-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
This was by no means a death threat.
All he did was tell a story that I have told many times on CC. Except I didn't use a particular name. Even if I did it wouldn't be a threat, and stating that someone carries a gun is not a threat either.
Praus, I love you to pieces. We get along awesome on this site, but you are dragging this one to the extreme.
All doulos is saying is we have the right to protect ourselves from harm. While trusting in God is the best protection of all we cannot sit and expect Him to do everything. From how I understand scripture God wants us to be able to take care of ourselves and each other, and protecting yourself and using self defense doesn't necessarily mean to kill.
All he did was tell a story that I have told many times on CC. Except I didn't use a particular name. Even if I did it wouldn't be a threat, and stating that someone carries a gun is not a threat either.
Praus, I love you to pieces. We get along awesome on this site, but you are dragging this one to the extreme.
All doulos is saying is we have the right to protect ourselves from harm. While trusting in God is the best protection of all we cannot sit and expect Him to do everything. From how I understand scripture God wants us to be able to take care of ourselves and each other, and protecting yourself and using self defense doesn't necessarily mean to kill.
A
Apology accepted. I encourage you to take a research and statistics course as well as a logics course at your local university. Knowing how to qualify and properly use data and information is critical to discovering truth.
In the meanwhile, try to seek out qualified sources even if they aren't the very best to support your assertions. They are usually broken into primary and secondary information sources. Here's an example of a secondary one (the type you will most likely be using) called NationMaster.
"NationMaster is a statistical website that aims to facilitate comparison of publicly available data on all countries of the world. Self-described as "a massive central data source," the developers bring together information found in a wide range of documents, including the Central Intelligence Agency World Fact Book and various United Nations reports and surveys. A wide range of demographic indicators are covered, including literacy rates, taxation levels, and murders per capita. These are also available in pie charts, scatterplots, and correlation graphs."
Though not the best source, it can provide adequate enough support to actually make an assertion of fact to drive discussions.
In this case, we see the following: Rapes statistics - countries compared - Nationmaster
As you can see they are aggregating reported and unreported (the latter speculative) data to assert that 1 in 16 males or 6.25% in the U.S. will commit a rape during their lifetime.
In the meanwhile, try to seek out qualified sources even if they aren't the very best to support your assertions. They are usually broken into primary and secondary information sources. Here's an example of a secondary one (the type you will most likely be using) called NationMaster.
"NationMaster is a statistical website that aims to facilitate comparison of publicly available data on all countries of the world. Self-described as "a massive central data source," the developers bring together information found in a wide range of documents, including the Central Intelligence Agency World Fact Book and various United Nations reports and surveys. A wide range of demographic indicators are covered, including literacy rates, taxation levels, and murders per capita. These are also available in pie charts, scatterplots, and correlation graphs."
Though not the best source, it can provide adequate enough support to actually make an assertion of fact to drive discussions.
In this case, we see the following: Rapes statistics - countries compared - Nationmaster
As you can see they are aggregating reported and unreported (the latter speculative) data to assert that 1 in 16 males or 6.25% in the U.S. will commit a rape during their lifetime.
A
P.S. I never called anyone a fool. What I did was qualify a behavior. Two different things. Please take a critical thinking course as well Praus.
Critical thinkers hold themselves responsible to certain standards of thinking:
1. Clarity (can you elaborate and give examples?)
2. Accuracy (how can we check, verify or test it?)
3. Precision (can you be more specific and how can we verify or test it?)
4. Relevance (how does it relate to the problem or how does it help with the issue?)
5. Depth (what factors make this a difficult problem and what are some of the complexities of this question?)
6. Breadth (do we need to look at this from another perspective?)
7. Logic (does all this make sense together and does what you say follow from the evidence?)
8. Significance (is this the most important problem to consider and which of the facts are most important?)
9. Fairness: (do I have any vested interest in this issue and have I examined my thinking for prejudice?)
Of course, they don't always achieve these standards or achieve them perfectly. Nobody is perfect. But they TRY to achieve them. If you were a critical thinker versed in logic, you would not have mistakenly asserted that I called you a fool but rather understood that I was calling the behavior of slandering/libeling oneself in asserting that one-third of all males are criminal rapists (when they are not) is "ignorant, irresponsible, and socially reckless" which it is, in fact.
Critical thinkers hold themselves responsible to certain standards of thinking:
1. Clarity (can you elaborate and give examples?)
2. Accuracy (how can we check, verify or test it?)
3. Precision (can you be more specific and how can we verify or test it?)
4. Relevance (how does it relate to the problem or how does it help with the issue?)
5. Depth (what factors make this a difficult problem and what are some of the complexities of this question?)
6. Breadth (do we need to look at this from another perspective?)
7. Logic (does all this make sense together and does what you say follow from the evidence?)
8. Significance (is this the most important problem to consider and which of the facts are most important?)
9. Fairness: (do I have any vested interest in this issue and have I examined my thinking for prejudice?)
Of course, they don't always achieve these standards or achieve them perfectly. Nobody is perfect. But they TRY to achieve them. If you were a critical thinker versed in logic, you would not have mistakenly asserted that I called you a fool but rather understood that I was calling the behavior of slandering/libeling oneself in asserting that one-third of all males are criminal rapists (when they are not) is "ignorant, irresponsible, and socially reckless" which it is, in fact.
S
No, not everyone has the right to even own a gun. Felons and those who are a danger to themselves and others cannot legally purchase a firearm in the united states, let alone carry it.
