they should be safe? Could you also give some examples of how your god grants ‘rights’ to you. I’m most interested.

          2. Steven P Robinson says:

            A little more accurately said is that the Constitution and 1st 10 Amendments recognize rights we have by nature of being born human.

            The Rights themselves are absolute, however, part of the Social Compact is the acceptance of brakes upon the liberty when have to exercise them.

          3. John Owens says:

            claude, what the heck are you talking about? Nobody said it was “okay to do these things to innocent children.”

            READ THIS: “…all men are…endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights: among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to secure these rights, governments are divinely instituted among men.”

            If the Creator ENDOWS me with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, He, She, or It also endows me with the ability to defend those rights. That means against a criminal, whether a run-of-the-mill criminal, an enemy spy or soldier, a criminal police officer, or a criminal government.

            None of this has ANYTHING whatsoever to do with children at school. TWO SEPARATE issues. Nothing to do with gods giving rights to kill innocents. God only gives rights to kill criminals and national enemies at war.

            Don’t be obtuse. Try to be adult and realistic. Less hysterical.

        2. C0315 says:

          Who said it was “okay to do these things to innocent children”? You must be one of the mentally defective individuals that you seek to ban from self preservation. By will and strength are rights granted. Yesterday 100,000,000+ law abiding gun owners shot no one.

        3. Sedonia Guillone says:

          Claude, exactly. The second amendment provides for lawful use of firearms. Obviously there are unstable people out there (people who before de institutionalization in the 1980s, would not have been out and in a position to buy firearms) who purchase them with criminal intent. Stringent laws to ensure that only responsible people will buy them are needed.

          1. Rev. Dr. Marion Ceruti says:

            True, 2A is about lawful firearm use. If governments intended to follow the law it would not violate any part of the Bill of Rights, which amend the highest law of the land, the Constitution.

            Indeed, to keep and bear arms is a right, which the government “shall not infringe,” not a privilege, which the government can grant or revoke at will. Moreover, no laws will prevent criminals from buying guns on the black market nor from using them illegally. Criminals do not respect any laws. They do what they please. Stringent laws affect only law-abiding citizens for whom stealing guns and the black market are not options. The more difficult it is to by a gun legally, the more readily it will be available on the black market. Gun laws do not disarm criminals, only good people like you and me. This is the main reason why “gun control” does not work.

            I agree with you that we need to bring back institutions for the mentally challenged so they can get the help that they need, while keeping them away from the general public. This would be a step in the right direction.

          2. claude says:

            Conversations about guns always get attention regardless where in the world you live.Any sane person can figure out however, that allowing anyone to ‘bear arms’ is not going to produce good results. Just look at the USA today. The right to arm oneself might be acceptable in some countries, but those same countries have excessively violent events on a daily basis. I read recently that (can’t verify the accuracy of the source) that on average 39 people die as a result of gunshot in the USA every day.,That number does not include accidental death or suicide. An earlier critic said he felt he had he right to defend himself…. which of course would be against another person with a gun. So what does that say about the real need to walk the streets armed??

          3. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Claude the real need to walk the streets armed is totally exaggerated. In spite of our problems here is nthe us, this is still a nation that runs on rule of law. If it weren’t the vast majority of us would not be able to leave our homes and go to the grocery store. While I won’t agitate for repeal.of the second amendment I do feel that americans’ obsession with their guns is one of fear and for many an extension of the male part due to tender little ego. I live in a rural area where the people love to hunt and shoot beautiful deer and I have grown to loathe these people and their childish g.i. Joe crap mentality.

          4. John Owens says:

            I don’t know for a fact that we need more stringent laws, but I do believe we need better means of verifying that a potential buyer is not evil or unstable. In the case of Cruz, I think it is a great injustice to all of his victims and even to him that he was able to obtain a 223 self-loading rifle. It is also a great injustice to us responsible gun-owners, because part of the population ignorantly wants to put some of the guilt for HIS crime on us.

            When there is a vehicular homicide, other vehicle-owners besides the perpetrator are not criticized but insurance rates go up, licensing becomes more stringent. When Islamic militants commit a crime or act of terrorism, people are quick to defend the majority of Muslims. If a black criminal kills someone, we don’t accuse all black people of being criminals. Why is it that if an unstable or just evil person commits a crime with a firearm, ALL firearms owners get tarred with the same brush, and it is not considered bigotry?

            Perhaps I’m just thinking in text here.

  5. Linda Happenny says:

    Now I am furious! I think all of you gun toting morons are looking for trouble. I don’t want automatic guns in hands of any people. that is what the gun control is about. Not taking other guns from you for hunting to eat or go to a shooting ranges. Somebody better check what that church is really about. It stinks death and blood!

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      If I may?

      I’m a veteran, who was my unit’s select marksman. I am also a trained gunsmith, was a hunting and shooting safety instructor for many years.

      The AR-15 is a Civilian, semi-automatic version of the Military M-16, which IS capable of automatic fire.
      It’s action is no different that a couple of the target .22’s I have. Also, Colt made changes to the internal design of the AR-15 in the early 80’s to make them very difficult to modify, this is the design all other AR-15 manufacturers have to copy.

      Fully automatic firearms have been heavily regulated since 1934, and new manufacture for civilian ownership was ended in 1986. Automatic firearms are very expensive and very hard to get.

      The AR-15 is military in appearance only. Not my preferred firearm for the target shooting and hunting I do.

      As for that church…it appears to be an offshoot of Reverend Moon’s Unification Church. Nuff said there.

      1. Carl Elfstrom says:

        It probably won’t be long before those church members eat some pudding and float up to a comet.

      2. Linda Happenny says:

        Thank you for your input. The info is good. I stand how I feel, but you are the only one that didn’t disrespect me. Thank you

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          Good morning Linda;

          It has long been my policy to present facts as I understand them.

          It does no one any good, and is not right, to inject personalization into the discussion.
          I respect than others have different emotions and opinions on such contentious matters than do I.

    2. John Owens says:

      Linda. Linda. Those aren’t automatic weapons. They are single-fire, semi-automatic. That means that you pull the trigger, it fires one shot, and as it fires, it reloads itself. I’ll remind you, the second amendment was NOT made so we could shoot targets or animals. PLEASE REMOVE THAT FALSE IDEA FROM YOUR HEAD. It was put in place because we were freeing our country from an oppressive government who did not mind sending its military to enforce its oppressive will on the colonists.

      When you gun-control freaks finally succeed in making a strong move against that amendment, you are going to reap the whirlwind for doing so, and wish you hadn’t. How do you propose to FORCE people to give up the weapons that they have LEGALLY bought with their own money?

      If people who legally carry guns were actually a danger to the public, you would be afraid to say anything for fear they would come and shoot YOU. Since you are not afraid to try to threaten our rights, that means you know they are not a danger to you. So…WHY ARE YOU MAKING A STINK?

      What on EARTH do you mean, that church stinks death and blood? You can’t smell it. You know nothing about it. Because they did something outlandish, you freak out about it. Smell a Planned Parenthood facility and tell me how it smells. Stop letting the US version of Pravda and Tass tell you how to think. They want you to be a subject in a communist totalitarian society.

      1. JOHN MAHER says:

        JOHN BOOGER BUTTERFLY OWINS, GO and S M E L L ALL the S C H O O L S WHERE ALL the KIDs / CHILDREN have BEEN SLAUGHTERED and SHUT YOUR STUPID MOUTH !!!

        1. Carl Elfstrom says:

          If he was truly a butterfly John Maher it seems like he would fly away. Maybe he’s stuck in his cacoon and needs more nudging to get out. Keep up the good work! I’ll continue doing my part, especially in religious articles, whenever it seems appropriate. Maybe he just needs to be directed to a different blog, one where fools will listen to him, and obey him. He seems to have control issues.

        2. Linda Happenny says:

          You have no right to disrespect me. I am entitled to my opinions and thoughts! If you don’t like it John, too bad. I will speak out and you or anyone else for that matter can’t shut me up!

          1. Barb Lanier says:

            We’re all entitled to our opinions Linda but it’s a pinions that are screwing this world up! It’s the acceptance and compromising of our opinions that is going to fix things not arguing over them. You’re trying to create Utopia in a world that hasn’t fought the Battle of Good and Evil yet that is what Jesus will bring to this earth after the war has been won. Good and evil are being separated right now like the wheat from the shaft. Observe the signs of the time. To not take a stand against evil is to Usher it in.

          2. Jim says:

            Linda, in a few of your posts you seem very intent on not being disrespected by anyone with a differing opinion. Yet, in your very first post in this forum you refer to many people as “gun toting morons.” It would seem to me that you should not demand respect from other if you are not willing to give it.

          3. John Owens says:

            I respected you enough to tell you the truth. I didn’t tell you to shut up, either. But, please, don’t be so emotional. It is not conducive to rational thought. That’s why I pointed out the errors in your diatribe.

        3. John Owens says:

          THE WHOLE THING WAS A SET-UP AND THE POLICE WERE IN ON IT AND DEBBIE WASSERMAN SHULZ AND OTHERS ARE COACHING THE TEENS AND PROVIDING BUSES AND PUBLICITY. AND NONE OF THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING I SAID AND YOU SHOULD SHUT UP. I WASN’T TALKING TO YOU ANYWAY.

          1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

            Dont mind Owen folks he is one of those Obama was not born in the U.S. types. Likely a flat earther to.Not to mention he thinks conspiracy but then thinks the dumbest version of it.

            I mean I could buy into the idea of this administration committing heinous acts against our own population to help strip people of their ability to resist tyranny but then remember the CDC and viral weapons and recall there is no real way for we the people to fight back against a tyranny and that we have lived in one while blindly thinking we are free.

            We may be liberal which aint a bad thing but no land is free of rulers and the rulers are all part of the same social cast and while they may all hate each other they are still the only peers they have to socialize with.

          2. John Owens says:

            and T’keren is a muslim gay dude who is bitter about everything. He never says anything good about anything or anyone.

            Linda, I respected you enough to speak truth and common sense to you. If that offends you, it is YOU who have a problem and not me.

          3. JOHN MAHER says:

            Mr. FAKE NEWS JOHN BOOGER BUTTERFLY OWINS, SORRY for YOU KNOW NOTHING, HOW MUCH of a SNIP did YOU GET ???

