…Bishop Daniel Flores of the Brownsville Diocese in Texas recently wrote on Twitter that Americans “sacralize death’s instruments, and then are surprised that death uses them.” 

The good of the whole community gets left out of the discussion, Bishop Flores told the Catholic website The Pillar, “when we’ve … elevated the individual right beyond proportion. … To say something is sacralized is to say it’s almost taken out of any possibility for conversation.”

Some observers on the right also see a threat – not from gun control advocates, but the gun community itself. “The threat is gun idolatry, a form of gun fetish that’s fundamentally aggressive, grotesquely irresponsible, and potentially destabilizing to American democracy,” writes David French, a veteran, lawyer, and evangelical Christian, in The Dispatch.

Social researchers show some causal effect. As Americans segregate along political, racial, and religious lines, more and more faith is being put in the gun. Since the sunsetting of an assault rifle ban in 2004, the number of AR-15 type rifles in American citizens’ hands has soared to 20 million. Marketers have paid heed.

Daniel Defense, the Black Creek, Georgia, company that sold the rifle used on May 24 to kill 19 grade schoolers and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas, earlier in May posted a photo of a toddler with an AR-15 on his lap, with the biblical caption, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” 

The National Rifle Association has long understood the power of religious messaging. Indeed, “you would get a far better understanding if you approached us as if you were approaching one of the great religions of the world,” the NRA’s executive vice president, Warren Cassidy, once said.

“They’ve kind of created this monster, as it were, organized around the gun as a political totem,” says Professor Spitzer.

— Patrik Jonsson & Noah Robertson in Has the gun become a sacred object in America?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

103 COMMENTS

  1. What the problem really is: We’re Where We Are Now Because Some Have Sacralized The Gangster/Thug Lifestyle

    • How many hundreds of million people living under crushing dictatorships wish they had the tools to free themselves?

      And once having done so, would likely sanctify them as well?

      Yeah, most of them…

      • “would likely sanctify them as well”? Those dictatorships invariably sacralize themselves. Communism, the rationale for several of the most crushing tyrannies in history, tried to eradicate the church not because people worshipped God there but because the Communist State was supposed to replace god, with the citizen dependent on it for everything, simply everything. The Nazis were developing their own Aryan religion to replace the Church as well. Other less doctrinaire dictators require near worship, too.
        The idea that guns aren’t needed implies that the State will protect you. But bitter experiences have shown that the American State often can’t and increasingly often won’t. If the State does take away the right to use guns to defend ourselves it takes on the moral duty to keep everyone safe, always, everywhere. No gun control law ever addresses this and law abiding citizens are left at the mercy of criminals that the State claims are victims, not perpetrators.

      • Millions of folks were exterminated by their own governments because they could not defend themselves… so the gun is a right to counter balance government tyranny… if the folks believed that the government would not infringe then I think folks would not buy as many guns. It is a right in the USA no where else.

      • BS country boy and whatever you say george pcn…The N-word you two would really like to use in your blame game did not create or glorify the, “gangster life style.” Gangster glorification was around long before break dancing, rap music, pants around the ankles, etc. The look changes, the torch passes but the dictionary definition of gangster never changes.

        • The definition of gangster as typically used by white boys has stayed consistent over hundreds of years because of certain segments of people acting the same way no matter what is given to them or the limitless opportunity laid at their feet. An Incredibly small minority of members of a minority are the cause of the majority of violent crime in the United States including murders. Half of all homicides in the United States come from 10 individual zip codes and you don’t have to be a genius to guess the ethnic makeup of those ZIP codes. In the United States violent crime and murder has a zip code and a skin tone. It’s always been that way and it always will be that way. There’s a song called Stagger Lee that talks about black senseless violence and when it was written 70 years ago it was a copy of a song that was already 100 years old. Pull it up and listen to it carefully.

    • and NO ONE is faulting the local LE that KNEW about this nutjob and his mental issues. NOR would the local gummi t poohbahss “allow” any adult staff AT the school to carry arns, as is legal to do in Texas IF the local school district/board says they’re fine with it. Uvalde District said NO our adult staff who are there every day, and who carry their own personal handguns everywhere ELSE they go excet that school, may NOT also carry at school. If one of those two teachers, now sacrificed on the alter of “peace and love” and “political correctness” had been armed.. with or without “permission” fro their overlords, we’d have had a LOT fewer deaths, because the ONE that mattered would have happened straightwaway, before Mr. Nutjob was able to ply his evil.

  2. Not only is a bishop on Twitter something to take note of in itself but…

    “sacralize death’s instruments, and then are surprised that death uses them.”

    All those ‘tools’ found in abortion clinics come to mind.

    • Remember the Shout Your Abortion PR campaign? Remember what’s-her-name B-list celebrity saying she wished she had an abortion?

    • Exactly. You so eloquently stated what I was thinking regarding the bishop’s words. When the church starts calling out the Bidens and Pelosis about their stance on abortion, then I’ll listen to what the bishop has to say…

  3. Let’s all take our spiritual advice from the Catholic Church, which in it’s ~2000 year history has only recently concerned itself with human rights. Seriously, study the Church’s history, and get a feel for their position on human rights. There are reasons for the whole Protestant movement.

    • The Catholic church had a big hand in the creation of the western civilization we all value. But it has certainly had it’s issues. Lately the biggest issue facing Catholics is the spreas of communism through the clergy and leadership.

      I would highly recommend this book as a good starting place for a study of the church’s role in the development of the most successful societies mankind has ever had
      https://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Church-Built-Western-Civilization/dp/1596983280

      • I was educated by private Catholic schools in the District of Columbia. One of my parents has a mathematics degree from MIT. The other was a NASA electrical engineer for 33 years. I have a B.S. in Wildlife Biology & minor in Microbiology. The Catholic Church suppressed science and the quest for knowledge in the western world for a thousand years. Yes, it was there to pick up the the pieces after the fall of Rome but who knows, without the church maybe mankind would have discovered antibiotics 800 years ago, split the atom 500 years ago or landed on the moon 300 years ago.

        • The Catholic church set the stage for science by insisting on a consistent God who made consistent rules that could be discovered. Aquinas, Augustine, the late Spanish scholastics, etc are the fathers of science. This is why science did not occur in places where other religions were dominant, but did under Christianity and Catholicism.

          Islam, for example, posits a God who actively manipulates reality all the time. If the rules can and do change then there is no point in seeking to discover them. The much ballyhooed Islamic science in the ancient word was not Islamic at all. It was Greek and Babylonian science, and most of those who taught and practiced it were Jewish slaves and servants.