There is a NCIC background check for all concealed carry licences. That's federal. I don't know of a single state in the US that doesn't also do a background check at the local level. Trust me, they know if the applicant so much as ever got a speeding ticket. It's a process that takes weeks (sometimes months), and you're giving permission for the state issuing the license to dig into every bit of dirty laundry you have.
Many states even fingerprint applicants. Bad people don't get concealed carry licences, the barriers are already there.
If you're getting your statistics from major US news outlets, I can understand where your concern lies. Less than 1 percent of crimes committed in Texas are committed by individuals with carry licences. That's texas, a state where gun ownership levels are high, and there is a lot of emphasis on "manly honor." They allow guns in restaurants that sell liquor for crying out loud.
Most of the crime committed with guns in the US is committed with illegal guns. It's exactly the situation that happens in the UK now, where handguns are illegal.
True story, I have an acquantance who carries a gun (legally, with a permit). One night he stopped a woman from being raped. I also have a close friend who stopped a car jacking. These are law abiding citizens who are safety conscious. They never even fired a shot
Guns are not the monsters they are made out to be. This side of heaven, there are always going to be people who are intent on doing others harm. If you remove the possibility of a gun, people just use something else.
If you really want to see crime rates drop, then the ideal situation would be to not change a thing about firearms and self defense, but go for stricter mandatory minimum sentences for offenses involving any kind of weapon. No new laws needed, just start enforcing the ones already on the books. Criminals never have and never will obey the law any ways, so the only way to stop them is to make it so painful to break the law that they won't do it.
There is a NCIC background check for all concealed carry licences. That's federal. I don't know of a single state in the US that doesn't also do a background check at the local level. Trust me, they know if the applicant so much as ever got a speeding ticket. It's a process that takes weeks (sometimes months), and you're giving permission for the state issuing the license to dig into every bit of dirty laundry you have.
Many states even fingerprint applicants. Bad people don't get concealed carry licences, the barriers are already there.
If you're getting your statistics from major US news outlets, I can understand where your concern lies. Less than 1 percent of crimes committed in Texas are committed by individuals with carry licences. That's texas, a state where gun ownership levels are high, and there is a lot of emphasis on "manly honor." They allow guns in restaurants that sell liquor for crying out loud.
Most of the crime committed with guns in the US is committed with illegal guns. It's exactly the situation that happens in the UK now, where handguns are illegal.
True story, I have an acquantance who carries a gun (legally, with a permit). One night he stopped a woman from being raped. I also have a close friend who stopped a car jacking. These are law abiding citizens who are safety conscious. They never even fired a shot
Guns are not the monsters they are made out to be. This side of heaven, there are always going to be people who are intent on doing others harm. If you remove the possibility of a gun, people just use something else.
If you really want to see crime rates drop, then the ideal situation would be to not change a thing about firearms and self defense, but go for stricter mandatory minimum sentences for offenses involving any kind of weapon. No new laws needed, just start enforcing the ones already on the books. Criminals never have and never will obey the law any ways, so the only way to stop them is to make it so painful to break the law that they won't do it.
Wow. Thank you for trying to show why we need firearms.
Writing my death in a "modern day parable" should definitely prove how extremely wonderful Christian people need to carry guns.
I will continue to repeat what I said, my trust and protection is in the Lord. If you must mock that and my faith in God by writing about my death than go ahead.
May God judge between us.
Me too, I need like ten courses!
I'm so sad and sorry that when people I trust engage in "ignorant, irresponsible, and socially reckless" behavior by posting mendacious rape statistics and tricking me.
If the so-called "rape culture" is so bad I wonder why we can't just be honest about it.
I'm so sad and sorry that when people I trust engage in "ignorant, irresponsible, and socially reckless" behavior by posting mendacious rape statistics and tricking me.
If the so-called "rape culture" is so bad I wonder why we can't just be honest about it.
It's easier to talk in "parables", my friend. Especially modern day ones.
(Better yet, wish death upon a person who wishes to follow God and refuses to carry arms)
Jesus did it too right? Hmmm?
M
Per the articles of Constitution...as is with Federal as well
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTIONARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTSSEC. 5.
The military is subordinate to civil power. (read Civilian)
A standingarmy may not be maintained in peacetime. Soldiers may not be quartered in any house in wartime except as prescribed by law, or in peacetime without the owner's consent.
In other words, the people(the citizens) are the authority.
Standing Armies in time of peace are inconsistent with the principles of republican Governments, dangerous to the liberties of a free people, and generally converted into destructive engines for establishing despotism.
Knowing your own rights is ...liberty and freedom from tyranny
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTIONARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTSSEC. 5.
The military is subordinate to civil power. (read Civilian)
A standingarmy may not be maintained in peacetime. Soldiers may not be quartered in any house in wartime except as prescribed by law, or in peacetime without the owner's consent.
In other words, the people(the citizens) are the authority.
Standing Armies in time of peace are inconsistent with the principles of republican Governments, dangerous to the liberties of a free people, and generally converted into destructive engines for establishing despotism.
Knowing your own rights is ...liberty and freedom from tyranny
Last edited:
It's easier to talk in "parables", my friend. Especially modern day ones.
(Better yet, wish death upon a person who wishes to follow God and refuses to carry arms)
Jesus did it too right? Hmmm?
(Better yet, wish death upon a person who wishes to follow God and refuses to carry arms)
Jesus did it too right? Hmmm?
- Status