• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NRA executive suggests slain Charleston pastor to blame for gun deaths

Emanuel A.M.E. Church did not allow guns. We can all see how that turned out.

And if it were legal, it is still the choice of the churchgoers to carry or not. Your point really isn't relevant and still smells of blaming the victims.
 
that seems to be a bit of hyperbole. the killer is responsible but disarmed victims are easier to kill. we saw lots of lefties blame Adam Lanza's mom for the sandy hook murders as well.

Pond scum-LOL. the fact is, people who don't like the NRA are going to pretend what this guy said was horrible, those who find victim disarmament zones to be silly are going to note that this is another case where the body count was higher than it should have been if someone had been able to legally carry

No. We see things like this happen even in places where it is legal to carry. People still have the right to choose whether they carry a gun or not. Further, as pro-2A people constantly say, gun laws won't stop criminals from getting guns. No gun-free zones won't stop psychopaths from doing these kinds of things... and in these cases is it always SOLELY the fault of the psychopath. It is never the fault of the individual who choose to not have a weapon. And yes, the moron from the NRA was a moron. His timing was idiotic and thoughtless, and his implied blaming the victim was plain stupid.

If we want to reduce gun violence, we need to make mental health services more available. Pretty much every one of these killers had some significant mental health issues.
 
not playing that game Gina. The killer was the cause of the deaths. Obama blaming our gun rights as a response was IMHO worse than the NRA guy blaming the pastor for creating a gun free zone. I'd be curious to know if any of those killed would have carried if the pastor had allowed it. If not, the entire argument is moot and stupid and the NRA guy would have no merit to his argument as to this massacre

I would say that since what COULD have happened is nothing but speculation with far too many variables to have any reasonable response, both Obama's and the NRA guy's comments were equally stupid.
 
Not everyone will have the optimum treatments, and even if they did-some will still occasionally do things like this. Its not common, but then again neither are these shootings.

And just as pro-2A people would say that allowing more access for those who carry guns could reduce incidents like this, having more access to mental health services could also reduce incidents like this. Nothing is going to absolutely prevent them.
 
gee that is just plain ignorant. what about it being a holy place makes it immune to attacks. this is the second mass shooting in a church in recent memory. don't you get it that people who want to kill others are going to pick areas that cause the most shock and allow the shooter the best chance of killing lots of people? Common sense tells me that if it was "God's house" he would strike down a killer before the killer could kill. but that didn't happen either did it? I am not going to debate the wisdom of religion but pretending assholes who want to kill pay any attention to "God" or other such things is just plain STUPID

If the church is worried about crazies with guns storming in, hire an armed guard to stand outside. If you lack the common sense to know that it's totally inappropriate to bring a gun to church, I can't help you.
 
I have no issue with someone wanting to carry in a place of worship. I see no reason for anyone to be prevented from doing so. I also see no reason to condemn anyone for choosing not to.
 
People go to a church to learn about the teachings of Jesus Christ and this guy wants eveyone to be carrying like they are going to war.

It's painful and very disgusting to see what the NRA of today has turned into when you compare it to the NRA of 40-50 years ago. Now they are nothing but a lobby for the gun manufacturers. They don't give a **** about anything, or anyone else.
 
Last edited:
The gun free zone is irrelevant. I attend a church. Concealed carry is allowed here. I know the people I am with. I know them well. Not one person in there carries a gun just because it is legal. There is 0 reason to believe that even if they could have been allowed to carry anyone would have or that it would have mattered. It could have made it worse.

What ifs are pointless. Noone knows which is my point that this being a gun free zone is irrelevant.

What we do know is the people who were attacked and the laws in SC are not to blame. Saying this senator is even partly to blame because he failed to enact laws to allow people to carry guns in churches is a stupid and ignorant attempt to politicize this incident. This NRA exec needs to be bitch slapped hard enough to continually remind him to not exploit tragic deaths for political gain.

And I am not anti gun. I dont think we really need more gun control. I dont think more gun control would have helped either. All gun control and anti gun control arguments are irrelevant to this incident. This is not about gun control anymore than it is about gay marriage, illegal aliens, the world series, or low calorie brownies.

We'll never know who might have been in the habit of carrying a gun who would have had one on. But we know that it wasn't allowed. And we know that no one had one except the bad guy. You see, in reality, laws just make it easier to arrest the bad guy. They don't stop crime at all.

As far as some bitch-slapping ' needed, I agree. It could start with our CIC.
 
Cotton might be "insensitive" and a "monster," but he's got a point: Another mass shooting in a "gun free zone."

And to take this to its eventual conclusion - do people really want to live in society where nearly everyone is armed in all sorts of places doing all sorts of things all the time? Is that progress or regression back to the wilds of some communities in the 1800's ..... at least in myth or fiction of the old west?
 
