Second Amendment Follies

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states the following:  “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.” This amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, which consists of the first ten amendments. These amendments add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights and place clear limitations on the government's power.

While almost all citizens appreciate most of the rights granted in the Bill of Rights, a disturbing number do not like the Second Amendment and would get rid of it if they could. In the processes, they twist reality into a convoluted mess of arguments against it. Some of their nonsensical arguments are listed below:

• “Since the amendment contains the word ‘militia,’ it applies only to members of the military.” This argument is patently absurd on its face, as are almost all of the anti-Second Amendment arguments. The reality is that our founding fathers preferred militias to a standing army. We cannot use 21^st century definitions to define what things were in colonial America. When the Constitution was written, a militia was made up of volunteers who came to fight, bringing their own arms and ammunition. Our founders knew better than to try and disarm the populace. Otherwise, there could be no militia
• “The ‘right of the people to keep and bear arms’ is a collective right rather than an individual right.” This argument falls flat when it is pointed out that it is a right of “the people,” not just of the government. In the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the "Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home." It should also be pointed out that if part of the Bill of Rights does not grant individual rights, then consistent interpretation would mean such is true of the entire Bill of Rights. There would be howls of protest and who knows what else should such an idea be embraced by politicians.
• “Since our rights are granted to us by our government, that same government has the right to take those rights away.” This argument fails miserably, and our founders recognized the fact that rights are not granted by government but by our Creator and are then to be secured by government. The Declaration states, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,,,” Our rights come from God, not from government. One of those rights is life, and we have the right to protect our lives and those of our loved ones, without interference from government.
• “The Second Amendment only applies to muzzle-loading muskets and rifles, not to ‘assault rifles.’” The absurdity of this argument is almost too obvious to need pointing out. Muzzle-loading muskets and rifles were the “assault weapons” of that day. Today, any weapon the anti-gun people want to ban gets referred to as an “assault weapon.” They need to at least know what they are talking about, but that may be asking too much. By the logic of this argument, the freedom of the press would only include primitive printing presses or quill pens and parchment. It certainly would not include computers with word processing programs, and it would in no way include television, radio, email, social media, or the Internet as a whole. Looking at the entire Bill of Rights through this lens certainly makes this argument about the Second Amendment look like the foolish drivel it is.
• “Semi-automatic rifles are not needed by civilians, because they have nothing to do with hunting.” The answer to that is that the Second Amendment likewise has nothing to do with hunting. Without the Second Amendment, none of the other parts of the Bill of Rights could exist. Experience told our founders that we would never have had a chance to gain our independence from Britain without an armed populace.
• “The Second Amendment is obsolete and no longer needed.” This implies that somehow people have changed for the better with time. It denies that there is a need to be alert and ready for attacks from those who would destroy life and limb and make slaves of others. The reality is that things are not getting better and “more civilized.” Instead, things continue to get worse, just as predicted in the Bible. “But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13, NASB). This Scripture is talking specifically about those who would pervert God’s truth and deceive others into believing falsehood, but it also certainly describes the state of the world today.
• “Since Jesus was a pacifist, we should disarm ourselves and follow His example.” This statement is totally wrong, because Jesus was not and is not a pacifist. He came the first time to provide salvation by His grace because of the great love of God toward guilty sinners. This does not negate the fact that He will come back in power and great glory to bring judgment to unbelievers. He said, “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34, NASB). It is interesting that He said to His disciples, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one” (Luke 22:36, NASB). He also spoke of home defense. “When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed” (Luke 11:21, NASB). “Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house” (Matthew 12:29, NASB).
• “‘Common sense’ and ‘reasonable’ gun-control laws will prevent shootings.” The big problem here is that “common sense” and “reasonable” are, in many cases, buzz words for finding a way around the Second Amendment by infringing on the right to keep (possess) and bear (carry) arms. Disarming potential victims does not create fewer victims, but more of them. If a bully is menacing children on a playground, it would certainly do no good to tie the hands of all the potential victims behind their backs and then hope that would deter the bully. Such thinking is totally absurd, but it is common among those who believe in “gun-control.” They will put up signs that say, “gun-free zone” and expect those signs to deter criminals. If that kind of thing worked, it would be beneficial to put up signs that say “crime-free zone” all over the country and signs along the border that say “no trespassing.” Such would be naiveté of the highest order.

