Leaderboard

Finally got to sit down and read though all of this thread. I have two things that I would like to bring to the discussion.    1. As a Christian, I am well aware at how we sometimes like to pick and choose parts of the Bible to suit our needs and other times we ignore if we dont like what is in it. Does that make it right? Of course it doesn't. Is being a homosexual a sin? No it is not. Is engaging in homosexual acts a sin? Absolutely. Just like any other sin of the flesh. There are times when I feel ashamed when I see other Christians straight up ignore one person who is obviously living a sinful life such as adultery while being outspoken about such things as homosexuality. They are hyprocrites and they are wrong.    2. I thing the title could have been worded a little bit differently as it is a little misleading. The church wasnt telling sinners they couldnt come to worship. They told a group that they couldnt use their facilites because they openly supported a biblical sin. There is a BIG difference in the two. Would there be as much backlash if some local guy or girl wanted to have the bachelor/bacheolorette party with strippers there and they were told no? Doubtful. This is only a big deal because it has to do with homosexuals.    After all that has been going on lately with our individual rights, some of you have the nerve to criticize the Church for their beliefs. Guess what right comes in front your so cherished right? The 1st Amendment. Freedom of Religion. If a Church chooses to not allow use of their facilities by someone who openly supports something that the church is in strong disagreement with then the have EVERY right to do so. 

Gun violence.  What about the people that were stabbed or beat?  There seems to be no concern over violence if guns aren't involved.

old people die, it happens every day.  Lautenberg was a poster boy for what is wrong with American politics.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.

It isn't? Have we been reading the same thread? The one I have been reading has been mostly filled with folks getting their panties in a bunch about where other folks are shooting their guns.

I'm not as kind and reasonable as some are.  Frank Lautenberg was a grandfatherly old man and grandpaw to someone who loved him; and i'm willing to concede and accept that fact.  He was also one of the most dangerous statist sons of Marx that made it way too entirely long (...in my view...) into the twenty-first century.  He and others like him have done this country and its citizens great harm and no one who loves freedom should be sad that he is gone to his reward.   Frank Lautenberg was a thoroughly dangerous opportunistic man; and was no friend to this country, freedom, or the Constitution. He could have just as well been decorated with the Order of Lennin for his service to socialism, as he could have been a WW 2 veteran.  As others have opined; i wonder which side he fought on....?   His votes, "public service", and belief system gave us people like Barak Obama and this pseudo socialist government we have today. He has pillaged the pockets of citizens, taken their rights, and enriched himself and his sorry associates for many a year.  People like Frank Lautenberg believe that folks like us "delightful rustics' are a rabble to be controlled and serfs to pony up whatever the "ruling elites" demand.   Frank Lautenberg (...and others like him....)  brought old world belief systems and serfdom to the new world.  They believed that they were the "best and brightest" and that the citizenry was a rabble to be controlled and to be made to bow down to these "ruling elites"; just as they have been made to do in New Jersey and New York.  If he had have had his way; the "New Jersey and New York" way would have been made the law of this entire land.   Dont be sad that he is dead.  You can be polite to the family; but dont gloss over the truth.  Remember this; everybody blesses us in some way; some by staying and helping, some by leaving.  Thank you Lord that You have called this dangerous man to his reward.   leroy

They have pretty much said that the whole purpose is to put the info into a national database. I agree. After conviction, fine. Or if DNA is pertinent to the case and is court-ordered. Otherwise this is just more 1984.

"I've never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure."

In dedication to the recently departed Senator from NJ. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2V6v6Xa-BI  

From Armslist.   I am wanting to sale $2,000 worth of my Walmart ammo. Mostly 22.'s 9.'s 40.'s and 45's. You know you can double your money. 3,250 is 22.'s. BULK RATE ONLY. DO NOT CALL IF YOU DON'T HAVE $2,000. I have receipts. All ammo is about 6 months old   hehehehe. guess someone isn't having any luck selling their ammo.

There are liberals, and then there are highly decorated members of the Douchebag Hall of Fame. It's more likely he will be replaced by one of the plain ones.

I don't see criticizing a decision is affecting anyone's rights. Freedom of speech goes both ways ya know. The church made a decision during a time where the subject is big in the news. This would likely not be news at all had it happened any other time. Personally, I support their decision 100%, just like I support BSA's decision.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/03/senator-frank-lautenberg-obit/2384125/ WASHINGTON — Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, a liberal Democrat who wrote some of the nation's most sweeping health and safety laws, died early Monday, his office announced. Good riddance. I wonder if Christie will name a replacement before or after he switches parties?

good thing she did not want to be a Boy Scout

  I don't see how any mistranslation can explain away Matthew 5:28. I listed it first, because if lustful thoughts are a sin, it stands to reason that other sinful thoughts are as well. As far as that being hard to live up to, I can't disagree with you there. I can only say that I'm less likely to do wrong, if I recognize I'm heading there...kind of like an ounce of prevention, ya know? I won't touch these last 2 words or this can go on forever. I'll just say I respect you for putting up a good fight to passionately defend your stance. It shows you aren't a blind follower, you thought out your position. I'd much rather walk away agreeing to disagree than to walk away thinking I've been arguing with a fencepost.

no one like to go when I have had tocos

I think everyone should be forced to use unisex bathrooms to keep from offending anyone.