          The conflict between Christianity and science was manufactured by people who wanted to undermine Christianity.

        • Also, you can play the what if game with anything. If the volcano on Thera had not erupted +/- 1628 BC the Minoans might have been landing people on the moon by the time Jesus was walking around the Levant.

        • “insisting on a consistent God who made consistent rules that could be discovered“

          Wow, I had no idea that the Catholic Church had disavowed the miracles recorded in the Bible, where the laws of physics were contravened by an arbitrary and capricious ‘supreme being’.

          Now, if they could just present some credible evidence that their ‘deity’ exists at all, much less occasionally takes a petulant and jealous hand in acting outside the laws of nature.

          And regarding the Catholic Church relationship with scientific inquiry, let us consider this historical fact:

          “Giordano Bruno, philosopher and scientist, burnt at the stake 400 years ago
          Frank Gaglioti
          16 February 2000”

          “Throughout his life Bruno championed the Copernican system of astronomy which placed the sun, not the Earth, at the centre of the solar system. He opposed the stultifying authority of the Church and refused to recant his philosophical beliefs throughout his eight years of imprisonment by the Venetian and Roman Inquisitions. His life stands as a testimony to the drive for knowledge and truth that marked the astonishing period of history known as the Renaissance—from which so much in modern art, thought and science derives.

          In 1992, after 12 years of deliberations, the Roman Catholic Church grudgingly admitted that Galileo Galilei had been right in supporting the theories of Copernicus. The Holy Inquisition had forced an aged Galileo to recant his ideas under threat of torture in 1633. But no such admission has been made in the case of Bruno. His writings are still on the Vatican’s list of forbidden texts.“

          Yes sir, nothing supports scientific inquiry like burning researchers at the stake, bring on the Inquisition!

        • I was educated by private Catholic schools in the District of Columbia. One of my parents has a mathematics degree from MIT. The other was a NASA electrical engineer for 33 years. I have a B.S. in Wildlife Biology & minor in Microbiology. The Catholic Church suppressed science and the quest for knowledge in the western world for a thousand years. Yes, it was there to pick up the the pieces after the fall of Rome but who knows, without the church maybe mankind would have discovered antibiotics 800 years ago, split the atom 500 years ago or landed on the moon 300 years ago.

          This is an old discredited myth about the history of the Catholic Church, and I say this as a guy who is not adherent to formal religion. The reality of the Church’s relationship to science was far more complex. For one, this idea that the Church suppressed science for a thousand years, and thus we’d be one thousand years ahead scientifically and technologically today, is a myth. If anything, it was a great deal the opposite—it is because of the Church that modern science even developed.

          Science was not advancing in the Greek and Roman Empire. They went centuries without ever making much of any real technical advancement, other than in structural engineering in the case of the Romans. But beyond that, science was no different in 400 AD than it had been in 400 BC. It wasn’t until the collapse of the western Roman Empire that the pieces began to fall into place to allow for the development of science.

          It was during the so-called “Dark Ages” that we saw true advancements made in agriculture (plows, three-field crop rotation), mechanization (water wheels and windmills and all the things that could be automated with them), advancements in metallurgy, the first mechanical clocks, the first universities, etc…which began to lead to the thinking that perhaps the universe itself was like a big form of mechanism created by God.

        • Wow, I had no idea that the Catholic Church had disavowed the miracles recorded in the Bible, where the laws of physics were contravened by an arbitrary and capricious ‘supreme being’.

          Throughout much of history, the Church was very open to a non-literal interpretation of the Bible. They understood that not necessarily EVERYTHING in the book could be taken literally, and that if reality showed things which contradicted what the Bible said, then modifications would have to be made in terms of the interpretation of scripture. This got countered later on with the Reformation where some people said this was nonsense and the Bible needed to be interpreted literally, and that the Church was corrupt, such as with the indulgences where one could buy their way out of sin, and this all led to the most bloody war in history until WWI.

          And regarding the Catholic Church relationship with scientific inquiry, let us consider this historical fact:

          “Giordano Bruno, philosopher and scientist, burnt at the stake 400 years ago
          Frank Gaglioti
          16 February 2000”

          “Throughout his life Bruno championed the Copernican system of astronomy which placed the sun, not the Earth, at the centre of the solar system. He opposed the stultifying authority of the Church and refused to recant his philosophical beliefs throughout his eight years of imprisonment by the Venetian and Roman Inquisitions. His life stands as a testimony to the drive for knowledge and truth that marked the astonishing period of history known as the Renaissance—from which so much in modern art, thought and science derives.

          In 1992, after 12 years of deliberations, the Roman Catholic Church grudgingly admitted that Galileo Galilei had been right in supporting the theories of Copernicus. The Holy Inquisition had forced an aged Galileo to recant his ideas under threat of torture in 1633. But no such admission has been made in the case of Bruno. His writings are still on the Vatican’s list of forbidden texts.“

          Yes sir, nothing supports scientific inquiry like burning researchers at the stake, bring on the Inquisition!

          Where to begin. All of this is myth. A thing to understand is that during the medieval times, the dominant scientific understanding was that the Sun orbited the Earth. This was not solely grounded in religion. It was the Aristotlean belief and was pretty well-supported. Understand this, it is VERY difficult, almost impossible, using naked eye astronomy to show that the Earth and planets orbit the Sun. Pretty much all hard observation will show that the Sun orbits the Earth.

          Bruno was not burned due to advocating any science, he was burned for other reasons (I forget off the top of my head, but it wasn’t due to his advocating any scientific argument). I believe he was kind of a nut who was doing the equivalent of saying aliens are real. If aliens show up at some point, it doesn’t mean the crazy old guy down the back road who claims aliens are real was making a coherent argument the whole time. Bruno just happened by chance to be right in the long-term.

          As for science in the Renaissance, the scientific advancements that happened during the Renaissance were due to the whole academic foundation that had been built and developed during the medieval period by medieval scholars.

          Regarding Galileo and Copernicus, neither one of them had a decent argument to show that the Earth and planets orbited the Sun. And Galileo’s problems were again more complex. He was a rather arrogant jerk who didn’t take kindly to people questioning his arguments, and this led to him being on the wrong side of some of the higher-ups in the Church. The Church however did not reject his argument because it was against religion, it was rejected because it was against the science of the time.

          The model showing the Sun orbiting the Earth was the best explanation for how the universe worked. It was not until Tycho Brahe did about forty years of hard astronomical observations and recordings, which he then passed on to Johannes Kepler, who engaged in further hard observation and built on Brahe’s work, that real advancement was made. Through Brahe’s recordings, Kepler realized that Mars’s orbit was elliptical and not circular, and this led to a revolution in thinking. No one had taken into account that the orbits were elliptical. Because of this, models by people like Galileo and Copernicus just didn’t work, because they used circular orbits, which thus fell out of sync with actual observations.

