# Guy shot in head after getting car-jacked, by "Good Samaritan"



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Guy who was getting car-jacked ends up getting shot in the head by a "good samaritan"

This is why there needs to be MORE gun regulations. I'm not saying they can't own a guy they just need to be able to aim at a target before they are allowed to draw a gun in a public space like in town. Going hunting and on your own property is completely different.

Texas ?good guy with a gun? shoots carjacking victim in head ? then runs away


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

NYPD Cop Attempts to Shoot Fleeing Suspect, He Misses and Kills an Innocent Bystander
Read more at NYPD Cop Attempts to Shoot Fleeing Suspect, He Misses and Kills an Innocent Bystander | The Free Thought Project

Yeah. More regulations will stop people from shooting the wrong people.


----------



## RNprepper (Apr 5, 2014)

My dad says there are 37 CCW holders in his church and they all carry on Sundays. Somehow, that is NOT a very comforting thought! Can you imagine 37 weapons being fired at a bad guy? It's enough to make me avoid that place as much as a place that _prohibits_ all weapons!


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

Not to mention I don't worship on SUNday


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Good gun control is using two hands. If one is going to carry, then there is a responsibility that you are capable of 1) making good decisions and 2) you can get the job done correctly. Just like mom said when I was toilet trained, "Aim counts!".


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Denton said:


> NYPD Cop Attempts to Shoot Fleeing Suspect, He Misses and Kills an Innocent Bystander
> Read more at NYPD Cop Attempts to Shoot Fleeing Suspect, He Misses and Kills an Innocent Bystander | The Free Thought Project
> 
> Yeah. More regulations will stop people from shooting the wrong people.


Something as in requiring them to shoot with an accuracy level of 80% and above. Filling out more paperwork might be annoying but, when people miss and then pick up the bullet casings in embarrassment instead of helping the double victim it seems like a red flag. With all the shootings lately there should be mental health screening kinda sad so many students trying to learn are getting gunned down. Not sure what is wrong with this generation if it's all the new big pharma drugs or something else. I'm assuming you guys heard about what happened in portland?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Camel923 said:


> Good gun control is using two hands. If one is going to carry, then there is a responsibility that you are capable of 1) making good decisions and 2) you can get the job done correctly. Just like mom said when I was toilet trained, "Aim counts!".


That's my point aim counts. If you can't hit a moving target why even bother drawing your gun trying to help. There needs to be better training. I'm not saying they need 400 hours or something. If they want to go hunt and shoot on there own land or a friends land let em. When they are in public with a gun, and right to conceal and carry they gotta be a way to make sure they can shoot, or at least be told they are a bad shot.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> That's my point aim counts. If you can't hit a moving target why even bother drawing your gun trying to help. There needs to be better training. I'm not saying they need 400 hours or something. If they want to go hunt and shoot on there own land or a friends land let em. When they are in public with a gun, and right to conceal and carry they gotta be a way to make sure they can shoot, or at least be told they are a bad shot.


No thanks, we do not need anymore unconstitutional infringements.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

I draw the line on the mandatory regulation pertaining to training. All then that is necessary to end the 2nd amendment is to make the requirements impossible to meet. Balance between being a good samaritan and reckless endangerment. Which we now have. Its not perfect but nothing ever will be. I am saying it is an individual responsibility like feeding your children. Not that you need 400 hours or more of classes that are government approved so you can feed your children. I didn't put that part in my previous post, my mistake for omitting it.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Camel923 said:


> I draw the line on the mandatory regulation pertaining to training. All then that is necessary to end the 2nd amendment is to make the requirements impossible to meet. Balance between being a good samaritan and reckless endangerment. Which we now have. Its not perfect but nothing ever will be. I am saying it is an individual responsibility like feeding your children. Not that you need 400 hours or more of classes that are government approved so you can feed your children. I didn't put that part in my previous post, my mistake for omitting it.


No what I'm saying is if you want to carry in town then you gotta be a better shot. If you want to buy a gun you don't have to meet any standards beyond not being mentally ill or a felon. I understand your fear about taking away gun rights but let's be honest gun rights gotta be a bit different for when you're in town vs. in the country. Small towns should be considered in the country too. Just saying for when people are in the bigger cities and suburbs where there are tons of people around. If your not a good shot you shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun in a city where you could easily kill somebody. Not sure but that guy trying to do the right thing ended up shooting a guy in the head. That victim will have a very difficult life due to that guy's mistake. It could have been prevented if his buddies were nice enough to tell him was a crappy aim. Now he might rot in a jail cell for trying to do what he thought was right. Nobody wins.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

Aa


BuggyBugoutBag said:


> No what I'm saying is if you want to carry in town then you gotta be a better shot. If you want to buy a gun you don't have to meet any standards beyond not being mentally ill or a felon. I understand your fear about taking away gun rights but let's be honest gun rights gotta be a bit different for when you're in town vs. in the country. Small towns should be considered in the country too. Just saying for when people are in the bigger cities and suburbs where there are tons of people around. If your not a good shot you shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun in a city where you could easily kill somebody. Not sure but that guy trying to do the right thing ended up shooting a guy in the head. That victim will have a very difficult life due to that guy's mistake. It could have been prevented if his buddies were nice enough to tell him was a crappy aim. Now he might rot in a jail cell for trying to do what he thought was right. Nobody wins.


The NYPD would be completely disarmed inside a week.

Everyone that carries a gun knows they are responsible for every bullet. That is the deal that goes with carrying/ using a gun.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

I'm not going to claim that I am a good shot, I qualify yearly with my weapon and I average around 96% to 98%. But that does not really mean much in combat. I walked in on 2 guys trying to kill each other, when both saw me, both of their guns were pointed at me and the guy on my right started shooting at me. I was not hit so he ran and I gave chase, we he ran towards a bunch of people he fired at me again, when the people cleared out, I had a clear shot of him but I decided not to take it because right behind him was a row home and people lived there. The bad guy got away. I was not confident enough at the time to shoot, besides I had cover when he was taking a shot at me. I did not want to hurt anyone else.

If you are going to carry, make sure of your actions. And no, no more regulations. 
Regulations will not prevent accidents.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Buggy you just described the problem with using deadly force. Over in an instant with no do overs. Huge problem cops face every day and even with training mistakes will happen. You can kill an intruder in your home, do everything right and still face prison and law suits from the criminals family. Still, I feel safer being in an armed society than an unarmed one where only criminals and government are armed.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

6811 said:


> I'm not going to claim that I am a good shot, I qualify yearly with my weapon and I average around 96% to 98%. But that does not really mean much in combat. I walked in on 2 guys trying to kill each other, when both saw me, both of their guns were pointed at me and the guy on my right started riding at me. I was not hit so he ran and I gave chase, we he ran towards a bunch of people he fired at me again, when the people cleared out, I had a clear shot of him but I decided no to take it because right behind him was a row home and people lived there. The bad guy got away. I was not confident enough at the time to shoot, besides I had cover when he was taking a shot at me.
> 
> If you are going to carry, make sure of your actions. And no, no more regulations.


