Nelson on Gun Laws

[Artaxerxes]

Assault rifles are used by most shooters.
Knives kill much more people than rifles.
Yet no talk of restricting knives.

It's been a while since I've seen the statistics, but in England where they've banned firearms, people still kill each other with other means. If people are that angry and deranged, they will find something to use to carry out their intentions.

One interesting tidbit I saw about the recent school shooter is that he (or whatever pronoun applies) came from little money, killing his/her/their grandmother over a cell phone bill. Yet this person had approximately $5,000 in firearms and ammo. Things that make you go hmmm....

We have about 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

55831cda69bedde87600549e.jpeg (105.97 KiB) Viewed 997 times

[Subcomandante]

Assault rifles are used by most shooters.
Knives kill much more people than rifles.
Yet no talk of restricting knives.

It's been a while since I've seen the statistics, but in England where they've banned firearms, people still kill each other with other means. If people are that angry and deranged, they will find something to use to carry out their intentions.

One interesting tidbit I saw about the recent school shooter is that he (or whatever pronoun applies) came from little money, killing his/her/their grandmother over a cell phone bill. Yet this person had approximately $5,000 in firearms and ammo. Things that make you go hmmm....

We have about 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

55831cda69bedde87600549e.jpeg

But at the same time, Mexico on that same list has a lot of gun regulations that make it virtually impossible for any citizen to legally get a gun, and their murder rate is four and a half times higher than the USA.

Albeit the vast majority of that violence is cartel on cartel or police vs cartel. I actually feel safer here in Central Mexico than I would feel in the bad side of LA or Chicago.

[TheDuke]

I don't think Zeniff wrote any scripture. Likely Alma captured the story that transpired when he got back to Zarahemla, but given the people fled, got captured by wicked priests, ended up prisoners for years, I don't see any plates going with them. But, likely got put together by Alma, but that is just IMO, there is nothing there about it. BTW most of the BoM by volume isn't classic scripture, it is warring as captured by Mormon, which is closer to historical perspective than prophetic utterances, other than the look back by Mormon to show how it was in deed prophetic. I'm not putting it down BTW just pointing it out.

As far at the title. I feel much that same way as he does. I mean if you're a leader of anything in the US, t seems that reasonable laws make sense. Personally, I think we already have them. the issue is making them work. Letting gangs get guns on the street and not prosecuting them and walk, to remain a non-felon, is an example of a problem, that would be handled by current laws, but seem to always slip through.

As stated above, the kid in Texas had way too much money in his weapons, I said this on day one of the shooting. I mean 2 AR's (not kits) and a full set of armor? Must have been purchased by George Sorros or his associate. Maybe he had a lot of Covid money????

[Refraction75]

One element in all of this that I have not yet seen mentioned is that the shooter posted his intentions some 30 minutes prior to the event on his Facebook page. So why is it that Facebook does not have some sort of system in place to flag such threats and notify the police prior to the act? It strikes me that a computer program could be devised to do this. I would say that Facebook is in some ways culpable in all of this as they had prior knowledge that a crime was likely to be committed.

Facebook and YouTube have the power and ability to censor conservative viewpoints... can surpress unpopular opinions about vaccination concerns...can claim Russian collusion in election fraud...but remarkably loose all power when it comes to a mass shooting threats...not only that....what are the odds...what are the odds nobody saw or read that post on social media and never notified the authorities.....and to me the funniest most ubsurd thing I read....the children shot were so unrecognizable that they had to use DNA evidence from the parents to identify the child....like these bullets exploded there heads clean off.... Do you realize how many bullets in the head you would have to receive in order for this statement to ring true? Joseph Smith was shot multiple times and was still rerecognizable...even if this was true the shooter just decided to keep unloading rounds into the skull...there are clothing and other methods to identify....This whole narrative stinks if you ask me....

IIRC wasn’t Joseph shot with musket balls?

Proportedly he was shot with musket balls.

My point being was these mass shooting were supposedly done with an AR 15 rifle and reported as these kids were so massacred beyond recognizing them any other way then DNA directly from the parents themselves. I FIND THAT SUSPICIOUS!