          Another was stellar parallax, basically that the position of the stars will move in relation to the change in orbital position of the Earth. If the Earth orbits the Sun, then there should be changes in the relative positions of the stars. Tycho Brahe actually proposed this as a test to see if the Earth orbited the Sun, but he failed to detect any parallax and many astronomers at the time argued that the fact that parallax was not observable was further proof that the Sun in fact orbited the Earth. As it is, parallax is in fact detectable, but without modern instruments, you have to really know what you’re doing and use certain primitive instruments to really detect it.

      • RE: “Bishop Daniel Flores of the Brownsville Diocese in Texas recently wrote on Twitter that Americans “sacralize death’s instruments, and then are surprised that death uses them.”

        Let’s not forget Bishop Daniel Flores…Point a finger and three fingers point back at you. Unfortunately some in your line of work do not follow the path of the righteous because they are pedophiles. Ring a bell? Now where I come from a firearm in the hands of a “Victim” will put the Fear of God in murderers, rapists, thieves, perverts, child molesters, kidnappers and last but not least I need a drum roll…Insane individuals who criminally misuse firearms…Bada Boom.

        Furthermore Bishop Daniel Flores the honorable firearm demonizer from Brownsville TX…Perhaps if the perp in Uvalde been brought up correctly to respect firearms in the manner Daniel Defense implied then a man who was brought up to respect firearms correctly would not have had to enter a classroom and fill the insane murderous perp with lead…Lead which may have came from a Daniel Defense firearm…Hammer forged barrels, baby.

        • This diatribe started off disingenuously with the words. ” Daniel Defense, the Black Creek, Georgia company that sold the rifle used in the….. “. No, they built, distributed, and papered the firearm in strict accordance with all applicable federal laws, as did the wholesaler and finally the dealer, whom ran the required Federal background check on the buyer before he LEGALLY transferred it to the buyer. THE BUYER then violated numerous State and Federal laws with it. Nothing being knee- jerked into law after that fact would have, nor will in the future, cause a nutjob to not be a nutjob, short of locking up said nutjob… sort of like NOT taking away everyone else’s F-150 will cure repeat DUI offenders. ( Nothing against Ford pickups, it just happens to be the #1 vehicle used in DUI offenses).

    • actually, it was the catholic church that helped end slavery.
      it was the protestant south in america that wanted to keep slavery so bad, they were willing to leave the united states.

  4. So, they’re upset that we’ve made scared a right that God made and gifted to us.

    Ok.

    • that’s a pretty excellent typo.
      and there’s no irony in the professor’s last name being spitzer.

  5. They can talk all they want, we still aren’t obeying any new laws or regulations and we will still defend ourselves if anyone tries to enforce any. We don’t have anything to discuss with them. Leave us alone or else.

      • I agree with with your sentiment.

        You might not know it but (within the context of this article), but ‘avatars’ are religious symbols that have been coopted by the world of tech.

        • “avatars’ are religious symbols that have been coopted by the world of tech“

          “avatar (n.)
          1784, “descent of a Hindu deity to earth in an incarnate or tangible form,” from Sanskrit avatarana “descent” (of a deity to the earth in incarnate form), from ava- “off, down” (from PIE root *au- (2) “off, away”) + base of tarati “(he) crosses over,” from PIE root *tere- (2) “cross over, pass through, overcome.”

          Meaning “concrete embodiment of something abstract” is from 1815. In computer use, it seems to trace to the novel “Snowcrash” (1992) by Neal Stephenson.“

        • @Miner49er
          Interesting your able to find such things.

          An avatar is the representation of the physical manifestation of a deity or god.

          When you go in and choose an avatar to represent you on forums like this you are essentially saying that you can be your own god. That Mickey Mouse is your god. That anything can be your god.

          There are legitimate reasons why any depiction of Mahamad gets Islamic people so angry. Personally I think they take it to the extreme and should stop but I do understand the offense. They don’t understand how much it’s laughed at and mocked or how evil it makes them look when they react so violently to it.

    • Your sentiments are probably shared by more people than you think. Yes it will be a major miscalculation on their part to think We The People are going to allow that to happen.

  6. Notice the language? The left uses sexual terms about those things they hate and love.

  7. I am in no way nreigious but I do recognise the wisdom that exists in ALL religious writings including thiose of the Ancients and none is more true that ‘he that lives by the SWORD shall die by the SWORD.
    Whilst there is as evidenced by this website a lot of more extremist weapon owners who seem bent of some kind of CIVIL WAR to protect as what they see as some kind of Constituional Right-in-Law, there are as I see it far more people including a great number of various religious groups who are, perhaps mistakenly but understandably concerned only with, in general terms, SELF DEFENCE, legitimate hunting and legitimate sporting aims as in the use of licensed ranges . They are neither politically extremist OR against further firearm control measures. They are almost certainly not at all interested in any kind of ARMED Civil Disturbance.
    As the opening comment points out what is worrying is the QUASI-RELIGIOUS STATUS given to firearms and in particular SEMI-AUTO HIGH MAGAZINE CAPACITY RIFLES and completely unnessessary HANDGUNS by those who need an easily dislayed personality ‘prop’ of some kind.

    Nobody actually needs for self defence more than a single good 9mm or .38. handgun. [I never did and I was a Professional in The UK Armed Forces [who are acknowledged some of the worlds best in these matters], including being a smallarms instructor for a number of years. We turned out Pros not wannabe Rambo gun freaks

    Nobody needs for hunting anything more than a decent FIVE shot BOLT ACTION RIFLE of a suitable calibre and nobody needs to hold any more than 25 rounds of suitable ammunintiion at any one time. [Though I could possible see an exception of .22rimfire ‘plinking’ rifles for vermin and suitable ‘COMPETITION’ firearms with ammunition only saleable at licensed ranges.]

    None of this goes against the American Constitution as far as I can see!

    • Albert, everything you just said goes against the 2nd Ammendment. The 2nd Ammendment, had nothing to do with hunting, it had everything to do with keeping the government power in-check.

      It’s not a “radical position” as you put it, for us to think about owning guns to protect ourselves against threats both foreign and domestic. How would you feel if you were an average citizen in Ukraine right now?

      Also, because if US public ownes so many guns, it would be suicidal for a foreign force to try to invade us. Isoroku Yamamoto was supposed to have said, “I would never invade America, there is a gun behind every blade of grass.”