Yes, every person should have the same training you have. Making that training and thinking part of the process for people to get permits to carry in town seems like a good idea. Requiring those standards for ALL gun owners is 100% WRONG! You don't have to be a good shot to own a gun. If you want to hunt you can practice and learn, when your in a situation where you could hurt bystanders you gotta be trained well enough to know how to handle the situation. We can't just assume everyone is smart enough to get there on there own. The states should require the standards be set for there own counties and towns NOT the federal government.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

This means people who can not afford to meet your new regulation can not carry to defend ones self. I think you are well intentioned but I do not like the unintended consequences it brings. Gun grabbers will like it because it will get the proverbial camel's nose under the tent and expand into an unrecognisable monster that will result in the end of concealed carry for all.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> Yes, every person should have the same training you have. Making that training and thinking part of the process for people to get permits to carry in town seems like a good idea. Requiring those standards for ALL gun owners is 100% WRONG! You don't have to be a good shot to own a gun. If you want to hunt you can practice and learn, when your in a situation where you could hurt bystanders you gotta be trained well enough to know how to handle the situation. We can't just assume everyone is smart enough to get there on there own. The states should require the standards be set for there own counties and towns NOT the federal government.


Still unconstitutional violates the 14th and 2nd amendment. If you allow anyone to treat your rights as privileges, eventually your privileges will be removed.

I could develop a course of fire with standards you could never pass, therefore you could never carry a gun to defend yourself.

Your statements about people not being smart enough to get ther on their own makes you sound like a statist gun grabber.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Camel923 said:


> Buggy you just described the problem with using deadly force. Over in an instant with no do overs. Huge problem cops face every day and even with training mistakes will happen. You can kill an intruder in your home, do everything right and still face prison and law suits from the criminals family. Still, I feel safer being in an armed society than an unarmed one where only criminals and government are armed.


I agree it does make things safer, but when you have knuckleheads that try to help and end up shooting the victim in the head well they have no right getting involved! There gotta be more training. You can't have situations like this keep happening. A fleeing robber is not the same as a robber that is threatening your life or charging at you. Not sure what all happened but it sounds from the story as if he was shooting at them as they were driving away, given the driver window was shot out. I think the guy was trying to be to much of a hero. Shouldn't be shooting at him while he is running away. Even cops can't do that. Not sure if the attackers used force or had a weapon, so maybe it was justified.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

Training on the range is great. You could hit 100%, all of the time. But when the adrenaline kicks in, you could be ten feet away and still miss. You're hands are shaking like you just stepped out of the deep freeze after a couple of hours of chillin'. There is no excuse for this man's horrible mistake. He shouldn't have drawn his firearm. The only difference between him and a LEO, is the LEO is won't be held personally responsible unless it can be shown he acted negligently. Personally, if I saw BBB getting robbed, carjacked, etc., I would stand back, and call 911. If it isn't me or mine that are in danger, to hell with getting involved. If it's an obvious case that someone will die, that's a different story.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> Something as in requiring them to shoot with an accuracy level of 80% and above. Filling out more paperwork might be annoying but, when people miss and then pick up the bullet casings in embarrassment instead of helping the double victim it seems like a red flag. With all the shootings lately there should be mental health screening kinda sad so many students trying to learn are getting gunned down. Not sure what is wrong with this generation if it's all the new big pharma drugs or something else. I'm assuming you guys heard about what happened in portland?


You seem to be missing the point. My article in response to your article was a COP shooting a bystander. You reckon his academy training would be accepted as meeting civilian requirement?

Accuracy of 80% minimum. So, according to you, those who can't reach your standard are not allowed to carry a weapon? According to you, a person who didn't make the cut would have to rely on someone else for protection? Someone who only makes 75% at a paper target is not allowed the wherewithal to defend themselves, but someone who makes 100% can? As far as you know, the "good Samaritan" might be a whiz-bang at shooting paper but not so good under pressure.

As my counter link indicates, all the training in the world does not remove the human factor. What the "good Samaritan" should not have done was run. Obviously, he shouldn't have hit the victim, but that goes without saying.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Camel923 said:


> This means people who can not afford to meet your new regulation can not carry to defend ones self. I think you are well intentioned but I do not like the unintended consequences it brings. Gun grabbers will like it because it will get the proverbial camel's nose under the tent and expand into an unrecognisable monster that will result in the end of concealed carry for all.


Being poor is no excuse for not being able to know how to aim a shoot a gun, to know when to shoot and try to help. Maybe Gun stores could offer free classes and volunteer to help train. Most of us live in smaller towns or in the country. We wouldn't be affected, thoes in bigger cities where everywhere you turn is a crowd of people THOSE are the places I am talking about! It should be left up to the states and local communities to decide what type of regulation they want.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

ANYONE Who thinks they can armchair quarterback what qualifications one should obtain before exercising their God-given right to keep and bear arms is wrong.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> I agree it does make things safer, but when you have knuckleheads that try to help and end up shooting the victim in the head well they have no right getting involved! There gotta be more training. You can't have situations like this keep happening. A fleeing robber is not the same as a robber that is threatening your life or charging at you. Not sure what all happened but it sounds from the story as if he was shooting at them as they were driving away, given the driver window was shot out. I think the guy was trying to be to much of a hero. Shouldn't be shooting at him while he is running away. Even cops can't do that. Not sure if the attackers used force or had a weapon, so maybe it was justified.


 Based upon one incident you propose to make every citizen in the US who carries a gun jump through hoops because you believe people are not smart enough to do the right thing on their own?

I suppose we should ban alcohol because some people drink and drive and others drink too much and fall down, while others may beat their spouse when they get drunk?

Maybe we should ban the internet because people use it to recruit terrorist wannabes?

Why don't we ban marriage because people get divorced?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

dsdmmat said:


> Still unconstitutional violates the 14th and 2nd amendment. If you allow anyone to treat your rights as privileges, eventually your privileges will be removed.
> 
> I could develop a course of fire with standards you could never pass, therefore you could never carry a gun to defend yourself.
> 
> Your statements about people not being smart enough to get ther on their own makes you sound like a statist gun grabber.