The reports the police waited 45 minutes before entering the school because it was locked... I find completely unbelievable as well....

[Thinker]

Assault rifles are used by most shooters.
Knives kill much more people than rifles.
Yet no talk of restricting knives.

It's been a while since I've seen the statistics, but in England where they've banned firearms, people still kill each other with other means. If people are that angry and deranged, they will find something to use to carry out their intentions.

One interesting tidbit I saw about the recent school shooter is that he (or whatever pronoun applies) came from little money, killing his/her/their grandmother over a cell phone bill. Yet this person had approximately $5,000 in firearms and ammo. Things that make you go hmmm....

Yeah, it’s insane.

Just to note again, I was mistaken. Most shooters have not used rifles. It just seems that way because the bigger stories seem to involve them.

[gruden2.0]

I don't think Zeniff wrote any scripture.

The record Zeniff wrote is Mosiah chapters 9 and 10. It starts out "I, Zeniff" which is typically how the writers identify themselves. So yes, he wrote some scripture that Mormon deemed worthy of inclusion. What transpires after that was kept by someone else, since Zeniff had passed away, but it was part of the record Zeniff kept for his people that comprise chapters 9-22. Thus Zeniff started the record and someone else completed it.

Not sure why anyone would look down on Zeniff. He had peaceful intentions with the Lamanites, led his people into productive pursuits, then exhorted his people to trust the Lord and they did prevail over the Lamanites when he led them to battle after things turned bad. His successors clearly fell short.

Anyway, I'd take Zeniff any day over Nelson.

[TheDuke]

Ok, I agree that anything can be canonized as scripture. Zeniff's was history, he never claimed to be a prophet and even got many killed in his first attempt. His second attempt resulted in slavery. He even says he was "overzealous". He never claimed any PH or any authority, or any revelations, not one. I mean we have scriptures about Korihor and his exact words. We have many begats. We have wars and body counts. I guess anything can be scripture, but he is not and never claims to be a religious (or even government) leader or prophet or anything like it. He wanted wealth and tried to reclaim the bountiful land to become rich. He has nothing to compare to RMN in any way. I mean good or bad, it is like comparing Joe Biden to Joe Montana, two different people in different roles in different times that made some headlines, good or bad.

[Benjamin_LK]

Lol. What did you expect?

“In the wake of a deadly school shooting in Florida, LDS Church President Russell M. Nelson criticized U.S. laws ‘that allow guns to go to people who shouldn’t have them.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/02 ... have-them/

Did he by chance provide a revelation specifying who should and shouldn't have them?

The Prophet Zeniff actually armed his people. The people who followed Capt. Moroni's banner brought their own armor, I assume they had their own weapons as well.

I doubt he wants to look at the fact that many times over people with repeat criminal offenses pass background checks and mass murder. Let’s face it, he can’t admit government corruption when it’s right in front of me.

[Benjamin_LK]

Assault rifles are used by most shooters.
Knives kill much more people than rifles.
Yet no talk of restricting knives.

It's been a while since I've seen the statistics, but in England where they've banned firearms, people still kill each other with other means. If people are that angry and deranged, they will find something to use to carry out their intentions.

One interesting tidbit I saw about the recent school shooter is that he (or whatever pronoun applies) came from little money, killing his/her/their grandmother over a cell phone bill. Yet this person had approximately $5,000 in firearms and ammo. Things that make you go hmmm....

Yeah, it’s insane.

Just to note again, I was mistaken. Most shooters have not used rifles. It just seems that way because the bigger stories seem to involve them.

But they also won’t talk about an attempted copycat killers in Alabama and West Virginia getting killed by a Concealed Carry or Police Officers.

[Benjamin_LK]

Lol. What did you expect?

“In the wake of a deadly school shooting in Florida, LDS Church President Russell M. Nelson criticized U.S. laws ‘that allow guns to go to people who shouldn’t have them.’”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/02 ... have-them/

Did he by chance provide a revelation specifying who should and shouldn't have them?

The Prophet Zeniff actually armed his people. The people who followed Capt. Moroni's banner brought their own armor, I assume they had their own weapons as well.

The difference is that this isn’t an invasion by an external nation. The enemy is already in here with the rest of us.

