More Guns, Less Crime

Some of you may remember the masterpiece of research and presentation on the matter of guns against the insanity of those who want to take away the rights of law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves and their families against unjust aggressors. The book is titled More Guns, Less Crime, by John Lott, Jr., first published in 1998. It is now in its third edition.

Here is just another among hundreds of cases we could examine that demonstrate how guns can be instruments that save the lives of the innocent. When two armed men attempted a home invasion robbery of a home in Ladson, South Carolina, where a 13 year-old boy was home alone, thank God he was able to quickly acquire his mother’s  legally-purchased pistol to defend himself.

To make a long story short, a gun fight ensued leaving one of the invading felons dead, and the other eventually in custody. The boy was uninjured. See the full story here:

http://www.worldpoliticus.com/6-time-felon-killed-shootout-13-year-old-home-invasion/

I, for one, am glad the Catholic Church is not pacifist, and, in fact, teaches, in CCC 2264-2265:

Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow…

[2265] Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of  the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm.

It is unthinkable to me how anyone, much less a Christian, could really believe the government should disarm its citizenry.

Some will say at this point that there is a legitimate tradition of pacifism in the Church. And there is. If you want to read an article I wrote about that, click here. So if someone wants to be a pacifist that is one thing. But to force others, even a father like me, who has the responsibility to protect my wife and seven children, to disarm so that he, or I, cannot protect my family, is unconscionable. In the end, the only thing gun control accomplishes is the rendering of law-abiding citizens defenseless against armed aggressors.

Thank God this 13 year-old boy had recourse to what became the ultimate equalizer in this battle of and for his life!

Don’t anyone dare to try and take my guns away from me and my family! Not gonna’ happen, folks!

 

12 thoughts on “More Guns, Less Crime

  1. This is idiotic, no one with any credibility is arguing to "disarm the citizenry". Putting legislation in place for proper background checks, waiting periods and proper gun protocol is not disarming the citizenry. This is a straw man argument.

    1. I speak to people all the time who want to “disarm the citizenry,” or who, at the very least, want to do more than just pass laws to implement “background checks, waiting periods, and proper gun protocol.” I was just recently told that if I really had faith, I would trust God to take care of me and my family. I wouldn’t need a gun. Another person told me I can just “hide” if I experience a home invasion. And these were both devout Catholics to whom I was speaking at the time.
      As to your point. I do agree that background checks could be helpful in keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally insane, but I am very skeptical of the government’s ability to accomplish this. The government tends to swat a fly with a 2,000 pound bomb. And even though the other two things you mention will do absolutely nothing to curb either terrorism or crime in general, I would have little problem with them being enacted into law. I have problems with situations like we have here in California, where they make it as hard as possible for law abiding citizens (like my wife, for example) to get concealed weapons permits, and they do silly things like outlaw high capacity magazines, and “bullet buttons” as they are called. All these laws do is weaken the law-abiding citizen’s ability to defend himself and his family. In other words, I have to abide by these silly laws. And I do. But the bad guys don’t.

    2. Oh yes, they want far more than proper background checks. If you really think that the total gun ban isn’t their goal then you are truly in denial. States like New York, CT, Massachusetts are pretty much already there. Australia and England were disarmed decades ago.

      Here is something interesting. Most of the phony “shootings” we have had in the recent years were “carried out” by the people who had proper background checks already, at least in the movie version of the events.

      So obviously, if you buy into this, which most people do, background checks don’t work. Logically, the only solution to this “problem” is to ban all the guns completely, and that’s what they are aiming at.

    1. I do believe that “more guns” in the hands of lawful citizens translates into less crime. It’s common sense. Every time government has disarmed its citizens in history, you don’t have a good outcome! We have to fight to maintain our freedoms, my friend!

      1. Yes, I agree. If people would study all the recent “shootings” they would see that they were all staged by the shadow govt for the purpose of enacting gun control. These events weren’t even real. B-movie production with paid crisis actors pretending like they were victims or victim’s relatives. Almost always calling for gun control. I want to be very clear, nobody died in any of these “shootings”.

        Check out these videos to see my point:

        Santa Barbara Shooting Hoax Actor Richard Martinez EXPOSED!!! MUST SEE!
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQEcVbixRhM

        Charleston Shooting Hoax Ultimate Exposed (Redsilverj)
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsA66EtYahg

        Sandy Hook Hoax Ultimate Case Closed (Redsilverj)
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B3kC-zQfRM

        Houston Shooting Hoax EXPOSED – Have Vomit Bag Ready!
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MESGm1sKvm0
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHRgk5IiaNk

        There is so much more bro.

  2. I agree with what is written in the blog, but allowing the links to the hoax theory videos to remain on this page discredits the entire page. The entire site even. Tim, you have to moderate the comment box or risk being labeled a crank.

  3. I am sure you will not post this, as you have not posted any of my other comments because I am not a radical righty. . You cherry pick the Catechism just as a Bible Believer cherry picks verses. To say that the right to self defense allows you to shoot people is not following the path of Non-Violence of Jesus or the Catechism. I , too, own guns, but I would ALWAYS try to pull the attacker or invader into a higher Spiritual realm and thus mirror his violence back to him through Non-Violence. If it costs me my life, then I will have died trying to bring another soul to Jesus.

  4. I am sure you will not post this, as you have not posted any of my other comments because I am not a radical righty. . You cherry pick the Catechism just as a Bible Believer cherry picks verses. To say that the right to self defense allows you to shoot people is not following the path of Non-Violence of Jesus or the Catechism. I , too, own guns, but I would ALWAYS try to pull the attacker or invader into a higher Spiritual realm and thus mirror his violence back to him through Non-Violence. If it costs me my life, then I will have died trying to bring another soul to Jesus.

    1. Hello Karen,
      I bet I will post your comment! :)
      In fact, I am not aware of a single post of yours that I have not posted, except for the one I see below that I have not read yet. It will be posted after I get a chance to read it.
      Thanks for posting, and God bless!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>