Don't get me wrong many people my age know how to treat a gun. Just look on youtube at all these young little dummies not knowing how to treat a gun let alone shoot a desired target! You want to defend yourself and your home you get to no regulation! Just a background check for mental healthy and felonies. You want to go hunting you can still do that no regulations at all, that's 100% fine by me. The point of the right to bear arms is to keep the government in check. I am NOT about supporting rounding up all the guns, hell no! If anything, I hope I scare you enough to buy more! haha.. What I'm talking about is when people have guns in larger cities, they need to be able to know how to treat a gun and aim and shoot with some level of accuracy.

You have the right up until you start endangering the lives of others. Not knowing how to aim a gun, and thinking you know well enough that's endangerment IMO. In a SHTF event I'm sure that rule will eventually get thrown out the window. Until then it won't do any harm to have people train more. There is a huge difference between going into town in rural Nebraska than going into town in downtown Denver. If you think that me suggesting there is a difference means I want to take away your guns your more paranoid than I thought. Keep your gun, go hunting, defending your home, take it with you into your local town, just not into town with 200,000 plus people who could get into the way of your target if you can't shoot the red side of a barn at 40ft.


----------



## GTGallop (Nov 11, 2012)

Look - when you own firearms, are around firearms, handle firearms you have statistically increased your chance there will be an accident. It is a fact of ownership. We accept it and live with it. In a society that is armed, your possibility of being shot by a Good Samaritan are very real. They are also very remote.

Saying that we need more Gun Control because some one was shot by a GS, is like saying, "Well the ambulance that was saving me wrecked on the way to the hospital - lets ban all of the ambulances." Or, "The fire truck responding to my car accident caused another car accident - time to crush all fire trucks! Put them out of business!"

It's real folks. I work with a guy that was rear-ended at high way speeds by an ambulance. Know what he did? He let the people on the ambulance check him out - they were already there on scene.

Yes we have guns. Yes there will ALWAYS be gun violence. Yes there will even be mass shootings with assault rifles even though murder is 1% of all deaths in the US and mass shootings are 1% of all murders and 1% of all mass shootings use an assault weapon. I don't dare say that is an acceptable ratio because we can and always should look to do better, but you have to acknowledge that at some point it will always be an element of life - however miniscule and small and tragic at the same time.

So instead of looking at this specific example where an armed Good Sam jumps in and accidentally nails the victim in the head and saying, "MORE LAWS!" I have to ask, would the victim have been car jacked in the first place if more people carried guns? Lets not forget who set off this chain of events - the criminal car jacker.

Just like people that leave their cars unlocked with valuables in the front seat and people who leave their homes unlocked invite crime and give criminals an easy job, so do citizens who choose not to carry. Criminals are always looking for the softest target. If people carried MORE guns and quit being soft targets, I'll bet there would be less gun deaths accidental or intentional - because the crime would drop off.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

No. Your idea will be abused by those at government house. 20,000 or so gun laws and you want new ones. Your taking one incident and ignoring the millions of times it doesn't go wrong. I can not and will not support further firearms regulation. Your attempting to compromise with the devil.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> Don't get me wrong many people my age know how to treat a gun. Just look on youtube at all these young little dummies not knowing how to treat a gun let alone shoot a desired target! You want to defend yourself and your home you get to no regulation! Just a background check for mental healthy and felonies. You want to go hunting you can still do that no regulations at all, that's 100% fine by me. The point of the right to bear arms is to keep the government in check. I am NOT about supporting rounding up all the guns, hell no! If anything, I hope I scare you enough to buy more! haha.. What I'm talking about is when people have guns in larger cities, they need to be able to know how to treat a gun and aim and shoot with some level of accuracy.
> 
> You have the right up until you start endangering the lives of others. Not knowing how to aim a gun, and thinking you know well enough that's endangerment IMO. In a SHTF event I'm sure that rule will eventually get thrown out the window. Until then it won't do any harm to have people train more. There is a huge difference between going into town in rural Nebraska than going into town in downtown Denver. If you think that me suggesting there is a difference means I want to take away your guns your more paranoid than I thought. Keep your gun, go hunting, defending your home, take it with you into your local town, just not into town with 200,000 plus people who could get into the way of your target if you can't shoot the red side of a barn at 40ft.


Again, you are assuming to be the almighty judge of who can carry.

Someone might not be able to hit a barn at 40 feet, but they might be able to defend themselves at five feet.

It doesn't matter if the situation is in the cornfields of Nebraska or a thriving metropolis.

There always seems to be someone who feels the need to restrict our God given rights because of an incident.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

dsdmmat said:


> Based upon one incident you propose to make every citizen in the US who carries a gun jump through hoops because you believe people are not smart enough to do the right thing on their own?
> 
> I suppose we should ban alcohol because some people drink and drive and others drink too much and fall down, while others may beat their spouse when they get drunk?
> 
> ...


It's not just one story, there are others out there too. Anyone applying for a new conceal and carry permit should have the extra training, I'm not saying that us old folks need to apply, just the young kids theses days applying for permits for the first time! Now that they are making cars with autopilot I doubt drinking and driving will be much of a problem within the next 10 years. There are too many illegal drunk driving checkpoints, I will say that forsure.


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

Being able to punch nice patterns in paper isn't a guarantee that you will hit anything when you find yourself in a high stress situation.

Anyone with any sense at all knows not to take the shot if there is a risk of hitting the wrong person. Marksmanship training won't correct poor judgement.

I would question the morality of shooting someone over a car. There are exceptions, and I don't know the exact circumstances, but really, is a car worth a life?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Prepadoodle said:


> Being able to punch nice patterns in paper isn't a guarantee that you will hit anything when you find yourself in a high stress situation.
> 
> Anyone with any sense at all knows not to take the shot if there is a risk of hitting the wrong person. Marksmanship training won't correct poor judgement.
> 
> I would question the morality of shooting someone over a car. There are exceptions, and I don't know the exact circumstances, but really, is a car worth a life?


YES! I agree with that 100% so there should be a self defense course putting people in these high stress situations and that way they can test and ensure they are able to handle themselves. Having training on how to defend yourself with your gun is not as simple as pointing and pulling. Making sure to know when to shoot and when not to and how to deal with any situation is important. There should be much more training involved in owning a gun in public, such as bigger cities. It should actually be taught in high school or middle school (many parents may want to train kids younger that's still there choice!) An ethical class should discuss the idea about when to shoot and when not to. That and teaching a child to balance a checkbook too. Maybe there shouldn't be required level to have a gun to defend yourself in a busy city, BUT there should still be a training process trying to help others learn and improve their skill. If they are so bad that they, just can't improve then they could at least be trained on when to not get involved. I worry about the future generations and their offspring too..