  Yep. I'm fixin' to raise a toast to the old commie in a minute.

Or, y'know...you could try thinking for yourself. :lol:   Why bother to study on your own, just parrot what the man in the pulpit/ on the radio/ Fox/ CNN/ etc has to say. It's just so much easier. 

Careful Romad7, that's how it starts...long trips. Then you start listening while you commute, run errands, and mow the yard. Soon, you've got earphones in your ears every chance you get.

I find myself attracted to the KRISS Vector Carbine. If it were wrong to merely like them or fantasize about having one, I'd surely be guilty of having impure thoughts. I've yet to act on that attraction, however.   I've never been alone with one; never taken one home with me, and never committed any acts with one. Given half a chance, wrong or not, I'd almost definitely take things to the next level...experimenting physically with the object of my attraction.   So, I guess what I'm saying is that all that stands between me having an innocent attraction and a full-blown, lead-flinging, carnal experience is opportunity...like stumbling across one alone in a tent on a BSA camp out, led by a Scout Master that owns a Vector too and thus condones my attraction.

I wonder who he fought for?

  I hear you Robert, but he was the enemy. I didn't start the war on guns, and certainly won't grieve when their ranks are thinned. 

  I don't agree that one sin is being singled-out by churches or the BSA at all, nor do I believe they are turning a blind eye to other sins.   What we have here is a group of people who wish to flaunt their sinfulness, while demanding acceptance. The difference it seems you are willing to overlook is that the average Christian (using them as an example, since this thread is about a Christian church's actions) doesn't wave their sins in peoples faces like a flag, thinking their fellow Christians should tolerate OR accept it as if it weren't immoral in the eyes of the Christian God they voluntarily accepted. Most realize that they are imperfect, regardless of how hard they try to do right and are ashamed of their transgressions. They are trying to be better Christians, not trying to change the rules, so they can slip in on a technicality.   That's not the case with openly gay Scouts. They don't see their self-identifying trait as a sin, so they seem to think others should ignore the sinfulness of the very characteristic they choose to identify themselves with.   I get the impression that some (not saying you, just "some" in general) want to rewrite Christian doctrine in terms of their personal ideals. These same people, while demanding that Christians remove homosexuality from God's LONG list of sins, are the same who accuse Christians of picking and choosing which sins they demonize. In actuality, if a group of adulterers, blasphemers, murderers, or liars were petitioning for acceptance, they'd be met with equal resistance. The difference is nobody in their right mind would question their exclusion. It's the non-Christians who want to choose which sins are real sins and demand that Christians bend their religious beliefs to meet their ideas of what they want Christianity to be.

While I often call him "Bloomingidiot" the truth is he is a very intelligent man,, even if morally and philosophically bankrupt.  So; it's not surprising to me that he would shift efforts to the states because i believe the state houses and capitals are precisely where restoration; preservation or loss of our rights will be won or lost.   The federal government is a lost cause...it's too large, too bloated and too corrupt to be of much use to anyone at this point.  The individual states, however, still hold the possibility of providing both protection of and then restoration of our rights to be free citizens (rather than subjects).

....didn't even have to use my AK... Sorry, couldn't resist.

The lesson to be learned here is that freedom-hating liberals do not sleep. They lie in wait for us to drop our guard and then pounce like a starving cat.

Personally, I'll be glad when this topic blows over and we can get back to debating something that engenders far less passion...you know...like the Zimmerman trial...at least that is actually a "firearm related" topic which, frankly, this one isn't.   ;)

  Well, you proved the point that was made by several here. If someone wants to join scouts with intent to do harm to kids nothing is going to stop them. As pointed out earlier there is no correlation between homosexuality and child molestation.    Kinda like that whole gun control debate we always have...

No! Keep the thing chambered. If someone has bad enough intentions to break into someone elses house, particularly when they are home, they are willing to take care of you and you just gave away your position. The element of surprise and "home field advantage" is your best friend here

Put it this way, I trust my reloads more than factory ammo. I can not say the same for someone else's reloads.

I am sure many have seen this:   http://civilusdefendus.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/liberty-vs-sharia-july-2010-ltr.pdf   but of particular interest and X-ring accurate from the article:     Seems reasonable to be able to speak the truth, to me anyway.

Whatever you get, don't get sucked into going with a pistol grip. They look cool in the movies but not for use in the real world. My comment is not to be confused with a stock that also has a pistol grip. Those can be useful if you like that style. Nothing wrong with a regular stock on a HD shotgun. I went with a Knoxx adjustable pistol grip stock on my 870 since the factory length of pull was too long for my wife to shoulder and still be able to pump it.

