“Our love affair with guns has nothing to do with tyranny, or militias, or self-preservation. Just ask any NRA member the following: If Jesus Christ himself were to come down off the cross and grant you one wish, would you opt for a world without guns — or the one we live in now? If every gun owner truly feared for their life and liberty, the answer would be obvious. But it’s not about life and liberty. It’s all about the sheer hard-on of owning a gun. –
a) If Jesus Christ himself were to come down off the cross and grant the wish for a world without g uns, then the world would go back to being dominated by the strong at the expense of the weak.
b) Fuck you Bufogle, you’re the one with the hard on for g uns.
^^^ THIS!!! We must remind people a world without guns would be a nightmare of epic proportions. Roving street gangs beating people to death. Unless you can rid the world of evil, guns are indeed a blessing and a necessity.
But he wrote hard-on and gun in the same sentence. Now I have to be alone for a minute. Well, several seconds at least.
Huh kinda sounds like most of the cities here.
“Unless you can rid the world of evil, guns are indeed a blessing and a necessity.”
I would say THIS is the quote of the day.
Web author anonymous but I love this little dity:
A GUN FREE WORLD (THE LIBERAL UTOPIA)
I wish we could go back in time and uninvent the gun. Because then, bigger stronger men who could swing swords and axes harder than their enemies would go back to ruling the world. No more of this ridiculous female “empowerment” and all minorities would be enslaved just the way they were meant to be. Without having disgusting guns to fight back, the weak and disenfranchised would have never forgotten their place in life, a life they should be thankful they were even allowed to have to begin with.
How about wishing for a world without violence instead of a world without g uns?
He would never do that. He worships violence and death, like all ‘liberals’, which in true Orwell fashion, now means: “Statists”, and other Authority Worshipers.
That’s why he can’t stand citizens with guns. Because they give us the power to speak to them in the only language they understand…
Yep. If we could magically have a world without human violence, sure, I’d wish for that. I wish for it every day, in fact.
Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. And I’m not dumb enough to think it would happen if guns magically disappeared.
The thing these anti-gun idiots don’t understand is that the problem isn’t guns, it’s human nature. And without guns, it gets even worse for everyone who isn’t a physically fit male or who doesn’t have a bunch of said specimens at their beck and call.
Plus, if humans never wanted to hurt each other, we wouldn’t have to worry about who should or shouldn’t have guns. And all of us who wanted guns could have ALL THE GUNS WE WANTED. No restrictions on anything. Why would there be?
Unless, as Kenneth points out above, the real goal of the anti-gun jihad is to make sure that the “right” people have a complete monopoly on violence.
ING –
so are you saying Soylent Guns is PEOPLE????
He has a hard on for violence committed by the state. For the Nazis it was the highly organized and efficient nature of the mass murder. For Communists, unless you are executed quickly, it is more about death by neglect, disease, malnutrition, or brutality.
I can make up hypotheticals all day long, but I can also imagine the consequences of them.
The only way Jesus Christ could literally disappear all guns would be to also disappear all knowledge of guns, all knowledge of the metallurgy necessary to make guns, the chemical knowledge necessary to make gunpowder, the knowledge to make replacements, and all human curiosity to find ways around this “miracle”.
I cannot imagine any world missing that knowledge which would also retain all other scientific knowledge, such as modern medicine and modern electronics.
In other words, we’d be back in the Garden of Eden, but there would be no apples and no snakes, and especially no clueless pundits.
Well chemotherapy was born from mustard gas so you sometimes just have to take the good with the bad. A world without chemical weapons is a world without a cure for cancer. There will always be wicked people who use whatever technology is available to harm their fellow man but that’s not a reason to ban innovation.
I was trying to point out the bigger general problem of banning one particular niche. Just as with the various alcohol, drug, fois gras, and other wars.
i’ve known enough people who have gone through chemo, that i might prefer mustard gas. just sayin….
“Well chemotherapy was born from mustard gas…” And then there’s Warfarin…
I’m not a big follower of the Bible, but didn’t Jesus already get off the cross and come back to life? Never been to Sunday school, but that’s kinda what Easter is all about, no?
Anyway, it’s nice to see so many here spot immediately the problem with these ridiculous viewpoints: they may have some logic to them, but they always start with an incorrect assumption. You can’t get to a proper conclusion if you start off at the wrong place.
You’re absolutely right. Jesus did come down from the cross. He then proceeded to offer everyone eternal life, provided you repent of your sins and follow him. Millions said yes to this offer. They’re called Christians. (Personally, I’m agnostic, which means I’m still thinking about it, but whatever.)
Quentin Bufogle is an idiot.
Actually it’s billions. With a ‘B’.
First thought that came to mind when i read the opening sentence of the article. Jesus already came off the cross, and he dealt with a much more serious issue than gun control when he did so.