Maybe some might want to let him off for trying to be a good person, but I hope he rots in a jail cell for a VERY long time for missing and hitting the victim and then picking up his casings and fleeing! I think life in prison would be acceptable, nothing less.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Denton said:


> Again, you are assuming to be the almighty judge of who can carry.
> 
> Someone might not be able to hit a barn at 40 feet, but they might be able to defend themselves at five feet.
> 
> ...


Good argument you persuaded me to change my mind a bit. That doesn't happen very often haha. I guess having a min. skill level may be a bit much but still going through an educational course would seem acceptable that way people will know what there actual level of abilities are so they will be able to make those quick decisions to draw or not to draw, and to shot and to not shoot.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

I used to work with a female detective who hated qualifications. It takes her atleast 3 tries to qualify with a passing grade of 70. Everytime she gets scheduled for her qualification she gets sick days before the day from stress. This woman could not shoot at all, atleast based on her yearly qualification. One year she got involved in a shooting during a robbery. In our department all police involved shooting is reported to homicide, IA and firearms training section to determine if the officer follows training protocol. When the witnesses of the shooting gave a statement everyone agreed exept firearm training section, they knew the detective very well because of her problems passing her qualification. The evidence on the scene and the witness account of the incident described her as an A+ shooter, Firearms training section could not believe it.

Moral of the story, there are people who don't do well taking test. But when its time to perform in a real world scenario, they do good. There are also good testers, that screw up in real time. No more regulation....


----------



## SOCOM42 (Nov 9, 2012)

BUGOUT,
I didn't see anything in the second that requires competency with a firearm. 
This state requires a safety course for all newcomers, that I can agree with.
There is no competency requirement.
How can you require someone new to have a level of performance when the don't have a handgun to achieve it or the license to use it or even get one?
That would be a catch 22 situation, would it not? 
As I said before you leak out closet liberalism, it is here in this thread and others.
Libs are always looking for another little piece of second rights, no matter how benign it seems, it will eat away.


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

Civilian gun owners prevent millions of crimes a year. The CDC (anti-gun) says 500,000 to 3 million, the FBI says 8 million, but the actual number is probably much higher, since not everyone reports an incident where the crime was prevented and nobody got shot.

Mistakes will happen when dealing with such huge numbers, but you have to look at the big picture.

I believe that making it harder for law abiding citizens to get and carry a gun would have a negative influence on the situation.

Let's say 50% of the people would be unable to pass a skill-based gun control program. I think 50% is way too high a percentage, but just look what happens at that number....

250,000 to 4 million crimes are NOT prevented because those guys and gals can't own a gun. How many people die? I can't say for sure, but it's more than a few. So yeah, tragic that there are accidents, but it's way better than letting the criminals go unchecked. Gun ownership is way up, gun crime is way down. Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control.


----------



## Broncosfan (Mar 2, 2014)

When I was taking my training for my ccw the instructor was firm in teaching that you take full responsibility for your actions. Your not the police! He brought up what if you shot the wrong person by mistake. What if you shoot a undercover cop. Your decision and you must live with your actions. Police have been known to shoot the wrong person. Do we take there weapons? I firmly believe I'm carrying to protect my family and myself first. If I was positive about a situation and had a clear shot to save someone else I would. If things weren't completely clear I would not take or risk a shot. People make mistakes and there are a lot of people out there with drivers licenses that can't drive and put someone in harms way more often than someone carry a concealed weapon. It happens in a non perfect world.


----------



## Broncosfan (Mar 2, 2014)

Prepadoodle said:


> Civilian gun owners prevent millions of crimes a year. The CDC (anti-gun) says 500,000 to 3 million, the FBI says 8 million, but the actual number is probably much higher, since not everyone reports an incident where the crime was prevented and nobody got shot.
> 
> Mistakes will happen when dealing with such huge numbers, but you have to look at the big picture.
> 
> ...


I agree 1000%!


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

SOCOM42 said:


> BUGOUT,
> I didn't see anything in the second that requires competency with a firearm.
> This state requires a safety course for all newcomers, that I can agree with.
> There is no competency requirement.
> ...


Say what you want about me but, one thing I put before my country is my God! There is only one thing that you can take with you upon your death and that is your faith and your relationship with God. Everything else is only temporary. Making it possible that others don't get harmed and hurt is important to me because all life is precious! Abortion is wrong, death penalty is wrong, and harming people by stray bullets is also WRONG! If that makes you think I'm a closet liberal so be it! I won't put my faith and my God in a closet! That's for darn sure!!

Getting back to what I suggested this test would be ONLY for people wanting to carry in public! meaning if you buy a gun you can carry and transport it in a safe way (not loaded and ready to fire) Then you can shoot all you want at your home and defend your property! Also going hunting would be just the same too. I only suggested people be propperly trained before they are allowed to bring a loaded gun into a crowded city where not everyone is willing to let you risk hitting them in an emergency situation where you think you may be smart enough to hit a target you clearly can't! It wouldn't prevent people from being "bad test takers" cause if you can't shoot a target cause your to nervous of failing then you have no reason to shoot at a mugger 15 feet away in a crowded place! Either you can shoot or you can't, having somebody training you how to defend yourself is a bad idea? Really? Why can't somebody take a class before they feel so empowered to go trying to fight off bad guys? If you miss and end up shooting somebody in the head then what? You want to go hunting or defend your property you don't need training or a permit in my mind. If you shoot yourself in the process that's your own dam fault. But God forbid you go into town and put other people lives at risk because of your lack of training that's where I cross the line.

Sorry not saying you specifically are a bad shot, I'm just trying to make my point. This story really bothers me, there is no way that was God's will to have the guy being robbed of his truck shot in the head by somebody trying to help! I hope everyone keeps him in your prayers. It's not right what happend to him. If he recovers I hope his can cope, I mean imagine if any one of you were in his situation. I hope both the mugger and shooter are in jail by now! Is nobody else upset for the guy who got robbed, then shot by another guy and they both run off and leave him there!!!