 Much more could be said, but the fact of the matter is that guns are not the problem in our society today. The problem is sin in the heart of mankind, and the only real answer to the problem is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and its power to redeem sinners. The Gospel is “... that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4, NASB). Sinners need a Savior, and the Lord Jesus Christ is the only one who can redeem us. Those who ignore that fact will continue to experience the meaninglessness and frustration of living, without answers, in this world full of evil. “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forevermore” (Galatians 1:3-5, NASB).

Other articles on this topic are found here.   

Politics and Other Things

This is a Christian blog. In the early days, almost all of the articles were in some way related to Christian school education, since I was involved in Christian schools variously as a principal, teacher, and basketball coach for thirty-four years. Since retiring in 2012, I have broadened my scope somewhat.

For a long time, I have tried to minimize addressing politics. Christians are so often told that we should avoid political issues based on the alleged “separation of church and state” that some believe is found in the U.S. Constitution, which it is not. Sometimes it is even said that Christians have no business bringing their convictions into the voting booth. I have never bought into such foolishness. The reality is that some of the things that are called political issues are more than Republican vs. Democrat or right vs. left. They are, in fact, matters of common sense vs. foolishness, right vs. wrong, Christian vs. non-Christian, Biblical vs. non-biblical, and good vs. evil. Christians do have a role in politics. Some issues are not merely political. Issues that involve normalizing sin are not political issues. Rather, they are moral and Biblical issues, and ignoring them by saying that Christians and the church should stay out of politics is at best cowardly and at worst a denial of our convictions and a great detriment to our nation. For my article on this topic, click here. 

Following are a number of thoughts on such issues. Some of these things are absolute facts. Others are merely my opinions, based on my experience and knowledge. There are many other things I could mention, but these are a random collection of ideas.