[Benjamin_LK]

Assault rifles are used by most shooters.
Knives kill much more people than rifles.
Yet no talk of restricting knives.

It's been a while since I've seen the statistics, but in England where they've banned firearms, people still kill each other with other means. If people are that angry and deranged, they will find something to use to carry out their intentions.

One interesting tidbit I saw about the recent school shooter is that he (or whatever pronoun applies) came from little money, killing his/her/their grandmother over a cell phone bill. Yet this person had approximately $5,000 in firearms and ammo. Things that make you go hmmm....

We have about 4x the homicide rate of the UK.

55831cda69bedde87600549e.jpeg

But at the same time, Mexico on that same list has a lot of gun regulations that make it virtually impossible for any citizen to legally get a gun, and their murder rate is four and a half times higher than the USA.

Albeit the vast majority of that violence is cartel on cartel or police vs cartel. I actually feel safer here in Central Mexico than I would feel in the bad side of LA or Chicago.

You might actually be safer in Chicago or LA than Philadelphia, they have reported the stories but now there’s a growing number of gang shootings going into center city so even tourists and people living better off are getting caught in the crossfire. Not only that but the murder rate per 100,000 varies all over the nation. Philadelphia may be high, but it’s under 1 outside Philadelphia and Pittsburgh and it’s usually the occasional murder from domestic violence. Philadelphia, Chicago, Baltimore, etc are much higher than the national average per 100,000, whereas in many counties or large towns it’s significantly less.

[Thinker]

But they also won’t talk about an attempted copycat killers in Alabama and West Virginia getting killed by a Concealed Carry or Police Officers.

True!
A lot of mainstream media tends to ignore how people with guns have put a stop to horrors.

[FrankOne]

When the U.S. finally gets a law on the books that either results in a mass buyup of guns , (like Australia), or any other major and notable FEDERAL program to take guns out of private hands, you will see the President of the church, at that time, encourage members to turn guns in.

don't think so?

watch. Could be one year or maybe 10. It's coming.

[Mamabear]

When the U.S. finally gets a law on the books that either results in a mass buyup of guns , (like Australia), or any other major and notable FEDERAL program to take guns out of private hands, you will see the President of the church, at that time, encourage members to turn guns in.

don't think so?

watch. Could be one year or maybe 10. It's coming.

I agree. I said this last year after the FP letter in August. They like to dictate as the government does.

[FrankOne]

When the U.S. finally gets a law on the books that either results in a mass buyup of guns , (like Australia), or any other major and notable FEDERAL program to take guns out of private hands, you will see the President of the church, at that time, encourage members to turn guns in.

don't think so?

watch. Could be one year or maybe 10. It's coming.

I agree. I said this last year after the FP letter in August. They like to dictate as the government does.

and we'll watch for the keywords used by the First Presidency to sell their pitch. "Christ" and "Love". Many predicted that those would be the words used in promoting the vax and they were right.

[Benjamin_LK]

When the U.S. finally gets a law on the books that either results in a mass buyup of guns , (like Australia), or any other major and notable FEDERAL program to take guns out of private hands, you will see the President of the church, at that time, encourage members to turn guns in.

don't think so?

watch. Could be one year or maybe 10. It's coming.

And he won’t use the name of God either.

[Yeliab]

Sadly, I have read through this entire thread and what I found was there was very little that actually discussed what RMN said or was said to have said by the Tribune. So, let's take a look at what he actually said, which by the way was very little. What did he say that was incorrect? That guns shouldn't be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them? In that opinion, he was and is 100% correct. Firearms, knives, gasoline, hammers, hatchets or baseball bats should be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them. Mass shootings in the U.S. have a long, long history, but to date not a single one of them were carried out by totally sane people? Not one of the perps who went on mass shooting rampages should have had the guns they used. So, RMN saying this is absolutely correct. His implications that we need more background checks, red flag laws etc. is dead wrong.