I realize this is a gun site with lots of differing opinions on religion in general and Christianity in particular, but i have to say, there is a lot of unity in the comments here. I think we generally agree the author of the quoted article is either an idiot, or a liar. maybe both.
Yes, we already had time without guns. It’s called “dark ages”.
Highly recommended reading on this subject – “A World Without Guns” by Dave Kopel – should be on this site: http://davekopel.org/NRO/2001/A-World-Without-Guns.htm Some of the salient points:
“Finally, for the first time, a gun-free world is truly within our grasp — and it’s time to see what man hath wrought. And for that, all we have to do is take a look back at the kind of world our ancestors lived in.
To say that life in the pre-gunpowder world was violent would be an understatement. Land travel, especially over long distances, was fraught with danger from murderers, robbers, and other criminals. Most women couldn’t protect themselves from rape, except by granting unlimited sexual access to one male in exchange for protection from other males.
Back then, weapons depended on muscle power. Advances in weaponry primarily magnified the effect of muscle power. The stronger one is, the better one’s prospects for fighting up close with an edged weapon like a sword or a knife, or at a distance with a bow or a javelin (both of which require strong arms). …
When it comes to muscle power, young men usually win over women, children, and the elderly. It was warriors who dominated society in gun-free feudal Europe, and a weak man usually had to resign himself to settle on a life of toil and obedience in exchange for a place within the castle walls when evil was afoot.
And what of the women? According to the custom of jus primae noctis, a lord had the right to sleep with the bride of a newly married serf on the first night — a necessary price for the serf to pay — in exchange for the promise of safety and security (does that ring a bell?). Not uncommonly, this arrangement didn’t end with the wedding night, since one’s lord had the practical power to take any woman, any time. ”
God created men and women – Sam Colt made them equal.
Thanks for the link and the quotes, Pete. Excellent. Will read that and share it.
You are welcome – read that years ago, and thought it was an excellent discussion of the result of removing privately-owned guns from society. I think it was George Orwell who said “firearms give claws to the weak.”
A couple of caveats concerning the pre-gunpowder world. First, the concept of morality predates gunpowder by millennia. While the wicked may become profoundly timid in the face of armed resistance, there is no evidence that the existence of gunpowder altered the propensity for violent behavior in either direction. (see WWI and WWII)
Also, tribal loyalties routinely inspired the strong to protect the weak. For instance, the Knights Templar started out to protect Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land. They eventually branched out into Europe’s first comprehensive banking system, which all depended on trust. These were the strongest men in Europe. Of course, the same kind of loyalties exist today and allows our government to pay our soldiers a fraction of their actual worth.
That said, the pre-gunpowder world was exceptionally brutal and I’m glad I didn’t live in it.
Mankind is a violent species. We have been killing each other with everything from rocks to nuclear weapons since Cain slew Abel. Removal of one weapon will not change centuries of human behavior. Ask all the folks in England how banning guns is working out for them….Oh wait, you can’t, they stabbed each other to death.
Seems to me that there weren’t any guns back in the day but the “AUTHORITIES” nailed HIM to a cross. Damn them to hell!
Exactly what I was thinking!
If you switched gun with any important “right” or object of desire of the left, the statement would be truthful.
Abortion, single payer healthcare, free college, free daycare, free pre-k education, free housing, absolute power… etc…
“It’s all about the sheer hard-on for having absolute power over all other citizens.”
And I like to use an example that illustrates the absurdity of banning something when some number of people abuse it.
Ask a Progressive:
How many annual injuries and deaths do we have to experience from fires that arsonists start with tampons before we ban tampons?
Assuming a)Jesus is a genie and b)guns are the only means by which people come to injury or death.
In what universe is Jesus still on the cross?
Is the author really that clueless?
Apparently he is, but he tiplifies the left-think in America. These people are the same ones who use to say “What if they gave a war, and nobody came?”
Shallow regurgitated platitudes are the closest they get to actual creative thought.
On the other hand, gentlemen, what if we had a war and EVERYBODY came? (Stolen from my favorite Far Side cartoon ever.)
BEARPAW , YES !!😏
He very well might be that clueless.. Catholic maybe?
A world without guns would be far more brutal then it is now, and it was far more brutal back before guns existed. If anything, the firearm did a hell of a lot more to civilize humanity then any printing press or religious book or piece of art.
Hold on a sec. printing presses allowed for documentation of past mistakes, some which show gun ownership is necessary to protect individual liberties. You can also now print a gun.
Actually, it was the British Longbow that was the weapon that defined the concept of the 2nd Amendment. They just take a hell of a lot more practice. Like 10 years worth.