    • Well, as the UK does NOT operate from the US CONSTITUTION, I would never expect the same level of consideration. As a result, the comparison becomes a meaningless apples-to-oranges diatribe.

      As has been said countless times, this is NOT and NEVER HAS BEEN about hunting. So even discussing THAT is pointless.

      The whole “nobody needs…” argument is meaningless. There isn’t much in life that anyone really “needs”. Nobody actually NEEDS guns at all (but try telling that to any military and the governments they operate under in this world). But you can say the same thing about most everything else like cars, internet, television, arrogant corrupt politicians, etc.

      What we ARE talking about here is something called FREEDOM. That is the very thing that forced the US into creating it’s own identity separated from under royalty, crown, or anything else.

      • RE:: sir albert hall of shame…”I am in no way nreigious but I do recognise the wisdom that exists in ALL religious writings including thiose of the Ancients and none is more true that ‘he that lives by the SWORD shall die by the SWORD.”

        The SWORD you SHOUTING red coat drama queen is one in the hands of an individual who criminally misuses their sword. People got tired of seeing other people sliced up so they stuck a sword in the bad guy. In other words if you criminally misuse a firearm you either go to jail or you could very well might die…jolly good ol’ chap.

    • “Whilst there is as evidenced by this website a lot of more extremist weapon owners who seem bent of some kind of CIVIL WAR to protect as what they see as some kind of Constitutional Right-in-Law…”

      It is not that many patriots seem “some of some kind of civil war…” but the fact that we have the means and must continually remind the Statist wanna be tyrants of that fact and the willingness to use them if forced to it.

      As the current crop in Washington seem particularly tone-deaf on this point the declarations must get louder and more strident to make the point.

    • When you make a Biblical reference to support your opinion, make sure you understand the context of the reference.

      The US is not Britain, Europe or any other Country except the US. Our laws and traditions are ours, we kicked you out of our affairs a long time ago. You are like ex who refuses to understand your control over us is over.

      No one needs is a weak position to debate from. The actual needs are food, water and shelter,. Anything else is not an actual need but a comfort.

      Your Civil War projection is nonsense. If the firearm owners wanted a Civil War it would have happened. We own firearms for our defense. The left here is calling for a war against anyone who is resistant to their utopian ideology. I read their sites, all profess Democracy thru the use of force against the Right.

      Your opinions, regardless of the moniker you use, are anti Democratic and align more with what you accuse us here of.

    • Luckily for American, we have a Bill of Rights, not a Bill of Needs. Anyone who uses the cliche, “No one needs” instantly loses all credibility in the discussion because they have shown how little they know about the topic.

      • In a Free Libertarian Country, there is No requirement for an individual to show a ‘need’ to exercise a guaranteed natural uninfringeable Sovereign Right to anyone.. not even god.

    • Oh, so now it’s “25 rounds”, not 50, Albert the Subject. Tell us again how you were an arms “trainer” for Her Majesty’s Gummint, Albert, you lying liar. You know f***-all about guns, and every time you try to “prove” your “knowledge”, you make an @$$ of yourself. Competent shooting requires PRACTICE, Albert, you blithering idiot. 25 rounds, even 50 rounds, isn’t even a warm up for a decent practice session.

      And you obviously know even less about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights than you do about guns, as hard as that is to believe (apparently, there is such a thing as “negative knowledge”!). Neither the 2A, NOR the Federalist Papers, nor the Anti-Federalist Papers, nor the notes of the Constitutional Convention mention “hunting” as a basis for the 2A, you ignorant dolt. There is, however, MUCH discussion of our ability to resist the tyranny of Mad King George, or future mad tyrants seeking our subjugation. Didn’t work out well for you folks, did it??

      Go be a happy subject, Albert the Subject, and leave free people alone. We haven’t given a s*** about your opinions since 1776. Sod off, swampy.

    • Hey Albert keep in mind we kicked your English butts in the Revolutionary War. We don’t need you to tell us what we need or don’t need. The folks who kicked your butts back then let us know that We The People have the right by whatever means it takes to remove despots from telling us how to think, when to speak, and when to obey. That’s the difference between you and us. If we were really all that irresponsible with over 50% of the Country owning firearms there would be no one left to criticize us. We would only have to shoot two people apiece and never listen to the BS again.

    • I thought that we had kicked the Eurotrash out of America clear back in the 1770s. Why are we even allowing them to comment on our websites?

    • jesus christ….. a subject trying to tell an American they don’t need a firearm….

      clown world….I swear…

    • Prince among kings Albert, this colonial has enough guns and ammunition for you to start calling your local member to demand action.

      Take a Bex, have a cup of tea, and a lie down to rest. There’s a good chap.

    • I am in no way nreigious but I do recognise the wisdom that exists in ALL religious writings including thiose of the Ancients and none is more true that ‘he that lives by the SWORD shall die by the SWORD.
      Whilst there is as evidenced by this website a lot of more extremist weapon owners who seem bent of some kind of CIVIL WAR to protect as what they see as some kind of Constituional Right-in-Law, there are as I see it far more people including a great number of various religious groups who are, perhaps mistakenly but understandably concerned only with, in general terms, SELF DEFENCE, legitimate hunting and legitimate sporting aims as in the use of licensed ranges . They are neither politically extremist OR against further firearm control measures. They are almost certainly not at all interested in any kind of ARMED Civil Disturbance.

      As the opening comment points out what is worrying is the QUASI-RELIGIOUS STATUS given to firearms and in particular SEMI-AUTO HIGH MAGAZINE CAPACITY RIFLES and completely unnessessary HANDGUNS by those who need an easily dislayed personality ‘prop’ of some kind.

      Nobody actually needs for self defence more than a single good 9mm or .38. handgun. [I never did and I was a Professional in The UK Armed Forces [who are acknowledged some of the worlds best in these matters], including being a smallarms instructor for a number of years. We turned out Pros not wannabe Rambo gun freaks

      You show a lack of understanding with this claim of “wannabe Rambo gun freaks.” For one, the belief in the right to keep and bear arms is religiously-based for certain people, but two, it is a natural right and as such it has little to do with “need.” It is about two elements: 1) the individual right of people to self-defense, and 2) the right of people to possess arms to check a tyranny, as historically, the government only possessing arms is a formula for tyranny to form. The government possesses a monopoly on force, but the People are the Sovereign, and the government the servant. The possession of arms by the people is the ultimate check on the government. It provides a counterweight to the government’s otherwise possessing a monopoly on force and changes the calculus in the relationship between a people and their government. It is the ultimate underlining of the fact that the People are the Sovereign and the government derives its power from the People and exists to serve them and protect their rights.

