teaman

“Let’s be clear: At some point we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries,” President Obama said in response to the murders that took place at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church in Charleston, South Carolina.

Knowing that he had misspoke, he clarified his statement: “It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.”

Mexico has a lot of mass gun violence even though its gun laws are very restrictive. "Mexican citizens and legal residents may purchase new non-military firearms for self-protection or hunting only after receiving approval of a petition to the Defense Ministry, which performs extensive background checks. The allowed weapons are restricted to relatively small calibers and may only be purchased legally from the Defense Ministry."

Democratic presidential candidate Martin O'Malley is "pissed off" over the Charleston church shooting. He contends that having someone armed in a church setting is not a solution. It's not the solution, but it's a solution when there is the potential for evil literally to walk into the sanctuary, sit with his potential murder victims at prayer, and shoot them without remorse.

Run the Jewels rapper Killer Mike tweeted: “What happened in Charleston is an act of terror committed by a terrorist. Simple & plain. I wish those folks in that church had been armed."

Consider what happened at New Life Church in Colorado Springs.

"In 2007, former police officer Jeanne Assam was working as a plain clothed security guard at New Life Church in Colorado Springs. When a man showed up on Sunday armed to the teeth and ready to carry out a massacre, Assam drew her weapon and stopped him before he could kill anyone inside."

What's the answer to a 26-year-old Austrian man of Bosnian heritage who injured 50 pedestrians and killing three with his car, and after "the car was stopped, the driver jumped out and attacked passers-by with a knife before he could be subdued and arrested." This happened today.1

Here are three proposed solutions by O'Malley, the former governor of Maryland, not of which would have stopped any of the mass shootings:

1. A national assault weapons ban. (The shooter used a hand gun)

2. Stricter background checks. (The shooter received the gun as a gift. He could have stolen it. He could have gotten the gun after a background check.)

3. Efforts to reduce straw-buying, like fingerprint requirements. (So-called "straw purchasers" are already illegal and did not stop passing the gun to the shooter unreported. Even if it had been reported, there was no way to predict how the gun would be used.)

Mass killers are not mentally ill; they are evil, a word that is not used much today since it assumes an older religious worldview where there was a God and good and evil could be explain in terms of man's fallen nature. Psychology is the new religion, and psychologists and psychiatrists are the new priests. Instead of the Lord's Supper where a person is to examine himself against an objective moral standard, that is, to evaluate his or her moral nature, the psychological priests give them drugs.

"Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep. But if we judged ourselves rightly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we will not be condemned along with the world" (1 Cor. 11:27-32).

There is no One ultimately to judge us. We're told that judging is the essence of a modern-day moral evil. And if we are to judge, by what standard?

Read more: "Liberal Toxic Culture Has Made Christians and Churches Easy Targets."

These mass shooters believed certain things that allowed them to justify their murderous ways. Without these beliefs, any weapons they had would have been unused.

Anders Behring Breivik killed 77 people in a bombing and a shooting rampage in Oslo, Norway, on July 22, 2011. On the second day of his trial, Breivik described the killings as “‘the most spectacular sophisticated political act in Europe since the Second World War’ and said he would do it over again.”

“At least seven people were killed when a teenaged gunman opened fire at a school in southern Finland on November 7, 2007 hours after a video was posted on YouTube predicting a massacre there. The gunman was a pupil at Jokela High School, a teacher who witnessed the attack told Reuters, and had walked through the school firing into classroom after classroom. . . . The YouTube video, entitled ‘Jokela High School Massacre—11/7/2007,’ was posted by a user called ‘Sturmgeist89.’ ‘I am prepared to fight and die for my cause,’ read a posting by a user of the same name. ‘I, as a natural selector, will eliminate all who I see unfit, disgraces of human race and failures of natural selection.’ Sturmgeist means storm spirit in German.”2" target="_blank">Sky News” does not include the “natural selector” and “natural selection” comments: He describes himself as “a social Darwinist.”3" target="_blank">Eight shot dead including principal in school massacre predicted in YouTube video,” Daily Mail online (Nov. 7, 2007).))