Robin Hoods men would have been very merry if they had access to a few AR’s
I would wish for a world without violence or oppression in an instant, but not a world without guns. This used to be a world without guns, and it was not the utopia Bufogle seems to think it would be.
well hopefully, if this does come to pass, yummy animals will then freely jump into my arms to have their necks snapped.
Yeah… because no nation was ever subjugated before the invention of firearms… go ask the city fathers of Carthage…
Nice “Starship Troopers” reference.
Let’s not forget medieval attempts to outlaw the crossbow.
My growing collection of firearms doesn’t give me a boner. What a stupid notion.
My collection of Bea Arthur erotica, however…
“Bea Arthur erotica” … grossssssss, where is the brain bleach!
What? It’s all very tasteful, I assure you! Bea had some very high standards about these things.
does it help if you play it at 78rpm?
I believe I’ll stick with images of Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Anyway, one bearded soy boy’s prejudices do not translate into confiscation. This is another example of latter day antigun literature; they can’t legislate gun control, so insult & innuendo is all they have left.
Why the false dichotomy?
How about a world where everyone’s rights are respected equally, and nobody felt the need or desire to do violence to anyone else?
Oh, and jetpacks. That world would need jetpacks.
Jesus has come down off the cross.
And he doesn’t ‘grant wishes’….
If Bufogle blasphtized Mohammad like that and there were no guns in the world, there would be nobody to keep the swords from his throat. Wouldn’t mind seeing that though…
John 2:15.
Just imagine if he had something better than a whip.
Luke 22:36 I imagine a few guns would have been more effective against the Romans than a few swords.
One of the world’s most recent and large-scale genocides happened not primarily with guns, but with machetes and other hand tools.
In 100 days, 1 million people were hacked to death.
You don’t have to have a gun to kill, but you may have to have one to protect.
If this is lost on you, be grateful for your life of privilege, and wake the fuck up.
We are a nation where literally half the people in it need woke up.
No, we are a nation where:
1/3 are woke
1/3 need to be woke
1/3 are irredeemable
For a few decades now the machete has been the world’s number one way to kill another person.
Gen. Rupert Smith points that out in his book The Utility of Force (2005).
One of the books on my shelf. I read it on the Haiti/DR border in 2006/7.
Don’t leave out OJ…
Ugh, the sheer ignorance in this morons statement is just overwhelming! The utter stupidity and disrespect in his ‘Jesus Christ’ statement alone is mind boggling and massively insulting.
Agree, what other religion is not only allowed, but socially encouraged to be openly ridiculed like this?
The only widespread one that doesn’t encourage having you killed for it…
Translation?
What he means is that insulting Islam or Mohamed is punishable by death.
I think we’ll all be driving flying cars first
They might even have self driving cars working by then…Nahhhh
Those were “flying carpets”…
Craig In IA:
I am generally not in favor of flying car pets. If one hit you in the back of the head while you were driving you could have a terrible accident, not to mention having to man-splain it to PETA… even if it was a small breed.
World without guns?
Fine, we’ll go back to the good ole days of cleaving a mother fornicators skull in two with a battle axe. I got Viking/Celt/Saxon/Visigoth blood in me, makes no difference to me.
PS: GFYS Bufogle
So in his world, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a hard-on is a good guy with a hard-on? That can’t be right.
Isn’t that another form of sword fighting?
tummy sticks!
Sounds like someone has a script idea…
“Yogurt has taught you well. And I see that your Schwartz is just as big as mine. Let’s see if you know how to use it.”
Leftism is a mental defect. They blame guns for the evil inherent in mankind. Our species is not sufficiently mature to eliminate evil. We hate each other for more reasons than one can count. The strong prey upon the weak. This is the undeniable reality of our existence. And so, the leftist’s denial evidences their mental defect. Another undeniable fact.
Meh, a quick Googling reveals several quotes attributed to this author that reveal his deep and thorough understanding of the subject matters of firearms, history, and human nature. Which is a shame, because there are some other, more entertaining quotes from him, too. I wouldn’t get too worked up over whatever he has to say or write. Not worth the energy – meanwhile, here I am posting about him…
False dilemma. Not logically sound. Neither is an ideal option. One takes your freedom (Bufogle’s preference). The other embraces risk and the conceptualization of a lack of safety. Which is to be burned at the altar? Freedom or safety? That is bufogle’s question.
But why would Jesus offer that???
The problem isn’t a world without guns. The problem is a world where people kill each other.
Bufogle needs to ask himself this question: If no one ever had any intent to kill anyone ever – then what is the problem with guns?
There isn’t any problem. Not only would guns existing be fine, so would knives, swords, poison, clubs, etc, etc. Thats because the method by which murder is accomplished doesn’t matter. Only the intent matters. There are many methods. Why wouldn’t Jesus offer to remove the intent instead???