      Nobody needs for hunting anything more than a decent FIVE shot BOLT ACTION RIFLE of a suitable calibre and nobody needs to hold any more than 25 rounds of suitable ammunintiion at any one time. [Though I could possible see an exception of .22rimfire ‘plinking’ rifles for vermin and suitable ‘COMPETITION’ firearms with ammunition only saleable at licensed ranges.]

      None of this goes against the American Constitution as far as I can see!

      It doesn’t? The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

      From this, you derive all manner of infringements as being permitted? Now “well regulated,” by the way, just meant “good quality,” “in good working order,” etc…you can find references to “well regulated horses,” “a well regulated society,” “a well regulated government,” “a well regulated household,” “a well regulated life,” etc…in the writings of the 1700s and 1800s. It did not refer to government regulation as we understand it today. “Militia” referred to the general population capable of bearing arms, and is distinguished from “select militia,” both of which are mentioned in writings of the time.

      So what the amendment is saying is, “A well trained arms-bearing population being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

  8. This is rich coming from an organization (Catholic Church of Rome Inc) that historically used violence to accomplish their ends. Just recently in modern times they have branched over to sexual abuse as it is easier to cover up. There was a whole school filled of deaf children that were abused by priests and none of the kids could talk and were abused for years. Clean out your house first Bishop Flores then we can talk. Until then you can “f” off.

    • Matt07924,

      And if you ever saw, from the inside, the abysmal way the Church has managed this, it would be a magnifying glass on the good points you have made.

      That being said, I know a lot of very fine, dedicated priests who have suffered greatly due to the malfeasance of some Bishops and Cardinals.

    • I have two books in my library: Sex lives of the Dictators and Sex lives of the Popes.

      Even the most depraved of the dictators, Hitler, was not anywhere near the popes. Leo X in particular. It is easier to list the sins he didn’t commit than the ones he did.

  9. All of these news articles and opinion pieces make it seem as if the AR and AK rifles are a new threat to people. The media and women of “The View” will screem to high heaven how these weapons of war need to be removed from society.

    Of course, we all know the AR and AK have been around for over half a decade.

    So what has changed?……How we raise and teach our children! Have you spoken to today’s youth? They’re a bunch of self absorbed narcissistic a-holes without respect for others. They’ll act as if they’re virtuous by doing things and posting it on social media, but they’re really looking for self affirming comments. Most of them act as if the world is ending if their feelings are hurt, so they demand to have their “safe spaces”.

    People don’t grow up this way, they have to be taught to be this ignorant (looking at you public schools and colleges).

  10. “Bishop Daniel Flores of the Brownsville Diocese in Texas recently wrote on Twitter that Americans “sacralize death’s instruments, and then are surprised that death uses them.” ”

    Well Bishop Flores, I’m catholic and American and I don’t ‘sacralize death’s instruments’. I’ve had to employ a firearm for protection several times in my life, only a few of the bad guys died even though all of them were hit. But I was not in anyway “surprised that death” used my gun because death didn’t, I shot those animals that were trying to kill either my wife or me and I shot them because they tried to be deaths instruments.

    Do I regret having to pull the trigger having no other choice and no other way out? No. I would have regretted not pulling the trigger though thus letting death use its instruments of criminality that death tried to visit upon us.

  12. Stick to preaching the Gospel, Mr. Bishop. The decay and corruption of Western civilization is a far greater problem than guns. Look to your own ranks for evidence.

  13. 50 years ago guns, ARs included, were more easily available and less highly regulated than today. Schools had shooting teams and kids brought guns to school and left them in their cars during hunting season, never thinking to use them to shoot up the school or their friends. What changed?

    We are where we are because of 50 years of Democrat soft on crime policies, no doubt supported by this bishop, and 50 years of Democrat social policies that have destroyed inner city families, and destroyed the concept of personal accountability for one’s actions.

    Liberal’s answers to the problems they’ve created always result in taking things away from the innocent mass of citizens in the vain hope of effecting change in the lawless few. The end result is that the innocent are punished by having their freedom restricted and criminals are unaffected.

    I’m fed up with the collectivization pushed by liberals like this bishop. No, I won’t punish myself and make myself a prisoner for his concept of “the common good.” Thanks to people like him we’re more highly taxed, more highly regulated, and less free than were the Founders under King George’s rule.

    So, as the Left is wont to say these days, “Enough is enough!”

    • Ticked Off,

      “No, I won’t punish myself and make myself a prisoner for his concept of “the common good.”

      Bishops should not speak out of ignorance. I wonder how many faithful, law-abiding gun owners from his congregation he spoke with before vomiting up his indigestible slurry.

    • Liberal’s answers to the problems they’ve created always result in taking things away from the innocent mass of citizens in the hope of increasing their power. FIFY

      They’re never serious about solving real problems. Just look at their track record. They excel at spending your money and expanding the government.

  14. Don’t fetishize bad things like individual liberty.
    Fetishize good things like government power and grooming.

    • Be sure to let everyone know what a good person you are by displaying your mask, rainbow flag, syringe, Ukrainian flag, and maybe a BLM flag outside of your home, or is that out of style now?

  15. What’s wrong with men and women liking their weapons? I like my other tools also. But, I admit, I do have an affinity for my weapons.

    • Gadsden,

      Yup. I love spending time in the shop, but an afternoon at the range is a real treat.

  16. One of the many I left the Catholic priesthood was the tendency of the Church hierarchy to pontificate on subjects of which they were glaringly ignorant. This was not my primary reason, but it was on the list.

    Guns have NEVER been the issue. Human behavior is the issue. Preach the Good News, THAT is how you change hearts and minds.

    And, even folk who do not believe in God support a message of kindness, the practical application of honesty, and even fiscal soundness (custodianship).

    There are clerical leaders who need to extract themselves from the bleeding heart, drag-queen flamboyance, communist leaning, and money grubbing church and personal enrichment practices, and instead focus on the messages that bring people together despite political differences.

  18. It should be important to those who love freedom. The reason dictatorships take people’s firearms is because they don’t want them to fight back. This is the real reason in this Country for the continual passing of laws that do not work. Look at the hypocrisy at work here. We defund the police, release criminals without bail, fail to charge criminals with serious crimes, give them meaningless sentences, have open borders and allow unvetted, untested illegals into our Country many of whom are drug and human traffickers, criminals, terrorists, and children without parents. We permit riots in Blue Cities to go on for weeks and months destroying property including Government Buildings, harming civilians and law enforcement officers and then we say we had an Insurrection because Conservatives protested at the Capitol for one day doing far less damage and destruction. Why? Because our dictators in Washington felt threatened. So, it’s just a matter of whose OX gets gored not the fact that something is inherently wrong. It’s about time this Government showed respect for the Constitution of the USA and quit making excuses to take people’s ability to protect themselves from THEM away.