There is NOT one single law, background check, red flag statute, Constitutional rule or Amendment that will prevent bad guys from doing terrible things to good guys. However, strictly enforcing the laws we already have on the books with maximum punishments for ALL who commit acts of violence while using or possessing firearms, knife, grenade, chemical agents, bio materials, or any other instrument, tool or supply that could be used or modified to be used to deprive others of life, liberty, or freedoms should be mandatory. ANY judge NOT issuing maximum penalties in these cases should be immediately removed from the bench and prosecuted for NOT upholding the law. It would be surprising to the vast majority of Americans and the world at how quickly the so called mentally unstable people would suddenly become reasonable and more willing to obey the laws of the land.

Having worked in Corrections for many years, (decades) I can't count the number of inmates I interviewed about their crimes and why they committed them, especially those who were repeat offenders. I can however count on the fingers of one hand how many said they would have committed multiple crimes regardless of the penalties. EVERY OTHER inmate that I talked to said, they would never have committed the various crimes had the system actually worked and maximum sentencing without parole been administered. Even the inmate, who once told the doctor that his "brains was too tight," said that he would NOT have committed the second through the 9th rapes had the sentencing laws been enforced/upheld.

Lastly, if more gun laws were actually needed, why is it the vast majority of mass shootings in the United States, have occurred while the democraps were in power? Wouldn't the number of such events be fairly steady regardless of which party was in charge and running the country?

[nightlight]

Sadly, I have read through this entire thread and what I found was there was very little that actually discussed what RMN said or was said to have said by the Tribune. So, let's take a look at what he actually said, which by the way was very little. What did he say that was incorrect? That guns shouldn't be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them? In that opinion, he was and is 100% correct. Firearms, knives, gasoline, hammers, hatchets or baseball bats should be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them. Mass shootings in the U.S. have a long, long history, but to date not a single one of them were carried out by totally sane people? Not one of the perps who went on mass shooting rampages should have had the guns they used. So, RMN saying this is absolutely correct. His implications that we need more background checks, red flag laws etc. is dead wrong.

There is NOT one single law, background check, red flag statute, Constitutional rule or Amendment that will prevent bad guys from doing terrible things to good guys. However, strictly enforcing the laws we already have on the books with maximum punishments for ALL who commit acts of violence while using or possessing firearms, knife, grenade, chemical agents, bio materials, or any other instrument, tool or supply that could be used or modified to be used to deprive others of life, liberty, or freedoms should be mandatory. ANY judge NOT issuing maximum penalties in these cases should be immediately removed from the bench and prosecuted for NOT upholding the law. It would be surprising to the vast majority of Americans and the world at how quickly the so called mentally unstable people would suddenly become reasonable and more willing to obey the laws of the land.

Having worked in Corrections for many years, (decades) I can't count the number of inmates I interviewed about their crimes and why they committed them, especially those who were repeat offenders. I can however count on the fingers of one hand how many said they would have committed multiple crimes regardless of the penalties. EVERY OTHER inmate that I talked to said, they would never have committed the various crimes had the system actually worked and maximum sentencing without parole been administered. Even the inmate, who once told the doctor that his "brains was too tight," said that he would NOT have committed the second through the 9th rapes had the sentencing laws been enforced/upheld.

Lastly, if more gun laws were actually needed, why is it the vast majority of mass shootings in the United States, have occurred while the democraps were in power? Wouldn't the number of such events be fairly steady regardless of which party was in charge and running the country?

I get Nelson is really special to you, but don't hold him to a lesser standard than you would any other man because of his status.

Nelson:
"How could God allow things like that to happen? Well, God allows us to have our agency, and men have passed laws that allow guns to go to people who shouldn’t have them.”

^^^^^ deconstruct that without bias. Pretend I said it.

What laws have men passed to "allow" guns to go to people who "shouldn't" have them???

Lol in December 15, 1791 a bunch of really smart guys wrote some stuff acknowledging the fact that people have a right to have a gun.
The government doesn't allow me to have a gun.

This is elementary stuff

Nelson is a man who has a weakness of hyperbole.

He was simply wrong. It's okay. He is a human. We all have weakness and say stupid stuff

[ajax]

The states can regulate. It’s their prerogative. The feds can’t.

[nightlight]

The states can regulate. It’s their prerogative. The feds can’t.

Regulate, but not outright ban.

No government, state or fed.... is above natural rights.