I’ll tell you why, because Bufogle wants to present a false dilemma to make you perceive yourself as being a bad guy because you don’t want to burn your freedom at the altar.
I’m having a flashback.
This guy has managed to pack so much implied false hood into a couple lines, he might be a good fiction writer. Taking guns from people isn’t fiction, so maybe a different approach is called for.
Guns are neither the source(*), nor the only means of violence, so in the really real world what’s someone with a hard on for their own life to do? What are we to do in general for or to tiny people in a violent world?
(*) Never let them call guns the “source” of violence. By themselves guns just sit there. Even H&K, it’s the company that hates you, not the gun.
Some years ago during “occupy” — good times — I tried to reply in kind to a cleverly Grinchian parable / poem, A I R by the author of Lemony Snicket. I was a page and a half just one-line listing the obvious assumptions, falsehoods n bad inference behind the piece, not stated but implied. Writing a story with counter-assumptions defeated me.
If Jesus Christ himself came down off the cross n offered a world without violence, if only we’d give up guns, hunters, target shooters, reenactors would line up to hand them over. Famlies would turn in heirlooms. The older man, and the younger would walk to give up the gun one had carried in war; just another, smaller sacrifice.
The point was always holding space to live in, sometimes the hard way.
Here in the really real world, that trade is not on offer. Here in the really real world, turn in the guns, and violence continues. Carrying a gun is a sacrifice. Choosing to be armed is choosing to make that sacrifice. The anti-people are willing to delude themselves to avoid that choice, and they’ll try to delude you, too.
“Even H&K, it’s the company that hates you, not the gun.”
So much win.
What an azzhole. My meager gun collection in no way excites me…
A world without spiders and venomous reptiles would interest me.
you are never ever more than a few feet from an arachnid.
Yeah, the days of being sliced and diced, speared and clubbed to death were much better…..
To be a bit serious here for a moment: Reducing Jesus Christ to some sort of fantasy genie from the Thousand and One Nights is ludicrous. The Christ has offered us one choice since “coming down from the cross”: believe in Him as the Messiah and Savior, and the only bridge to eternal life, or suffer the consequences of placing your trust in the World and other human beings.
Bufogle, whom ever he may be, needs to do a bit more referencing before postulating the ridiculous. His notion is actually nothing I’m interested in. Human beings were placed in the world to deal with challenges. The “world we live in now” has always been one of those challenges- ongoing choices between “good and evil” since the beginning of time. We all make our own choices and that’s the way He planned it.
Really? I was under the impression that Jesus himself never said that he was the Messiah, but instead denied it many times.
“I am the way, the truth, and the life. None come unto the father but through me.”-J “H” C
Yeah, I really don’t get where people get that ridiculous idea from. Even the most cursory and/or antagonistic reading of either of the four Gospel accounts would make clear that Jesus of Nazareth made numerous claims of deity.
He also had a great way of getting others to declare Him such as well.
My advice: start with the NLT version, if you can understand most newspapers you’ll be able to follow this. You’ll also learn that nothing is really new in the 21st Century that wasn’t already going on 3000 years or earlier BC.
I think this moron meant, a world WITHOUT the NEED for guns to defend ourselves (or a world without murder maybe). he clearly is has very little thought process and doesn’t understand his own words
It’s a common mistake among us to try to interpret what someone has said or written. I believe they should all be taken at face value- words have meaning. Just sayin’
The only time I ever got a hard on from guns was when YouTube pulled videos and content producers were uploading them to youporn.
Reducing interest in firearms to sexual deficiencies….how original.
If this came true then he’d be wishing for common sense sword and crossbow control.
I will say it because nobody else will. Most atheists are stupid about the Bible. They have chosen not to even read it. The Bible is full of storirs about military battles, personal combat and killing. The average atheist is really quite stupid when it comes to religious history.
Because the atheist is socialist Progressive in their political orientation. They totally focus on sex or drug use. It was the atheists who created the government welfare industrial complex. Because it was the church whether they like it or not, the private church provided social relief to families and individuals in need.
Even John Stossel has done programs about how atheists replaced the private social support network systems with government programs in Europe.
Yes I know there are atheists who believe in the 2nd Amendment. Unfortunately most atheists do not believe in the Second Amendment. And in fact most atheists don’t believe in the Bill of Rights.
The average atheist will support Banning protesters at abortion clinics. And those same atheists will support protests at military recruiting centers.
Atheists are dangerous hypocrites.
For many atheists the State has replaced/become God. This is by design. At the same time, there is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole…
Spent some time in “foxholes”. Never said a prayer to any thing even when the man was knocking on the door. Unless “medic, medic” is a shout-out to god.
It’s just an expression, and there’s always fringe exceptions.
