Hurry and pass gun control before we have time to read it!

[cornhole153]

So, back to the original question, and one posed to corn hole: Should a gun control law include exemptions for law enforcement officials?

Cornhole, can I get an answer?

And I still haven't seen anything showing a Church-wide ban on weapons - just a public notification of one for church buildings in one in Utah.

Still waiting.

1-no

2-the Church handbook applies world wide.

[Ddawg]

This is how I really feel.

In this whole discussion of the gun control, there is a lot of side stepping the real issue at hand. That issue is the U.S. Constitution itself, which the 2nd Amendment is part of.

If certain individuals here feel strongly enough to discount and dismiss one part of the Constitution, such as the 2nd Amendment. I have to ask, why stop there? Why not dismiss the 1st Amendment and free speech too.

I think a brief historical look at how LDS people view the U.S. Constitution is important. Brigham Young said: "We will cling to the Constitution of our Country, and to the government that reveres that sacred charter of freemen's rights; and, if necessary, pour out our best blood for the defense of every good and righteous principle."

Notice - he did not say we cling to the Constitution - except the 2nd Amendment.

In the D&C 101:77 "According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles."

Continuing - D&C 101:80 "And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."

James Madison, considered the "Father of the Constitution" wrote - "There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them."

An integral and critical part of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. They were written after the Constitution was written and ratified. They were not an after-thought. They actually had their roots going back almost 600 years and the Magna Carta. In 1689 the British Parliament guaranteed individual rights against Royal Power with the English Bill of Rights.

The first 10 Amendments to the Constitution were introduced in the 1st Congress by James Madison and were designed to limit govt. and protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They are all important. Individually, they are pieces of an integral puzzle that fit together to protect the rights of citizens against the power of an intrusive, abusive govt. Is one right more important that another? No. They all work together to support a free people.

It is interesting to note that just as the prophets from Joseph Smith to this day have taught that the U.S. Constitution was divinely inspired, they have also warned that one day the Constitution would be in peril of collapsing.

I have quoted this before. It is worth re-quoting. Elder Orson Hyde was present when Joseph Smith discussed, and made his prediction of the Constitution "hanging by a thread."

Orson Hyde:
"It is said that brother Jopseph in his lifetime declared that the Elders of this Church should step forth at a particular time when the Constitution would be in danger, and rescue it, and save it. This may be so; but I do not recollect that he said exactly so. I believe he said something like this - that the time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and said he, "If the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church." I believe this is about the language, as nearly as I can recollect it.

The question is whether it will be saved at all, or not."

Pres. J. Reuben Clark Jr. said:
"Brethren, let us think about that, because I say unto you with all the soberness I can, that we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back ... "

Pres. David O.McKay said:
"Next to being one in worshipping God there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States."

Reading these statements, it is evident the Constitution was divinely inspired and critical to the freedom of our citizens. It is also evident that the Constitution shall be in danger of falling, perhaps collapsing, if not saved. That it will "hang by a thread" as prophesied. I believe that time is now. Right now there is a liberal law professor calling for the abandonment of the Constitution.

Knowing these things - how could any LDS member support weakening the 2nd Amendment, which will assist in weakening the Constitution itself. I cannot understand or support any action which would weaken the Constitution.

[tww]

Stop stop Ddawg. Now you are turning me on. This like porn or something. I am going to have to start sending you flowers. My wife is going to get jealous.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[nuk13]

"Freedom is living without government coercion." While I haven't been a big R. Paul person I agree with this statement. "Reasonable laws" against the second or any other amendment is government coercion. You are right Ddawg, they won't stop at the 2nd amendment. Hawk alluded to this earlier. The old saying "a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link" goes without saying. This much bigger than firearms.

[cornhole153]

This is how I really feel.

In this whole discussion of the gun control, there is a lot of side stepping the real issue at hand. That issue is the U.S. Constitution itself, which the 2nd Amendment is part of.

If certain individuals here feel strongly enough to discount and dismiss one part of the Constitution, such as the 2nd Amendment. I have to ask, why stop there? Why not dismiss the 1st Amendment and free speech too.

I think a brief historical look at how LDS people view the U.S. Constitution is important. Brigham Young said: "We will cling to the Constitution of our Country, and to the government that reveres that sacred charter of freemen's rights; and, if necessary, pour out our best blood for the defense of every good and righteous principle."

Notice - he did not say we cling to the Constitution - except the 2nd Amendment.

In the D&C 101:77 "According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles."

Continuing - D&C 101:80 "And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."

James Madison, considered the "Father of the Constitution" wrote - "There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them."

An integral and critical part of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. They were written after the Constitution was written and ratified. They were not an after-thought. They actually had their roots going back almost 600 years and the Magna Carta. In 1689 the British Parliament guaranteed individual rights against Royal Power with the English Bill of Rights.