• The legitimate function of government is outlined in the Scriptures.  “First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity” (1 Timothy 2:1-2), NASB). This makes it clear that God’s requirement for government, which He established, is to defend its citizens so that they are free to live godly lives. This would include law enforcement, national defense, border security, and anything else necessary to provide for national security. That’s it. Anything else government chooses to do must not interfere with this primary function. Sadly, government so often spends so much time and resources doing things it has no business being involved with that it has nothing left for its primary purpose. “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor” (Romans 13:1-7, NASB).
• The Tenth Amendment must be honored and obeyed literally. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The government spends far too much time, effort, and money on things it is not authorized to do, and often it uses resources from those things it is supposed to do (such as national defense) in order to pay for activities that are reserved for the States and/or the people. The federal government has usurped authority it is not authorized to have. A good place to start would be to note that the government has no business overseeing education, medical care, and energy. All of these things can be done far more efficiently by private organizations that do not have the luxury of operating at a deficit. There are many other things that could and should be added to this short list, but these would be a good place to start.
• Defense of our country is a primary responsibility of the government. While funds for this purpose must be spent in a wise and prudent manner, funds must not be diverted from national defense and defense of our national interests abroad in order to pay for social welfare programs.
• Requiring voter ID is not racist. It is the best way to insure the integrity of the election process. Voting is a fundamental right of all age-eligible U.S. citizens, and eligibility to vote must be determined by a valid birth certificate and resulting picture I.D. in order to determine eligibility. Opposition to voter ID laws is a very thinly-veiled effort to allow people to vote who are not eligible to do so and therefore to cheat in elections. In reality, those who are against voter ID are acting in a racist manner by implying those they pretend to speak for are too stupid or otherwise incapable of getting an ID. People should be insulted by such an attitude. If people come to this country and want to vote, they should go through the legal process to become citizens. For my article on voter ID, click here. 
• Voting against a minority candidate is not racist. Those who voted for Mitt Romney instead of President Obama in 2012 were not racist unless their votes were based strictly on skin color. Voting either for or against a candidate based on skin color is racist, but no vote is racist if it is based on the positions of the candidate. Voting against a woman is not sexist. Those who voted for President Trump instead of Hillary Clinton were not sexist unless their votes were based on sexism. Voting either for or against a candidate based on gender is sexist, but no vote is sexist if it is based on the positions of the candidate.
• The Electoral College is our method of electing a president. The popular vote is irrelevant. I addressed the electoral college in a previous article. For that article, click here. 
• Socialism has never, does not now, will never, and cannot possibly work. Those who call themselves “progressives” and then want to go back to the failed policies and procedures of socialism should actually be called “regressives.” Such people are either ignorant of or willingly ignore reality.
• The government is not Santa Claus. It cannot provide everything for everyone. Those calling for Medicare for all, free college tuition, free medical care, etc., etc., have lost touch with reality and can never answer the question of who is going to pay for all this with any other response than “the rich” or “the government.”  It is important to remember that the government has nothing to give away other than that which it has taken from someone. Government produces no wealth, and money is not created by a printing press. Under a situation of “everything for everyone,” there would not be any rich people to pay the taxes, because there would be no motivation to work and produce anything.
• A few years ago a congressman said that business does not exist to make a profit but to provide revenue for the government. This is an illustration of the fact that there is much foolish thinking among our alleged “leaders.” This demonstrates very clearly the need for term limits on Congress.
• Higher taxes cause an economy to stagnate and result in more poverty and less revenue for the government. Lower taxes stimulate an economy, create wealth for more people, benefit everyone, and result in more revenue for the government. This has been illustrated many times. A previous U.S. President said he understood this truth, but he operated against it in order to be “fair to everyone” and “level the playing field.”
• When someone says, “The rich don’t pay their fair share,” the speaker is generally someone who pays little or nothing. So who isn’t paying their fair share?
• The largest tax cuts will inevitably go to those who pay the most. Anyone who understands third grade math should understand this. “Tax breaks for the wealthy” are so often talked about as a terrible thing, but the truth is that “the wealthy” are those who put more money back into the economy if they don’t have to give it to the government. More money in the economy creates jobs and produces more goods and services for everyone.
• We often hear about “immoral profits.” It is really unclear why the word “immoral” needs to be put before the word “profits.” Profits are earned, and that money, in one way or another, goes back into the economy. As an example of “immoral profits,” consider the oil industry. “Big oil” (a term used as a pejorative by many) companies do research and development, exploration, drilling, etc. These companies take all the risk, and often their efforts lead to dry wells. On the other hand, the government puts taxes on everything corporations do, including on each gallon of gasoline. It takes no risks but just stands there with its hand out. The government actually makes more off of each gallon of gasoline or diesel than the oil company does. If anyone is making immoral profits, it is the government.
