Gun Control

All registered users can post here.
User avatar
Tuly
Posts: 4388
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:16 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Tuly »

I have been reminded that as a parent of adult children, I need to send clear messages of where I stand in each situation, when I don't, I send mix messages to our children. Dad has tried to be clear in some topics and has clearly offended some of his children. So now you see the dilemma. However, we are clearly commanded to teach our children correct principles and then let them govern themselves, that doesn't mean that once we teach correct principles we ignore their choices. Dad and I can not ever do that even when we die you will hopefully remember those principles, it should be easy since you read your scriptures and follow the counsel of our prophets. So with that in mind;

1. I am grateful for our constitution and support the right to bear arms, hence not gun control. I'm so grateful to live in this country and to be a citizen of this country. That we can speak freely about guns without being banned, is an incredible gift given to us by the blood of many people who I believe saw the future of this nation and gave us this gift for freedom of speech and to bear arms, among other freedoms.

2. I'm sorry Betsy that you will ignore Steve's posts, he is not forcing his religion down your throat, but principles that we need to be reminded of. I understand your passion to this cause and mental health. Because this is a public forum we will disagree or agree with you, hopefully you will not feel defensive because you are offended. When I'm offended I personally can't think clearly and take everything personally so I loose the purpose of my cause. I'm sure that is not your intention.
"Condemn me not because of mine imperfection,... but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been." Mormon 9:31
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

Gainesville man holds thieves at gunpoint until police arrive
By Jeremy Thomas | Posted: Wed 10:22 PM, Jun 01, 2016 | Updated: Wed 10:52 PM, Jun 01, 2016
GAINESVILLE, Texas (KXII)

A Gainesville man had tens of thousands dollars worth of electrical equipment stolen on Monday. But after filing a report with police, he took matters into his own hands.

Electrician Brian Jackson noticed three men with his tool bags near his home. He then pulled out a gun holding them there until police arrived.

"8:15 in the morning, I stroll out to the truck and my toolbox was wide open," Jackson said. "And I already knew what happened."

Jackson knew his tools were stolen from in-front of his own home just south of Highway 82 and North Grand.

"Knockout kits, your typical hand tools, some pretty expensive meters, line locators and a jack hammer," Jackson listed some of the items stolen.

More than $20,000 of equipment gone. But after going for a drive to clear his head, he circled back home and made a discovery, just next door.

"The victim had seen three suspects who were carrying some of his property, some of his tool bags," said Gainesville Police Chief Kevin Phillips.

Just 90 minutes after reporting the theft, Jackson took matters into his own hands.

"I hit my brakes," Jackson recalled. "They fell right in line like they were guilty. I hit my reverse lights, and it just played out. I pulled in with my .45, and I got their attention."

Jackson held the suspects at gunpoint until police arrived.

"'Bring me my tools, and you can go ahead and have a seat. Your rescue is on the way,'" Jackson recalled telling the thieves. "And I meant it. I didn't have any intention on using it. I just wanted their attention."

"We have been familiar with the subjects in the past," said Chief Phillips. "We're not looking at any charges with the displaying of the firearm. He was lawfully making an attempt to recover his property."
so let it be written... so let it be done.
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

Police: Aiken woman shoots husband in self-defense
Aiken Standard, by Tripp Girardeau, June 1, 2016, 7:41 pm; updated June 2, 2016, 6:01 am

Aiken Department of Public Safety officers obtained arrest warrants Tuesday for an Aiken man following a domestic incident, which ended with him getting shot in the leg by his wife.

Officers responded to Taylor Street around 5:30 a.m. after a 49-year-old Aiken woman called claiming her 50-year-old husband assaulted her while their 12-year-old daughter was present, a report provided by the Aiken Department of Public Safety said.

According to the report, the suspect had a gunshot wound to his leg and he claimed his wife had shot him.

Officers spoke with the victim who claimed the suspect hit her in the face before putting both hands around her neck and choking her in their bedroom, the report said.

The victim told officers she pulled her .22 caliber pistol out and shot the suspect out of fear for her life, according to the report.

Investigators reported finding the firearm on top of the refrigerator.

The suspect told police his wife “came after him” during an argument over money and he pushed her against the wall to get her off him, according to the report.

He claimed she went to their bedroom, came out with the firearm and shot him, the report said.

The couple’s daughter told police she had witnessed her father choke her mother and saw her mother shoot her father, according to the report.