Mob rule is not it

[ajax]

The states can regulate. It’s their prerogative. The feds can’t.

Regulate, but not outright ban.

No government, state or fed.... is above natural rights.

Mob rule is not it

The states can regulate. It’s their prerogative. The feds can’t.

Regulate, but not outright ban.

No government, state or fed.... is above natural rights.

Mob rule is not it

I don’t disagree, but it’s a state issue. Some states, political societies, will choose differently. Fight for your right in the jurisdiction you reside, or move to another.

[Being There]

[Yeliab]

Sadly, I have read through this entire thread and what I found was there was very little that actually discussed what RMN said or was said to have said by the Tribune. So, let's take a look at what he actually said, which by the way was very little. What did he say that was incorrect? That guns shouldn't be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them? In that opinion, he was and is 100% correct. Firearms, knives, gasoline, hammers, hatchets or baseball bats should be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them. Mass shootings in the U.S. have a long, long history, but to date not a single one of them were carried out by totally sane people? Not one of the perps who went on mass shooting rampages should have had the guns they used. So, RMN saying this is absolutely correct. His implications that we need more background checks, red flag laws etc. is dead wrong.

There is NOT one single law, background check, red flag statute, Constitutional rule or Amendment that will prevent bad guys from doing terrible things to good guys. However, strictly enforcing the laws we already have on the books with maximum punishments for ALL who commit acts of violence while using or possessing firearms, knife, grenade, chemical agents, bio materials, or any other instrument, tool or supply that could be used or modified to be used to deprive others of life, liberty, or freedoms should be mandatory. ANY judge NOT issuing maximum penalties in these cases should be immediately removed from the bench and prosecuted for NOT upholding the law. It would be surprising to the vast majority of Americans and the world at how quickly the so called mentally unstable people would suddenly become reasonable and more willing to obey the laws of the land.

Having worked in Corrections for many years, (decades) I can't count the number of inmates I interviewed about their crimes and why they committed them, especially those who were repeat offenders. I can however count on the fingers of one hand how many said they would have committed multiple crimes regardless of the penalties. EVERY OTHER inmate that I talked to said, they would never have committed the various crimes had the system actually worked and maximum sentencing without parole been administered. Even the inmate, who once told the doctor that his "brains was too tight," said that he would NOT have committed the second through the 9th rapes had the sentencing laws been enforced/upheld.

Lastly, if more gun laws were actually needed, why is it the vast majority of mass shootings in the United States, have occurred while the democraps were in power? Wouldn't the number of such events be fairly steady regardless of which party was in charge and running the country?

I get Nelson is really special to you, but don't hold him to a lesser standard than you would any other man because of his status.

Nelson:
"How could God allow things like that to happen? Well, God allows us to have our agency, and men have passed laws that allow guns to go to people who shouldn’t have them.”

^^^^^ deconstruct that without bias. Pretend I said it.

What laws have men passed to "allow" guns to go to people who "shouldn't" have them???

Lol in December 15, 1791 a bunch of really smart guys wrote some stuff acknowledging the fact that people have a right to have a gun.
The government doesn't allow me to have a gun.

This is elementary stuff

Nelson is a man who has a weakness of hyperbole.

He was simply wrong. It's okay. He is a human. We all have weakness and say stupid stuff

Nelson, special to me? He is just a man, who puts his pants on the same way I do, unless of course, he has his wife do it for him. Yes I believe he is the Prez of the Church of LDS, yes I do believe he holds the authority to speak as a mouthpiece for God and the Savior. But, I do NOT worship him in ANY way. No, I'm NOT saying you said that I worship him. What I am saying is, I believed him to be the Prophet of the Lord right up until the now infamous photo op in the Spring of 2021. At that point, I began to open my eyes a bit wider. Then the equally infamous letter of August, ended that for me. Not because of the letter itself but because NOT a peep after it about it being generated NOT from the 1st Presidency but rather through the P.R. department. Do, I think he is a fallen Prophet? NO! But, I do think, his prophetic powers might be on indefinite suspension. (feeble attempt at humor on those last few words).

My entire point was NOT about RMN but for, the very first few sentences. I was noting how quickly the entire thread went off the rails from what he said to what it became. That was my initial point.