And if it were legal, it is still the choice of the churchgoers to carry or not.

True, but if things go south don't blame the gun and the larger society and say that we should all be lambs to be led to slaughter while "forgiving" the wolf. Personally, I'll leave the forgiveness part to God and Jesus.

Your point really isn't relevant and still smells of blaming the victims.

Relevancy and blame are separate issues. I don't see pointing out a logical truth as laying blame. On the other hand, being alive instead of dead is relevant even if it's just based on speculation.
 
Last edited:
People go to a church to learn about the teachings of Jesus Christ and this guy wants eveyone to be carrying like they are going to war.

It's painful and very disgusting to see what the NRA of today has turned into when you compare it to the NRA of 40-50 years ago. Now they are nothing but a lobby for the gun manufacturers. They don't give a **** about anything, or anyone else.

Excellent point. Much has been written clearly documenting how the NRA became a right wing organization changing its position on many things and leaving all common sense behind over the last few decades.
 
Well, I think we all know who is going to be on the next cover of Rolling Stones magazine! :shoot

Are the Stones on tour again? Is AARP the tour sponsor?
 
And to take this to its eventual conclusion - do people really want to live in society where nearly everyone is armed in all sorts of places doing all sorts of things all the time? Is that progress or regression back to the wilds of some communities in the 1800's ..... at least in myth or fiction of the old west?

Short answer? No. I don't think anyone wants to live in an uncivil society where they feel a need to be armed. They also probably wish we didn't need firemen and emergency rooms and all the other things we hope we'll never use. But we should keep in perspective that, even as open carry and castle doctrine laws have proliferated, violent crime, including homicide, has been trending down. While these mass shooting are still relatively rare, a common thread in many of them is that the perpetrator was "troubled" or suffered some sort of mental illness. That's where we should be focusing our efforts.
 
And to take this to its eventual conclusion - do people really want to live in society where nearly everyone is armed in all sorts of places doing all sorts of things all the time? Is that progress or regression back to the wilds of some communities in the 1800's ..... at least in myth or fiction of the old west?

This begs the question of whether our society is becoming so unsafe that people who don’t ordinarily carry are considering doing so, even in church. Talking about this is a reaction rather than an action.
 
Short answer? No. I don't think anyone wants to live in an uncivil society where they feel a need to be armed. They also probably wish we didn't need firemen and emergency rooms and all the other things we hope we'll never use. But we should keep in perspective that, even as open carry and castle doctrine laws have proliferated, violent crime, including homicide, has been trending down. While these mass shooting are still relatively rare, a common thread in many of them is that the perpetrator was "troubled" or suffered some sort of mental illness. That's where we should be focusing our efforts.

I agree with you 100% that we need far far far more efforts in identifying and fighting mental illness.

And you are correct that things like open carry and castle doctrines and more and more obsession with what the gun lobby inappropriately calls "gun rights" has prospered and thrived over the last decade or two. Which leads us back to the question i raised as to the type of society we want to live in. Quite frankly I really do not care one iota if every house in America has a gun in it and people have them in their cars and places of business as long as they follow the law. I accept that America is different regarding guns and it is part of our culture - for better or worse.

But I am also very much against the growth in things like open carry and the announced purpose of some of the devotees of the practice to desensitize people to seeing guns in public - especially the more modern or more military looking weaponry that some sport with a macho pride. I truly DO NOT want to live in a more gun-centric USA.
 
As I said above, you must assume that because you 'know how to use it' that others do. I don't make that assumption. And in a place as statistically as safe as a church, there is no reason for anyone, rational or irrational, to worry whether you do or don't know what you're doing. Worry whether your child will take it out of your wife's purse, and shoot me, you'll leave it on the back of the toilet, drop it, etc.



OK, I guess, but so what?



It was sarcasm. I don't believe your story that almost everyone in any area had carry permits or that it was why some area was safe from violent crime for 30 years. Criminals are typically very stupid people, as you know. That they knew this and accounted for it defies logic.



Holy strawman Batman!! It's late and this discussion is deteriorating. I'll pass further comment tonight.

so no, you cannot make a rational argument why a church is somehow not going to be attacked.

statistically we just had a church attacked.
 
I would say that since what COULD have happened is nothing but speculation with far too many variables to have any reasonable response, both Obama's and the NRA guy's comments were equally stupid.

that's legitimate
 
If the church is worried about crazies with guns storming in, hire an armed guard to stand outside. If you lack the common sense to know that it's totally inappropriate to bring a gun to church, I can't help you.

your definition of common sense is not sensical to me. I guess I just don't find a church or parishioners much different than other assembly areas. No one has been able to explain why a church should be different than a school, a mall, a car dealership et c
 
But I am also very much against the growth in things like open carry and the announced purpose of some of the devotees of the practice to desensitize people to seeing guns in public - especially the more modern or more military looking weaponry that some sport with a macho pride. I truly DO NOT want to live in a more gun-centric USA.