Officers reported obtaining arrest warrants against the suspect for first-degree domestic violence and unlawful conduct toward a child.

The victim will not be charged for shooting the suspect at this time, because she was acting in self-defense, the report said.
so let it be written... so let it be done.
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

DA: KILLING OF ROBBER AT LEVITTOWN PHARMACY A 'PUBLIC SERVICE'
By Dann Cuellar, Friday, June 03, 2016 11:31PM
LEVITTOWN, Pa. (WPVI)

The pharmacy owner who shot and killed a robber on Friday morning in Levittown, Bucks County, will not face charges - and was even praised by the district attorney.

During a news conference on Friday afternoon, Falls Township Police Lt. Henry Ward said Pennsbury Pharmacy owner Kenneth Lee "had no choice to do what he did. He was protecting himself and his business."

District Attorney David Heckler wholeheartedly agreed.

"There is no thought that we would prosecute the shooter in this case. He was entirely justified in his conduct, and frankly should be commended," Heckler said.

"From what I can see, he performed a public service in taking out this fella," Heckler continued. "The fella asked for what he got and he got it."

Meanwhile, police are still seeking to identify the man who was killed.

Investigators have released a photo of his distinctive tattoo in the effort to ID him.

Authorities say they are going to try to identify the man through fingerprints, but are asking anyone who recognizes the tattoo to call police.

The shooting happened Friday morning at the pharmacy on New Falls Road.

Police say the armed man, who was wearing a Halloween mask, got out of the passenger's seat of a minivan - leaving the driver in the vehicle - and headed into the store. He tried to mask his gun with an umbrella, but the owner was ready.

"He has a good camera system, so he actually saw the subject come into the store with the shotgun," said Lt. Ward. "He was prepared for the armed intruder."

Ward said the pharmacy owner warned the suspect multiple times, but the man crossed the room and jumped the counter.

Investigators say the owner fired nearly a dozen shots at the armed man, striking him numerous times.

Sources say it appears the robbers intended to clear out the pharmacy. The dead man had zip ties by his body, so it appears he was going to tie up the pharmacy owner.

The other suspect remained in the minivan, and was unaware of the shooting.

When police descended on the pharmacy, he was still in the vehicle. That man, identified as Kim Goldsboro, is now in custody.

He tells authorities his memory is fuzzy about what happened, and he doesn't even know the dead man's name.

Along with robbery, Goldsboro will also face homicide charges because he allegedly had a role in the crime that led to his co-conspirator's death.

He has been remanded to the Bucks County Correctional Facility without bail.

As for Lee, he was questioned and released.

Neighbors applaud his courage.

"I'm glad he had the weapon to defend himself," said Chad Gullick, customer. "I support guns and everything like that for reasons like this."

"Everything that we see at this point, this poor gentleman that poured his heart and soul to open this store, lone employee, had no choice to do what he did," said Lt. Ward. "He was protecting himself and his business."
so let it be written... so let it be done.
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

here's an interesting church news article from 1990. president gordon b. hinckley had accepted a "good citizenship" medal from the utah society of sons of the american revolution. he stated that the bill of rights is "one of the most significant accomplishments in the history of all mankind," and that it guarantees "natural rights which come from God, and over which the federal government has neither authority nor jurisdiction." he spoke about each of the first ten amendments to the constitution, one by one. he made specific mention that the first and second amendments are under challenge.

as a sidenote, the article mentions that president hinckley descended from mayflower passenger stephen hopkins. we also descend from hopkins.
President Hinckley honored for example as 'a good citizen'
Church News, Published: Saturday, May 12, 1990

Honored as one who "personifies the qualities of a good citizen," President Gordon B. Hinckley received the Utah Society of the Sons of the American Revolution's Good Citizenship Medal May 4.

Rodney H. Brady, former president of the society, read a citation honoring President Hinckley, first counselor in the First Presidency. The Church leader was recognized for his respect for the Constitution and the law, love of the nation and its symbols, concern for the "self-evident" truths defined in the Declaration of Independence, active participation in self-government, and devotion to the principles of freedom.The society's president, R. Bert Carter, presented a silver Good Citizenship Medal to President Hinckley, along with a Sons of the American Revolution membership certificate. President Hinckley is a descendant of Mayflower passenger Stephen Hopkins. One of his forebears, Thomas Hinckley, was governor of Plymouth Colony from 1681-1692.

After accepting the award, President Hinckley spoke of the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, commonly known as the Bill of Rights. He referred to the Bill of Rights as "one of the most significant accomplishments in the history of all mankind."

