kallend 2,147
Quote
I refer you also to Luke 22:36.
We should all buy SWORDS? Do you have stock in Wilkinson?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Quote[replyI guess thou shalt not kill was blacked out of that churches commandments and replaced with thou shalt have well armed and trained guards at the doors of the house of god, because surely smith and wesson shall protect thee when the lord is otherwise occupied.
Actually, the text was "Thou shalt not MURDER." - a bit of editing was done from the original Hebrew.
I refer you also to Luke 22:36.
Does ancient Hebrew make the same distinction between those two concepts the same way English does? What are the two words?
QuoteQuoteQuoteAll you gun enthusiasts can do is whine "I dont see a way to do it " whine whine whine.
What a cop out. All of you!
*Inserts "Get your head out of the clouds and face reality" remark.*
Eventually you'll have to accept that criminals break laws. Throw more laws at them if you want to. The laws haven't solved the problem, and making more laws won't, either.
Here' some reality:
PS I didn't call for more laws. I called for uniform laws and for gun owners to take responsibility for the security of their own weapons.
Hardly an unreasonable request; that someone who wants to possess a lethal weapon should take responsibility for it's security.
That's already a law in most states. In California, you are required to keep your gun secure or you can face charges. Fortunately, there's an exception: If someone steals your gun during the commission of a crime (burglary, robbery, assault) you're not responsible. Thus, if I spend $1000 on a gun safe and someone comes along and gets the guns anyway while robbing my house, I'm not responsible. There's federal laws that require a background check before buying a gun legally, and it's already illegal to steal them.
What about that, exactly, would you change? How would you make guns harder to get for criminals without making them harder to get for non-criminals?
PS: Nice graph. Isn't it wonderful how you can make the data points fit any curve you like by leaving off the data points that don't fit? Where's Switzerland on that graph, again? I'm surprised that a professor would mistake correlation for causation.
7CP#1 | BTR#2 | Payaso en fuego Rodriguez
"I want hot chicks in my boobies!"- McBeth
"I want hot chicks in my boobies!"- McBeth
nerdgirl 0
QuoteI refer you also to Luke 22:36.
Along with Joel 3:10.
And, perhaps, keep in mind and at heart Isaiah 2:4 and Micah 4:3.
VR/Marg
Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying
kallend 2,147
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAll you gun enthusiasts can do is whine "I dont see a way to do it " whine whine whine.
What a cop out. All of you!
*Inserts "Get your head out of the clouds and face reality" remark.*
Eventually you'll have to accept that criminals break laws. Throw more laws at them if you want to. The laws haven't solved the problem, and making more laws won't, either.
Here' some reality:
PS I didn't call for more laws. I called for uniform laws and for gun owners to take responsibility for the security of their own weapons.
Hardly an unreasonable request; that someone who wants to possess a lethal weapon should take responsibility for it's security.
That's already a law in most states. In California, you are required to keep your gun secure or you can face charges. Fortunately, there's an exception: If someone steals your gun during the commission of a crime (burglary, robbery, assault) you're not responsible. Thus, if I spend $1000 on a gun safe and someone comes along and gets the guns anyway while robbing my house, I'm not responsible. There's federal laws that require a background check before buying a gun legally, and it's already illegal to steal them.
What about that, exactly, would you change? How would you make guns harder to get for criminals without making them harder to get for non-criminals?
PS: Nice graph. Isn't it wonderful how you can make the data points fit any curve you like by leaving off the data points that don't fit? Where's Switzerland on that graph, again? I'm surprised that a professor would mistake correlation for causation.
Why don't you fix it for us? You can also separate out by US state too, to show how the states with highest rates of gun ownership also have the highest gun fatality rates in the USA (Louisiana, Alabama, Tennessee, Arizona, TX).
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Actually, the text was "Thou shalt not MURDER." - a bit of editing was done from the original Hebrew.
I refer you also to Luke 22:36.
I know. I just found it a bit ironic that of all places you would think you would be protected by god, it would be "his house". Guess not. I mean, they couldn't even kill people in churches in the Highlander movies. That has to count for something, right? I also thought it was a bit ironic that the head guy at the church was calling the guard a hero. Just sounded weird to me. I expect the leader of a church to be talking about compassion, tolerance, inclusion, forgiveness, and love. Not this guy. His hero is a woman with a gun who took someone's life. Not saying I don't agree, but it just seems so unbelievably out of place.
I don't get the Luke 22:36 reference, but then again the bible seems to be the only book that you can extract a paragraph out of a one thousand page book and act like it has some meaning all by itself (I know, off topic)
Glad to hear your brother is ok. I missed it the first time around.