----------



## Medic33 (Mar 29, 2015)

RNprepper said:


> My dad says there are 37 CCW holders in his church and they all carry on Sundays. Somehow, that is NOT a very comforting thought! Can you imagine 37 weapons being fired at a bad guy? It's enough to make me avoid that place as much as a place that _prohibits_ all weapons!


can you imagine being the bad guy with 37 weapons pointed at you?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Broncosfan said:


> When I was taking my training for my ccw the instructor was firm in teaching that you take full responsibility for your actions. Your not the police! He brought up what if you shot the wrong person by mistake. What if you shoot a undercover cop. Your decision and you must live with your actions. Police have been known to shoot the wrong person. Do we take there weapons? I firmly believe I'm carrying to protect my family and myself first. If I was positive about a situation and had a clear shot to save someone else I would. If things weren't completely clear I would not take or risk a shot. People make mistakes and there are a lot of people out there with drivers licenses that can't drive and put someone in harms way more often than someone carry a concealed weapon. It happens in a non perfect world.


Yes, I agree mistakes happen. A mistake is when the shooter missed his target as he was not hit. Yet, when he "mistaked" and hit the victim in the head that was beyond a mistake! That was manslaughter, his carry permit should be revoked. Though considering he fled the scene I'm sure he will face jail time and get a nice felon on his record and loose his gun. Denton did make a good argument, so even if people don't "pass" the assessment they should at LEAST be told of their limits. Such as you can't shoot a side of a barn from 60ft. ...well you can get the permit but if you discharge your weapon in public you have better be shooting within 2-5ft. otherwize if ya miss you should have known better and if you end up shooting somebody by accident you loose your carry permit and ya gotta keep your guns at home OR for hunting only.

I think that is better compromise. I always try to think what would Jesus want, I think people should be able to defend themselves but if they can't because they are not a good shot they have to use there gun very limited. Meaning they won't be able to dare take a shot at a guy with a weapon and a hostage. It's not worth having a gun to carry into town to defend yourself if you can't use it in most situation. But like Denton said you could still use it to defend yourself at close range or something. What this guy did in the story was 1000% wrong! He should have known his limitations. He never hit his target once!! Yet, ended shooting the victim in the head! I mean I am SHOCKED the Victim was still alive! I don't think Jesus would have wanted that guy to get involved given he clearly was not able to defend himself. He should have had somebody telling him he was a bad shot and needed more practice! Is it REALLY such a bad thing to have that for every gun owner before they get a carry permit? Is testing to see how good you are at defending yourself bad because you might not like what they have to say?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

RNprepper said:


> My dad says there are 37 CCW holders in his church and they all carry on Sundays. Somehow, that is NOT a very comforting thought! Can you imagine 37 weapons being fired at a bad guy? It's enough to make me avoid that place as much as a place that _prohibits_ all weapons!


Don't get me started about guns in the church! I think that is NOT the place for weapons, but if the priest and his ushers want to carry they should be allowed to, maybe even a deacon but ONLY with the priest's blessing. The people go to church for spiritual guidance, let those who are already spiritually enlightened make the judgement call if such a situation arises. The Lord's house is run by the priest, and should be defended as how the priests see's fit! I take it your priest is aware of the situation? He better be, I would think it would be rather disrespectful if they didn't get the priest's blessing before bringing a gun into the lord's house.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> No what I'm saying is if you want to carry in town then you gotta be a better shot. If you want to buy a gun you don't have to meet any standards beyond not being mentally ill or a felon..


You're actually wrong. You have to take a gun safety test and one of the answers is "You are responsible for every shot you take".


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

A church is no place for a gun? Sure, you should be a sitting duck in church. Your responsibility to protect yourself and your family stops there. That is complete sarcasm, by the way. Your right and responsibility does not stop at the doors, and the priest's or pastor's responsibility stops at the spiritual leader role.

Without critically analyzing the notion, I can see how one might think a gun in a church is not a good idea. Why, all of the gun carriers shooting all over the place would be crazy! Now, stop and think about it. Do you really think they will be doing that? Also, would you rather the killer be the only armed person in the church? Do you somehow feel that would be a safer scenario? 

I have to admit, it has been decades since I have been in a church for reasons other than weddings or funerals. Still, I have friends who attend church on a regular basis, and most of them go armed. I'd say that is a good idea, considering Christians are leading the way in the "kill them because of their beliefs" category. As our government imports more people who believe it is the will of Allah that they go and kill those who do not abide by their ideology, and considering many Christians gather in what would become a shooting gallery, the chances of needing to protect one's self as well as others is increasing.

Norman Rockwell's world never really existed, but the hopes of it are long gone.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Gun training. Should it be mandatory? No. Should you receive training, and should you maintain and sharpen your skills? Danged skippy. Cops miss at seven to fifteen feet during high stress situations and they have received training, both on the range as well as how to handle themselves in high stress situations. Why should any citizen who feels they should carry think otherwise about themselves?


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

When the guns come out, every place is a church. There's probably more real praying at a gunfight than at many churches. Just sayin'


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> Don't get me started about guns in the church! I think that is NOT the place for weapons, but if the priest and his ushers want to carry they should be allowed to, maybe even a deacon but ONLY with the priest's blessing. The people go to church for spiritual guidance, let those who are already spiritually enlightened make the judgement call if such a situation arises. The Lord's house is run by the priest, and should be defended as how the priests see's fit! I take it your priest is aware of the situation? He better be, I would think it would be rather disrespectful if they didn't get the priest's blessing before bringing a gun into the lord's house.


Not carrying in the church..... Well, that didn't work out for several people in south Carolina. Not being able to carry in church is no different than not being able to carry in schools. After all why would you carry in a place where people just go to learn right? Gun free zones has NEVER saved anyone's life.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

BuggyBugOut,

You should probably move to one of the European Socialist Liberal Countries, they have plenty of regulations that might fit your needs. Please do not vote.

Thanks

Slippy


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

For anyone who thinks that a church is not a place appropriate to carry weapons... Please read the quar'an... Surah 2:191.... that verse should be a good reason for us kufaars and proud infidels to be armed in our churches at all times.


----------



## Dubyagee (Nov 9, 2012)

*Guy shot in head after getting car-jacked, by "Good Samaritan"*

There are mistakes made in every aspect of life. From guns to forum threads that shouldn't be.

You libs already have a giant stack of regulations that dont work. Its obvious to the people that libs are scared of life and want everyone else to suffer right along with them. Thats why they vote in control freaks that know a sheep when they see one. Cowards one and all.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

It would appear we have a liberal in our midst. Nothing good can come from more goberment regulations. That's exactly how they operate. A little law here, a little regulation there until next thing you know, we have no money, no privacy, and no freedom. Keep your regulations Buggy


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Unfortunately the best place to be armed is where it is prohibited. All the nut jobs that want to kill scores of random people uninterrupted can read that there will be no armed opposition to them and they will be control. It is a cold, premeditated calculation by a murderer, Satan's work if you wish. Just read 6811's last post.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

Slippy said:


> BuggyBugOut,
> 
> You should probably move to one of the European Socialist Liberal Countries, they have plenty of regulations that might fit your needs. Please do not vote.
> 
> ...