President Hinckley read and commented on each article of the Bill of Rights. He noted it is interesting that the first item provides that Congress "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

He said, "One who stands where I stand knows something of the constant threat of the heavy hand of government against religion. It is felt at the local level, at the state level, at the federal level. In recent years it has grown in strength and the attacks have increased in frequency."

Of the rights guaranteeing free speech, a free press and peaceable assembly, he said, "The history of tyrants is a history of the muzzling of free expression and the granting of assembly." He spoke of being in a country in the 1960s when a military coup occurred. Awakened at 4 a.m. by cannon fire in the street, he turned on the radio to learn what was happening.

"It had become the first target of those taking over the government," he said. "The newspapers followed. Freedom of the press was abridged. Freedom of speech was abridged. Freedom of assembly was abridged. These were primary targets in taking control of the nation and its people."

President Hinckley said that in a time when there is so much violence in the nation's major cities, the provisions of the second article, which deals with the right to keep and bear arms, are under challenge.

The third article proclaims that no soldier "shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

"This," explained President Hinckley, "was an expression of a fear of a large standing army which should become a threat to the people."

He spoke of the fourth article, which guarantees the rights of people to "be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. . . . "

He said people in other lands who have known the dreaded knock in the night know how precious a protection of such a provision can be.

He spoke of the fifth article, which deals in part with the matter of double jeopardy - such as one not being tried twice for the same charge and the right of a defendant to not be compelled to be a witness against himself.

"This," said President Hinckley, "covers such a universe of public justice and the protection of the citizen. . . ."

President Hinckley spoke of the sixth article, which deals with the right to trial by an impartial jury and of other rights of the individual on trial. He noted that in this article are set forth great, basic and fundamental rights that have been enjoyed by Americans for 200 years, while millions over the earth have been denied such rights.

He cited the seventh article, which deals with the right of trial by jury in civil suits, and the eighth article, which provides that excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

He said the ninth article, in effect, says that the inclusion or omission of specific rights shall not become a denial of those rights to the people.

The 10th article, he said, specifically reserves to the individual states those powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution.

President Hinckley concluded, saying the first 10 amendments to the Constitution are "so basic and fundamental in guaranteeing to all citizens those natural rights which come from God, and over which the federal government has neither authority nor jurisdiction."
so let it be written... so let it be done.
User avatar
Steve
Moderator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Provo, UT

Re: Gun Control

Post by Steve »

Cool, Ian, thanks for sharing. Once you know the truth, it's much easier to cast aside the falsehoods spread in our day.
When God can do what he will with a man, the man may do what he will with the world.     ~George MacDonald
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

we were blessed to attend the dedication of the san diego temple. in that dedicatory prayer, president hinckley stated:
We thank Thee for this nation under whose inspired Constitution we enjoy freedom of worship and freedom to build these sacred houses. Bless this land, we pray Thee, and bless those who govern that the precious liberties enunciated in the Bill of Rights may never be abridged nor taken from the people. Strengthen the cause of freedom among the nations of the earth.

President Gordon B. Hinckley, San Diego California Temple Dedicatory Prayer, Ensign, July 1993
so let it be written... so let it be done.
User avatar
Steve
Moderator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Provo, UT

Re: Gun Control

Post by Steve »

Speaking of the Bill of Rights:
Do you not regard the Constitution of our nation with respect and veneration? Have you not taught your children that the Declaration of Independence is the highest bill of rights which man has ever bequeathed to man? Have you not held up to them for emulation the character of the father of his country, the great George Washington? When recently gazing upon his monument in Washington, D.C. which has been so many years in building, I asked myself the question: Is all this mass of polished marble being accumulated and put together with such accurate nicety and at such vast expense because George Washington was willing to float with the current of public opinion, right or wrong, or is it because he had those noble sentiments which beat and throb in generous hearts for freedom? He, while possessing many ideas of the English aristocratic school, was no weathercock to be turned by the passing breeze. How few men in the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, appear to have been close students of history. Had they been such they would have seen in the characters of Washington, Jefferson, and the Adams's something far different from that possessed by the average statesmen of our day. Close students of history should be able to sense the fact, that in emergencies when the waves of popular feeling run high, great men whose hearts beat for liberty and freedom come to the front but they do not float with the tide, nor are they swerved by prejudice or biased by public opinion. ...