Queens, I saw my share of the inside of entrenched positions and foxholes – I heard plenty of wounded screaming and moaning to God. Perhaps you were the exception but this is not uncommon for wounded personnel, especially the mortally wounded, to seek redemption when they think they are near death or are suffering from severe wounds. Personally I was never wounded during battle, but you can bet I looked to God to protect me during a few artillery/mortar/rocket barrages and enemy small arms fire.
Congratulations on being able to be your own higher power. Personally, I would not want to rely on any human being to hold and exercise that kind of authority in my life. If people are the pinnacle of achievement then you have a might weak supreme being.
I would amend your statement to say modern atheists. Back in the day, prominent Atheists like Bertrand Russell and George Bernard Shaw not only knew the Bible but could read it in Latin and Greek.
Also today’s Libertarians are ignorant as well. They are Atheists out of necessity. Personal autonomy doesn’t mean much if there is a higher power that can say no.
Tdiinva
100 years ago in the days of George Bernard Shaw, not only were atheists more educated but so were Christians.
At times it seems there is a race-to-the-bottom in today’s society. Who will hit bottom first? Perhaps it will be a tie.
You assume that all atheists are socialists, and in that you would be wrong.
Mark N
The atheists are responsible for creating their own image problems.
Mark N. –
Enough socialists are atheists and atheists are socialists that they constitute the majority in both cases.
Well said, Veteran.
Socialists / communists operate under the fundamental belief that there is no God, and therefore the state is god. It is why the attack on God, Christianity, religion, and the church has always been one of the key strategies of communists. When you destroy the belief in God, you lay the ground work for the state being the all-caring, all-knowing, all-powerful God. Communism cannot exist in competition with God. Without God, or with a greatly diminished God in people’s mind and faiths, the state becomes THE arbiter of life and death.
The history of the Bolshevik coup — there was no ‘revolution of the people’ — should give us plenty of warning of what awaits we the people, should communism reign again. And we have vast numbers of traitors in the highest offices of the land.
My oh my, I’m gonna need you next time I paint my house. Must be quick work with that large brush you wield. I love the bible, it is a fascinating read and the many stories that became the amalgamation that is Christianity seem to echo earlier tales of human history before the written word. I can confidently say there is no god. At least not as portrayed by any of the monotheistic prophet based religions I’ve seen. I get there’s billions of people who want to be the created to the creator. I have simply come to find that we are all creating creation. That’s about as wide as my brush can go.
Chris T in KY;
There is a term for the atheists preference for lack of biblical knowledge – it is willful ignorance. They make a conscious effort not to read the Bible because it is dangerous to their belief that there is no heaven, no hell, no afterlife and no being superior to man. For them to read the scriptures is to deny everything they believe, therefore they reman ignorant on purpose. The anti constitutionalist element of our society is much the same way about firearms. They see no need for them and believe you should not need to possess one either. Their poorly reasoned philosophy ignores facts, such as people would be defenseless in a world without weapons. They further do not think it takes any skill to use a firearm effectively. They believe a firearm is a death ray capable of great destruction and the trigger is a push button for unleashing it. They have no concept of the real effort and skill involved in firing a cartridge and making it hit precisely where it is aimed. They prefer instead to believe their fears instead of becoming informed because then they would have to admit they were wrong, and atheists and anti gunners will never admit their flaws. They will instead find a scapegoat to blame. This is why we have so many investigations and hearings in Congress over everything with the possible exception of dandruff… give them enough time though and we will see that as well.
Stubbornly stupid and ill informed is the only way they can justify their anti fact beliefs.
Jesus did live in a world without guns. Fat lot of good it did him. And anybody else that incurred the wrath of the Legions.
WOW- do you know anything about the reason Jesus came to Planet Earth? He was “doing good for us”, not the other way around.
Apparently not. Jesus tcane to take on the sins of the world not to rid the world of sin.
This reminds me of the greenies “what would Jesus drive” nonsense. Jesus was a tradesman so he would have driven some big honkin’ pickup like a Ford 150 with a crew cab. It would have come in handy for taking his disciples around when he started his ministry.
“Jesus was a tradesman so he would have driven some big honkin’ pickup like a Ford 150 with a crew cab.”
F-250 diesel dually 4X4 “Rolling Coal” on Trump ‘protestors’ :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYPMbLO4pAY
During the time of Jesus we had a world without guns. The Legions managed to enslave a large chunk of the world, commit wholesale slaughter and run an empire that thrived on war. All without firing a shot.
Why Jesus came into that doesn’t really figure into it.
Jesus doesn’t need guns in his realm…………but this broken world we live in needs them more and more everyday. As the ding-a-ling liberals let their constituents out of prisons and they insist Jesus be less and less visible we need more and more guns to keep them from destroying our society.