That made me laugh.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

A while ago I saw something stating the perfect argument for anything against anything that would further our rights begins with F and ends with you. That is the perfect rebuttal that not only does prevents blood boiling, it also doesn't waste oxygen (or electrons) arguing with a brick wall.


----------



## Seneca (Nov 16, 2012)

To those who wish to impose new regulations, I would suggest this...why wait for the government? 

Don't thing guns belong in church? don't bring your gun to church. Worried that being a good Samaritan will get you shot? don't stop and help. What ever regulations your heart desires, impose on yourself and leave the rest of us out of it.


----------



## GTGallop (Nov 11, 2012)

Denton said:


> A church is no place for a gun? Sure, you should be a sitting duck in church. Your responsibility to protect yourself and your family stops there. That is complete sarcasm, by the way. Your right and responsibility does not stop at the doors, and the priest's or pastor's responsibility stops at the spiritual leader role.


Security guard who stopped shooter credits God - CNN.com

I have a buddy who was with his GF in this shooting. They were injured, but if I remember correctly it was from the mass panic and chaos rather than from the bullets. He said he walked right past the shooter and was 10/15 feet behind him on his way down the aisle when the fit hit the shan. He has always regretted not carrying in the church that day.


----------



## Stick (Sep 29, 2014)

Not sure if this has been addressed, but...maybe the Good Samaritan was a part of the hijack team.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Denton said:


> A church is no place for a gun? Sure, you should be a sitting duck in church. Your responsibility to protect yourself and your family stops there. That is complete sarcasm, by the way. Your right and responsibility does not stop at the doors, and the priest's or pastor's responsibility stops at the spiritual leader role.
> 
> Without critically analyzing the notion, I can see how one might think a gun in a church is not a good idea. Why, all of the gun carriers shooting all over the place would be crazy! Now, stop and think about it. Do you really think they will be doing that? Also, would you rather the killer be the only armed person in the church? Do you somehow feel that would be a safer scenario?
> 
> ...


I think you need to recheck your christian values before you keep calling yourself a christian. Going to church regularly is critical at getting guidance in your faith. I go every week, and I attend several daily masses. Saddly I gotta work alot during the week so I can't go more than that. I'm no young man either but I always make sure I have an hour to pray daily and to read books or the bible about my faith.

Now that said, if you die for your religion you get a express ticket to heaven! Who wouldn't want that? Now if you start discharing your weapon in a church that does not sound like it could end very well. As for protection that's why I said the priest and ushers and maybe a deacon could be armed IF the priest gives the OK. You should NEVER EVER EVER bring a weapon into a church if you don't have the blessing of the priest! The priest is the leader of the church and it's his choice to allow weapons or not. Sneaking them in is NOT acceptable behavior, if you priest says no find a new church! It just seems so disrespectful to not even think about getting his permission before bringing your weapon. Maybe you would consider asking some of your friends to gather on day during the week or weekend to have a spritual hour? Where you read from the bible and talk about God. That way you can still carry your weapon if that is important enough that would prevent you from going to church. I hope you at least consider it Denton. God wants us all to constantly reflected and learn more about him and his will. I know if you dwell on it you will come to see that knowing more about his is NOT a bad thing!


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Prepadoodle said:


> When the guns come out, every place is a church. There's probably more real praying at a gunfight than at many churches. Just sayin'


That's just not true, A God's house of worship is the only place where you can pray to God and reflect. Hoping to hit a target is not praying, but if you are praying to hit a target then you really should practice more cause your not a good enough shot even by your own standards.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Slippy said:


> BuggyBugOut,
> 
> You should probably move to one of the European Socialist Liberal Countries, they have plenty of regulations that might fit your needs. Please do not vote.
> 
> ...


That's not a nice thing to say Mr. I like living in my community. I love going to my local church and my community is VERY strong in their faith! I would never abandon them! I have no desire to ever move. The reason why citizen are allowed guns is to keep the government in check. You want to go hunting or defend your home as well that's fine! Bringing your guns out in public and end up shooting people in the head is going BEYOND your personal right. You're infringing on the rights of others! I don't understand why you don't see that. Not to mention thinking that bringing a gun to church is OK without even getting the priest's permission!!! Do you even know what a church is? It's the house where you go to talk to God! The priest has the right to ban or ask you not to bring your gun IF he thinks it's the best route! If there are serious safety concerns offer to become a usher and pray upon it BEFORE you decide to bring your gun without even letting the priest know! I'm shocked at your viewpoint. I like this country, but not as much as my God! That should hold true for every American! Put your God first before country if you are a TRUE christian you will understand you can still like and love your country.

Country is only temporary, God is forever! Please remember that! Also Yes, I do vote every voting cycle even when I am sick I still make it to vote and I'm proud of that I'm serving my God by voting for the will of God!


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> That's not a nice thing to say Mr. I like living in my community. I love going to my local church and my community is VERY strong in their faith! I would never abandon them! I have no desire to ever move. The reason why citizen are allowed guns is to keep the government in check. You want to go hunting or defend your home as well that's fine! Bringing your guns out in public and end up shooting people in the head is going BEYOND your personal right. You're infringing on the rights of others! I don't understand why you don't see that. Not to mention thinking that bringing a gun to church is OK without even getting the priest's permission!!! Do you even know what a church is? It's the house where you go to talk to God! The priest has the right to ban or ask you not to bring your gun IF he thinks it's the best route! If there are serious safety concerns offer to become a usher and pray upon it BEFORE you decide to bring your gun without even letting the priest know! I'm shocked at your viewpoint. I like this country, but not as much as my God! That should hold true for every American! Put your God first before country if you are a TRUE christian you will understand you can still like and love your country.
> 
> Country is only temporary, God is forever! Please remember that! Also Yes, I do vote every voting cycle even when I am sick I still make it to vote and I'm proud of that I'm serving my God by voting for the will of God!


What in the world are you talking about? Your multiple posts are incoherent ramblings that make no sense at all. Please look back over your post and edit them so that you don't look 100% like an idiot.