Public opinion, backed by persecution, drove our fathers across the deep, and planted the Pilgrims upon Plymouth Rock, ready to perish if needs be for God and liberty. Had they been of the class predominating today in our National legislature, a free government on this land would have been unknown to the present generation. But they were noble, self-sacrificing men who, loving liberty better than life, could neither cringe to the dictates of kingly power nor bow to the behest of priestly authority. Hence, that conscience might be free and God worshipped accordingly, they braved the dangers of the sea in search of a land of freedom, a home for the oppressed. And here, upon the choice land of Joseph, still persecuted and hated, the survivors prospered and grew and became strong under the blessings of God, until their noble hearts and generous brains produced thoughts and actions that led to one of the grandest and most successful efforts, in the interest of human freedom, the world has ever known. ...

Traitors may arise and seek to trample upon the provisions of the Constitution, but right here in these mountains—on the backbone of the continent—will grow the men who will preserve intact that sacred inspired charter of human rights, under the just provisions of which millions will rejoice long after usurpers and traitors shall have been buried in oblivion. And right here in this connection I desire to repeat what I have said in public once before. In reviewing the tribulations through which the Saints have passed, and while contemplating the wrongs which they have endured at the hands of despoilers, I have felt and said, rather than be robbed as my father on several occasions was, on account of his religion, I would endeavor to have facts plainly submitted to the President of these United States, so that he might fully understand the situation, and then, before I would permit my possessions—the hard earnings of year's of toil—to go into the hands of those who covet our property, and who would rob us, as our fathers were robbed, I would deed it to, and make a present, if he would accept it, of all the property I have to the President and his successor in office forever, as a perpetual reminder, that here, in free America, whole communities of citizens have been plundered, persecuted and deprived of the peaceful possession of property without cause and without redress. ...

Of one thing we are certain: that which is a crime to an individual or a community cannot become a virtue in lawmakers, even though advocated as an expedient. ...

Let us maintain the Constitution of our country, and all laws enacted in conformity therewith, realizing that the destruction of the Constitution must lead to the ruin and destruction of the Union.

(Elder Moses Thatcher, General Conference, April 1882)
I expect we shall continue to contend for liberty, not with physical weapons but with steadfast moral courage, despite the Edmunds' law, despite the Poland law, despite the law of '62, or any other law that may be made in violation of the Constitution, and of the Bill of Rights. We shall have to contend unceasingly for those principles, without wavering or yielding one iota in our determination.

(President George Q. Cannon, Discourse delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Sunday, June 25, 1882)
I appeal to you now, during this heated political contest, regardless of party, partisanship or politics to stand for America; to stand for the Constitution of the United States; to cast your vote only for those who have the character, the manhood, the stamina to live the law ; vote only for those who when they take that sacred, that solemn oath of office which says that they will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States will have the honor, the integrity, and enough of the genuine spirit of America to live in accordance with that pledge.

(Elder Richard R. Lyman, General Conference, October 1932)
What is that destiny? It is that this government of ours shall persist; it shall continue; it shall never be thrown down; no enemy that comes against it shall ever triumph—upon this one condition, that the people to whom the Lord has given these bounteous blessings; these miracles which have come to the earth during my lifetime, these people who have grown from an exceedingly small beginning to be the wealthiest, perhaps the most important in influence—I believe I am justified in saying it—that there is in the world—upon condition that they serve the Lord of the land, who is Jesus Christ. ...

I have faith in the soul of these American people which God has brought to this land. He has said, and I am only repeating his words, that the nation shall persist, that it shall be able to meet any emergency that shall arise if it will only, as I have stated, have faith in the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ. ...

Do I exaggerate when I say that men are elected to office who are unworthy, and never should have been chosen? Every man who goes to the Congress of the United States holds up his hand and covenants with God that he will obey the Constitution of our country, and then frequently he goes right out and violates it. It applies to men who are sent up to our legislature. They enter into that covenant and then disregard it. I know how I should feel if I did a thing of that kind. I would know that I was a perjurer and I would expect to be impeached and sent home where I belonged. Some such method as that will have to be adopted before our house cleaning will be complete. ...

I believe that in many instances we have become so accustomed to and so committed to party rule, to arrangements made by professional politicians, regardless of the real voice and desire of the people, that we have felt it our duty to follow them whether they are right or wrong. Just a word of solemn warning: I say to you regardless of party politics, regardless of your past affiliations, in this time of extremity, and it is a time of extremity, see to it that honest men, wise men, capable men are sent to represent you in the organizations of the country, the bodies which formulate our laws and appoint the men who administer them. You know that the constitution of the United States gives Congress certain privileges and rights. There are certain other sacred privileges and rights that it does not confer upon them and that they should not be permitted to overstep. ...