          4. JOHN MAHER says:

            I BELIEVE JOHN BOOGER BUTTERFLY OWINS that U are TALKING to YERSELF, WHY NOT GO FISHING and FALL OVERBOARD !!!

          5. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Wow, people, dial down the capital letter shouting.

          6. Sedonia Guillone says:

            John owens, you are a russian troll bot, i am sure. Busted?

          7. T'Keren Valmaz says:

            Sadly Sedonia Owens here is a regular on the forums and seems ardent in his conspiracy theory ramblings.

            He admits to among other things believing Obama wasnt a U.S. born citizen. The Pizza Gate BS really did happen, the earth is flat, that change is always bad, and a few other bits of lunacy.

          8. John Owens says:

            Sedonia, that Russian troll-bot comment is about the stupidest thing any brainwashed idiot ever decided was somehow witty or acceptable. Can you even DEFINE a Russian troll-bot? So many brainwashed little snowflakes will say stupid things like that, which have nothing to do with anything. Irrelevant, insulting, dismissive, uninformed. Moronic. The trolls were not all pretending to be conservative. An equal number were pretending to be liberals. I DID read about how the Russians tried to stir up division between people, races, right/left, whatever, and it would seem that perhaps you fit that description better than I. Vy ponimayete, tovarishch?

          9. Sedonia Guillone says:

            I was responding to this cap yelling comment: THE WHOLE THING WAS A SET-UP AND THE POLICE WERE IN ON IT AND DEBBIE WASSERMAN SHULZ AND OTHERS ARE COACHING THE TEENS AND PROVIDING BUSES AND PUBLICITY. AND NONE OF THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING I SAID AND YOU SHOULD SHUT UP. I WASN’T TALKING TO YOU ANYWAY.

            Personally i would rather the person saying this was a russian troll bot than a fellow american who is spouting such a horrible thing to say about the Parkland shooting and then degrading their protesting gun violence in schools. I call this cap yelling statement a rant. And calling people of a certin viewpoint brainwahsed snowflakes is cruel and bullying. Name calling is a tactic of the wek minded who just lash out at people and taunt them as you have said you ant to do to liberals. You weren’t raised right, that’s for sure.

        4. Barb Lanier says:

          What you fail to understand is all those deaths were caused by mentally incompetent people that were put back out on the streets with no help under the Obama Administration not by responsible gun owners.

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            My cousin James is a good example of someone who needed help, which his parents were unable to provide as his illness did not manifest until after he was 21 and on the street.

            Fortunately, the incident, which got James incarcerated was only a property crime.

            The judge who heard the case put James in a hospital and then sentenced him to be put in an assisted living facility after treatment. James spent 2 years in the hospital and has been at the facility for over 25 years. He has a job and is much more the friend I had when we were growing up together. He also admits that his illness precludes him ever living on his own ever again.

          2. Sara says:

            It was President Reagan who closed mental institutions with no funding for support services for the people who were flung into the streets.

          3. Steven P Robinson says:

            The closing of mental hospitals started in the late 70’s with “consent decrees” by magistrates like Frank Freedman of the Federal Circuit Court in Springfield, MA, and the states not funding replacement programs with what they used to spend on the hospitals.

          4. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Dont blame the Obama admin for those mentally unstable people. Was Reagan who closed down all the public mental hospitals in the country, creating epidemic homelessness and scores of mentally unstable people moving about in society. Why does Obama get the blame for all the problems created by Republican actions?

          5. T'Keren Valmaz says:

            Those places needed to be closed down, they were as close to hell on earth as ever any place was to be found. rampant abuse of the patients was common. The Ice pick lobotomy used liberally. Countless people suffered fates worse then death in such places.

            The sad harsh fact is those incapable of caring for themselves should be euthanized as an act of mercy to them and to avoid them suffering or harming others.

            Check out a documentary called Cropsey to have an idea of the terrible fate such mentally impaired people suffer or inflict suffering upon others.

          6. Sedonia Guillone says:

            T’kerem, definitely those places were hell. I would never want anyone to be kept in one where they ar being treated that way. I was just making a point about why there are people like these mass shooters who are now out in the world to buy firearms. Some of these crazy ranters think the second amendment applies to everyone across the board no matter what they do when that is not true. The second amendment clearly uses the words lawful use for the application of firearms and in so doing are basically defending the mass shootings of children. I dont think euthanasia is an answer because there you tread the very dangerous path toward eugenics which was practiced here in the united states on mentally ill people through sterilization and then was adopted by hitlers third reich where mentally ill people were murdered. So the answer would be for hukanity to become humane but i dont see that happening on any significant scale.

          7. John Owens says:

            Sedonia, to which crazy ranters do you refer? I have noticed a few ranting on the left, but none on the right. Oh. Maybe you imagined it.

      2. Scott says:

        John Owens I’ve read through all the post before yours. I come from the north-east part of our great nation. My family made a living hunting and trapping. My grandfather was a World War 2 veteran. My father was a Korean War veteran. I had three brothers that went to Vietnam. We had piles of guns in our home. I live in a very rural area. I have carried a concealed weapon most of my life. As a youngster we had fully automatic weapons. Which were never pointed at any person. With the world is crazy as it is. If there was a invasion in this country. Or if a group of radicals where to invade or occupy my space or my town. I would seek out the people that had the automatic and the semi-automatic weapons.
        I have stood and observed many assault weapons, and never once have I seen a weapon assault anybody. Weapons do not assault people assault. Leave our guns alone. Bring God and Jesus Christ back into our homes and our towns.

        1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          God is never in the heart or home of any hunter or trapper.Those who practice such things are as contrary to nature as it comes. Hunters prey upon Alpha examples for the best trophy kills, for the most meat. Trappers kill with no discernment of the local ecology.

          Wolves take only the weak and the sick and the terribly stupid. Men kill the best and weaken the entire eco system.

          Ban humanity from hunting and bring pack the wolves that once ranged far and wide. They will check the numbers in herds while making all the parts of nature stronger.

          End ranching. We should all be eating tofu not steak and pork and chickens. Poor miserable creatures denied a chance to really live and existing only for our dinner plates.

          1. John Owens says:

            My word. You presume to speak for God, T’Keren. If I’d known there was a prophet here, I would have put on a white robe before getting on here. That is an arrogant and bigoted bit of self-righteous slander you just threw out.

      3. Mitchell Halper says:

        Wow, pink commie reds uh? Firearms may be a necessary evil due to other evils in our world but they are the result of Fear not Faith. I think that’s the problem. Fear is not a desirable motivation is it, compared to love or joy of hope? Fear smells, literally. Animals can smell it. Perhaps crazy people can smell it, I don’t know. I know this, people can snap, even sane, balanced ,good people can snap. Firearms allow such mass destruction that they represent an ever present danger for the simple reason that we are all fallible. In fact the bible says we are all sinners, maybe not so good for fallen brings to be armed and dangerous? Pravda? Really?

      4. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Actually I am not muslim, not that there is anything wrong with being one. Nor am I gay though again nothing wrong with being gay. The fact you throw those as insults says alot more about you then me Owens.

        Granted if Brad Pitt wanted to take me out for a drink I wouldnt say no;)

        But seriously you throw out false statements as counters to actual facts. You have on numerous posts called Obama a kenyan muslim traitor. You are the self confessed birther and bigot.

        Your opinion on anything is invalid because of your willfully ignorant outlook.

        You are a radical christian extremist no better then a muslim extremist on jihad. No scratch that you are worse at least they have the justification of feeling threat from foreign military occupation and being born in a land caught up in wars for many many years.

        1. John Owens says:

          Just because a malcontent liberal moron calls me something doesn’t mean it is true, T’Keren. I have not claimed to be a prophet here, like you as much as did. I call Obama a Kenyan because it drives snowflakes like you crazy and because I saw him on video saying he was from Kenya. You try to make me sound as radical and ignorant as you, which is impossible, and now again you justify the jihadis and put down the Christians. Shows your faith by your words. You are an enemy of humanity.

      5. Rev. Dr. Marion Ceruti says:

        Well stated. These are aspects of guns, rights, and the constitution that the left will never understand because they are incapable of connecting cause with effect. As the number of guns and concealed carry licenses in the USA continues to increase, crime overall has decreased over the past few decades.

        What the gun grabbers do not understand, because cause and effect continues to elude them, is that once they begin to infringe on one right (2nd amendment), they will infringe on another right (4th amendment) in an effort to clean up the mess that they made when they infringed on the 2nd. This creates a cascade of infringements that collectively make the situation worse because their “solutions” actually are the cause of the problems.

        Again, because the gun grabbers know nothing about cause and effect, they will not understand that genocide is possible only against an unarmed populace. History is full of examples. Millions of people were murdered because they could not defend themselves. The far left communists who want to take over the USA do not understand that communism when extrapolated to its logical conclusion results in Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea. Gun control stinks to high heaven of death and blood.

        1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          Lol Id say its folks like you Marion that do not understand cause and effect. Which is typical for science ignoring creationist types like Im guessing you are.

          Japan for example has a population of a 130 million plus people on a tiny bit of land compared to ours, They play violent video games, have a culture thick with warrior castes and martial tradtions yet due to extreme gun control rarely have gun related murders. Why is that?

          Could the cause of not allowing guns casually into the hands of just anyone have the effect perhaps of keeping guns out of the hands of people and thus prevent mass shootings.

          You do understand most guns used in crime first were bought legally then either resold privately, stolen. Inherited after a death etc. Hell one of the biggest exports of the gang MS 13 is fire arms aquired in the U.S. legally then sent to other countries with stricter gun control laws.

          Our lax laws do not only hurt us we are actively used as a source for fire arms by the most powerful global gang on earth.

    3. John Owens says:

      AR15s are NOT automatic weapons. They are auto-loading. You pull the trigger, it fires and re-loads itself, but doesn’t fire again until you pull the trigger again. That is the basic definition of semi-automatic. Any police officer who does not carry a revolver carries a semi-automatic handgun. The AR15 is no more an automatic weapon than a police officer’s sidearm.

    4. Barb Lanier says:

      Well I hate to break it to you Linda but the church is about a war between Good and Evil. They are fighting a war in heaven that extends down to earth. When God returns with his army he won’t be collecting the guns from Satan’s Army and trying to convert them. And when the gates of hell open on to the Earth and only Satan’s Army has guns I guess you’ll wish you hadn’t banned any of them!