----------



## Mish (Nov 5, 2013)




----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> I think you need to recheck your christian values before you keep calling yourself a christian. Going to church regularly is critical at getting guidance in your faith. I go every week, and I attend several daily masses. Saddly I gotta work alot during the week so I can't go more than that. I'm no young man either but I always make sure I have an hour to pray daily and to read books or the bible about my faith.
> 
> Now that said, if you die for your religion you get a express ticket to heaven! Who wouldn't want that? Now if you start discharing your weapon in a church that does not sound like it could end very well. As for protection that's why I said the priest and ushers and maybe a deacon could be armed IF the priest gives the OK. You should NEVER EVER EVER bring a weapon into a church if you don't have the blessing of the priest! The priest is the leader of the church and it's his choice to allow weapons or not. Sneaking them in is NOT acceptable behavior, if you priest says no find a new church! It just seems so disrespectful to not even think about getting his permission before bringing your weapon. Maybe you would consider asking some of your friends to gather on day during the week or weekend to have a spritual hour? Where you read from the bible and talk about God. That way you can still carry your weapon if that is important enough that would prevent you from going to church. I hope you at least consider it Denton. God wants us all to constantly reflected and learn more about him and his will. I know if you dwell on it you will come to see that knowing more about his is NOT a bad thing!


No priest in this world will tell me what to do bucko! You can write that down.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> That's just not true, A God's house of worship is the only place where you can pray to God and reflect. Hoping to hit a target is not praying, but if you are praying to hit a target then you really should practice more cause your not a good enough shot even by your own standards.


I'll worship anywhere I choose, what is this nonsense that "A God's house of worship is the only place where you can pray to God and reflect?" That is some mumbo jumbo voodoo talk if I ever heard it. Good Lord, where do we find these numbskulls?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> I think you need to recheck your christian values before you keep calling yourself a christian. Going to church regularly is critical at getting guidance in your faith. I go every week, and I attend several daily masses. Saddly I gotta work alot during the week so I can't go more than that. I'm no young man either but I always make sure I have an hour to pray daily and to read books or the bible about my faith.
> 
> Now that said, if you die for your religion you get a express ticket to heaven! Who wouldn't want that? Now if you start discharing your weapon in a church that does not sound like it could end very well. As for protection that's why I said the priest and ushers and maybe a deacon could be armed IF the priest gives the OK. You should NEVER EVER EVER bring a weapon into a church if you don't have the blessing of the priest! The priest is the leader of the church and it's his choice to allow weapons or not. Sneaking them in is NOT acceptable behavior, if you priest says no find a new church! It just seems so disrespectful to not even think about getting his permission before bringing your weapon. Maybe you would consider asking some of your friends to gather on day during the week or weekend to have a spritual hour? Where you read from the bible and talk about God. That way you can still carry your weapon if that is important enough that would prevent you from going to church. I hope you at least consider it Denton. God wants us all to constantly reflected and learn more about him and his will. I know if you dwell on it you will come to see that knowing more about his is NOT a bad thing!


First off, you are making a grave error in questioning my faith or salvation.

Second, you are making a grave error in thinking I am Catholic. I am not required to ask a priest to exercise a right endowed me by God and not a priest.

Disrespectful to others if I carry - anywhere? _It seems so_? Thanks for telling me your opinion, but I don't know of many around my neck of the woods who feel that way. That includes _pastors._ _Sneaking_ them into church? Again, you are building straw arguments.

As far as your thoughts of why one should go to church, I may pray and reflect wherever I am. I also receive teaching, but not in church. Just as you aren't in church every time the doors are open, I am at work or asleep when it is time to attend.

_Discharging a weapon_ is the same as the term, _homicide_. Homicide means the taking of a human life. It doesn't mean either justified, manslaughter or murder. Likewise, "discharging a weapon" simply means just that. It doesn't mean negligent, self-defense or murder. Again, you are building a scenario of guns going off, willy-nilly, in church. It doesn't happen.

Now, you are entitled to your opinion, but not entitled to shove it on me. If you and I were in church, I was carrying, and you were feeling disrespected, that is on you and not me. Me exercising my God-given right offending you is yours to bear. When the doors are crashed open by those who are not there to reflect and are armed with weapons meant to murder and not for defense, it would be those with weapons who would be able to stop them and not you.



> And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.


 I'll listen to Jesus and not you.


----------



## Mish (Nov 5, 2013)

Ok everyone, I just had a little chat with God and he says to contact him Monday thru Friday, between 9am and 5pm. He will answer any questions you have about guns in church..
Now, let's change the subject. 
Thanks!!


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Mish said:


> Ok everyone, I just had a little chat with God and he says to contact him Monday thru Friday, between 9am and 5pm. He will answer any questions you have about guns in church..
> Now, let's change the subject.
> Thanks!!


I don't believe you. As a matter of fact, I know better. God isn't customer support for just about every single company I have ever needed to contact because of their crappy product.


----------



## James m (Mar 11, 2014)

Mish said:


> Ok everyone, I just had a little chat with God and he says to contact him Monday thru Friday, between 9am and 5pm. He will answer any questions you have about guns in church..
> Now, let's change the subject.
> Thanks!!


Does he still have the same cell # ??


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Slippy said:


> No priest in this world will tell me what to do bucko! You can write that down.


If you don't want to be a soldier of christ that's your choice. There is no guns in heaven, and the house of God there should not be any either. Now if a priest thinks there is a danger for whatever reason he should make that judgement call. Don't love your gun over God, it's not worth it. I will pray for your soul Mr. Slippy. Have a blessed day.


----------



## Mish (Nov 5, 2013)

Denton said:


> I don't believe you. As a matter of fact, I know better. God isn't customer support for just about every single company I have ever needed to contact because of their crappy product.


Alright, I'll admit it wasn't God. It was my dog. I asked him about the gun stuff and he barked twice, then went outside and pissed on the fence.
I understood what he was trying to say, though.


----------



## Dubyagee (Nov 9, 2012)

Im busy Monday too


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Mish said:


> Alright, I'll admit it wasn't God. It was my dog. I asked him about the gun stuff and he barked twice, then went outside and pissed on the fence.
> I understood what he was trying to say, though.


That the right to defend one's self doesn't end when one is in a public gathering, or that companies have no desire to do a thing but make me slam my phone against the wall?


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

Mish said:


> Ok everyone, I just had a little chat with God and he says to contact him Monday thru Friday, between 9am and 5pm. He will answer any questions you have about guns in church..
> Now, let's change the subject.
> Thanks!!


DON'T MOCK THE LORD! He died for your sins, he deserves more respect than you are showing, even if your are a heathen. I thought this was a christian forum not an "atheists" group.

Galatians 6:6-10 Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor. Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.

Revelation 20:9-10 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> DON'T MOCK THE LORD! He died for your sins, he deserves more respect than you are showing, even if your are a heathen. I thought this was a christian forum not an "atheists" group.
> 
> Galatians 6:6-10 Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor. Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
> 
> Revelation 20:9-10 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


Actually, this is a prepper/survivalist forum. All are welcome, Christian or not. Evangelism is not a part of this forum.