I fear this, that under existing conditions we are gradually drifting toward a paternal government, a government which will so intrench itself that the people will become powerless to disrupt it, in which the lives and liberty of the people at large may be jeopardized. They are pouring millions of dollars in this time of need into sources for the benefit of the people and it is a great benefit and perhaps salvation, but it is going to result in this—I am going to make this statement—that if the present policy is continued it will not be long until the government will be in the banking business, it will be in the farming business, it will be in the cattle and sheep business, for many of these debts will never be paid. That will mean the appointment of innumerable agencies. The government now is overloaded with commissions and agencies, some of them administering the very laws that Congress itself has enacted. Someone else should be administering those laws. If you want to save yourselves from the bondage of debt and political influences which are not of your own choosing I ask you to think of what I have said.

(President Anthony W. Ivins, General Conference, October 1932)
We should at all times be willing to sustain the great Bill of Rights in our own country, to sustain and uphold the laws here.

(Elder Joseph L. Wirthlin, General Conference, October 1938)
The perils of these times justify some comment. May I be pardoned if I repeat now some things I have said on other occasions.

In September, 1923, eighteen years ago, at a religious service in this Tabernacle, I mentioned certain trends I then saw. They were: a spirit of revolution that threatened the very foundations of government everywhere, indeed the destruction of the existing bodies politic of the world; the unrestricted immigration of aliens who were foreign and in tradition hostile to our systems of government; the enhancement of the power of the Federal Executive; the breaking down of the mutual independence of the three branches of government,—executive, judicial, and legislative the disappearance of local self government and the assumption of control by the Federal Government of the very details of our lives; the curtailment of our constitutional guarantees under the Bill of Rights; the building of class in our nation and of class conflict and hatred; the spread of Bolshevism, we call it Communism now, working for the overthrow of our government, the doing away with religion, even the overturning of our family relationships.

During the eighteen years passed since then, I have on all opportunities repeated these observations. I will leave you to make up your own minds how far these trends have become realities. ...

No man, of his own power, sees the end. But the end the revolutionists seek is fairly clear; it is the overturning of the whole existing order, political, financial, economic, social, religious, the complete destruction of our Constitution and the government established under it, and then the setting up of some sort of despotism that shall destroy, in all these fields, the free agency which the Lord gave to man. The revolutionists plan that this is to be largely done during the war, under the plea of war necessity; it is to be continued after the war under the excuse—if we are not then too cowed to require an excuse—that this new political order is necessary that we may rehabilitate the world.

Knowing as we do that God set up this Constitution of ours and that He has declared it "should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles," (D. & C. 101 :77) it is the duty of every member of the Church to protect and defend the Constitution against any and all attack. In this country our lawful political allegiance runs not to any man, not to any party, not to any "ism," but to the Constitution of the United States and to the free institutions set up under it. There can be no tampering with the "just and holy principles" of the Constitution. No true Latter-day Saint can or will do other than reverence the Constitution; each will do all in his power to save it from pollution or destruction. ...

Too many of us of this land have not hearkened to the voice of the Lord, nor observed His laws and commandments. The offenses of the peoples of the earth have been great; the eternal law seems to be that there must be an equal atonement. Jesus said to His disciples: "Woe unto the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh! (Matt. 18:7.)

But in all the afflictions we now have or that loom up ahead, it is my faith that the Lord is at the helm, for this is a major event in the history of man. It is my faith that nothing has happened and nothing will happen that is contrary to His plan or that is against His will. In the final event, God does not permit any trifling with His decrees.

(President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., General Conference, April 1941)
The chief author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, was not only an inspired man in what he advocated, but I believe he was blessed with the gift of prophecy. I should like to read a Jeffersonian prophecy to you:

"The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may become persecutor, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right, on a legal basis, is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war (of the Revolution) we shall be going down hill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of the war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."

And as I view conditions today in the light of Jefferson's prophecy, a great apostasy has taken place from "the law and the testimony" of American democracy, or the Constitution of the United States. Just as there has been an apostasy from the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, there has been an apostasy from those divinely given principles of Government which have been transmitted to us by the inspired men who founded this great nation. ...