• Calling people “racist” because of differing political views is neither accurate nor appropriate. When people have no legitimate argument for their positions on issues, they tend to fall back on name-calling, usually calling their opponents “racists” or one of several other “…ists” or “…phobes.” Mocking, ridicule, and name-calling are usually a sign of unwillingness to debate because of having a very weak position on the issues in question.
• If there is a speaker who holds an opposing point of view, the proper response is to either listen respectfully or to simply not attend the event. Burning buildings, breaking windows, vandalizing cars, and doing all sorts of other mischief in order to prevent that speaker from speaking will accomplish nothing but illustrate a fear of someone else’s position. Much of this seems to be done in the name of “free speech.” This is utter hypocrisy.
• People who preach tolerance should practice tolerance instead of being the most intolerant of people.
• It is not racist for a country to control its borders.
• Some say, “Not my president.” There is no such elected office as “My President.” There is the “President of the United States.” I did not vote for Barack Obama, but he was my president. Currently, Donald Trump is my president, and he is “our president,” including all of the “not my president” types.
• All rights ultimately come from God, not the government. This is made clear in our Declaration of Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” 
• None of the legal rights given by God and spelled out in the Bill of Rights can be legitimately taken away, but it must not be interpreted to guarantee imaginary rights, such as the "right" to an abortion, which it never mentions and which was never intended.
• Abortion is the murder of a human being. No amount of convoluted reasoning and foolish arguments can change this reality. This is our modern-day holocaust and will ultimately bring God’s judgment.  God knows us before he forms us in the womb. God said to the Prophet Jeremiah, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5, NASB). King David amplifies this truth:  “For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them” (Psalm 139:13-15, NASB). ",,,abortion is not a matter of a woman’s right to choose. It is a matter of the life or death of a human being made in God’s image." (Reference here.) 
• The First Amendment has two parts relative to religion:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This means not only that the government is not to establish a religion, but it also means that the government is not to interfere in religion. It does not mean that the government can compel the removal of religious symbols, such as crosses, that have meaning to the people in a historical sense. Our country was established based on religious freedom and Christian beliefs. It also does not mean that the government must recognize violent political movements disguised as religions. This amendment limits what Congress can do. It says nothing about what the church can or cannot do.
• “Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it” (Edmond Burke). We do a great disservice to our younger generation by refusing to teach the history of the United States, including the reality of the Civil War. Tearing down statues of Robert E. Lee (who actually opposed slavery, although many today do not even realize it) and other Confederate figures is nothing more than pretending our history does not exist. Such is foolishness and does nothing to improve anyone’s life. Acknowledging the reality of the Civil War is not racism.
• The Second Amendment means exactly what it says, and it is as much a part of the Bill of Rights as freedom of speech, religion, etc. "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." Those who want it to mean something other than what it says must recognize that if they destroy the Second Amendment, the whole Bill of Rights becomes meaningless. This amendment guarantees every citizen the right to own and carry firearms for the purpose of defense, and it states that this right must not be “infringed.” To “infringe” is to “encroach or trespass.” This falls far short of the desire of many who would not just “infringe” on this right but would totally take it away. Quite literally, this amendment makes almost all, of not all, gun control laws unconstitutional. To “bear arms” means to carry a loaded firearm. An unloaded gun is a club. So many who seem to love freedom of speech, at least for those with whom they agree, also seem to hate the right to keep and bear arms. This is inconsistent and hypocritical. A “gun-free zone” is actually a shooting gallery for those who have no respect for the law.
• All laws passed by Congress must apply to the all government employees, including the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches.
• It seems as if most foreign aid is a waste, especially when it goes to countries that hate us. Following are two examples of legitimate foreign aid:  (1) In cases of natural disaster, humanitarian aid should be carried out as long as there are safeguards to insure the aid ends up in the hands of those for whom it is intended and not in the hands of dictators, and (2) Economic and military aid must continue to the nation of Israel, since friendship with Israel is our greatest guarantee of national security. God said to Abraham, “…I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you, And make your name great; And so you shall be a blessing; And I will bless those who bless you,
  And the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed” (Genesis 12:2-3). This promise has never been rescinded, and it will not be, because God is truth and cannot lie.
• Judges, elected officials, and other government employees who ignore and violate the Constitution and other laws must be held accountable and removed from office. Members of the Executive Branch must not hide behind "executive privilege" in order to defy the courts and the law. On the other hand, federal judges should not be allowed to overrule the executive branch based on a political philosophy rather than on the law.
• It does not matter if a judge or Supreme Court Justice is a Democrat or a Republican, nor does it matter how that judge would vote on a hypothetical future case. What matters is that the judge or justice believes the Constitution means what it says and says what it means. Legal decisions must be made based on the rule of law instead of the political philosophy of the court.