” If Jesus Christ himself were to come down off the cross and grant you one wish, would you opt for a world without guns — or the one we live in now?”
Is this idiot aware that the world without guns was a horribly violent place with an average life expectancy around 40 years?
He forgot to mention that small penis thing. We’re all just compensating for inadequate anatomical endowment.
Who is Quentin R. Bufogle and why should I care what he thinks?
ANG PILOT – he is inconsequential and a left wing antigunner. His opinion on guns is also non-sequitur since it is an extension of his lack of information on the subject.
lets not bring God into the 2nd amendment unless were bringing it into the 14th also
pro tip:
theres more biblical justification for being armed in a manner commensurate with self defense againt the godless than killing a baby fearfully and wonderfully made in the womb
Dumbest quote I have seen in a while. Guns are an equalizer! A grandma with a gun has a fighting chance against a group of thugs. That would not be the case in a world with swords and clubs.
One, your theology is horrible. Jesus himself wouldn’t come down off the cross, because to do so would mean that he did not complete His work here on earth. Also, Jesus is no longer on the cross, because He did finish His work, by dying on the cross, being buried, rising to life after three days, and ascending into Heaven. So, Jesus “coming down” would imply that we are talking about His second coming – at which time, this debate will be the furthest thing from anyone’s mind.
Two, if Jesus granted me one wish (and if we hold to the pretense that any one, arbitrary wish would be granted), I would wish for a world not without guns, but rather a world without sin. Without sin, I would never have to worry about the misuse of guns – or of any misuse of force against me or my loved ones that would otherwise necessitate my use of guns in self-defense.
Absolutely correct. In fact, God has promised a world without sin. (Based on his distortions, Mr. Bufogle won’t get to enjoy that world.) God even specified the logical result of a world without sin:
It’s the elimination of sin and the violence which results that is logically prior to the elimination of weapons. But Mr. B’s quote suggests he thinks its possible to elimination the weapons without eliminating sin.
Put another way, Jesus did promise a world where guns are eliminated. Going to the cross was a critical step on the way to achieving that goal. But it also includes a stipulation that you have to be willing to accept His terms to able to enjoy that world. So what steps are being taken by Mr. Bufogle to help people experience the fulfillment of that promise of a world where guns are not necessary?
As I recall, when Jesus returns that is pretty much it for this world. I’m not expecting a cameo appearance to ask my ( or anyone else’s) opinion on guns. If you believe in the Bible, there is a place without guns or violence, it’s called heaven.
Holy false-dichotomy Batman!
A world without guns would be super nice, just like the twelfth century – Bring on the serfdom and the plague, fun for the whole family. (Help, help, I’m being repressed. Come and see the violence inherent in the system.)
I tend to be bigger than most of the people I see walking around on a daily basis. I don’t think those smaller people would want a world where people like me can use our physical attributes to dominate them and not have access to tools to fight back.
You don’t want the world to be like a prison where the bigger person, stronger group and creative weapon maker can own the territory and kill you whenever they feel like it. You don’t want them to be able to control your food, clothes and bed. You don’t want to be constantly raped. I know you don’t want such a world.
Taking away guns will put women back to the days of complete submissive servitude to all men. Rape culture will return.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LVSgYuRxt4
Who do I talk to about getting a refund on the 15 seconds I spent reading this crap?
I had to do a search on this giant anus to find out who he even is. His other notable belief is that all problems in life can be solved by money and booze. Seems like he has had a little too much of the latter… and probably took a little too much of the former from bloomberg.
https://itsamoneything.com/money/quentin-r-bufogle-alcohol-solves-1-problems/#.W_MIzxZlA8o
“It’s all about the sheer hard-on of owning a gun.”
Yeah, so what? It’s my right, just as it’s your right to complain about it.
It’s called freedom, and as long as I’ve done nothing wrong then you don’t
have the right to take mine away, just as I don’t have the right to shut you up.
So keep complaining and I’ll keep stroking my long hard barrel. Better yet,
mind your own business and stay out of mine.
Luke 22:36, Jesus to his Disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane. Pretty much sums up that resisting evil is more important than being comfortable. Implausable arguments are one of the last attempts made by any losing side. The circumstances defined could never happen…and… there we go back down the rabbit hole, it’s impossible to frame a legitimate response to set of hypothetical circumstances, you can’t win and they can’t lose. Anyone playing The Jesus card is the most disgusting of all liars. The Bible and the Constitution of the United States are not a pick and choose menu. Jesus will forgive them, I sure won’t. -30-
Oh yeah,…and the horse (lattitudes) he rode in on! -30-
Ignoring the obvious jab at the religious…
This guy clearly has no concept of what humans are, how we are “designed” or how other apes and monkeys work. In short, he’s a moron who doesn’t know a damn thing about human nature, the natural world or, apparently, much of anything.