Many Governmental policies now in operation are being imposed upon the people without their consent or knowledge. In contemplation of these conditions, it can readily be seen that a great apostasy from "the law and the testimony" of the American democracy, the Constitution, is taking shape and form.

Furthermore, the people are being lulled to sleep by an opiate called "borrowed prosperity." As Jefferson indicated, the people are so inclined toward the gaining of wealth they are forsaking the fundamental law of this great republic. ...

I point out these few facts to you in substantiation of the point that as a people and a government we are on the high road of apostasy from that inspired Bill of Rights bequeathed to us by the founders of this great republic. ...

And in making an effort for the preservation of our great Bill of Rights, may we do so energetically and willingly that others seeing our example will be inspired to follow after us and not for one moment to continue in the lethargy we are now in...

(Elder Joseph L. Wirthlin, General Conference, October 1941)
The preservation of our inherited liberties and of our God-given free agencies is worth every thing necessary for us to give in order that we might re-possess and maintain them. Otherwise, will not the America of the future be devoid of the essentials that have made the America we inherited, a land of glorious promise?

(Elder Joseph F. Merrill, General Conference, October 1941)
So, brethren, I wish you to understand that when we begin to tamper with the Constitution we begin to tamper with the law of Zion which God Himself set up, and no one may trifle with the word of God with impunity.

Now, I am not caring today, for myself, anything at all about a political party tag. So far as I am concerned, I want to know what the man stands for. I want to know if he believes in the Constitution; if he believes in its free institutions; if he believes in its liberties, its freedom. I want to know if he believes in the Bill of Rights. I want to know if he believes in the separation of sovereign power into the three great divisions: the Legislative, the Judicial, the Executive. I want to know if he believes in the mutual independence of these, the one from the other. When I find out these things, then I know who it is who should receive my support, and I care not what his party tag is, because, brethren, if we are to live as a Church, and progress, and have the right to worship as we are worshipping here today, we must have the great guarantees that are set up by our Constitution. There is no other way in which we can secure these guarantees. You may look at the systems all over the world where the principles of our Constitution are not controlling and in force, and you will find there dictatorship, tyranny, oppression, and, in the last analysts, slavery.

I have said enough. I believe you understand what I have said. Today, our duty transcends party allegiance; our duty today is allegiance to the Constitution as it was given to us by the Lord.

(President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., General Conference, October 1942)
The inspired founding fathers formulated a system of government with checks and balances protecting the freedom of the people. But even this was not enough. The first order of the new congress was to draw up a Bill of Rights—ten amendments guaranteeing for all time the fundamental freedoms that the American people insist are theirs by the will of God, not by the will of government.

(Elder Ezra Taft Benson, General Conference, October 1958)
...and yes, this is all very much on topic.
When God can do what he will with a man, the man may do what he will with the world.     ~George MacDonald
User avatar
Steve
Moderator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Provo, UT

Re: Gun Control

Post by Steve »

Joseph Smith described the constitution as a "heavenly banner," a "glorious standard."

One of our great international lawyers, President J. Reuben Clark, Jr., at one time declared:

". . . Out of the depths of eternal truth was born the Constitution of the United States . . . It is my conviction that God inspired the indicting of that document, the Constitution becomes sacred scripture to me. It is the greatest political heritage ever bequeathed by fathers to their posterity. God grant that we may preserve it." ("Gratitude for our Heritage," pp. 910.)

And the Lord himself has declared that "it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another. And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this . . . purpose" (D&C 101:79-80). And he said that it "should be maintained for the . . . protection of all flesh" (D&C 101:77).

Thus, under the guidance of the Lord was established a government based upon a written constitution in which were set forth the laws whereby its citizens were to maintain their freedom, freedom for us—

To live,
To pray and worship,
To work,
To own property,
To keep and bear arms,
To educate our children,
To assemble together,
To be tried by a jury,
To speak without fear of being cast into jail,
To go where we choose and do as we wish, so long as we do not jeopardize the rights, the welfare, and the safety of others.

Doubtless in all the world there is no document to compare with this "heavenly banner," this "glorious standard," the Constitution of the United States! ...

To be a good citizen, we should learn for ourselves what is set forth in the constitution. This knowledge can be obtained only through individual study of the document itself. We must not only study it, but we must also guard it. It was Daniel Webster who uttered these prophetic words: "Watchful guardianship over the Constitution is the proper means for its support." ...

