Any time a firearms-related thread is created on FreeRepublic, please be sure to add the "banglist" keyword to it so that interested FReepers don't miss it.
Let Freedom Ring,
Posted on 03/22/2005 5:39:37 AM PST by Mikey
A man walked into a church in Wisconsin two weeks ago and shot dead seven people before turning the gun on himself.
He fired a total of 22 rounds from a 9 mm handgun.
He wounded four others.
No one knows exactly what set off this nutcase, Terry Ratzmann. It doesn't really matter.
The bloodbath is sure to evoke new cries for gun control in America. No doubt some so-called "Christians" will even embrace this draconian, freedom-destroying solution to random or planned violence in this country.
But let me tell you why this is exactly the wrong prescription.
There were about 50 to 60 people attending the service at the Church of the Living God that day.
All they could do was plead with the murderer to stop. All they could do was pray he would stop.
Ratzmann even dropped a magazine and reloaded another.
If just one other member of that congregation were carrying a gun, lives would have been saved.
And that's the real answer to this kind of murder and mayhem.
Oh, I know, some of you are saying to yourself: "Farah, are you suggesting packing heat at church?"
Yes, I'm advocating it.
I'm advocating that law-abiding people carry firearms wherever they go – especially in places where guns are thought to be unnecessary, especially in schools and other "gun-free zones," especially in the high-crime cities where guns have already been banned.
It's a matter of life and death.
The only person safe in a "gun-free zone" is the criminal, who doesn't care about such rules and regulations.
This time it was a lone nut who shot up a church.
But you might also take note of the news report last week, the warning that al-Qaida operatives are planning to attack "soft targets" in the United States – schools and movie theaters, for example.
Why would terrorists target schools and movie theaters? Because they know the likelihood of receiving return fire is minimal.
I would submit to you that church services are an even likelier target for terrorists who hate Christians.
It has happened before – though not in America as yet.
The date was July 25, 1993. The place was South Africa. The event would become known as the St. James Massacre.
"Grenades were exploding in flashes of light," wrote Charl Van Wyk in his book, "Shooting Back." "Pews shattered under the blasts, sending splinters flying through the air. An automatic assault rifle was being fired and was fast ripping the pews – and whoever, whatever was in its trajectory – to pieces. We were being attacked! Instinctively, I knelt down behind the bench in front of me and pulled out my .38 special snub-nosed revolver, which I always carried with me. I would have felt undressed without it. Many people could not understand why I would carry a firearm into a church service, but I argued that this was a particularly dangerous time in South Africa. …"
Van Wyk did what he had to do. He returned fire. He shot back. And he minimized the death toll, chasing some of the terrorists out of the church before they could empty their automatic weapons into more innocent victims in the congregation.
I would suggest to you that we are living in dangerous times in America, too.
The answer is not disarming.
The answer is arming.
That way, when the next inevitable attack comes – whether it is at a movie theater, a school, a church, a shopping mall, and no matter who the perpetrator is – there will be return fire.
That's called deterrent. That's called civil defense. That's called common sense.
RELATED OFFER:
Are you ready for the Second American Revolution? Joseph Farah's book, "Taking America Back," exposes the weaknesses in America's current system and offers practical solutions that are real and doable – solutions that can revive freedom, morality and justice in our nation. Order your copy now in WorldNetDaily's online store, ShopNetDaily!
Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief executive officer of WND and a nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. He is also the founder of WND Books. In addition to his daily column in WND, he writes a nationally syndicated weekly column available to U.S. newspapers through Creators Syndicate.
Look at Australia. The government went on a gun graping rampage and seized (plus a lot of ignoramuses turned in their guns) millions of privately owned guns, and yet did the crime rate fall?, no just the opposite happened. Yet the liberals (and other ignorant people) in this Country still scream GUN CONTROL.
That's why his recent remarks about gun control, published in Vanity Fair, have resonance.
"Gun Control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." -- VANITY FAIR 9/99 page 165 Sammy “the Bull” Gavano
Yep, it's pathetic....they want to lighten sentences for criminals and abolish the death penalty for youthful murderers, then take away the means to defend ourselves from these depraved creatures. Dial 911 and die
This is a difficult concept for some to grasp; it cannot be said to often.
An armed society is a polite society.
Any time a firearms-related thread is created on FreeRepublic, please be sure to add the "banglist" keyword to it so that interested FReepers don't miss it.
Let Freedom Ring,
I am armed everywhere I go. That includes Church.
They always answer yes. Then I ask them do criminals still commit these crimes? Yes. If there are all these laws against the above actions and criminals still commit them, then what makes you (the liberals) believe they (the criminals) will suddenly start obeying guns laws?
Naturally I get this blank stare, and then they either walk away or continue with their mindless prattle about how gun control will reduce crime bla bla bla.
Talking to a liberal is like talking to the wall.
If this shooter only had access to a single shot, bolt action 25ACP handgun, fewer people would have died that day. We have no use for high capacity semi-auto handguns. They are meant for killing humans and have no hunting use whatsoever.(/sarcasm)
It must be the worst kind of death to know death is coming to you, a family member, a loved one, and feel completely helpless to prevent it.
What kind of a sick mind can believe that that is the most "civilized" way to live?
Not that I mind at all, if it were limited to a personal choice. When it is forced upon everyone else due to insanity or any other reason, that anger overtakes me.
Educating a liberal is like fertilizing a rock.
"I blame the deaths of my parents on those legislators who deny me my right to defend myself"
Isn't that the truth?
Like trying to catch fish in the dead sea.
What really gets libs going is telling them I planted a styrofoam cup on earth day to see if it would grow.
I really did.
Separate subject-Legal question. My church meets in a public school. When we are there as tenants, is it a church, where I can carry, or is it a school, where I cannot legally carry?
When we are there as tenants, is it a church, where I can carry, or is it a school, where I cannot legally carry?
"A man walked into a church in Wisconsin two weeks ago and shot dead seven people before turning the gun on himself.
I agree with most of the article but I am sick to death of the above media-perpetuated lie. It was not in a church, it was church-group in a hotel.
James Madison, The Federalist Papers No. 46 243-244 "I blame the deaths of my parents on those legislators who deny me my right to defend myself"
Dr. Suzanne Gratia
(Referring to the incident at Luby's cafe in Killeen in which a murderer killed her parents in her presence.)
United States Code, Title 18, US Criminal Code, Section 242;
Deprivation of rights under color of law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;
and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
They figure that law, and others, don't apply to them. Won't they be surprised if after a change in the political climate in the next ten, twenty, or even forty years, their violations of such civil rights acts are indeed called to account, just as prosecutions of Klan members 40 years after the fact has now repeatedly taken place.
It can disrupt their complacency for the immediate present. But more is coming, I believe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.