This list of things could go on and on. Instead of doing so, I present a sampling of Scripture that addresses politics and government from a Biblical perspective, as well as a brief quote from Patrick Henry.

“Righteousness exalts a nation, But sin is a disgrace to any people” (Proverbs 14:34, NASB).

“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, But when a wicked man rules, people groan … Scorners set a city aflame, But wise men turn away anger”  (Proverbs 2:2&8, NASB).

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalm 33:12, NASB).

“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here” (The Trumpet Voice of Freedom, Patrick Henry of Virginia, p. 3).

Mass Shootings: The Bible's Answer

Here we go again:  another mass shooting in a “gun-free zone,” this time at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida with a death toll of 17 and 15 more hospitalized. When something like this happens, whether at a school, a church, an entertainment venue, or any other public place, there are the immediate knee-jerk reactions and recriminations to further political agendas, often even before the families have had time be notified.

Democrats blame Republicans and say they “have blood on their hands.” Many Republicans likewise blame Democrats. “Gun-control” politicians blame the NRA, guns themselves, and the 99.99% of gun owners who never have and never will shoot anyone. Gun owners blame those who came up with such ideas as “gun-free zones.” And on and on it goes. The blame always gets put on those who had nothing to do with it, and the individual who did it usually gets sympathy as a “poor, misunderstood kid” who had such potential, but he was bullied and forced by others into what he did. We’ll see how this latest incident plays out.

As usual, there will be statements about “thoughts and prayers,” and there will be those who say such things are pointless. There will be others who call for more gun laws, even though “common-sense gun laws” have, to date, failed to stop gun crime. Gun laws are not only unconstitutional. They are foolish and defy common sense.

In these debates, I come down on the side of those who say that those with intent to do evil are never stopped by laws. Bullies are not stopped by tying the hands of the potential victims and then hoping the bullies will leave them alone. This is little different than herding the potential victims of mass shooters into “gun-free zones,” which should actually be called “free-fire zones” or “target rich environments” and expecting a few signs to keep them safe. Those signs might as well say, “Attention Mass Shooters:  Come on in. No one will shoot back.” That is naiveté of the worst and most dangerous sort. I am fully aware that there was an armed guard on the campus of the school where the most recent shooting took place. However, one armed guard in a school of 3,000 students is worse than insufficient.

Some say we need “more education” in order to stop people from doing bad things. I have seen too many articles about how education is the answer. If a man beats his wife, he needs “more education” on why he shouldn't beat his wife. Right. No one realizes that spousal abuse is wrong unless he has taken the proper education courses to help him see that. The problem is not lack of knowledge. It is a heart problem. As long as politicians and the media insist on blaming inanimate objects and their political opponents for every mass shooting, there will be no real solutions. No amount of education or counseling is going to fix the problem.

The Bible says, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). All human beings are sinners, and sin comes out in different ways in different people. Not everyone will get a firearm and kill people, but we are all sinners, and we all commit sins against God. That is the problem with which we need to deal. It would be extremely difficult to deny this.

Individuals must be held accountable for their actions. Sadly, in our society, we seem to be looking for explanations and reasons instead of holding evildoers accountable. The Bible very clearly addresses this. “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecclesiastes 8:11, NKJV). "Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death" (Numbers 35:31, NKJV).

The sin principle must be addressed. Evil actions are all the result of sin. Ultimately, death is the result of sin. We cannot fix this problem by making new laws, banning guns, making more mental health treatment available, or any other bandage we might put on the problem.

The only way to address this is God’s way. The Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is very clear:  “... that Christ died FOR OUR SINS according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day...” (1 Corinthians 15:3-4, NKJV).

Sinners, including potential mass shooters, need a Savior, and the Lord Jesus Christ is the only one who can redeem us. Those who ignore that fact will continue to experience the meaninglessness and frustration of living, without answers, in this world full of evil. “Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever” (Galatians 1:3-5, NKJV).

For other posts I have written on this topic, click here and here.

Proposal to Solve Gun Violence

Solving gun violence does not have to be complicated. Actually, it should be very easy. Following is my proposal to solve the problem.

We know that a large percentage of gun crimes are committed with stolen guns. All we have to do is make a new law (Isn't that always the answer? Make a new law.) that says all criminals must submit to a background check and purchase a "gun stealing license" before they are allowed to steal a gun and then wait fifteen days before stealing it. After they steal it, they must register it. That way, after they commit their gun crime, they will be easier to catch. This will work because we know that criminals always obey the laws. If they see a sign that says "gun-free zone," they simply slink away and find something else to do, so obviously if they know it is illegal to steal a gun without a background check and without a license, they simply will not do it.

Does that sound absurd? Obviously, it does, so I fully expect some elected official to pick up on it and propose it, because it is very much like all of the other foolish gun-control laws and proposals.

Enough Politicizing of Shootings!