It is the obligation of parents to acquaint their children with this great document:

1. That they may have understanding of and appreciation for the principles that make their liberty and freedom possible.
2. They should be taught as well what their personal obligations will be when they become mature citizens of the United States.
3. We must see to it that they learn the factual history of our country.
4. They must be made to recognize and resist the constantly fomented ideologies that threaten the very life of our republic, the individual liberties of our people, and the God-given heritage of freedom. One of the greatest contributions of a free people is to transmit that freedom to their children.

We must remember that reverence for and obedience to law should begin in the home. President David O. McKay has warned that "no greater immediate responsibility rests upon the members of the Church, upon all citizens of this Republic, and of neighboring Republics, than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States." (The Improvement Era, May 1950, p. 378.) ...

Like the patriots of old who, under extreme difficulties and discouragements, hammered out our constitution, may we say of that inspired document:

"And for the support of this with a firm reliance upon the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our, fortunes, and our sacred honor." (Declaration of Independence.)

I pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

(Elder ElRay L. Christiansen, General Conference, October 1967)
When God can do what he will with a man, the man may do what he will with the world.     ~George MacDonald
Betsy
Posts: 856
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Betsy »

Mom, as an adult child of adult parent, I am aware of where you stand on the topic, and you have been respectful in the process, which makes it possible for the doorways of communication to remain open (therefore not equating to any "mixed-messages" being sent). When I say "respectful" I mean that you have refrained from belittling, name-calling, and domineering. My job as an adult is to allow everyone the freedom to say what they please but to ignore what I know to be wrong. I often refer to this as "making healthy boundaries" which is, unfortunately, often misconstrued as shutting a person out. (Healthy boundaries is another topic for a different time, but it is a key practice for happy, successful people. Mom and Dad have practiced this many times, in many ways.) You'll notice that I said that I will mostly ignore Steve's posts, but never him as a person. So yes, following his own prompting, I am choosing to ignore what he puts on the forum. I have to ignore half of what Edward has written, and Ian as well. What's funny about you saying "forcing his religion down your throat" is that it is also MY religion. I would never, ever claim that I am a better saint, or has more faith than he, or any other family member. What I get from Steve's posts is that since we do not have the same political views (yes political, even though he has stated he is politically indifferent, that is most likely not true, given his activity on many political topics on this forum), I am not as good of a member of the church as he is. I know this is absolutely wrong, whether he intends it that way or not. So I must ignore this. But, note that I am not offended by him, nor am I offended by any family member. I just think it's grievously erroneous to presume that when I ignore Steve's quotes I am "ignoring the prophets". When I read prophetic quotes I do my best to apply them in the correct context. There have not been many prophets who have spoken directly about our modern situation concerning gun control. (They have spoken about the constitution, but a. gun safety can abide by the 2nd amendment and b. they were still not speaking directly about our gun violence epidemic, which has sharply risen in the past few decades.) When a prophet HAS spoken about gun control (not the constitution or the 2nd amendment) like Gordon B. Hinkley did, it has been ignored, which is fine, but…it only helps my point. Gun control is both compatible with his statement on the matter as well as all the other prophetic statements about the constitution.

Thank you for understanding how passionate I am about this, to me it is an issue far above any other in politics, because those who are alive (or rather, have not been shot or murdered) have the freedom to discuss, even fight or argue about human rights. Those who have lost their lives to gun violence don't even have a voice. This kind of injustice is absolutely sickening to me, which is a feeling I choose to listen to, instead of ignore.

I’m going to restate this again because I don’t think anyone watch the Obama video I posted: America can abide by putting forth common sense gun safety measures AND having the 2nd amendment REMAIN FULLY INTACT. Like Obama explained, democratic leaders are not hell-bent on taking away our guns. Even though I would have NO PROBLEM with a national gun confiscation, we have to at least start with being okay with:

1. Background checks
2. CDC research on gun safety and government funding of said testing
3. Maximizing efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime
User avatar
Steve
Moderator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Provo, UT

Re: Gun Control

Post by Steve »

Betsy: ...even though he has stated he is politically indifferent...
Where did I say that I am politically indifferent?
Betsy: What I get from Steve's posts is that ... I am not as good of a member of the church as he is.
That is your own projection, I'm afraid. I never said, nor would I ever say, any such thing. EDIT: I would add, though, as much for me as for you, that if something the brethren said in one of my posts hurt, or made you or me feel bad, you and I should probably repent and make the necessary corrections in life.
Betsy: I know this is absolutely wrong
I do too.
Betsy: I’m going to restate this again because I don’t think anyone watch the Obama video I posted...
I know how you feel. :)
Betsy: Even though I would have NO PROBLEM with a national gun confiscation...
That's precisely what I'm referring to, and precisely where you're ignoring prophetic warning.
Betsy: We have to at least start with being okay with:

1. Background checks
2. CDC research on gun safety and government funding of said testing
3. Maximizing efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime
2. The CDC should have nothing to do with gun safety. I do not want my dollars going to them for any such thing.