Read the rules. They'll help you discuss things without getting in trouble.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I got this one, Mish...


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> If you don't want to be a soldier of christ that's your choice. There is no guns in heaven, and the house of God there should not be any either. Now if a priest thinks there is a danger for whatever reason he should make that judgement call. Don't love your gun over God, it's not worth it. I will pray for your soul Mr. Slippy. Have a blessed day.


First, I appreciate the prayers. Second, ######## Third, I don't need a priest to tell me when danger or evil is about. Evil exists here on Earth and not in heaven.

What we just learned from your little ramblings, is that people just like you and your ilk have contributed greatly to the demise of The United States of America. Again, please do not vote any more.


----------



## 6811 (Jan 2, 2013)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> That's just not true, A God's house of worship is the only place where you can pray to God and reflect. Hoping to hit a target is not praying, but if you are praying to hit a target then you really should practice more cause your not a good enough shot even by your own standards.


No that's not true, church is certainly not the only place you can pray. I don't go to church anymore other than for work. I still pray and give thanks to my God. I can pray in my room, while taking a walk in the woods, sometimes I pray while enjoying a motorcycle ride. Thanking God for allowing me to enjoy this wonderful world he created.

As for asking a priest permission if I can carry, that won't happen. It's easier to say sorry later on that to ask permission and be turned down.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

I'm starting to think Maine Marine is trolling us... This buggybugout guy sounds a lot like MM preban. 

But seriously this is a prime example of picking out the exception and acting like it's the rule. 

REALITY CHECK: People are stupid. We live in a society that requires instructions on toothpicks. Don't believe me? Go look. People cut themselves on knives, sever their own limbs on chainsaws, overdose on anything a human can overdose on, shoot themselves, crash their cars, slam their fingers in things they are shutting, etc. You get my point? 

People will do stupid Sierra. 

My best advice is remove all the warning labels, and let nature take its course. The people left over will be smarter and happier.


----------



## Mish (Nov 5, 2013)




----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> DON'T MOCK THE LORD! He died for your sins, he deserves more respect than you are showing, even if your are a heathen. I thought this was a christian forum not an "atheists" group.
> 
> Galatians 6:6-10 Nevertheless, the one who receives instruction in the word should share all good things with their instructor. Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
> 
> Revelation 20:9-10 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.


Woah, wait, wut?

You tell us don't mock the Lord, then post a verse saying he CANNOT BE mocked?

Make up your mind dude, jeez.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I swear, if this thread goes religion, I am going Pentecostal.
(gonna lay hands on y'all. I'm not Pentecostal, so if the hands are closed tightly, it is only because I am not trained)


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Denton said:


> I swear, if this thread goes religion, I am going Pentecostal.
> (gonna lay hands on y'all. I'm not Pentecostal, so if the hands are closed tightly, it is only because I am not trained)


Now that made me smile.

Out of respect for my favorite moderators who come to my rescue faithfully, I will bow out of this hapless thread. Peace.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Slippy said:


> First, I appreciate the prayers. Second, ######## Third, I don't need a priest to tell me when danger or evil is about. Evil exists here on Earth and not in heaven.
> 
> What we just learned from your little ramblings, is that people just like you and your ilk have contributed greatly to the demise of The United States of America. Again, please do not vote any more.


Reminds me of the underpants gnomes from South Park.


----------



## dsdmmat (Nov 9, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> If you don't want to be a soldier of christ that's your choice. There is no guns in heaven, and the house of God there should not be any either. Now if a priest thinks there is a danger for whatever reason he should make that judgement call. Don't love your gun over God, it's not worth it. I will pray for your soul Mr. Slippy. Have a blessed day.


When your argument isn't worth a crap, throw the religion card.

Check


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> If you don't want to be a soldier of christ that's your choice. There is no guns in heaven, and the house of God there should not be any either. Now if a priest thinks there is a danger for whatever reason he should make that judgement call. Don't love your gun over God, it's not worth it. I will pray for your soul Mr. Slippy. Have a blessed day.


It may be true there are no weapons in heaven, but if you will recall the Gospel, Jesus himself advised his followers here on earth to be armed. "Let he who hath no sword sell his cloak and buy one."
I don't know where you live, but in my area many churches have designated men carrying concealed weapons to protect the congregation. Southern Baptists are who I am familiar with. Not just any, but those churches that belong to the SBC. I can not speak for other demominations.


----------



## BuggyBugoutBag (Jul 20, 2015)

rice paddy daddy said:


> It may be true there are no weapons in heaven, but if you will recall the Gospel, Jesus himself advised his followers here on earth to be armed. "Let he who hath no sword sell his cloak and buy one."
> I don't know where you live, but in my area many churches have designated men carrying concealed weapons to protect the congregation. Southern Baptists are who I am familiar with. Not just any, but those churches that belong to the SBC. I can not speak for other demominations.


Thanks for sharing! I support that if the priest is OK with having designated men carrying. Trying to sneak and carry a gun in without the priest's blessings is what I was saying was wrong. My local church used to be very against guns inside the church but they started allowing them in the basement and then with all the recent shootings in the last several years they started allowing several people to carry. They don't always carry but they are allowed to. Our local priest was a bit hesitant but decided if only a few were allowed then that would ensure everybody could come and pray and feel safe. One of the guys is a deacon, another one is a teacher in the religious programs on wed. Another guy is a retired cop in the city. A few others I think has gotten the priest's permission but I don't know who they are. Mostly our priests wants to make sure the person with guns are long standing members of this church and has gotten a good deal amount of time to pray with the priest to ensure he is of mind to defend God's church. Thanks again for sharing the gospel!


----------



## Stick (Sep 29, 2014)

Boy, this thread to just went all to hell, didn't it?


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

BuggyBugoutBag said:


> The states should require the standards be set for there own counties and towns NOT the federal government.


nope sorry... here in PA we have had towns try to make it impossible to have a gun... they lost in court

The right to own a gun is a federally protected right


----------



## A Watchman (Sep 14, 2015)

There are weapons in my Church at every service, but we are just a bunch of crazy Baptists. I attend a large Church that hires local police officers, who in uniform and armed have a minimal prescience. But they can be seen. They are not a distraction.

I remember when it wasn't so. Today in this world of deceit and evil, it is a necessary precaution. I am for carrying weapons at my home and in my car. Places I pray and worship regularly also. So as well, I am okay with a little backup while I worship in Church.


----------