[InfoWarrior82]

Sadly, I have read through this entire thread and what I found was there was very little that actually discussed what RMN said or was said to have said by the Tribune. So, let's take a look at what he actually said, which by the way was very little. What did he say that was incorrect? That guns shouldn't be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them? In that opinion, he was and is 100% correct. Firearms, knives, gasoline, hammers, hatchets or baseball bats should be in the hands of those who shouldn't have them. Mass shootings in the U.S. have a long, long history, but to date not a single one of them were carried out by totally sane people? Not one of the perps who went on mass shooting rampages should have had the guns they used. So, RMN saying this is absolutely correct. His implications that we need more background checks, red flag laws etc. is dead wrong.

There is NOT one single law, background check, red flag statute, Constitutional rule or Amendment that will prevent bad guys from doing terrible things to good guys. However, strictly enforcing the laws we already have on the books with maximum punishments for ALL who commit acts of violence while using or possessing firearms, knife, grenade, chemical agents, bio materials, or any other instrument, tool or supply that could be used or modified to be used to deprive others of life, liberty, or freedoms should be mandatory. ANY judge NOT issuing maximum penalties in these cases should be immediately removed from the bench and prosecuted for NOT upholding the law. It would be surprising to the vast majority of Americans and the world at how quickly the so called mentally unstable people would suddenly become reasonable and more willing to obey the laws of the land.

Having worked in Corrections for many years, (decades) I can't count the number of inmates I interviewed about their crimes and why they committed them, especially those who were repeat offenders. I can however count on the fingers of one hand how many said they would have committed multiple crimes regardless of the penalties. EVERY OTHER inmate that I talked to said, they would never have committed the various crimes had the system actually worked and maximum sentencing without parole been administered. Even the inmate, who once told the doctor that his "brains was too tight," said that he would NOT have committed the second through the 9th rapes had the sentencing laws been enforced/upheld.

Lastly, if more gun laws were actually needed, why is it the vast majority of mass shootings in the United States, have occurred while the democraps were in power? Wouldn't the number of such events be fairly steady regardless of which party was in charge and running the country?

I get Nelson is really special to you, but don't hold him to a lesser standard than you would any other man because of his status.

Nelson:
"How could God allow things like that to happen? Well, God allows us to have our agency, and men have passed laws that allow guns to go to people who shouldn’t have them.”

^^^^^ deconstruct that without bias. Pretend I said it.

What laws have men passed to "allow" guns to go to people who "shouldn't" have them???

Lol in December 15, 1791 a bunch of really smart guys wrote some stuff acknowledging the fact that people have a right to have a gun.
The government doesn't allow me to have a gun.

This is elementary stuff

Nelson is a man who has a weakness of hyperbole.

He was simply wrong. It's okay. He is a human. We all have weakness and say stupid stuff

Nelson, special to me? He is just a man, who puts his pants on the same way I do, unless of course, he has his wife do it for him. Yes I believe he is the Prez of the Church of LDS, yes I do believe he holds the authority to speak as a mouthpiece for God and the Savior. But, I do NOT worship him in ANY way. No, I'm NOT saying you said that I worship him. What I am saying is, I believed him to be the Prophet of the Lord right up until the now infamous photo op in the Spring of 2021. At that point, I began to open my eyes a bit wider. Then the equally infamous letter of August, ended that for me. Not because of the letter itself but because NOT a peep after it about it being generated NOT from the 1st Presidency but rather through the P.R. department. Do, I think he is a fallen Prophet? NO! But, I do think, his prophetic powers might be on indefinite suspension. (feeble attempt at humor on those last few words).

My entire point was NOT about RMN but for, the very first few sentences. I was noting how quickly the entire thread went off the rails from what he said to what it became. That was my initial point.

The last prophet to display any kind of prophetic power was Wilford woodruff

[buffalo_girl]

Has the issue of prescribed psychiatric medication ever been publicly reported as related to the shooter’s state of mind?

Is psychiatry sometimes the pathway for these often already emotionally damaged people? The ‘Joker’ shooter claims he was brainwashed by a psychiatrist. Anyone ever hear how his case turned out?