It is becoming all too common that these “history began the day I was born” types exhibit this kind of myopic perspective on the world. One does not need to be but tangentially aware of human history to know that violence has nothing to do with the invention of the firearm.
Frankly, this kind of thought process confuses me. I cannot work out how anyone can be this badly misinformed or possessed of so little understanding. Apparently, there are very many who are this foolish but, I just don’t understand how that can be.
Mr. Bufogle is actually almost right.
The real reason I have more than two (a pistol to carry and a long gun for hunting) is that I think guns are AWESOME. Shooting is the most fun you can have with your clothes on. Although a really good pencil-paper-dice tabletop roleplaying game comes pretty close…
Self-defense and anti-tyranny insurance are important, but actually far less motivating than the fun factor.
Come to think of it, the same jerkwads who keep yelling that people like me are doing games and fandom wrong are the same ones who think no one (ecxept giant totalitarian governments, of course) should have guns. Funny how that works.
“In the dimness of the shadows
Where we hairy heathens warred,
I can taste in thought the lifeblood;
We used teeth before the sword.”
We soon discovered that our teeth were not up to the task, and therefore we were obliged to invent weapons. The first arms race pitted clubs against sharp sticks. The sharp sticks proved to be the superior weaponry.
Pointy sticks anyone?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piWCBOsJr-w
The Athenians didn’t have guns, and they extirpated the entire male population of the Melian people and sold the surviving women and children into slavery.
The Aztecs didn’t have guns, and they extirpated lots of enemies, often sacrificing captives to their religion.
Wasn’t life just grand before guns?
The world didn’t always had guns. The strong preyed on the weak. Not good.
It is estimated that the Mongol invasions killed 1/5th of the world’s population without guns.
ONE FIFTH.
And if they hadn’t, global population would have surpassed 10 billion a hundred years ago. They did us a favor, although I’m sure that was not on their minds at the time.
Well, apparently, climate change is gonna kill us all in a decade or two anyway so whatever apex life form evolves next will have to figure out how to manage the world without us.
Probably not. Our species has survived quite a lot in the last 200,000 years or so. 🙂 Which is not to say our numbers would not be significantly reduced from current levels.
I’m an agnostic. You’re not going to con me into being a helpless, disarmed victim by lame appeals to somebody else’s religion.
I don’t see how he could convince anyone, religion (or absence thereof) notwithstanding, about anything.
Jesus would have no problem with a sidearm. He told Peter to put his sword back in place (holster your weapon !) after Peter whacked a Roman’s ear off ! He DID NOT say get rid of it or turn it in at the next sword buyback @!
I dunno, I think I’d rather be shot than be hacked to death with a broadsword or a battle axe.
this is a bad argument. he says we say we want guns for protection and we fear a peaceful/crime free world because then we would have no need for guns. even if the world were crime free I would want guns because theyre fun! also forgetting that in a crime free world (one in which he suggests guns are unnecessary) why would he want to ban them? there wouldn’t be anyone using them for crime. who doesn’t like to go shoot for fun and hunt?
butt-f**ker, stick it up your a**
you sir are a Theological Ignoramus, as stated previously Jesus could not come off the cross or it would be non fulfillment of prophecy!
Jesus instructed his disciples to buy the Assault weapon of the Day {sword} even selling their clothes to own one, sorta sounds like self defense with prayer! scoff you say all the Disciples were put too death! yes by the Disarmament group of Authorities in various countries. Still this did not change the Idea of Self Defense!
God created man Sam Colt made them equal.
What a blithering idiot this guy is. Does he think men didn’t kill each other prior to the invention of firearms? Sanctimonious blowhard.
A nice little parable demonstrating the author’s hoplophobia. It’s the gun that is evil and wrong, and not the person carrying it. I personally sleep better knowing my 120-pound sister is not restricted to hand-to-hand combat against a full-grown man (or 2, or more) if she were attacked.
A world without guns is why we invented guns.
I dont deserve to get oppressed/enslaved/killed because some other dude was born bigger than me.
Exactly. That is brilliant.
Mr. Eng – Unfortunately the fears of people on the left like Mr. Bufogle will never give way to such reasonable and factual thoughts as yours, but I commend you for your well informed statements.
This is so easy to foil-
1. The LORD Jesus Christ is God himself, not a genie.
2. You said “remove guns” not “remove evil”. As long as evil exists, I’ll keep my gun, and Jesus told me it is OK, even if I have to break a gun control law to do it (Luke 22:36-38, it was against Roman law for non Roman citizens to own swords). This is telling, the author equates evil with guns but is too dim to see it.