The first 10 Amendments to the Constitution were introduced in the 1st Congress by James Madison and were designed to limit govt. and protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They are all important. Individually, they are pieces of an integral puzzle that fit together to protect the rights of citizens against the power of an intrusive, abusive govt. Is one right more important that another? No. They all work together to support a free people.

It is interesting to note that just as the prophets from Joseph Smith to this day have taught that the U.S. Constitution was divinely inspired, they have also warned that one day the Constitution would be in peril of collapsing.

I have quoted this before. It is worth re-quoting. Elder Orson Hyde was present when Joseph Smith discussed, and made his prediction of the Constitution "hanging by a thread."

Orson Hyde:
"It is said that brother Jopseph in his lifetime declared that the Elders of this Church should step forth at a particular time when the Constitution would be in danger, and rescue it, and save it. This may be so; but I do not recollect that he said exactly so. I believe he said something like this - that the time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and said he, "If the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church." I believe this is about the language, as nearly as I can recollect it.

The question is whether it will be saved at all, or not."

Pres. J. Reuben Clark Jr. said:
"Brethren, let us think about that, because I say unto you with all the soberness I can, that we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back ... "

Pres. David O.McKay said:
"Next to being one in worshipping God there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States."

Reading these statements, it is evident the Constitution was divinely inspired and critical to the freedom of our citizens. It is also evident that the Constitution shall be in danger of falling, perhaps collapsing, if not saved. That it will "hang by a thread" as prophesied. I believe that time is now. Right now there is a liberal law professor calling for the abandonment of the Constitution.

Knowing these things - how could any LDS member support weakening the 2nd Amendment, which will assist in weakening the Constitution itself. I cannot understand or support any action which would weaken the Constitution.

Lovely dodge.

[Ddawg]

This is how I really feel.

In this whole discussion of the gun control, there is a lot of side stepping the real issue at hand. That issue is the U.S. Constitution itself, which the 2nd Amendment is part of.

If certain individuals here feel strongly enough to discount and dismiss one part of the Constitution, such as the 2nd Amendment. I have to ask, why stop there? Why not dismiss the 1st Amendment and free speech too.

I think a brief historical look at how LDS people view the U.S. Constitution is important. Brigham Young said: "We will cling to the Constitution of our Country, and to the government that reveres that sacred charter of freemen's rights; and, if necessary, pour out our best blood for the defense of every good and righteous principle."

Notice - he did not say we cling to the Constitution - except the 2nd Amendment.

In the D&C 101:77 "According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles."

Continuing - D&C 101:80 "And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."

James Madison, considered the "Father of the Constitution" wrote - "There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them."

An integral and critical part of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. They were written after the Constitution was written and ratified. They were not an after-thought. They actually had their roots going back almost 600 years and the Magna Carta. In 1689 the British Parliament guaranteed individual rights against Royal Power with the English Bill of Rights.

The first 10 Amendments to the Constitution were introduced in the 1st Congress by James Madison and were designed to limit govt. and protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They are all important. Individually, they are pieces of an integral puzzle that fit together to protect the rights of citizens against the power of an intrusive, abusive govt. Is one right more important that another? No. They all work together to support a free people.

It is interesting to note that just as the prophets from Joseph Smith to this day have taught that the U.S. Constitution was divinely inspired, they have also warned that one day the Constitution would be in peril of collapsing.

I have quoted this before. It is worth re-quoting. Elder Orson Hyde was present when Joseph Smith discussed, and made his prediction of the Constitution "hanging by a thread."

Orson Hyde:
"It is said that brother Jopseph in his lifetime declared that the Elders of this Church should step forth at a particular time when the Constitution would be in danger, and rescue it, and save it. This may be so; but I do not recollect that he said exactly so. I believe he said something like this - that the time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and said he, "If the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church." I believe this is about the language, as nearly as I can recollect it.

The question is whether it will be saved at all, or not."

Pres. J. Reuben Clark Jr. said:
"Brethren, let us think about that, because I say unto you with all the soberness I can, that we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back ... "

Pres. David O.McKay said:
"Next to being one in worshipping God there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States."

Reading these statements, it is evident the Constitution was divinely inspired and critical to the freedom of our citizens. It is also evident that the Constitution shall be in danger of falling, perhaps collapsing, if not saved. That it will "hang by a thread" as prophesied. I believe that time is now. Right now there is a liberal law professor calling for the abandonment of the Constitution.

Knowing these things - how could any LDS member support weakening the 2nd Amendment, which will assist in weakening the Constitution itself. I cannot understand or support any action which would weaken the Constitution.

Lovely dodge.

Dodging what exactly?

[SpiffCoug]

So, back to the original question, and one posed to corn hole: Should a gun control law include exemptions for law enforcement officials?