The impetus behind open carry laws was to close a loophole in concealed carry laws in which a person could be called to task if he inadvertently exposed his weapon in public. I agree that the sort of "in your face" parading of military-style weapons in public is probably not productive and was not the original intent of these laws.
 
so no, you cannot make a rational argument why a church is somehow not going to be attacked.

statistically we just had a church attacked.

Speaking of statistics, I Googled on church violence: Ministry Violence Statistics

From USA Today in 2013:

"This is the norm in our world's culture and there's a need for security wherever we go nowadays," said Gilchriest, who oversees security efforts at Freedom Christian and also is the CEO of Opaque Security, an international company that trains churches and synagogues to protect congregations. "We need to be prepared."

It is an increasingly common sentiment in churches, synagogues and mosques nationwide as the number of deadly episodes at sanctuaries has soared over the last decade, and mass shootings at elementary schools, malls and movie theaters have left Americans feeling like it could happen anywhere.

Just last month, the federal government stepped in with a first-ever report outlining security recommendations for houses of worship. The 38-page plan, released just days after a man was shot and wounded during a Catholic Mass in Salt Lake City, advises congregations to plan for potential emergencies, including what police call random "active shooter" situations. Among the advice offered by the federal government: run, hide or, as a last resort, fight.

Churches boost security as violent incidents grow

From the CS Monitor in 2014:

The shooting of two priests at a Phoenix church is the latest in more than 780 deadly attacks in US places of worship in the past 15 years. Priest killed: How often does violence enter churches? - CSMonitor.com
 
It's painful and very disgusting to see what the NRA of today has turned into when you compare it to the NRA of 40-50 years ago. Now they are nothing but a lobby for the gun manufacturers. They don't give a **** about anything, or anyone else.

Actually, the NRA is a genuine grassroots organization of several million members that has stayed true to its core of sponsoring and supporting the shooting sports and training firearms instructors even while defending the individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms against organizations such as "Everytown for Gun Safety" that are really nothing more than "grassroots" fronts for people like Michael Bloomberg and their millions.
 
The impetus behind open carry laws was to close a loophole in concealed carry laws in which a person could be called to task if he inadvertently exposed his weapon in public. I agree that the sort of "in your face" parading of military-style weapons in public is probably not productive and was not the original intent of these laws.

agree with all of the above. BTW NBC is whining about guns again as two black guests were supporting what Obama said
 
Speaking of statistics, I Googled on church violence: Ministry Violence Statistics

From USA Today in 2013:

"This is the norm in our world's culture and there's a need for security wherever we go nowadays," said Gilchriest, who oversees security efforts at Freedom Christian and also is the CEO of Opaque Security, an international company that trains churches and synagogues to protect congregations. "We need to be prepared."

It is an increasingly common sentiment in churches, synagogues and mosques nationwide as the number of deadly episodes at sanctuaries has soared over the last decade, and mass shootings at elementary schools, malls and movie theaters have left Americans feeling like it could happen anywhere.

Just last month, the federal government stepped in with a first-ever report outlining security recommendations for houses of worship. The 38-page plan, released just days after a man was shot and wounded during a Catholic Mass in Salt Lake City, advises congregations to plan for potential emergencies, including what police call random "active shooter" situations. Among the advice offered by the federal government: run, hide or, as a last resort, fight.

Churches boost security as violent incidents grow

From the CS Monitor in 2014:

The shooting of two priests at a Phoenix church is the latest in more than 780 deadly attacks in US places of worship in the past 15 years. Priest killed: How often does violence enter churches? - CSMonitor.com

excellent

what is pathetic is the sentiments of several posters who just assumed that churches are somehow different or that parishioners who carry other places are "psychopaths" to carry in a church or that someone else carrying in a church "diminishes" their worship experience". or finally that God will somehow make a church immune to criminal attack
 
Actually, the NRA is a genuine grassroots organization of several million members that has stayed true to its core of sponsoring and supporting the shooting sports and training firearms instructors even while defending the individual right of Americans to keep and bear arms against organizations such as "Everytown for Gun Safety" that are really nothing more than "grassroots" fronts for people like Michael Bloomberg and their millions.


in the 1960s, the Democrats adopted gun control to fight off charges that Democrats were weak on crime and the DNC used gun restrictions as a way of pretending they were DOING SOMETHING to fight crime without actually upsetting their large constituency block that tended to be hostile to crackdowns on street criminals. That forced the NRA to become the opposition to the scheme to scape goat gun owners that the Dems were engaged in
 
Back
Top Bottom