Worldviews matter, and liberalism has created a toxic worldview.

Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/23141/what-liberals-refuse-to-acknowledge-about-gun-violence/#BXyDX2Tv5cthWs9w.99

Unclet Loc: Amarillo, Tx

Libbies, can't change, teach, or ignore them. Wonder how they will fair with a less tolerant society takes over. I would predict, not to well.

peter11937 Loc: NYS

www.thereligionofpeace.com has a list of attacks by terrorists since 9/11.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

First thing out of the liberals mouth, it's the guns. Guns are the method but guns are the choice, at least here in the US. So ok we ban all guns so what's next to be ban. Knives, hammers, what? There willing to ban guns and I'm sure all guns would be turned in (only in a liberal's wet dream) so then what? OK crooks and bad people still have guns, they use those guns but liberals aren't in favor of putting those who use guns to kill other people to death, they act like they can save everybody.

The gun didn't kill anyone but liberals know that.

peter11937 Loc: NYS

The Army taught me to make lethal weapons from wire coal hangers, a sock and bar of soap, even a #2 pencil. It is man that decides to kill, not the object he holds.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

How about your bare hands? Snap a neck? Good for one person, maybe two.

Then why do liberals have this thing about guns and not hammers?

markinny

you will always be able to get guns illegally, period.

PeterS

How did the president misspeak? What he said was that it didn't happen in other advanced countries which is correct, it doesn't. Now the question begged is why? Why is the United States on the level of a Mexico instead of a very liberal and godless Europe? And since we all know your only purpose is to somehow blame all of this on liberals then why isn't Europe ripe with violence like in the US?

PeterS

No, but a gun means some with no training can kill with impunity whereas with you, it took intensive training. So exactly why is it we want to make it easier, instead of harder, for people to kill?

PeterS

Because with a hammer a 21 year old kid wouldn't be able to kill 9 people in just a few seconds...

W8_4_It

If a gang of 9 stages a home invasion, lets hope the homeowner has a freaking hammer. Brilliant.

peter11937 Loc: NYS

Not the point. Point is that people chose to live a civilized life or they do not. The founding documents understood this, which is why there is the second amendment, The SCOTUS agrees but also agrees that REASONABLE limit is permitted. Outright bans are not permitted. Remember the declaration of Independence, we have an unalienable right to LIFE, which presupposed a reasonable way to defend yourself. Today, that means reasonable access to a firearm. Not a 155mm self propelled howitzer , or an RPG or even am M-2 .50 cal Browning heavy machine gun. Futher we have tens millions of people here who are from some very violent societies, Honduras, Mexico, any of the 576 Islamic states, China and now Russia is once again on the march. twenty years ago Brighton Beach , LI NY was full of recent Russian immigrants and was a source of Russian firearms of any kind from the old USSR. Hell, thery were caught trying to sell nuclear subs, tanks , MiG aircraft and endless numbers of small arms. I spoke with a local modern machine shop, and they said given blueprints, their computerized shop could be turning out MAC-10's in a few hours.
The opening shots in our revolution were fires at the Brits. to prevent their seizing civilian arms , gunpowder and field pieces. The penalty for being unarmed is immense. Dr. John Rummel has the site "The Statistics of Democide" which might enlighten you to the dangers of unrestrained government and a helpless population. This will take some time to go over and understand, but it will be time well invested.

PeterS

No, but it was the point I was trying to make.

As for millions being from violent societies they are no more violent than we are here and mind you--violence in Mexico and South America is over servicing the drug trade to the United States. If not for the war on drugs, those societies would be more peaceable than ours!

And just who said they wanted to seize all our guns? Where was that argument ever made?

peter11937 Loc: NYS

Tat is the end game for the anti gun nuts. They have said so many rimes, 2nd amendment or not. Please check Dr. Rummel's work before responding.
That is always the end game.

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

But he sure could with a back pack full of TNT or nitro, that would kill more than 9 people.