The recent shootings in Colorado Springs, Colorado and San Bernardino, California and the inevitable response by many politicians and members of the media make me want to shout, "Enough politicizing of shootings!" As a well-known politician once said, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." Too many politicians and others jump on terrible crimes in order to further their agendas. They may give lip-service to the suffering of the victims and their families, but that usually fades into the background as they seek to push their agendas by blaming Christians, the NRA, Republicans, gun stores, the Second Amendment, and anyone or anything else they can think of who very likely had nothing to do with it, before finding out the facts. Rarely do they concentrate on the actual perpetrators of the crime, because they have been "mistreated" and/or are "misunderstood." "Political correctness" continues to control the narrative until the ugly truth comes out.

They immediately propose more "gun-control" laws, usually ignoring the fact that shootings almost universally occur in places with very strict gun laws, and more specifically in "gun-free zones." They also seem to ignore the fact that those committing such crimes are in violation of many laws, and will very likely violate any future laws. Criminals, by definition, are not the people who choose to obey laws. In almost every case, those on whom they originally cast aspersions have nothing to do with it, and the actual perpetrators are other than those they attempted to blame. They end up looking foolish for jumping to conclusions, but that fact is usually ignored.

Real people die in these violent crimes of evil. Here in Colorado Springs, the police officer who was killed was a husband, father of two, an elder in his church, and even though I did not know him personally, one of my brothers in Christ. He willingly went into harm's way in an attempt to save lives. Every time such a shooting occurs, people with guns are called in to help, because they are the only ones who can help. Almost always, they arrive too late to stop the carnage. Victims who must run and hide or attempt to fight back with whatever improvised weapons they can find have little chance of survival and even less chance of stopping the shooting.

I will start respecting anti-gun politicians when they get rid of their armed bodyguards, including the Secret Service. They seem to believe they and their families should be protected by guns, while everyone else only needs signs that say "Gun-Free Zone." Of course, if they did attempt to live by their philosophy of "all guns are evil and should be taken away," I could respect them for not being hypocrites. However, I still could not respect their foolish and illogical position on the issue until someone makes a lucid and common-sense argument that explains how disarming potential victims somehow makes them safer. With notable exceptions, in most of these cases no one has the capability of shooting back until the police arrive. Many clichés are true, and one of the most cogent is this:  "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away."

The problem is not "gun-control" laws or lack of them, lack of self-esteem, lack of education, problems with the economy, racism,  "climate change," or any other external thing people want to blame. The problem is the sin nature running amok and the resulting evil behavior. Evil is real, and no amount of pretending otherwise by our politicians, the media, and others will change that. We don't need more laws. We need strict enforcement of the laws we already have. "Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil" (Ecclesiastes 8:11, NKJV).

The only real answer to the problem is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and its power to redeem sinners. The Gospel is "... that Christ died FOR OUR SINS according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day..." (1 Corinthians 15:3-4, NKJV). Sinners need a Savior, and the Lord Jesus Christ is the only one who can redeem us. Those who ignore that fact will continue to experience the meaninglessness and frustration of living, without answers, in this world full of evil. "Grace to you and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory forever and ever" (Galatians 1:3-5, NKJV).

I touched on this topic in a post back in 2012, which can be seen here.

A Gun's Free Will

I learned about this experiment from my friend Ralph​, so I decided to try it for myself.

I took my Charter Arms Bulldog .44 Special revolver out of the gun safe and placed it, along with a box of ammunition and a speed loader on my desk. I told it that it could exercise its free will and do anything it chose to do. I know it sounds unbelievable, but it just stayed where I left it. It did not even have the motivation to load itself.

I took another step and loaded it with five rounds of “Buffalo Bore” hollow point .44 Special ammunition and placed it back on my desk. I again told it to exercise its free will and do anything it wanted to do. What a lazy gun. It did nothing.

Perhaps this speaks to two issues:  1) "Gun control." The fact is that a gun is just an inanimate object. It needs an idiot attached to it to do anything evil.  2) The correct theological definition of free will:  “The freedom to act according to one’s nature.” Just as the gun could do nothing without someone acting on it, so humans cannot be made right with God by their own righteousness. We have none; that's why we need a Savior.