This is the typical attitude of the elitist liberal fools who never served a day in their lives in the armed forces, and who also look down upon our warfighters as too stupid to attend one of their ivy league schools. Mr. Bufogle, you are a taker, and everything you do or say is for self. I am sick and tired of these fear mongering fools with a computer who take our individual liberties as an entitlement, unless of course they disagree with them which is the case with the Second Amendment. Most of them would rather we put the Constitution and the Bill of Rights into the garbage disposal. These same people want the socialist’s dream of a single government world wide, which is the new world order that was preached in the books of Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto. What these modern socialists wrongly assume is they will be part of the power structure of their dream of subjugation of those they oppose. WE the People are the ones they want to have life or death decision making power over. Their scholarship on the subject ends there, and they fail to recognize the top tier in every socialist government that has ever been instituted is very sparsely populated. 95 percent of them are doomed to becoming the useful idiots and deemed expendable by the ruling class.
These elite political individuals who want this world to have one government organized under a centralized power structure will never admit that it has been tried before and every time it has failed and resulted in millions of deaths from the violence that these regimes always resort to when they are challenged by their own citizens and the free world. There is a term that is becoming a misnomer nowdays, the free world is a concept that really means very little other than opposed to totalitarian socialist rule.
Being a former member of the US Army and having been brought up by two veterans, I was taught to respect the power of firearms, and to appreciate the fact that every individual who abides in the law is allowed to own them. This is the one thing that keeps foreign powers from invading our country, it was the single most feared thing the enemy in World War Two did not want to confront. Why? because when you add the numbers of armed citizens to the power of the armed forces you have the largest force on Earth that will oppose any military invasion force from foreign shores. Americans will bond to form a formidable force in times of war and emergencies that threaten the existence of our people and our nation.
I own firearms because I can, and because I swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and the American people against all enemies, foreign and domestic. ALL ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. I am not alone. There are millions of people like me, war veterans as well as civilians, who will stand to preserve what we alone have in America. I also use my firearms to protect my family, and to hunt. I don’t need to hunt to feed my family but that skill assures the survival of my family and did serve in the past to be our sole source for meat.
So Mr. Bufogle, you can trivialize gun ownership in this country all you like but for me and many more this is a serious business. In making that remark you have revealed yourself to be the opposite of serious. I can also believe you have seldom if ever touched a gun, much less fired one. Target shooting is a personal challenge to be as accurate as possible. It is not easy to aim and fire at a target and hit the bullseye, whether it be a paper target or a less formal target like a tin can at distance. Many people own guns expressly for the purpose of target shooting. The reason they do this is because it is fun. For the competitive natured people it is a constant quest for self improvement, a personal achievement being the goal of the activity. I don’t expect you to understand that because your uniformed opinion can’t include anything so reasonable as responsible ownership and use of firearms. No sir, you are convinced that possession of firearms by individual citizens is bad, despite the many facts to the contrary. No one can challenge your intellect on this subject for it is impossible for the facts to be right and you to be so very wrong.
The biggest problem with gun ownership is people with borderline psychiatric conditions who can fool the average person for a long enough time to obtain a firearm via the legal process in place from BATFE at retail gun dealers. If they can act – play the part of a reasonable person – for the duration of the process they can walk out the door with their gun unimpeded. This is a flaw in the system. Anyone who has filled out the forms to legally own a gun knows you have to respond to the questions in the affirmative, otherwise the sale will not be closed. There is no gun show loophole, and you can’t win a gun in a contest without filling out the paperwork. PERIOD. How many times has this falsehood been the argument of the gun ignorant left? Every time an anti-gun politician or demonstrator/protester opens their mouth this ignorant fallacy spews forth. Let them talk long enough and here it comes again – and it is utterly and irrevocably wrong, but they persist.
This poses a problem for legitimate business enterprises because everytime a gun is sold to someone who commits a criminal act, especially mass shootings, the person is found to be irrational and many times they are known to authorities as mentally compromised and have some kind of mental illness. The perpetrators of such crimes also know this – and they put on an act during the transaction in an effort to keep the seller from discovering they are not well. Another thing is people lie on the forms used to process the background check, so they make it through with flying colors unless they have a police record or there is other legal documentation that refutes their statements on the form. This is an instant failure on a NICS check, so they lie because they want the gun and they know they will not get it if even one thing they say is not congruent with a passing grade (getting approved).
The criminal element does not generally purchase their guns from retail stores, they steal them or acquire them from the black market. It is not the lawful citizen purchase of guns that is the problem, it is the criminals and the mentally ill who are the problem. Very seldom do you hear about a rational person taking a firearm an perpetrating these shootings. There is either crime or lack of sanity involved, and no law is ever going to stop that. To quote the old saying, the only way to stop a bad person with a gun is to counter them with a good person with a gun.
Until crime and insanity are eliminated there will always be the need for people to have self defense tools.
Comments are closed.