Regarding 1 and 3, what do you have in mind?
When God can do what he will with a man, the man may do what he will with the world.     ~George MacDonald
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

betsy wants a "national gun confiscation," which would clearly violate the second and fourth amendments to the constitution.
so let it be written... so let it be done.
Betsy
Posts: 856
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Betsy »

Ian, ignore what I want for a moment and think about what other politicians are proposing with regards to gun safety. Do any of those things violate the 2nd amendment? I cannot imagine how doing a scientific study on gun safety would be at all a threat to the constitution.
User avatar
Ian
Site Admin
Posts: 2307
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:46 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Ian »

many politicians want a "national gun confiscation" as much as you do, but they are more skilled at disguising their intentions.
so let it be written... so let it be done.
Betsy
Posts: 856
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:38 pm

Re: Gun Control

Post by Betsy »

That's an totally unfounded accusation, as per usual. You have fallen prey to the classic NRA fear mongering tactic that "they're coming for yer guns!" Incidentally, the NRA magazine published an article that admits to their own faulty understanding about presidential and congressional power. Essentially this is a total backpedal from what they have been claiming for years, but we all know that the NRA are a bunch of idiots, right?

NRA Admits It: “Obama Really Hasn’t Had The Opportunity To” Confiscate Guns
The NRA Just Debunked Its Favorite Talking Point


The NRA’s magazine acknowledged that President Obama “really hasn’t had the opportunity to” confiscate firearms, undercutting years of fearmongering about the supposed existence of a “massive Obama conspiracy” to dismantle the Second Amendment and take guns away.

The NRA’s admission that a president can’t confiscate guns because “Congress writes the laws, not the president” also demonstrates the implausibility of repeated recent claims from the NRA that link Hillary Clinton to gun confiscation.

The admission was included in a June 9 article for NRA magazine America’s 1st Freedom which took issue with how Obama “rudely” responded to a question from a gun store owner at a recent town hall event.

The article quoted Obama as telling the questioner, “I’m about to leave office. There have been more guns sold since I’ve been president than just about any time in U.S. history. There are enough guns for every man, woman and child in this country. And at no point have I ever proposed confiscating guns from responsible gun owners. So it is just not true.”

Responding to Obama’s statement, the article acknowledged, “Now, [the gun store owner] could have interrupted the president to mention that Obama really hasn’t had the opportunity to do that. Congress writes the laws, not the president”:

Rhude didn’t sit down after asking his question. Rather, he stood silently as President Obama didn’t even try to answer his question, but instead went off on a defensive tirade: “First of all, the notion that I or Hillary or Democrats or whoever you want to choose are hell-bent on taking away folks’ guns is just not true. And I don’t care how many times the NRA says it.”

Obama then said, “I’m about to leave office. There have been more guns sold since I’ve been president than just about any time in U.S. history. There are enough guns for every man, woman and child in this country. And at no point have I ever proposed confiscating guns from responsible gun owners. So it is just not true.”

Now, Rhude could have interrupted the president to mention that Obama really hasn’t had the opportunity to do that. Congress writes the laws, not the president. He could then have listed the many attacks on the right to bear arms -- from Operation Fast and Furious to Operation Choke Point to Obama’s attempted ban on common ammunition for AR-15-type rifles to his using a “pen and phone” to push anti-gun executive actions. But Rhude respectfully stayed silent.


Claims about gun confiscation and Obama have been the NRA’s bread and butter for the past eight years. More recently, the NRA has suggested that the election of Clinton could lead to gun confiscation for law-abiding Americans.

According to FactCheck.org, neither Obama nor Clinton have advocated confiscating privately held firearms. Both have instead expressed support for regulating gun ownership, not banning it.

The NRA’s fearmongering about gun confiscation is even implausible under the unlikely hypothetical scenario where a president and Congress both acted to take guns from Americans; under current Supreme Court precedent, blanket gun bans are unconstitutional.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests