Religion and violence

chris_brown207 · Post by **chris_brown207** » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:15 pm

The United States is nation with a Christian majority, with about 78% claiming some form of Christianity as of 2009. We are one of the most religious nations by far of all of the westernized, modern nations of the world.

Yet, as yesterdays tragedy shows, we are also one of the most violent nations in the world. 2012 has been a historic year for gun violence, with both the frequency and the level of devastation.

Questions for debate - what is the root cause? If religion brings peace, then why are we one of the most violent of the free and democratic nations in the world? What can we do to fix this?

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:29 pm

otseng wrote:
Goat wrote: However, there is a correlation between gun ownership and homicides.
Agreed. But, there is also a correlation between knife ownership and homicides. Also between car ownership and auto deaths. Also alcohol and drunk driving fatalities.

... and as brought up before, high gun ownership can be associated with low gun violence as dianaiad mentioned earlier. Goat's point does not take away dianaiad's point that there are conditions where high gun ownership can be associated with low violent crime rates.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:59 pm

otseng wrote:
Goat wrote: However, there is a correlation between gun ownership and homicides.
Agreed. But, there is also a correlation between knife ownership and homicides. Also between car ownership and auto deaths. Also alcohol and drunk driving fatalities.

I would assume that nobody is actually arguing for a complete ban on any of these things. But, I would agree that all these things should be regulated. And I'm even for stricter gun regulations.

Yet.. when it guns, the sole purpose that guns were made were to kill. And many guns are specifically designed for mass murder. The assault rifles that Nancy Lanza had for example, the same weapon were also used in the Colorado Mall Killing. There is no other tool that is the most linked to homicide and to murder than gun ownership.

As for cars, the one thing about cars. .. they are licensed, and there is insure involved in having an operating car on the road. You have to pass a test to let you use them. There are penalties when people improperly use them, and we mandate the use of seat belts to prevent accident and injury as much as possible.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:38 pm

Goat wrote:
As for cars, the one thing about cars. .. they are licensed, and there is insure involved in having an operating car on the road. You have to pass a test to let you use them. There are penalties when people improperly use them, and we mandate the use of seat belts to prevent accident and injury as much as possible.

And yet there are thousands of people killed by individuals driving irresponsibly, without insurance, in unlicensed or improperly licensed cars they don't own. Licensing and insurance regulations just regulate and insure responsible individuals. They do nothing to stop the irresponsible. That said, what does this have to do with religion? Religious people, seeing as how they by definition are people who follow rules, tend to be the responsible ones.

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:49 pm

Goat wrote: And many guns are specifically designed for mass murder.

What guns are specifically designed for murder? Yes, guns are designed to kill, but not for the express purpose of murder.

As for assault type weapons, I'm for making them illegal. Handguns, hunting rifles, and shotguns, I'm not for banning them.

bluethread · Post by **bluethread** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:58 pm

otseng wrote:
Goat wrote: And many guns are specifically designed for mass murder.
What guns are specifically designed for murder? Yes, guns are designed to kill, but not for the express purpose of murder.

As for assault type weapons, I'm for making them illegal. Handguns, hunting rifles, and shotguns, I'm not for banning them.

What makes something an assault type weapons?

Armed Citizen · Post by **Armed Citizen** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:06 pm

bluethread wrote:
otseng wrote:
Goat wrote: And many guns are specifically designed for mass murder.
What guns are specifically designed for murder? Yes, guns are designed to kill, but not for the express purpose of murder.

As for assault type weapons, I'm for making them illegal. Handguns, hunting rifles, and shotguns, I'm not for banning them.
What makes something an assault type weapons?

The Left-Wing Liberal Bias.

There ain't no such as a type of assault weapon. All weapons are assault weapons. Ater all when anything is used to "attack" peoples then that is assault. Its a lil phrase conjured up ta scare the low information or heavily biased anti-gun crowd.

I've seen the same kinda tactic used against people with a different skin color or them that pray to a different god then the next guy.

Its a language game.

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:12 pm

bluethread wrote: What makes something an assault type weapons?

In my mind, it's civilian versions of fully automatic weapons (such as AK-47, M16, M4 carbine).

Angel · Post by **Angel** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:20 pm

I agree with Otseng's statement except for the point about banning assault rifles. I am not for banning assault rifles because there may be scenarios where you may have to kill a mass number of people, like gangs, violent riots/mobs, etc. Yes, this scenario will hopefully be rare in the US, but that does not take away from my point of there being instances where assault rifles (or any 13+ round clips as high as 30) are useful.

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:38 pm

Angel wrote: I am not for banning assault rifles because there may be scenarios where you may have to kill a mass number of people, like gangs, violent riots/mobs, etc.

Has there been any situation in the past that this scenario has actually happened and required the use of an assault rifle?

chris_brown207 · Post by **chris_brown207** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:44 pm

Angel wrote: I agree with Otseng's statement except for the point about banning assault rifles. I am not for banning assault rifles because there may be scenarios where you may have to kill a mass number of people, like gangs, violent riots/mobs, etc. Yes, this scenario will hopefully be rare in the US, but that does not take away from my point of there being instances where assault rifles (or any 13+ round clips as high as 30) are useful.

There are a lot of what-if scenarios that an assault rifle would be handy in (maybe those N. Koreans really will invade us like the movie suggested). However, we have multiple examples of actual mass killings taking place within a single year using high capacity assault rifles - no what-ifs necessary.