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Satans army? Barb they have hell fire and other awesome magic why the hell( hey hey) would they need mere mortal weapons?

        Not to mention its part of the biblical myth that Lucifer took the best 3rd of heavens host with him. God got stuck with the second string angelic warriors. Hence why all god could do was concede the region later called hell to him and his forces. Even 2 to 1 god didnt have the angel power to do more then maintain a stalemate with Lucifer and his superior quality force.

        Ill side with the quality over quantity any day. Also the winchester brothers prevented the gates of hell from opening. I mean hell TV shows are no more or less then the bibilcal myths so as far as I care Lucifer is currently sitting on the throne of heaven.

        Hail to Lucifer the King of Heaven!

        1. John Owens says:

          …and you have the unmitigated gall to say I am willfully ignorant. You are willfully evil, like any good agent of jihad.

      2. Linda Happennyb says:

        I am not god centered! I don’t believe in heaven or hell. So you can’t tell me what I will wish I banned anything. Also, this church is about all religions not just Christianity. Earth will only swallow up what you believe.

  6. gerrydiamond says:

    I was a British Army Officer serving in Iraq and we did not allow firearms in the hospital, when our US colleagues took over running the hospital then they carried weapons. Britain has its problems, but the general population has no access to firearms and our police are routinely armed with a pistol but a truncheon or tazer.

    I think that our religious communities of every denomination would be appalled and shocked at a ceremony blessing attack rifles. We do not execute people either, and tougher sentences are being brought out for people carrying knives thank goodness.

    I don’t envy the US worship of guns.

    God bless

    1. Barb Lanier says:

      With all respect to you and your service all of our Armed Forces understand the right to bear arms we don’t worship guns we are just protecting our rights to bear arms. Most people don’t want to admit or talk about all the incidents where lives were saved by guns and that total is a lot higher than the lives lost by guns. And all of those shootings we’re done by mentally incompetent people that the Democrat Party took away their treatment and put them back out on the street. That’s the real crime and the real issue here not responsible gun owners. The problem here is neither side wants to listen to the other and compromise. We’re more interested in our own agendas and bipartisanship which is destroying this country. It’s not about our individual rights or opinions it’s about what’s right and wrong in society as a whole. The the right thing is what is good for everyone both sides have valid points. If you notice kill zones are always gun free. I say fence the schools in and put guards around them that should deter possible future incidents.

      1. John Owens says:

        Thank you, Barb.

  7. atatakaidanjp says:

    Revelations? What Revelations? Are you talking about the Book of Revelation? Apparently, assumption is not enough but also requires saying things which are not accurate – like Mr. Cheeto’s “Two Corinthians”.

  8. Brien M Demartino says:

    C’mon people! You all cannot possibly be this ignorant.While all of you flat heads decide to support or protest a bunch of nut jobs that belong in a rubber room wearing white dinner jackets, I would like to let you know that I am forming the church of the hammer. If you do not bring a hammer, you will be denied entry. The bible says so……oh wait a sec…better idea, the church of the broom and dust pan…..yeah that’s it…..
    I hope what I wrote above seems completely stupid to all of you. That is what this story and all the comments about it seem to me.

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      There already is a “Hammer Cult,” those of us who Offer Worship to the historic Thor and wear a pendant in the shape of Mjolnir, his hammer. 😉

    2. Jim says:

      The Church of the Hammer actually kind of works. After all, Jesus was a carpenter. I’m sure he had a hammer.

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Actually on the cartoon show Gargoyles they kind of did have a church cult with the hammer as a symbol because they hunted and smashed gargoyles.

        1. Jim D says:

          I actually used to watch that cartoon in the mornings getting ready for work. I remember the church with the hammer. That was a great cartoon. Thanks for reminding me of it. Now I have to see if it’s available on Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc.

  9. Carl Elfstrom says:

    Who provides the nails? What good are hammers without nails? Do your congregants stand in line going to the altar to receive a nail instead of a communion wafer? We do carry our besoms to rituals, but only to psychically sweep the area of the circle.

    1. Carl Elfstrom says:

      But Brien, don’t you think it’s fun to get into debates about these stupid subjects? It beats the hell out of isolating.

    2. Mitchell Halper says:

      Careful, didn’t that Muslim Obama take away all the nails?

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Mitchell you sound like you may need to be fitted for a tin foil hat and a straight jacket.

        1. Sedonia Guillone says:

          He is being sarcastic.

          1. John Owens says:

            So funny you had to explain that.

  10. Lynn Gideon says:

    The scripture does not say peace on Earth, good will toward men. It says on Earth, peace and good will toward men. Luke 2:14 KJV
    Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace and good will toward men.

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      Quoting the Great Teacher, Yeshua ben Miriam…Matthew 10:35 (Aramaic Bible in English): Think not that I have come to bring peace in the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

      1. Barb Lanier says:

        Amen he has come to divide families he is separating the wheat from the shaft. If you don’t stand against evil then you stand for it.

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          …and, I hope that those of us who believe in different Great Teachers can work together to preserve the Good.

        2. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          do any of you people understand that if jesus was the messiah of the ancient jewish prophecy that his followers claim he was, that peace on earth would of come with his birth and lasted after his death? Like literally that is the big main point of the prophecy of the messiah.

          So no world peace means jesus wasnt special. That simple.

  11. Sara says:

    How about a church of pasta? I personally revere Spaghetti Carbonara.

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster…
      https://www.venganza.org

    2. Carl Elfstrom says:

      I’m half Italian,Sara. I’d go for that. I’m a good cook too. I’m eating Italian sausage right now. About a pound of it. Why not, the hair already fell out of my legs and can’t fall out again. Now you’re making me hungry for pasta.So where’s the church?

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        Paisan! I’m Italian on my mom’s side…keep about a dozen and a half different kinds of macaroni and 4 of spaghetti in the pantry at all times.

      2. Sara says:

        Hey, we’re on our way to a new congregation. Hail all that’s good in the universe and pass the Parmesan cheese!

      3. Sara says:

        Welcome to the new congregation! Hail the new order and pass the Parmesan cheese!

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          I like a mix of Parmesan, Romano and Asiago. 🙂

          1. Sara says:

            We’ll be a very liberal congregation accepting all pasta and cheese denominations and persuasions.

    3. Jim says:

      There might be problems with the Church of Pasta. Half the congregation says “gravy” and the other half says “sauce”. See that? We hardly get started and there’s already a conflict.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        Never heard spaghetti sauce (either red or white) called gravy until we lived in northern Illinois.

        1. Jim says:

          I know, right? I had friends in college that called it gravy. I thought they were nuts. I explained to them gravy is made from meat drippings. Sauce is not.

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            That is how I learned to cook from my mom and Nonnie D’Orazio.
            Gramma Robinson only made gravy, being Irish.

            Sauce might have meat in it, but the main components were either veggies (like tomatoes) or dairy (like Al Fredo) and gravy was made from the pan drippings from the meat or poultry.

  12. Gilbert Mason says:

    CLAIM 1: The increase in firearms in the U.S. also means an increase in gun violence.

    False. Since 1993 gun violence has been cut in half, and the number of firearms has doubled.

    CLAIM 2: A “full semi-automatic AR-15” is the most dangerous assault rifle.

    False. There is no such thing as a “full semi-automatic AR-15”. There is full auto which is illegal, and semi-auto which means you can only pull the trigger once per shot. Also, AR-15 does not mean “assault rifle 15”, it means ArmaLite 15, which is the brand and model. Lastly, no, the AR-15 is not the most dangerous. There are more deaths by guns that are pistols than any other firearm.

    CLAIM 3: You can go buy a gun easier than buying pseudoephedrine at a pharmacy.

    False. You much go through a background check and pass the background check. You cannot have any criminal history that involves the revocation of your rights to bear arms.

    CLAIM 4: Gun free zones have less chance of gun violence.

    False, based on actual statistics, gun free zones are 35% more likely to experience gun violence.

    CLAIM 5: Getting rid of all of the guns would decrease gun violence.

    True, but that doesn’t mean that people that want to kill wont be able to kill. They will just find other means like knives, bombs, etc. Also, if the right to bear arms was removed, you would have illegal gun owners which are expected to be criminals and killers, would be the ones with the guns and all of the law abiding citizens would be unable to defend themselves, and the criminals would be well aware of your vulnerability.

    CLAIM 6: “The Right” does not care about the lives lost due to gun violence and they have no solutions.

    False, and a gross statement. Practically everyone that cares about humanity cares about the lost lives, regardless of political affiliation. The difference is how the political parties want to reach a solution. The Right believes we as a country can continue to have the right to bear arms and also keep guns out of the hands of people who use them on law abiding, morally-just citizens. If the FBI and law enforcement do their jobs correctly, many potentially dangerous individuals would be prevented from killing people. Also, it is up to the citizens of the U.S. to “see something, do something”: that means, if you know of someone, either a family member or friend, that is mentally unstable and potentially dangerous and has access to firearms, it is your responsibility to use due process and get their right to bear arms removed.

    1. Carl Elfstrom says:

      Either that or maybe chop off their hands so they can’t hold a weapon.

      1. Carl Elfstrom says:

        If he’s crazy enough he’ll think they’re still there, and won’t miss them. Or, he could say he was praising the Lord in the church of the chain saw.

    2. Troy says:

      “CLAIM 3: You can go buy a gun easier than buying pseudoephedrine at a pharmacy.

      False. You much go through a background check and pass the background check. You cannot have any criminal history that involves the revocation of your rights to bear arms.”

      No ID needed to buy a firearm in a gun show, private transaction. Whereas, ID is required to buy pseudoephedrine.

      Mr. Mason is wrong on this issue, invalidating his points.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        Depends on the jurisdiction.

        When I lived in Illinois, I participated in a few private sales as both seller and buyer.
        One must have both a valid state issued identification with picture (driver’s license or ID card) and a valid state issued firearm owner’s ID. A bill of sale must be drawn up with the buyer and seller’s information, plus details about the firearm. This receipt must be kept by both parties for 20 years.

        It is not a background check, but it is a restriction. One with which I agree.

      2. Jim says:

        Troy, that is not exactly true. First, there is no such thing as the “gun show loophole”. It’s a crock and always has been. What we’re talking about here is the private sale of long arms (rifles and shotguns). In states where private sales are allowed, it is a transaction from one state resident to another, both being from the same state. Private out-of-state sales are not permitted, and private handgun sales are also not permitted.

        This is the part that is the real problem. The transaction must take place between two persons that are not prohibited from possessing a firearm and are from the same state (assuming it’s legal in that state). What does that mean? It means at the very least you should ask for a driver’s license to confirm residency. As far as lawful possession goes, if you don’t know the person buying your gun, you’re taking a chance on whether or not that person is allowed to own a gun. If you sell a gun to a criminal, that’s a crime whether you knew he was a criminal or not. And if he commits a crime with the gun you sold him, you’re in a lot of trouble.

        The private sale of guns was traditionally for transferring ownership of a gun to a family member or a friend. At the very least, the buyer/transferree should be someone you know, and you are sure they are not prohibited from owning a firearm.

        If I had a gun to sell, and a person I didn’t know wanted to buy it, I would insist on going to a licensed dealer to do the background check. If they don’t like it, I don’t care. I’ll sell it to someone else. I would be fine with strengthening the laws regarding private sales so that they are restricted to buyers that are familiar to the seller.

        1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          Funny Jim. My 357. PD Ultralite I bought at a gun show in reno from an old vet selling his collection for retirment funds only needed to see my state ID. Which was even expired but he didnt blink twice.

          750$ and now I own a gun I could sell for triple that to a banger or pimp who would love such a beauty of a beastly blaster.

          I only have it for true home defense but even then would prefer to slice and dice an intruder unless I see them carrying a gun.

          1. Jim D says:

            T’Keren, you failed to mention when you purchased your revolver. If you purchased it after January 1, 2017, then I’m afraid you and the old vet have both committed a crime. Now, that being said, the state attorney general for Nevada has stated that the universal background check law, which was passed by voter referendum, is unenforceable as written. Even so, I would consult with an attorney familiar with firearm laws in your state to see if there is anything with which you need to be concerned.

            Had you tried to do a background check with an FFL, you would have been bounced because your state ID had expired making it invalid unless you had another form of ID, like a state vehicle registration card that was not invalid. The expired ID and the current registration (assuming both have the same address) would have been sufficient.

          2. John Owens says:

            Tell him, Jim.

      3. Gilbert Mason says:

        Troy,

        I have heard this claim before – you can buy a firearm at a gun show with no ID. I’m curious which state you are referring to. In my own personal experience, every gun show I have ever been to, if I wanted to purchase a firearm from a private dealer, I had to get a membership with the gun show, which does require security checks and registration, and you have to present your membership card to the private dealer.

        1. Jim says:

          Private dealer? There is no such thing. I admit, federal law is a bit ambiguous on this point. The ATF states, “The federal Gun Control Act (GCA) requires that persons who are engaged in
          the business of dealing in firearms be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).” Here is the link if anyone is interested: https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download

          So you can’t be a private dealer. If you hold an FFL (federal firearms license), you have to do background checks. If you do not, and you sell something “off the books”, you could wind up in the pokey.

          However, you can sell firearms from your own collection. A lot of people do, just as a means of getting rid of guns they don’t shoot anymore, or they are short on cash. But if you are going out and buying guns to sell, like a business, you need a license.

          Maybe what you meant to say is private seller, not private dealer.

          1. Gilbert Mason says:

            Yes, I did mean private seller. Thank you for the correction.

      4. C0315 says:

        You have to show ID to enter the gun show. Most booths at gun shows are local gun shop owners. Something tells me you have never been to a gun show before.

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          I have run across a few, truly private sellers at gun shows.

          However, in the states where I have attended, private sales do have some restrictions, such as showing ID with proof of residency in state.

      5. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Troy I live in nevada and I assure you that yes you can buy guns privately with no back ground check, and at gun shows private sellers only have to see a valid nevada ID. no back ground check either. Only official gun dealers have to run back ground checks, and they are showing up less and less at the gun shows because no one wants to pay the back ground fee.

    3. Barb Lanier says:

      Yay someone with facts! If people checked their facts and statistics regularly there wouldn’t be so many arguments LOL

    4. Rev. Dr. Marion Ceruti says:

      You are right about all of these false claims regarding gun ownership. My only suggestion regarding claim 5 is that the government cannot get rid of all the guns. Criminals will continue to have guns and any other weapon they want.

      Whenever the gun grabbers talk about “gun violence” they really mean “gun rights.” They want to get rid of our gun rights so they can set up a totalitarian communist dictatorship in the USA.

  13. Minister Norman says:

    Amazing how little “Grace” there is in so many of these comments to most ULC Blog Posts lately (and not just this one). That’s why I have rarely commented on any of them anymore.

    I thought (obviously in error) that this was supposed to be a SPIRITUAL discussion zone. So thank you to those who at least try to keep it civil, and also make cogent points.

    First off, this gun toting “church” is horribly abusing both the 2nd Amendment and the Bible.

    Secondly, I too Believe in the 2nd Amendment, HOWEVER…

    We are losing sight of what that was, and is really all about, and how our country has since sought to become a Civilized Nation of Laws; and however unevenly dispensed or flawed those laws might be. Which is also why I remain a champion of the second amendment and the other FREEDOMS we all possess as Citizens. But I also, realize (both Secularly and Spiritually), that old laws, even sacred ones, must keep pace with the times, and with ever-changing societies in order to maintain their relevance.

    When it comes to GUNS, have we truly forgotten our past? Did we forget that most old (Wild) West townships, Bars, Schools, etc in an attempt to become “More Civilized”, required that you check your weapons at the door, or with the local Sheriff or Magistrate; many times even before entering their burgeoning townships and communities?

    And guns did not exist in biblical times, so that’s a none-starter. “God” or Jesus or whomever, could not be speaking of guns in “Revelations” or otherwise in any part of the “Bible”.

    Their were actually MANY “revelations” written back then anyway. So what true “authority” does any the one of them, even the one they finally just “picked” (and out of (SO) many during the Nicene Councils) ACTUALLY have? And do we really want to steer humankind toward an “Apocalyptic” course of events just to fulfill some ancient prophecy? Is that REALLY the BEST we can aspire to?

    The Source (God) I worship isn’t asking that of me: Just for my personal accountability, in becoming my “True Authentic Self”! And I’m not selling that or procelatizing to anyone.

    But we are not under Biblical Law in this Nation anyway (thank GOD!), regardless THEY, regular MEN, voted on that “Revelation”, and in much the same way we vote today! So too bad for them now if we all grow up and think better thoughts, and I guess by their own standards, too bad for “god” then, or did HIS words really make their final cut?

    Sorry, but I just don’t buy any “Unerring” arguments when it comes the Bible, to the Constitution, and guns, to my own beliefs, or to anything else.

    Once you shut down any other possibilities, you assassinate the future, and disregard your own ignorance.

    YES, please now attack me and tell me how I’m going to hell for not believing exactly as you do. Thus the arrogance of organized “Religion”. I have very deep Beliefs, but refuse to weaponize them!

    Not all of us Believe the same things: Nor should we. That’s also a RIGHT!

    “Those who do not learn from the past are destined to repeat it!” Or, as Forest Gump’s Mom would put it, “Stupid is as Stupid does”!

    It’s like we’re going backwards with all of this: Religion and Guns. “Open Carry” and/or “Concealed Carry” is nonsense, and “Religious Freedom”, doesn’t mean you get to make any ridiculous claims you want, and the greater society must just acquiesce. Conflating Religious Rights, or Biblical doctrine with GUNS (something that didn’t even exist when they cobbled that book together), is just obscene, and not only a very dangerous precedent, but sounds markedly insane.

    …And from an offshoot of the wacko Moonies; there’s a shock! It’s like were on the Planet of the Apes! What’s next, “The Church of the Holy Bomb”?!

    NO, we do not need to be taking away anyone’s RIGHT to own a gun, but we sure as hell need to regulate guns a lot better than we currently do, or at least enforce existing laws; and at very least, do as good a job with gun control as they did in the WILD WILD WEST: Which we seem to be revisiting.

    Sensible precautions such as licencing and mandatory training would be a great start…

    Okay, KNEE-JERK REACTIONS from that faction NOW! ATTACK!, I mean after you recover your tentative composure, but don’t! Please. Save it for some other zealot, because I won’t hold my breath on that one, and neither should you.

    But reality check, we’ve got a REAL problem here, that ignoring will not fix!

    Hell, you can’t even drive a car without a license and training, or do a lot of other things, like Law Enforcement, Medicine, or be on the Radio, and even practicing Cosmetology requires a license!

    BUT practically ANYONE can buy a gun!

    We at very least need ABSOLUTE background checks, and that includes Gun Shows and Online sales. Why is that even an argument?

    What’s the point of folks having to go through Legal Background Checks in stores (which the NRA doesn’t oppose), but not at gun shows and online (which the NRA very adamantly opposes)!

    What’s their AGENDA anyway; and why should our entire Country follow in goose steps with a rabid POLITICAL LOBBY?! … Especially one that caters mostly to Special Interests like Gun Manufacturers and the like?

    WHY are (should) Gun Shows and the Online Sales of GUNS be exempt from our EXISTING LAWS? And why should any city, town, or municipality be forced to allow Open Carry or Concealed Carry, or crazy “churches” to do either, and on any grounds: Civil, “Religious” or otherwise.

    BTW, the NRA wants Open Carry and Concealed Carry Permits to be transferrable across ALL State lines.

    So much for their dueling/conflicting arguments (when it serves them), of “States Rights” and Laws, and then for Federal “Constitutional Rights” (when it doesn’t)! Gun violence is out of control, and the NRA is outmoded!

    We need a serious discussion about all of this, and then some actual ACTION.

    It’s just too easy to attack, dismiss or poke fun at any opinions you disagree with, that run counter to your own, but how about we finally have a REAL discussion about guns and gun violence in this country, and about the real threat unchecked guns pose to our (eroding/semi) Civilized Society?! And we need to stop catering to Religions over Secular Society as a whole.

    We are all FREE to “believe” whatever floats our boats, but that “FREEDOM” does not include usurping the rights and freedoms of others.

    NO, (on their own) “Guns don’t kill people; People kill people”. That is absolutely TRUE! So how do we keep guns out of the hands of people who would use them to kill other people?

    “Impossible” too many say, “So we all need to be armed”.

    I just don’t believe that! It’s time to regulate (not confiscate), but REGULATE GUNS!

    The 2nd Amendment says we have a RIGHT to own Guns, but the “gun nuts” usually leave out that part that speaks about a “Well REGULATED Militia”.

    BTW, if the Feds do “come for your guns”, for those of law abiding Citizens, then count on me to stand with you in opposition to that!!!

    But “Citizenship” means more than “what do I get?”; it also means “What must I do to be a more responsible citizen, for myself, for my country and for fellow citizens!”

    Rhetoric sure isn’t a solution, but then neither is inaction in the face of tragedy. We need real actions and leadership on this one! I don’t believe better gun regulation is a slippery slope to confiscation. That’s the rhetoric (the lie) politicians getting money from gun manufacturers and gun salesmen propagate; for profit!

    Sadly they are profiting off of misery.

    “Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything” — Benjamin Franklin

  14. Steven P Robinson says:

    I have long tried to understand the Why of violent acts, regardless of what inanimate object the evil doer used.
    I still cannot wrap my head around the ability to to commit violence when one is not seeking to protect someone, or oneself.

    I am a veteran, and am trained to violence, but have always had the attitude that I am a protector, not a wrecker.

    Over the span of years I have been on Earth, there appears to have been a coarsening of our dealings with each other (in the aggregate). My dad liked to say one cause was the demise of front porch culture. Before TV and AC, folks would be out and about, or sitting on the front porch. You got to know the people next door and down the street as friends and neighbors. You watched out for each other.

    Sure, we had our fights, but a bloody lip or nose usually ended things. We shake hands and go on about our lives. Things did not fester as much. You had person to person contact.

    I do think we have lost a lot of that. I see it in myself, have always had a tendency to hermit up. Part of the reason why I try to be courteous in my online interactions.

    Twas too windy tonight, so tomorrow night I’m going to light a fire out in the yard (I have a worship spot built out there) and sit sharing a bottle of mead and my words with the Holy as I know it. The main thing is to mark that I have survived 33 months now after having surgery for pancreatic cancer. The average is 15 months.

    Good night all, try to reach out and do a kindness each day.

  15. Brien M Demartino says:

    Ok, we have gone way outta pail on this one. Let me try to reel this one in….
    1. I am a law abiding person. I am not great, I am not bad. I am just an average good person.
    2. I am spiritual and I keep that where it belongs, in my heart.
    3. I am a gun owner. I like to go target shooting, and my weapons are always properly stored.
    Ok, having that said, there are two descriptions that can be used for a building full of people with assault weapons.
    The first is a squad of TRAINED soldiers or police either in their barracks or performing their respective duties or training.
    The second description is a compound full of nut jobs waiting for the end of the world, or a second coming, or whatever netball reason they decide to use to justify having a building filled with nuts and assault weapons. And no, you do not just get to say a damn thing about your second amendment right to bear arms because you simply have no good justification for having that many people putting themselves in that much danger simply because they want to have a pissing contest.
    I believe in the second amendment . I also believe that it gets abused by so many idiots using it to justify their stupidity.
    I for one do not find this story funny at all. I think these people are irresponsible and clueless about the harm they do to decent people that own firearms. As a gun owner, it is my duty to make sure that MY second amendment right to bear arms is not put in jeopardy by nut jobs that want to see who can pee the farthest. If you dear reader cannot understand this simple yet important point, then you may be part of the problem.

    1. Linda Happenny says:

      A person can own them if they are responsible for their uses. For example :Hunting and going out to target practice so they can protect their home and property. Not taking guns away from them. The gun control is for domestic people not to have guns that are used for police and military uses so they can’t kill people for whatever reason. Why can’t people get this?

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        I have a few non-military appearance firearms as well as 1 that appears military (however, it is a semi-automatic, not capable of full automatic like a true military, or in some cases, police firearm), which can be found in police use around the country. The only firearm I own, my pump action shotgun, which I use for hunting, does not look “police” or Military,” yet the model is in use by both elements of the US Military and many Police Departments.

        If I might venture an observation? Appearance is not a good criteria.

        The only times in my life I came close to killing someone in a non-military setting, 1st was with a baseball bat, 2nd was with my fists. I did not face charges either time, the system was more interested in justice. I was defending young ladies, in both instances (about 4 years and 200 miles apart) from being sexually assaulted.

        I had access to firearms both times, but gave no thought to using one on another human.

      2. John Owens says:

        An AR15 is a non-military rifle. Why can’t people get this?

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          The Armalite Model 15 was originally designed by Eugene Stoner as a semi-automatic survival rifle for air crews.

          Robert Strange MacNamara and his Whiz Kids of JFK’s Defense Department got ahold of the design and ran with the idea of a lighter, smaller caliber rifle for the field soldier to carry, than the .30 caliber M-14 then in service. It was transformed into the M-16, a rifle capable of fully automatic function.

          The cartridge, known as one of intermediate power, was designed for survival hunting, and last ditch self defense.

          It has become popular for sport shooting because it is light weight, relatively easy to learn and the ammunition is inexpensive compared to full power cartridges like the .30-06.

      3. Barb Lanier says:

        Honestly Linda I do get where you’re coming from but there is a flip side to that philosophy. All that does is control honest people who own guns that wouldn’t be using them in that way to begin with. It wouldn’t be controlling criminals who can get those kind of guns on the black market anytime they like criminals don’t go through gun registrations and the likes of that. So it doesn’t solve the problem.

        1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          As many frequently and correctly point out Barb that is a failure of logic, if laws only effect the lawful then why have them at all?

          As is seen in other countries like the Uk and Japan gun control does indeed prove highly effective at minimizing rampage killings.

          Someone with a machete, hammer etc while dangerous can be tackled down by a few quick and brave souls with minimal harm.

          Psych profiles of rampage killers shows a correlation with and gravitation towards fire arms because they allow rapid distant attacks on massive amounts of people.

          1. John Owens says:

            Rampage killers can be brought down MORE quickly with a handgun.

  16. Elder Freddie Bell says:

    Amen! Very well said!

  17. T'Keren Valmaz says:

    This is just another cult of false christians using the bible and nationalism to create a militant cult. No true christian would want to own nor wield a weapon. A true christian is 100% turn the other cheek and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

    Blessing weapons is the kind of thing romans would do asking for Mars. The greeks Aries etc. This is a warrior tribal cult mentality and has no place in the modern age.

    I can respect the traditional blessing of swords practiced in the far east lands. But blessing guns nope I know of no modern faith built around a new age modern diety that places a gun up as a holy weapon and symbol and any that do are mere militant cults not groups of seekers of enlightenment banding together to share ideas and communities.

    1. John Owens says:

      They are just upsetting snowflakes. It was a publicity stunt.

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Oh look Owens is trying to use the derogatory term snowflake to attack those he holds in contempt. Because in his radical extremist mind anyone that does not think or believe like him is an enemy.

        Personally I think the guys in pink with pretty princess tiaras and babbling about their divine right to carry weapons sound like they think themselves special. maybe as special as snow flakes;)

        1. John Owens says:

          You need to stop fantasizing that you know what you are saying, because you really don’t.

    2. John Owens says:

      Look at T’Keren, who despises Christianity, prefers jihadis, and then says what no true Christian would want or do. As if. And to what nationalism do you refer? The photos shows more than one ethnicity there. Do you mean US nationalism? What could possibly be bad about that? We ARE a nation, after all. Not for long, if people like you have any say, but still, for the time being, we are. You can respect the traditional blessing of swords in the far east. So, you like anything that isn’t American. I sure hope you weren’t born in the US. It would be terrible to hate yourself.

  18. Carl says:

    America and it’s love affair with weapons of mass destruction has gone beyond the wildest of anyone’s imagination. They are now serving a GOD of violence, death and mass destruction period, and these religious leaders are the worst offenders.

    1. Dreamsinger says:

      Funny how a lot of folks were tortured, executed, or worse by the Church for pointing that out over the years.

      Those who do not learn from history… do not get to use ignorance as an excuse.

  19. Stephen Waters says:

    This is a funny conversation. I have never seen any object decide to hurt anyone. Until we invest back in our mental health in this country this will continue to happen. If they do not have an assault rife they will use pressure cookers and homemade bombs. Remember McVeigh? So it is clear you people want to ban a company’s name brand weapon? AR stands for Armalite Rifle Company and they are the one who gave us this design. It does not stand for Assault Rifle. I have had my home blessed so no big deal if they want to do their AR’S

    1. Dreamsinger says:

      A few months ago, Mother Nature was labelled a “bioterrorist” by Stony Brook University President Sam Stanley. He’s also the chairman of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity.

      Not to mention, the NRA is run by a guy who received a medical deferment for “nervous disorder”.

      We’re way past the point of no return, and about one bad decision away from large-scale Jonestown Redux.

  20. James Jimbo Jones says:

    Even God can’t fix that level of stupid.

  21. Glenville says:

    Speaking of weapons before guns existed, ‘Those that live by the sword will die by the sword. I thing this applies to guns in our age.

  22. Dreamsinger says:

    “What does God need with an AR-15?”

    If you truly believe that you need a semi-automatic military weapon to protect yourself in church… you might want to ask God for his identification.

    An omnipotent deity shouldn’t have to rely on earthly means so heavily.

  23. Dreamsinger says:

    I’m armed 24/7, yet never own or carry a single weapon.

    That’s how powerful a Swiss Army Nerd is.

  24. mkmangold says:

    I saw a photo of a Methodist minister blessing a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic, exclaiming that it (the clinic) was a site of “life and hope.” Really now? Is this any more moronic than this church?

    I believe that change for the better in this country can only come through a change in our society’s overall attitude defects simultaneously with our own personality defects. Apparently these people didn’t read my memo.

  25. Raymond T. Cottrell says:

    Awesome – my kind of church!

  26. Bill Fox says:

    Before it was sacked by the Romans, the Temple in Jerusalem had its own armed guards. The history of Judaism and Christianity is about a war between the Kingdom of Heaven and Satan the Devil. Government cannot enforce laws without weapons. Government exists because God allows it to exist.

  27. Jim says:

    Everybody is so serious! I saw the pictures in the article and laughed myself silly. C’mon, the five guys with the pink tunics and the plastic crowns from the Dollar Store? The newlyweds clinging to their rifle? Oh, you had to laugh at the guy with the crown of rifle cartridges. That stuff is funny.

    And it gets funnier. The subheading that reads, “Protesters Gathered Outside”. Yeah, all two of them. Hilarious!

    Now for the serious stuff. There is something in the article that caught my attention. They referred to one of the (two) protesters, Lisa from Scranton. Part of her quote is something I hear all the time. She said she “supports gun ownership, but…”

    Anyone that says, “I support gun ownership, but…” or “I support the 2nd Amendment, but…” is a liar. You don’t support. You say you do so that people that really do support gun ownership and 2A don’t immediately shut you out of any conversation. It’s misleading, and it’s shameful. So, for everyone’s sake, please be honest. You cannot support the 2A and be all for banning guns. You cannot support gun ownership by private citizens and be in favor of the government confiscating privately owned guns. Stop being disingenuous, please.

    Now I’m going to forward the pictures to some of my friends so they can have a good laugh.

    1. Sara Rawlins says:

      Jim, I’m a gun owner, in fact I have several pistols and rifles, no assault type weapon, all safely locked up, but where I can get to them if the need comes up so I can defend myself or my home and family. But something does need to be done to get guns out of the hands of the mentally ill who want to do harm to themselves or others. The need for an assault weapon only tells me that person has no regard for life and only wants to kill something. The damage done to the body by one of those weapons would make it a terrible weapon to use for hunting game. I do not want to see guns banned, but assault rifles need to be put in Armouries where they belong, for defending our country from foreign aggressors. Our forefathers got along just fine with the old flint-lock rifles for hunting and defending hearth and home.

      I support the 2nd Amendment, but common sense needs to be a factor in owning a gun. If we have to have a license to drive a car, which are deadly if driven by someone who doesn’t know how to drive, then a license should be issued to people who want to own a gun. I have no problem with that since my fingerprints are already on file for my permit to conceal and carry.

      1. Jim says:

        Thank you, Sara, for proving my point. Look at the beginning of your second paragraph: “I support the 2nd Amendment, but…” I don’t know what kind of guns you own (other than “pistols and rifles’), and I don’t care. If you shoot someone with one of your guns, they are just as dead as if you shoot them with an AR-15. It does no more damage to a body than any other firearm. And please stop thinking you know what everyone should use to defend themselves and their homes. You don’t.

        Everyone please stop thinking an AR-15 is soooo deadly and soooo scary. It’s no more deadly than a 9mm pistol, a 12 gauge shotgun, or a .357 magnum revolver. And for the 1000th time, AN AR-15 IS NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE!!! It is not used by the military. It is not fully automatic. It is a civilian rifle. Can we all stop being afraid of the big, bad, black rifle now, and start acting like intelligent adults? Please???

        Also, gun ownership is a right. Driving is a privilege. Don’t conflate the two.

        There is one thing you got right. We need to stop people with mental illness from getting their hands on guns. No question about it. To add to that, we need law enforcement to follow up on tips they receive in a timely fashion and to go after an active shooter and hide like cowards and wait for the shooting to stop.

        So, next time, Sara, try saying it like this: “I support the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership. Responsible people should be allowed to have whatever kinds of firearms they want. Criminals and the mentally ill are already prohibited from possessing firearms by law, and we should do everything we can to enforce that law WITHOUT compromising the rights of responsible gun owners.” Learn it. Know it.

        1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          There are very few humans who truly meet the qualification of responsible. Owning a gun is only called a right because of a man made document. It can and should be changed.

          Because guess what school kids are tired of being afraid of being used as target practice. They have the right to feel safe in their schools. The right to know that only those under extreme over sight like cops with body cams have easy access to high capacity firearms,

          Who do you need to defend yourself from that you think you or anyone needs more then a revolver or double barrel shotgun?

          Because the 2nd was never about self defense it was about being capable of revolution should the government grow corrupt. Since that is a lost cause of a fight in the age of viral weapons clinging to an archaic law simply makes no sense.

          1. Jim D says:

            T’Keren, first it depends on your definition of “responsible.” Anyone can have a momentary lapse in responsibility, like forgetting to lock the car door or to move the wet clothes from the washer to the dryer. Then there are those who are incarcerated. I think you can figure out which group should be prohibited from possessing firearms.

            Second, firearm ownership is not a right because of a document. If that’s what you think, I suggest a refresher course on middle school civics. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights do not grant rights at all. They simply document and enumerate them. In fact, the Constitution state our rights are unalienable, as in not capable of being repudiated. Our rights are granted to us by our very existence. Some like to say they are bestowed on us by our Creator, but I prefer to be a bit more secular about it.

            You ask, “Who do you need to defend yourself from that you think you or anyone needs more then a revolver or double barrel shotgun?” My answer to you is another question. Who are you to tell me or anyone else what I can or can’t use to defend my home, my family and myself? If your home is invaded by three or more armed assailants, are you going to be satisfied with a double barrel shotgun? I guess you think your aim must be really good. And if you think home invasions of that nature don’t happen, just do a google search and see how often they occur. Most are just burglaries, but some are far worse. Read the one that happened in Connecticut in 2007. Absolutely terrifying.

            Self defense takes on many forms, including defending oneself from a corrupt government. If you want to think fighting a corrupt government is a lost cause, that’s fine for you. Give yourself up, your family, your possessions and become a subject of a monarch, dictator or despot. That’s your choice. But please don’t make that choice for me or anyone else.

      2. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Sara the reason for the 2nd was to keep the government in check to avoid tyranny. However that reason is invalidated in an era where should the government decide to turn on the citizens all it takes is unleashing viral weapons cooked up by the CDC that they alone have the means to cure.

        And we the people will blindly allow it. Infect rural areas. quarantine said areas, make sure the news is thick with fear mongering about how if said infection escapes the isolation zone masses will die. Claim people are rioting and trying to escape. Napalm said area to ash. People who have no personal ties to said area will cheer.

        Eventually people will just accept said napalming as an acceptable evil and soon after those deemed problematic by the new tyranny can be burned down at will.

        Do you really think the UN, NATO, or anyone outside the country would raise a cry or come to the aid of our bloated over sized country? Nope We are too massive and seeing us turn on each other would make the world breathe easier.

        Owning guns might make you feel safer from fellow citizens. But they are meaningless against the tools of dictators.

        1. Sedonia Guillone says:

          I totally agree with you. Thank you for the rational, intelligence, finally!

        2. James says:

          Unfortunately… There is a lot of truth in T’Keren Valmaz words. As we are all (and the planet) poisoned by Gov & corporations, kept weak & divided (fearful of our neighbors). Ruby ridge & copious other grand shows of force that were mostly fraudulent based. Regulate guns? Maybe… Regulate stupidity. Not so easy.

          1. John Owens says:

            The Afghans and Viet Cong used firearms and booby traps combine with things they could take from their “imperialist” enemies very effectively. It goes on to this day in Afghanistan.

  28. XaurreauX says:

    Those bullet crowns are SOOOOO four centuries ago!!!

    1. Jim says:

      I don’t know. After seeing that picture, I think they might be making a comeback.

      1. Steven P Robinson says:

        I prefer a crown like one of my ancestors, Merovech of the Salian Franks, wore.
        Standard gold circlet with points.

        1. Jim says:

          Oh, forgive me, Your Majesty. I am but a worm. And the crown? Yes, very fashionable. 😉

          1. Steven P Robinson says:

            Then again, my connection to Merovech and $10 will get me lunch at a bag and gag fast food joint. 😉

    2. Sedonia Guillone says:

      “Those bullet crowns are SOOOOO four centuries ago!!!”

      Lol.

  29. Cameron grant says:

    I’m sorry but I’m having a hard time with this not being an American I just don’t get the whole gun thing and just how easy it is to get one I mean the whole idear that I can go to my local supermarket to pick up a loaf of bread and a pint of milk at the same time I can also pick up a gun is ludicrous and as far as the justification that the biblical quota of a rod of iron seriously a rod of iron aren’t guns made from steal had the quote stated been rod of steel then they might have had a bit of justification but not with rod of iron but hay there’s a reason people say only in America

    1. Steven P Robinson says:

      Actually, AR-15’s are mostly aluminum and plastic composites with only the barrel, springs, bolt and a few other small parts being steel (the main component of which is iron).

      Not many places one can purchase groceries and firearms/ammo these days.

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        Wal Mart. nuff said.

        1. Steven P Robinson says:

          That is one example, as is the gas station/convenience store at the other side of the county where I live. Both are in a small subset.

  30. Jim says:

    Cameron, you did not say where you are from. There are lots of things we Americans don’t get about other cultures too… like afternoon tea in England, yodeling in Switzerland, and not bathing regularly in… well… lots of other countries.

    The best way I can explain it is like this. Practically every other country around the world was run by a monarchy for a majority of its existence. Therefore it’s part of those cultures to be ruled, to be treated as subjects and not citizens. America is different. As a nation we have never had a monarch. In fact, we fought long and hard to break free from a corrupt king and live as free men, free citizens, not subjects. The founding fathers were keenly aware of how easily a government can be corrupted, and they took provisions for the people to be able to defend their liberty by recognizing the right to defend it with fire power. It was woven into the very fabric of our constitution and bill of rights. And we will defend that right from anyone, even our own government, if they try to take it away. The rest of the world can go ahead and be treated like subjects if they want. I like being a free citizen.

    As for the ease with which one can buy a gun, if the buyer is of age, has valid ID, no criminal record, no history of mental illness, no other reason that would prohibit possession of firearms, and can pass a background check, then yes, it is easy.

    As for the biblical quotes, forget them. All nonsense.

    1. Sedonia Guillone says:

      Someone else in the comments made a very valid point that if the US government wanted today to tyrannize us, they could easily use biological (or technical warfare as we have seen from the recent Russian attack on our electoral system). So while the founding fathers insituted the second amendment to allow us to protect ourselves from a corrupt government, they certainly did not take into account the developments of the future beyond guns, and they certainly did jot have assault rifles at the time of drafting the consitution. So this mania to have guns has become completely distorted, an addiction borne of fear that the NRA feeds in order to encourage as many sales as possible. It has become a dirty business and I firmly believe if our founding fathers could see us now, they would shit their knickers at the epic fail.

      1. Jim says:

        Sedonia, you are absolutely right. The government could use biological weapon against its own citizens, but I think it is unlikely. Bio-weapons have a nasty tendency to get out of control very easily, and the possibility of infecting an unintended part of the population is far too great.

        Nevertheless, just because the government has other weapons at its disposal (bio, cyber, etc.), that doesn’t mean we should just surrender ourselves and our weapons to the government and become subjects under a monarch, dictator or despot. We fight. No matter what the odds, we fight. We’d rather not. It would be far better to simply be free citizens and elect our representatives and hope they have our best interests in mind. It’s funny, I hear so many people complain about Washington and congress, and yet, we keep electing the same nudniks to office. It’s no wonder nothing changes and nothing gets better!

        You say the NRA is feeding us a fear to encourage gun sales. Maybe, but if you look at world history in the 20th century (in other words, not that long ago), there are numerous examples of governments disarming the citizens and then just imprisoning and/or slaughtering those that don’t tow the line. Hitler in Germany, Stalin in Russia, Pol Pot in Cambodia, Amin in Uganda, Castro in Cuba, and others. It’s not fear the NRA is feeding us. It’s recent history.

        And by the way, your name is quite lovely. Sounds like music.

        1. Sedonia Guillone says:

          Hi jim, that is true. My husband also says the biological weapons could affect the people using them too. I am not one who would repeal the second amendment or keep the populace disarmed. Being Jewish, I would be one of the last to say citizens should not be armed an fight back against a government who would slaughter them.

          However, the epidemic of mass shootings in our nation in rwe cent decades points to definite problems that need fixing ASAP.

          And thanks for the compliment. My husband gave me that sa my pen name. I am a romance auhor by trade.

          1. Jim D says:

            You’re welcome, Sedonia. There should be more complimentary comments instead of all the vitriol that usually show up on these forums.

            You have the right attitude regarding gun confiscation. Here is a link you will find very interesting. It was posted on another forum:

            http://jpfo.org/articles-assd03/kopel-catastrophic-consequences.htm

            If you ever need a cover model (like Fabio) for one of your books, give me a call… only if it’s a comedy… and only if your readership is blind and the book is in Braille. 😉

        2. Sedonia Guillone says:

          Jim, i looked at that a article yu sent. They embarrass me. Lol

        3. T'Keren Valmaz says:

          Actually Jim viral mutation is not nearly as problematic as popular fiction tends to portray it as. The CDC has for decades developed viral weapons and their cures. designer viral weapons are very stable and the chance of them mutating in a way not already seen during extensive testing is less then 1%

          And if used the goal would be to use them on isolated regions with the full intent to then napalm the region and get the population to cheer saying it saved them. Eventually people would grow used to entire towns being burned to ash they wouldnt even care beyond knowing they felt safe knowing another outbreak had been contained. And the media would be painting the out breaks as terror attacks deflecting all blame away from the government.

          The world would sit back and laugh thankful the over bloated country called the US was finally tearing itself apart.

          1. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Wow you have really thought this out.

          2. Jim D says:

            And from which sci-fi movie did you get this, T’Keren? Your scenario borders on the ridiculous. Anyone truly familiar with bio-weapons knows they have a nasty tendency of getting out of control very easily and turning on the ones that use them.

            As for the US tearing itself apart and the world laughing at us, that’s not likely. Without the US and its powerhouse economy, half the world would fall apart. There won’t be any laughing, except maybe from Putin and Kim. There are 20 nations in the world that control 80% of the world economy. And who do think holds the biggest chunk? You guessed it. The US is responsible for nearly 25% of the world’s economy. If the US were to fall tomorrow, who do think is going to step and be the big champion? China manages less than 15%, and they are not exactly known for being a big help to other nations. Russia? Less than 2%. Even Germany, the European champ, has less than 5%. And the last 20% of the world’s economy is shared by the other 175 nations. I doubt there are any Rocky’s waiting in that group to rise to the challenge.

            No, the US will be just fine. Sure, we have a few problems, and of course, when you’re as big as the US, the problems are big as well. But we work them out eventually.

            You might want to lay off the Netflix for a while. You’re starting to get a little… out there!

      2. XaurreauX says:

        Absolumundo! [I don’t know if that’s fake Italian or fake Spanish.]

        1. Jim D says:

          Definitely fake Spanish. But you’re actually very close to real Spanish, which is “absolutamente”.

          Sorry, brain full of useless trivia. Can’t make it stop.

          1. XaurreauX says:

            I am a walking encyclopedia of information that will do me absolutely no good.

        2. Sedonia Guillone says:

          I think it is actually Fonzie speak.

          1. Jim D says:

            Yes! That’s it. Excellent catch, Sedonia. Heeeeyyyy!!!

    2. T'Keren Valmaz says:

      You Mr Jim seem very bloated by the constant false propaganda fed to school kids. King George was not some vile tyrant.

      Lets take one of the big bits of our revolutionary history and tear into it. The Boston Tea Party. We all know about it right. Or do we?

      Did you know that the so called sons of liberty where mainly comprised of shipping merchants and ware house owners. They didnt care about peoples rights they wanted to make more money off people. They initially petitioned the crown to be allowed to add an additional tax to tea on their end and King Georges response was more or less “My loyal colonists already pay their fair due to the country that protects and sustains them you greedy merchants have no right to milk my people for your personal coffers.”

      So then using false propaganda they stirred the pot claiming the taxes where unjust, the king uncaring. Then once the revolution began people had to start giving even more to the new upstart merchant kings to help finance the war. They used nationalism and the idea of a militia to put the burden on the people. And after the war was done taxes on things where higher then they had ever been under the crown. The excuse well we just fought a war and need to finance the new fledgling government.

      A king is no better or worse then a president. And in fact a king who is actually raised right with the aristocratic ideals that a king is meant to look after and love his people like a father makes for a much better leader then someone like well every president we have had since like Teddy. Who was rather imperialistic and aristocratic in his views. He put the government for the people not the bosses as he called them, which where just his generations merchant kings.

      Merchant kings aka corporate share holders are not now and have never been other then in it for themselves and be damned the people.

    3. James says:

      As for the biblical quotes, forget them? All nonsense? For the most part, the biblical quotes hold weight. Humans Phaneron is the problem in biblical quote. The writings have been totally skewed into stupidity. Current interpretations of most scripture is a misunderstood joke. One big reason Atheist feel & believe as they do.

  31. Sedonia Guillone says:

    If I wanted to create a sick joke, I could not even conceive of this madness! Puke!

  32. Cameron grant says:

    Jim I’m from Scotland and whilst I have a lot of family in the u.s and I visit there regularly I do as a non American hear what you are saying about cultural differences and I don’t fault that I do question the ease of which guns are able to be gotten hold of then again is this really the problem there are country’s around the world where guns are as avalibil but don’t have the history of gun violence sister land for example has national service all there citizens have to serve in there armed forces and get to keep there kit at the end of there service point being there are very few houses in Switzerland that don’t have semi automatic fire arms in them yet Switzerland has the lowest gun crime in the world as for your second admen dent rights I personally think you should keep them as I worry that in today’s age if you take the guns away all we will see in the news is story’s about drone attacks on schools by deranged students rather than mass shootings however your point about background checks well my son has learning difficultys he has a mental age of a 4year old he got married to a u.s girl last year and now lives in California with her and her family he also has a record due to his disabilitys he is 27 years old and the first thing he did after he got married was buy a gun so your checks don’t work it would seem anyone can get a gun in the u.s regardless of background checks which need to be more strictly Inforced

    1. Jim D says:

      Cameron, you’re from Scotland? Awesome! I’ve always wanted to go there. It looks like beautiful country, and there’s nothing in this world like a fine single malt scotch. I envy you.

      As for your son and his purchase of a firearm, he had to pass a background check. Here is the link to the form he had to fill out:

      https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-transaction-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

      Read question 11f, then read the instructions for that question on pages 4 and 5. If your son answered the question incorrectly, then he broke the law and should not have been able to purchase the firearm. This is where he background check system falls apart. The databases that are accessed by NICS (National Instant Check System) are only as good as the data entered into them. This is why the shooters in the Florida school and the Texas church were able to purchase their guns. There was more than enough history for each of them that they should have failed the NICS check. But because law enforcement in Florida (locals and FBI) and the US Air Force (in the Texas shooter case) failed to do their jobs, a lot of lives were needlessly lost.

      Here’s the thing, Cameron. We have the laws. We have all the laws we could possibly want to protect us from the criminal use of firearms. But when law enforcement, the judicial system, and the mental health industry fail to do their jobs, we all suffer. More laws won’t help. They’ll just be ignored as well.

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        sorry jimmy dean sausages. private sales for example make it very easy to get a gun with no back ground check. All my guns Ive ever had I bought from old vets trying to raise funds to live on in retirement. Never have had to fill out a form or register to have them.

        Virtually all guns used in crime are gotten the same way. From private sales, from inheritance, from thefts into homes and cars. In fact the global gang MS 13 regularly ships weapons aquired here in the states to other countries that make it much harder for criminals along with everyone else to get guns.

        We are not just hurting ourselves we are the supplier of guns used violently all over the world.

        1. Jim D says:

          “Jimmy dean sausages?” That’s a new one.

          I’ve answered this before, but depending on your state laws, it is possible to buy a gun privately without a background check. You mentioned in another thread that you bought a revolver from an old vet in Reno, so I’m assuming you’re in Nevada. If you purchased any firearms after January 1, 2017 without a background check by an FFL, you and the private seller have committed a felony. You might want to consult an attorney about that. And there is no registration in Nevada.

          I don’t dispute that some laws could stand a little tightening up. I think private sales should be restricted to what I refer to as “familiar” people. Meaning they have to know each other (not necessarily related but didn’t just meet at a gun show or flea market), be from the same state, and know neither buyer nor seller is prohibited from owning firearms.

          “Virtually all guns used in crime are gotten the same way.” Not sure where that statistic comes from, but I think it’s wrong. I’ve seen studies that show 80% of guns used in crimes are do not legally belong to the user. It’s actually a very small number of guns used in a crime that are legally owned by the person committing the crime. Remember, all guns are legal at some point.

          I’m not sure what the reference to MS 13 is supposed to signify. MS 13 is a organization that engages in criminal activities. I doubt there is a single transaction involving a firearm that is legal where they are concerned. How in the world do you think they are acquiring guns legally? Doesn’t make sense.

          “…we are the supplier of guns used violently all over the world.” Uh, dramatic much? I hope when you say “we” you are not including me it that. I do not engage in criminal activities of any kind, let alone with guns. You should use better qualifiers. Try saying, “criminals are the supplier of guns used violently all over the world.” That would be more accurate. Don’t blame law-abiding gun owners your rant.

          1. James says:

            Pass all the laws one wants. They are NOT regulated crime, stupidity & greed. If the laws fail or one gets thru “the system” they do… Crime follows few if any laws.

  33. Cameron grant says:

    Hi Jim first thanks for your kind words about Scotland it truly is a stunning country and you really should visit if you can as for the malt yes I quite agree there’s nothing like a good 30yr old malt my faverot is Ladaig it has a light peat/salt tast that I’d recommend
    Anyway thank you for the information on the firearms application Iv just had a quick look at it and can see a loophole in question 11f as in Scotland you have to be diagnosed with a mental incabasity by a dr working in mental health which is not stated in the notes for the form this is where I would feel the laws need to be tightened up and have the loopholes closed I’m not against gun ownership I just feel that it needs to be better monitored as I’m sure you will understand as I come from somewhere where guns are not an everyday thing it can be hard to understand them when the last law we passed ment you now have to have a license to own a BB gun so we would seem to be at opposit ends of the spectrum on gun laws

  34. Cameron grant says:

    Sorry there Jim but my last reply to you seems to have been cut short for some reason what I was saying is that I agree with you regardless of where you or I am from the last thing we need is more laws what is needed is for the exsisting laws to be amended to close the exsisting loopholes as they say guns don’t kill people people kill people which is a wider debate that needs to happen in order to prevent more of the traggitys that have happened in the past the people that carry out these mass shootings have all been determined to do so and have spent time planning them to the extent that if you where to remove guns from the equation they would find another weapon to carry out the attacks
    Again thank you for helping me better understand the gun ownership process I know there’s no easy fix to this problem but it needs to be looked at

    1. Jim D says:

      My pleasure, Cameron. I actually work in the firearms industry (part time), so I have a ton of first hand knowledge. I would be happy to answer any questions about firearms and the law to the best of my ability.

      And now I’m going out to look for a bottle of 30-year-old Ladaig. Wish me luck.

  35. Archbishop Leonardo Marin-Saavedra says:

    The members of this false group called Church are false and in error. Jesus of Nazareth the founder of true Christianity had no weapons and never organized an army of armed men. He simply had 12 men called his apostles. That’s why he said it: “My Kingdom is not of this world.” The God made man repeated with elegance and diplomacy the best of the commandments: “Love one another as I am loved”. The Great Whore who speaks the holy gospel names the group of organizations that will praise the Anti Christ and one of them is the one of Pennsylvania. I regret that black people are in the picture and also that they follow the game to Satan. The promoter of evil and weapons, is Satan and is within these groups that have created false churches so that the sons and daughters of God forget God and follow the things of the world. The faces of the people in the picture look more like demons and evil spirits than human mortal terrors of Peace. I say no to war, No to armed armies. We must all close the dens and weapons factories. The land does not require military or police. If there were justice and love, there would be no problems on the planet of contradictions and we would live in peace, dignity and equality.

    1. Sedonia Guillone says:

      With all due respect, archbishop, jesus did not found christianity. Paul founded Christianity many years after Jesus’ death. Telling people that Jesus founded a religion has opened the door through history for all manner of atrocities committed in his name. It was Jesus who said to pray closed up in private so as not be a hypocrite like the publicans who pretend to be pious. Somehow, thta little fact has gone completely ignored. Jesus told each and every one of us that the kingdome of heaven is within you. That statement too seems to have gone completely ignored. After all, why would people need a religion to follow, telling them where god is when god is actually inside themselves? It makes me think of the pharmaceutical companies that outlaw herbs and other things that people use to successfully heal their own illnesses because it impinges on their profits. I do agree with you that if jesus’ original message was the abiding spirit, the land would not need a military and laws because love would guide everything, but that does not seem to be in the prigram for humanity and so laws are needed and the intelligent wise interpretation of them.

      1. T'Keren Valmaz says:

        You are very right Mrs Guillone. Far too many calling themselves christian seem confused by its origins. And correct me if I am wrong but in my talks with rabbinical scholars Ive been told that the ancient Hebrew prophecy of the messiah that Christians view Jesus as had as one of its requirements to be the messiah bringing peace to the world in his/her lifetime. This is why the jews did not consider jesus the christ if I understand it all right.

        1. Sedonia Guillone says:

          Yes that is right. Jesus was not the military leader they was expected to quell the enemies if the Jewish people. Either way, Jesus did not start Christianity. That is a lie.

        2. Sedonia Guillone says:

          The prophecy was for a military type of leader and that is why to this day Jesus is not considered the messiah although he is jewish. Honestly he never claimed to be the messiah. His message was that god is within each one of us and there was not a messiah outside of ourselves.

          1. Tom says:

            Sedonia…i believe you are correct about the message from Jesus…and any military person will fail as an alleged minister of God…Peace…Tom

          2. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom, which would mean that a majority of these ministers are alleged and have failed, as they use their position to collect scandalous amounta of money, condemn acts that they themselves engage in and condermn with hellfire and damnation whole populations because of their sedual orientation or race and who are just trying to live their lives peacefully. Jesus said judge not lest ye be judged, and as ye judge so shall ye be judged. And yet these so called christians judge everyone who isnt just like them and act as if those words of jesus don’t exist. The absolute gall to call themselves Christian is beyond comprehension, as is the case with these abominations in the article blessing their guns as they exchange sacred vows.

          3. Tom says:

            Sedonia…Agreed….Jesus did not want anyone to judge anyone else, and that is a wonderful message…he also never urged anyone to start a “religion”…unfortunately, as you said, there are a lot of people using religion to support themselves, both economically and psychologically, instead of simply being models of loving and caring, without the need of a “religion”…it is sad to me that so many people judge race, sex, ethnicity, finances, education, power etc…in the end, it hurts them, but they do not realize it…Peace…Tom

          4. Sedonia Guillone says:

            Tom yes we are on the same page with that.

    2. Gary Weyandt says:

      Luke 22:35-38 New International Version (NIV)
      35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”

      “Nothing,” they answered.

      36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[a]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”

      38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”

      “That’s enough!” he replied.

      1. James says:

        And Jesus drove a Honda… And, Moses rode an old British motorcycle. As stated, “For I did not speak of my own Accord…” – John 12:49. As evidenced by a Bible passage declaring that “the roar of Moses’ Triumph is heard in the hills.” POINT>>. Biblical teaching can be twisted, spun, interpreted as any reader wishes. As clearly indicated in some of the postings. Religious / spiritual growth is an internal, personal experience for PERSONAL development. Cast your pearls wisely.

  36. Cameron grant says:

    Thanks for that Jim I may well come pick your brains about gun ownership as you no doubt understand coming from a non gun oriatated culture I just find the ease of which gun ownership can happen don’t get me wrong there are a few guns here in Scotland it’s just extreamly hard to get a licence to own one here there are a few farmers I no that have shotguns and these have to be kept in gun safes with trigger locks on behind two sets of locking doors and the ammunition has to be kept in a different room again behind two sets of locking doors and these are checked before a licence is issued as well as annually to ensure they are properly ment ain’t even then you can only have a single barrel or double barrel gun no pump action allowed I think it’s deliberately made difficult to discourage ownership I myself find it hard to understand how you don’t have to prove your capable of using correctly any firearms if you look at it a kind to what you had to do to get your drivers licence hours of practis and testing to ensure you were compadent enough to be let losse on the roads
    Anyway hope you find that bottal you will need deep pockets if you do as it ant cheep

  37. secretary3rd says:

    Sounds like the Irish are doing what Irish always have done. God, whiskey and a gun all go hand and hand.

  38. Tom says:

    No ” religious ” organization promotes violence, without abdicating its alleged spirituality…Tom

    1. Jim D says:

      Tell that to ISIS.

      1. Tom says:

        Jim…ISIS, and most other “religions” may say they are spiritual, but they are not…anyone advocating violence is not spiritual…Peace…Tom

        1. Jim D says:

          That is your opinion, Tom, but from ISIS’ point of view, they would argue they are very spiritual. In fact, they would probably argue they are far more spiritual than you are. They are willing to kill and die for their religion. Are you willing to say the same?

          I didn’t say they were rational, just religious.

          1. Tom says:

            Jim…i feel you are entitled to your opinion…for myself, i am certain that religions are a negative, and any religion and any persons willing to kill and die for their religions are generating more karma to resolve; not spirituality…Peace…Tom

          2. Sedonia Guillone says:

            “Jim…i feel you are entitled to your opinion…for myself, i am certain that religions are a negative, and any religion and any persons willing to kill and die for their religions are generating more karma to resolve; not spirituality…Peace…Tom”

            BINGO

          3. Jim D says:

            Tom, thanks for explaining that. Now I get your meaning, and I happen to agree with you on that..

          4. Tom says:

            Thanks, Jim…sorry I was not clear…Peace…Tom

        2. James says:

          ISIS is NOT a spiritual / religious group… They are a tyrant that milks the Koran (teachings) to their spin to justify an already existing skewed perspective. What better god to believe in than one that uses a weapon as a tool as such to encourage faith.

  39. Rev. Ned says:

    I gotta say, that’s a pretty diverse congregation, AND their firearm safety is exemplary. Notice the orange wire ties indicating that every arm was unloaded and, maybe, inspected by someone who put the wire ties on the weapons. I don’t find this scary at all.

  40. James says:

    Aloha, These ppl are making a statement. NOT worshiping the AR or AK. Bless ones food, bless ones neighbor, Bless ones possessions, Its good to bless “everything”. Including ones mindset & attitude. Guns NOT kill, ppl do.

Leave a Comment