Cornhole, can I get an answer?

And I still haven't seen anything showing a Church-wide ban on weapons - just a public notification of one for church buildings in one in Utah.

Still waiting.

1-no

2-the Church handbook applies world wide.

2- Yes the handbook applies world wide. But the ban is not in the handbook. All you have is a statement from the Church of its intent to comply with Utah state law. I don't believe Utah state law to be world-wide enforceable.

1- Wow! Are you saying a that a gun control law should NOT have exemptions for law enforcement agents?! So if the law is written so that no gun can have more than three rounds, then police should only be allowed weapons with three rounds as well?

[cornhole153]

This is how I really feel.

In this whole discussion of the gun control, there is a lot of side stepping the real issue at hand. That issue is the U.S. Constitution itself, which the 2nd Amendment is part of.

If certain individuals here feel strongly enough to discount and dismiss one part of the Constitution, such as the 2nd Amendment. I have to ask, why stop there? Why not dismiss the 1st Amendment and free speech too.

I think a brief historical look at how LDS people view the U.S. Constitution is important. Brigham Young said: "We will cling to the Constitution of our Country, and to the government that reveres that sacred charter of freemen's rights; and, if necessary, pour out our best blood for the defense of every good and righteous principle."

Notice - he did not say we cling to the Constitution - except the 2nd Amendment.

In the D&C 101:77 "According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles."

Continuing - D&C 101:80 "And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood."

James Madison, considered the "Father of the Constitution" wrote - "There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them."

An integral and critical part of the Constitution is the Bill of Rights. They were written after the Constitution was written and ratified. They were not an after-thought. They actually had their roots going back almost 600 years and the Magna Carta. In 1689 the British Parliament guaranteed individual rights against Royal Power with the English Bill of Rights.

The first 10 Amendments to the Constitution were introduced in the 1st Congress by James Madison and were designed to limit govt. and protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They are all important. Individually, they are pieces of an integral puzzle that fit together to protect the rights of citizens against the power of an intrusive, abusive govt. Is one right more important that another? No. They all work together to support a free people.

It is interesting to note that just as the prophets from Joseph Smith to this day have taught that the U.S. Constitution was divinely inspired, they have also warned that one day the Constitution would be in peril of collapsing.

I have quoted this before. It is worth re-quoting. Elder Orson Hyde was present when Joseph Smith discussed, and made his prediction of the Constitution "hanging by a thread."

Orson Hyde:
"It is said that brother Jopseph in his lifetime declared that the Elders of this Church should step forth at a particular time when the Constitution would be in danger, and rescue it, and save it. This may be so; but I do not recollect that he said exactly so. I believe he said something like this - that the time would come when the Constitution and the country would be in danger of an overthrow; and said he, "If the Constitution be saved at all, it will be by the Elders of this Church." I believe this is about the language, as nearly as I can recollect it.

The question is whether it will be saved at all, or not."

Pres. J. Reuben Clark Jr. said:
"Brethren, let us think about that, because I say unto you with all the soberness I can, that we stand in danger of losing our liberties, and that once lost, only blood will bring them back ... "

Pres. David O.McKay said:
"Next to being one in worshipping God there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States."

Reading these statements, it is evident the Constitution was divinely inspired and critical to the freedom of our citizens. It is also evident that the Constitution shall be in danger of falling, perhaps collapsing, if not saved. That it will "hang by a thread" as prophesied. I believe that time is now. Right now there is a liberal law professor calling for the abandonment of the Constitution.

Knowing these things - how could any LDS member support weakening the 2nd Amendment, which will assist in weakening the Constitution itself. I cannot understand or support any action which would weaken the Constitution.

Lovely dodge.

Dodging what exactly?

Oh I don't know, maybe your know obviously incorrect statement that all cops can bring guns to church. You know, the subject we've been discussion for like 10 pages?

[BroncoBot]

and that topic (guns at church) has absolutely no bearing on the 2nd amendment. which is the real issue.

[cornhole153]

So, back to the original question, and one posed to corn hole: Should a gun control law include exemptions for law enforcement officials?

Cornhole, can I get an answer?

And I still haven't seen anything showing a Church-wide ban on weapons - just a public notification of one for church buildings in one in Utah.

Still waiting.

1-no

2-the Church handbook applies world wide.

2- Yes the handbook applies world wide. But the ban is not in the handbook. All you have is a statement from the Church of its intent to comply with Utah state law. I don't believe Utah state law to be world-wide enforceable.

1- Wow! Are you saying a that a gun control law should NOT have exemptions for law enforcement agents?! So if the law is written so that no gun can have more than three rounds, then police should only be allowed weapons with three rounds as well?

In the handbook, the church officially prohibits guns (except for LE required to carry), which is a ban.

Sorry, I mean't no--I misread your question.