    • dprato, What you said here is what more folks need to think about when they look at our present goverments dealing with things.

  19. From the article:
    “Christian nationalism”
    I’ve noticed that phrase popping up recently. That’s one of the new scary phrases they’ll try to use to smear the Right.

    From the article:
    “…so-called Christian nationalism is “a cultural expression of Christianity fused with American civic identity, [signaling] a comfort with a society that is hierarchical along gender, sexuality, and ethno-racial boundaries.”

    Really it’s just a different way to say the same thing: sexist, ho_mo/transphobic, racist, basket of deplorables.

    ho_mo used to avoid moderation

  20. “The good of the whole community gets left out of the discussion…”
    He is confused. This has NOTHING to do with guns. This is an important aspect of Democrats NOT keeping criminals behind bars. So while I agree, the underlying reason for saying it is completely wrong.

    “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
    This is the very reason why so many parents are so upset at teachers, school boards and administrators, and teachers unions. people are being robbed of the hearts, minds, and souls for the grooming and spread of communism as it’s taught at such an early age. It is quite telling how a bishop refuses to deal with the actual problem. How many children have been hurt, killed, or have killed themselves as a direct result of using Twitter that he so obviously sacralizes?

    “The National Rifle Association has long understood the power of religious messaging.”
    Well, the NRA has nothing to do with anything. That might be a corrupt organization that I currently refuse to be part of but they did not create this problem. Unless something drastically changes, I don’t see the NRA as being part of the solution either. THAT’s just something this bishop through in to indicate his allegiance to the Democrat left.

  21. How about we stop letting corrupt politicians “sacralize” themselves and letting them have immunity from the corrupt laws they create for others…including making some pay taxes while others don’t. Government has been directly involved/caused more harm and deaths than even the church…(pulling out of Afghanistan, Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.).How about going after the big fish first…they are the biggest problem…people see the government literally getting away with murder with no consequences …so now we have people deciding to do all sorts of heinous crap because of the corrupt elite…Do something to FIX that First… bishop and the other moron…How’d that be?

  22. The new protagonists: The climate. Marxism/critical (race) theory. Sexual deviance. The power of the classes
    The new antagonists: Free speech. Guns. Dissent. Individual rights. Free thought.

    Just in case you didn’t look beneath the hood of newest ones off the lot.

    • Catholic bishop huh? My GOD commands me to provide for my own family. That includes protection. To the death btw. Or why I have an AR. Sell your cloak & buy a sword senor Flores…

    • John B,

      Only if we can add Samuel Colt, Hiram Maxim, Oliver Winchester, Eugene Stoner, Wilhelm and Paul Mauser, and Mikhail Kalashnikov. Then I’d be all in.

  25. Catholics have an ‘obligation’ to follow ‘The Doctors of the Church’, the Magisterium, Papal decree, and the Holy See.

    The Doctors of the Church and the Magisterium are clear that self-defense of self and others is not only a right, but in some cases, a duty. The “duty” towards others applies to those the Catholic has an actual duty to protect and not necessarily everyone or just anyone – family, neighbors, friends, are duty to protect but others not within the duty can also be protected by your application of defense if another is endangered. In the “Catechism of the Catholic Church’ the guidelines for when self-defense is legitimate are presented.

    There are Catholics (and priests, nuns, bishops etc…) who are pacifist and would say that lethal force is never justifiable even in self-defense, this Bishop is of that type. However, the answer from the church is that lethal force can be justified. The Catechism tells Catholics that lethal force can be justified if one is left with no other choice, and that killing is a last resort after everything else has been tried to avoid killing. There is no stand-your-ground or no-duty-to-retreat justification for a Catholic if they follow church teaching and dogma as they must, according to the Church, exhaust every thing else first before employing lethal force to kill in self-defense and that includes running away from and avoidance of the threat. So, in short, as one priest once told me in explaining all this “if its too late to run or avoid or they keep after you and bearing down on you, then shoot them.”

    But when it comes to use of force for defense for a Catholic (using church dogma), after everything else has been tried to avoid it there is a ‘use of force continuum’. Citing Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Catechism says

    “Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.”

    In other words the Catechism tells us that moderation in self-defense is responding to force with like force. For example, if a person is stealing a bike you don’t use a firearm, if a person is coming at you with a knife you can can respond in kind (lethal force to lethal force, use a firearm). The force used is not required to be ‘equal’ (e.g. knife for a knife) but only that it be the force necessary to stop the threat – in other words only the ‘necessary’ lethal-force-of-any-type to counter the threat lethal-force-of-any-type. By the way, this is where the idea for the modern day “use of force continuum” used by law enforcement originated.

    But the right of self-defense for a Catholic (following church dogma) is based upon the need, ultimately in the name of God, based on a rightly ordered concept of ‘self-love’ which puts God first in your relationship with your self and others. So self-defense for a Catholic, ultimately according to church dogma, is conducted in the name of God to preserve that self-love relationship as is employing the force or killing in defense.

    Owning a firearm, or employing a firearm for self-defense or defense of others, is not a sin nor does it “sacralize death’s instruments”.

    • Some clarifications to my above, on the way the Catholic Church teaches it:

      On self-defense: The Catholic Church has always taught that self-defense against a physical attacker is not forbidden, and in fact is morally good. The church has always taught that you have a responsibility to preserve your own physical bodily life over that of the attacker, that you have an obligation to preserve your life more than that of the attacker.

      On defense of others: The Catholic Church has also always taught that you have an obligation to, as scripture says, “rescue those that are taken off the slaughter” or in other words also defend those endangered (e.g. by an attacker). So its an obligation to defend others IF YOU CAN if they are endangered also, but, if you do (and follow church dogma) you don’t have to be overly careful about preserving their life because you have the greater obligation to preserve your own bodily life over theirs.

      Going back to St. Thomas for a moment for clarification in context with church teachings and self-defense; Your intention has to be to stop the attacker (and indeed this is pointed to and considered in concept in law also), not an intent from the beginning to kill them even if you know that if you must employ deadly force that it may result in the attackers death. But you don’t have to be overly careful about preserving their life because you have the greater obligation to preserve your own bodily life over theirs.

    • As a Catholic Gun Owner (and a poor one at that), well said Sir, and you laid out the doctrine beautifully.

