Catholic teaching does not define owning a gun as a God-given right. Catholic teaching says you have the right to defend yourself with whatever means are at hand. It does not say to which means you are entitled.
Sounds good to me.
Way too much gun for my taste!
What you want is something compact. Not crew served.
That is an inherent contradiction. If you have the right to self defense, but not a right to the tools of modern self-defense, the former is not really a right at all. The “means at hand” are simply inadequate in the modern world.
If someone is shooting at you, trying to kill you, what means would you want to “have at hand?” I would want a gun, and a better one than the bad guy has. You will never convince me otherwise. And I checked my list of who I believe about Church teaching. You weren’t on it.
You misunderstand the right. The right is a release from the sin of murder if you should happen to kill the aggressor. It is not a right to succeed in all possible situations.
There is no point to it if you can’t succeed. You and I will have to disagree on this.
As a Canadian, the gun culture in the U.S. is a bit absurd to me on the outside looking in. However, understanding that at this point in history, it is too far gone to try and take the guns away from citizens who have had the right to own guns since the founding of the country. Now, historically speaking, the second amendment was written when muskets were the actual firearm of choice, and it was designed to allow militia to take up arms against an oppressive government, but besides the point. There are more mass shootings and gun related murders in the United States than there are in any developed country on the planet. Is this as a result of the relaxed gun culture? Yes, BUT… and this is a huge BUT, I can understand the fear that citizens of the US have that would make them feel the need to own a, or multiple, guns based on the aforementioned point. All of this being said, you cannot expect people to give up something they’ve had for hundreds of years without causing much bigger problems. In terms of sin and our faith, it’s not a sin to own something like a gun, it’s a sin to use it maliciously to intentionally harm or kill without your own life being in danger.
No matter what gun you are allowed to have, there will still be circumstances where you will fail to protect yourself.
It can be dangerous in big cities. Big cities tend to be controlled by those from the Democrat party, like Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, St. Louis, Cleveland, Flint, Gary. They have more strict gun laws typically, yet they are still dangerous.
Supporting weapon rights, in order to defend innocents from aggression is Church teaching. It is not sinful.
Many crimes in American history could have been a lot worse if there were not gun carrying good Samaritans around.
If I can have the weapons I choose, with the training I have had, I will claim 90+% of the circumstances. Close enough. And you didn’t answer my question: If someone is shooting at you, trying to kill you, what means would you want to “have at hand?” Or would you turn the other cheek until it’s blown off?
What I would want and what I have a right to have are two different things.
So you still won’t answer the question. Interesting.
It is an irrelevant question. Regardless of what I might wish I had in an emergency, the Catholic faith does not teach that possessing a gun is a right over which legitimate authority may not rule.
The topic of the thread is, “Should a Catholic support gun rights?” You and I are Catholics. My question gets to an important motivation someone might have for supporting gun rights and a likely consequence of having gun rights. Given the range of answers of this thread, I would say my question is well within the bounds of the discussion and therefore not irrelevant. And what would be the harm in just answering it?
Your reluctance to answer a simple, relevant question speaks to me more than any of your posts.
If you want an answer to the question of the thread, I would say a Catholic may, if he chooses, support gun rights. There is nothing in Catholic teaching that would prevent him from doing so. And if he chooses not to support gun rights and supports gun control instead, that is also his prerogative. A Catholic may do either one, according to his conscience.
As for my personal preference in choosing a weapon, that falls in the category of discussing each other and not the issues. Back when we used to have moderators and rules for this forum (i.e. the good old days…) we were constantly admonished to “discuss the issues and not each other.” Even though those rules are no longer enforced, I think they were good rules and I am going to try to follow them anyway by not answering personal questions.
I like your answer and agree with it.
The intent of my question was not to ask about you as an individual, per se, (I was thinking more like a generalized “you” if that makes sense), but rather to get a sense of how your very theoretical approach to the topic applies in the real world.
As for theory vs practice, I am reminded of the various arguments about abortion. On one hand we have the theory that says abortion is the taking of innocent life and always seriously wrong. On the other hand we have “real life” stories of women who are raped or sick or too poor to provide for a child and we are invited to experience their pain in the “real world.” I’m sure you can appreciate that so-called “real life” scenarios like this, laden with emotion, do not always provide the best framework in which to discuss the evils of abortion. Similarly, describing a situation in which I (or anyone else) are sudden in need of a weapon for self-defense, of course such as person would want to have the meanest, nastiest, ugliest (no, wait, that’s from Alice’s Restaurant…) most powerful and effective weapon there is. But those immediate emotional needs should not dominate over reasoned debate when it comes to deciding gun policy.