  26. “Jonsson and Robertson: We’re Where We Are Now Because Some Have Sacralized Guns”

    Fine.

    Want fries with that?

    • “They’ve kind of created this monster, as it were, organized around the gun as a political totem,” says Professor Spitzer.” I also agree with this statement from the article except I think it’s on the Left side that the monster and political totem is created.

      All the media comments are on weapons of war and what gun control can we get in this political set up, demonize the evil inanimate guns watch are strangely cursed and exude some kind of corrupting mismia.

      You see it anytime they wring their hands about how many guns were sold, what they look like, or how many someone has. The mere presence of a gun in a church or school regardless of who is actually carrying it is the only consideration for the left.

  27. “…certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life…”

    This is a statement that government has no capricious natural right to kill people for its own pleasure, or benefit. It is not a statement that anyone has a right to be completely safe from anyone else, or even everything else. If such a right would exist, the numbers of deaths in automobile accidents would mandate confiscation of all privately (even corporate) owned vehicles: 2021 – 42, 915; 4000, ages 0-17)
    (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/17/us-traffic-deaths-hit-16-year-high-in-2021-dot-says.html)

    (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6637963/)

  28. Ummm, no. I like and enjoy the firearms I own. Never thought they were somehow sacred or of some strange sexual fetish. What interests me is the mechanics and engineering of them
    And I like to challenge myself to see just how well I can use them. As in being capable to put my projectile on target as accurately as possible and from a long a distance as possible.
    I also enjoy working with the antique machinery I have rebuilt for working with my horses, using other antique tools, and trying to use older techniques and methods of craftmanship.
    But none of the above is in any way a religious or sexual experience.
    Perhaps the Bishop would be better served, and be of actual service of his parishioners if he taught the basic premise’s and tenants of his Church. Something like thou shall not kill, thou shall not bear false witness, thou shall not covet, thou shall not steal, etc.And that God created Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve.

  29. Some people have become fixated on keeping guns because other people have fixated on taking them.

    Funny how the Bible says nothing about praying to Mary or praying to dead believers, yet the Catholic church does both of those and then accuse gun owners of idolatry.

    Idolatry is worshipping or elevating something above God. I worship the God of the Bible, not guns. Guns are simply tools. I enjoy and appreciate their recreational and protective use.

    Self defense is a God given right. Luke chapter 22 Jesus, God the Son, told his followers if you don’t have a sword sell your cloak and buy one.

    • And that statement, not so co-incidentally, was in response to the Tyrannical Authority of Rome against Jews & Christians. But today the Church still remains anti-second A in their Canon Law?
      The Church always was part of the Royalist power elite and literally in bed with kingdoms all throughout history. They never really gave a fuck about the flock itself, except as a source of slave labor and income. And of course, The Vatican currently has its own Austrian Special Forces elite nini Army with the latest H&K equipment. Not to mention they own the Italian Government.

      Did you know that the Catholic Church owned slaves in America?

      • Of course the Catholic Church owned slaves in America. Most of the major religions, and branches of them, have owned slaves in America at one time or another either directly or indirectly. The practice existed up until almost the mid 1970’s in various sects/branches with most of the major religions using various races, where officially by law they were not at in those times classified as slaves but rather by various tiles such as ‘laborers’, ‘domestic help’, etc… but in reality they were “indentured servants” (a form of slavery) working off the debt of them being smuggled into the country (a form of human trafficking slavery). This happened not only in the U.S. but it was for a long time common practice around the world.

        In the U.S. it began in earnest in 1652. In 1652 the Colony of Rhode Island established a law abolishing “African Slavery”, but there was a catch. The law read that no ‘black mankind’ person could serve more than 10 years in “indentured servitude” (a form of slavery). Of course it was exploited and they were kept in that slavery “indentured servitude” up to the 10 year period ended. During that 10 years they were ‘owned’ by the church in Rhode Island and by the elders of the church and by others.

  31. To say something is sacralized is to say it’s almost taken out of any possibility for conversation.”

    Yup! But it’s the right to keep and bear arms for both individual self-defense and resistance to tyranny that is what is sacrosanct.

    “The threat is gun idolatry, a form of gun fetish that’s fundamentally aggressive, grotesquely irresponsible, and potentially destabilizing to American democracy,” writes David French, a veteran, lawyer, and evangelical Christian, in The Dispatch.

    If applied to the current leftist ultra-PC dogma, I agree, and it is an apt description.

    “They’ve kind of created this monster, as it were, organized around the gun as a political totem,” says Professor Spitzer.

    I agree again, but when applied to the PC dogma currently in vogue.

  32. ” ‘They’ve kind of created this monster, as it were, organized around the gun as a political totem,’ says Professor Spitzer.”

    Spitzer is nuts.

    Guns were not a ‘political totem’ of anyone other than those who are anti-second amendment/anti-gun. They made it such. The legitimate legal gun community was happy being able to own, carry, go to the range, hunt, be able to defend ourselves and family, and in the hobby aspects – were were happy exercising our second amendment rights and we kept it to our selves – we didn’t try to force it on anyone and we mostly kept it in the community, and in our families, and only when some in the community wanted to share this wonderful ‘hobby’ with others was it taken outside the community. But, some bad people committed criminal acts using guns – it used to be that law enforcement/governments went after the criminals and prosecuted them but today instead of going after the cause (the criminal) they go after the law abiding gun owner by trying to restrict and remove their rights.

    Then years ago some very liberal idiots who wanted their way did three things. One was, some said “Hey, lets reform the criminal justice system to start treating criminals as victims to be ‘cured’ and give them a chance no matter overall they re-offend and overall the criminal element grows every year generation after generation.” So these decided that was going to work and said “if that’s working then the problem must be guns, so lets go after guns and get the government to help do that.” The other thing was some of them said “we don’t see a need for the second amendment and don’t like guns so lets get rid of guns.” And the next was “hey, its common sense to think that if there were no guns there would be no gun crime.” and ignored that gun related crime is committed by the very criminal elements they allowed to flourish with their ‘reform’ of the criminal justice system. So they started attacking the rights and property of the legal law abiding gun owner, chanting “no guns then no gun crime” And its at that point guns became a ‘political totem’, not because the gun community made it so but because these idiots turned it into one on their crusade to ruin the country by letting it be overrun by the very criminal element they allowed to flourish.

    Now they want to disarm the law abiding populace. Its a fact, historically and by nature, that when a ‘populace’ is defenseless the predators increase and start treating the populace like their own personal buffet. Now today in the United States we see criminal elements and crimes of proportions the likes of which we never had before in 100% of all areas where guns are severely restricted or denied, for example, Chicago but not only in these areas its spilled over to others and its resulted in an increase in the number of people who can have guns having to use them for more defense and the number of events of such have doubled year over year. Some would say “but the stats….” for which we all know is BS because its known these very same idiots, by their government sock puppets, changed the reporting requirements so that the stats are biased to not include most of the crimes that are committed when the stats are generated, for example, FBI stats reporting was changed to only include those which were convicted at the time of the stats generation and it may take a few years to convict someone but if its pleaded down to a lesser charge it doesn’t show up in certain categories of violent crime.

    For example, instead of incarcerating criminals in Chicago; In 2000 (and continuing to today, and before that), ~80% to ~90% of the violent crimes committed in Chicago, were by criminal gang members or by those affiliated with gangs. Mayor Lori E. Lightfoot solution was to ‘reform police’ to turn their focus away from catching the offenders to hand holding in the communities so people would “feel” safer. Its nice to “feel” safer, but “feeling safer” is not the same as “being safer” – and the criminal gangs flourish. Further since then the Mayor has re-aligned the criminal justice system in Chicago with that of the states view to focus more on “no entry” into the criminal legal system, decarcerating jails, and transforming incarceration – the number of re-offenders has increased since not only in Chicago but in Illinois in general.

    The amount of violent crime has actually increased beyond the stats. Basically, the justice system deals with it by pleading down to lesser offenses or dismissals on technicalities even when there is a confession, and diversion programs, and other things to dispose of the cases as quickly as they can and then the offender is back on the streets to do it again. It used to be they got convicted and were locked up, but… “Hey, lets reform the criminal justice system to start treating criminals as victims to be ‘cured’ and give them a chance no matter overall they re-offend and overall the criminal element grows every year generation after generation.” – while the very government we depended on and basically had the only job of protecting and defending the rights of the people seeks to restrict and remove the right to the very thing needed by the law abiding populace to protect their selves. Not that I’m a conspiracy type of person, but its very hard to not think its not a plot or plan or conspiracy of some type by the anti-gun groups and the government to make the populace defenseless in the name of a false ‘common sense’ logic and ignorance with trying to make the law abiding gun owner the bad guy that needs to be ‘controlled’ and made to pay for whats happening.

    Its been happening in other countries as well where guns are banned or severely restricted for the law abiding populace.

    For example; The United Kingdom has had a gun ban in place for years. In the UK gun related crime has risen 27% in five years and the number of firearms seized has quadrupled. Firearms are easily available to criminals despite an almost total ban of firearm ownership among law-abiding citizens. Its pretty clear their gun ban hasn’t really been working to stop illegal gun trafficking or crime as its been touted to be by the anti-gun crowd. Today, due to a change in the U.K. reporting requirements, over 40% of the violent crime is either under reported or not reported in stats because there was no conviction because the criminal was either not caught or was given a lesser charge or released on a technicality yet despite this there was still a victim of a violent crime who will never be reflected in “stats” and lives in terror unable to defend them selves because the government keeps them disarmed while the criminal has ‘carte blanch to re-offend.

    The U.K. has had many mass shootings – just not all at once and by the definitions we use in the U.S. but collectively in terms of numbers shot by criminals over time, considering reported AND not reported to authorities. In this sense there are mass shootings in the U.K. almost daily across the country if its considered that four or more at shot by criminals across the country every day. And since the time of imposing more strict gun control and bans, violent crime has become more brutal and increased and today the U.K. is the violent rape capital of Europe and the most likely spot in the world to be knifed.

    Once again, its a fact, historically and by nature, that when a ‘populace’ is defenseless the predators increase and start treating the populace like their own personal buffet.

  34. someone find this silly stuffed frock of a “bishop” to go and find out whoat the Jesus he purports to serve had to say about self-defense. He told His most trusted followers make sure you bring a sword. If you don’t have one, sell your coat and buy one. He also told householders that, when you are at home and closed down for the night to sleep, and someone breaks into yiour house, “you may strike him that he die, and there shall be no bloodguiliness come upon you”. In other words, B&E could be met with death. In other words, protect your own, even if it means taking out the trash.

    Don;t know WY this creep wants to protect nutcases like this kid who did the shootemup rather than speak out against his crime. It was not that expensive rifle the punk had. That did nothing but what the kid made it do.

    God instituted the “civil magistrate” to “bear the sword against those who DO harm. Please not well,, mister split hat dude, that God did NOT institute the civil magistrate to bear the sword against those who possess the tools to do harm. ONLY those who DO harm. And my owning any particular implement of destruction is NOT doing any harm to anyone. That kid’s buying that rifle was not harm. ONLY when he took it into hishands and FIRED IT AT HUMANS did he “do harm”.
    Thank God for those border patrol heroes who raced over forty miles to get there, told the local LE to put it where the sun don’t shine, breached the buidling ahd KILLED the evil on two legs who was HARMING people. There, the “civil magistrate” we call border Patrol wielded the “sword” against he who was doing harm, so that he stopped. Dead. As he should be.

  35. Another beef with the idiot who wrote this piece.. Daniel Defense did NOT “sell that rifle to the killer”. Nope. They did, as is right and moral and all, build that rifle, ship it out into the retail sales ssytem, and a licensed dealer, performing his duty under the law, made all the checks and lawfully sold it to this creature. If George Smith had bought that rifle the day before, the punk would have bought something else. Srta loke condeming Chevrolet for building the pickup truck that crashed into your car and put you into hospital. If it hadn’t been that Chev, it may well have been a Ford or Toyota. The tool is nothing. It is the one USING the tool. Untilthese clownish pseudo-religious poohbahs wake up and focus on the ROOT of the problem, it will continue and increase. Gys like this “bishop” need to go find a real job. Tey are not helping.

  36. Globalist puppet master: “Keep throwing poop at the wall until something sticks!”
    Lefty useful idiot (takes out thesaurus): “I got you, fam.”

  37. As a Catholic Gun Owner, the Bishop is entitled to his opinion, but it is just that, an opinion and not one in line with Church doctrine. The Bishop would take his place in line as they are loading the cattle cars. Good for martyrdom, but not really a Good Shepherd of the flock entrusted into his care. We’ve an abundance of Martyrs, and frankly your Grace, we’re running out of Feast Days. So Bishop, you go right ahead and die for the faith, whilst I and many others will kill to protect it if necessary.

  38. The Catholic church is run by men, as such it is fundamentally flawed. As Christianity teaches, humans are fundamentally flawed. As such I will take Monsignor’s opinions as just that, the opinions of a human.

Comments are closed.