Fellas, I'm a lesbian (like any male) and to be honest, if people get butt hurt because a institution doesn't want to participate in their silly games, you know what, move along and find your own damn group of like minded individuals. This isn't just about Christians, gays, BSA, it's something in general that is happening across the board here in the USA. People need to start growing thick skins, don't like a comment, deal with it. The PC crowd has turned majority of the US into pussies..    People criticize institutions and make them look evil using the media, but what they are doing is just, they don't want to participate in the social experiment and have every right not to. BSA chose their bed and not they need to sleep in it.  

I have often found it amazing how the supposedly "tolerant" people are actually some of the most intolerant people on the planet.  Here we have a small church, which I would be willing to bet that close to 100% of their congregation disapprove the BSA's decision on homosexuals, stand on their principles.  At one time in this country, people who were unwavering on their principles/convictions were respected.  Today, it is totally different.  If your view or belief is not in sync with the latest pop culture, you are mocked, ridiculed, demonized, and if you are of a certain political affiliation, you are targeted by the IRS.  I guess in reality those that cry tolerance are really only tolerant if you accept their viewpoint.

This "gay scout" thing is another accommodation to the "balkanization" of america by those who hate the system and intend to re-write the immutable laws.  The Boy Scouts (...and others, some of them churches...) have chosen to accomodate the whims of pop culture; the current whim is "...its ok to blab and brag about your sexuality and orientation....".  I think this move is probably the death knell to the current Boy Scout organization.     I think the issue of the BSA and the church is an "apples and oranges" thing.  Heres why:  The BSA is a private, benelovent institution that teaches self-reliance and morality (... check the scout oath out here:     The "rub" here is two fold.  The first is the definition of "morality".  The "old definition" called homosexuality a perversion; hardly a morally straight condition.  The "new definition"; applied in the military and in other sectors today by our political masters , is "...its ok to be homosexual....; its simply a lifestyle choice....".   What you have here is a re-definition of morality (...endorsed by government and other interest groups eg: "...group morality...) that changes the "old definition".  "Evolution as some would say.  I wuz a boy scout myself many years ago; and i simply dont remember the issue of sexual orientation comming up as part of the "Boy Scout Way".  The reason; homosexual behavior (...as well as promiscuitous behavior...)  was considered immoral behavior that no polite society talked about; and the Boy Scouts and their supporters well understood it to be so.  There may have been those in the ranks of the BSA that were "gay" and some were probably "promiscuitous", but they were quiet.  I think that was exacly has they should have been.    This current move is nothing more than the destruction of an organization that has done much good as a sacrifice to the "god of tolerance".   In this country we are busily killing off any semblance of "biblical morality" as somehow "intolerant".  This is simply the product of the "jhadist" who whant to change the immutable rules.  "GLT" jhadism is simply the latest iteration.  My guess is that the BSA has been murdered at the hands of the jhadists and the accomodators to pop culture.   As to the church thing (...taking a stand against certain behaviors and organizations...).  It should be understood that the church is a "house of prayer" and a "haven for the lost sinner" and a non-judgmental place where the Gospel Message can be heard and accepted if the affected soul wants to be accepted into the Family of God.  God calls the lost to Salvation.  That means everybody; saint, sinner, jhadist, gay boy scouts, gay non-scouts, everybody;.... period.... .   That means that the door should be open as to salvation.  Scripture teaches (...and i believe them...) that God loves the sinner and hates the sin.   That means that all who are willing are welcome.  The correctly constituted "church" should operate on that model.  This is the "greatest outreach" of the church and the fullfillment of the "Great Commission".    There are some qualifications however.  The plain reading of scripture defines immorality in brutally plain terms.  That means that there has to be some inward changes made to the "immoral lifestyle" and the church has the duty to obey the principles of scripture.  Viewed in that light, alone, the church has the right to "turn out" individuals and organizations who do not share the values and principles that the church is founded on.   So this thing cuts both ways; the church is a "home for sinners"; but it also has a duty to  to abide by those principles outlined in scripture.   Thhis whole thing (...in my view...) has murdered the presently constituted BSA, put the church on the spot in some locations, and has given the enemies of God great occasion to blaspheme Him no matter which side of this arguement ya come down on.  The real loosers in this "rewriting of the immutable laws" are society in general, and the Boy Scouts specifically.   Thats how i see things this mornin.   leroy

Of course, you realize that research has shown time and again that homosexual men are no more likely to assault children than anyone else.  In fact, the vast majority of child molesters identify as heterosexual in their lives and are commonly married.  Dozens of studies by psychologists, criminologists, and medical professionals have failed to show that there is any connection at all between homosexuality and child molestation.  Just because a man wants to engage in consensual sex with another man, there is no way that any honest person can extrapolate that to mean that they would want to force sex upon a child.  I'd rather have a "queer" with a good heart lead my son's Scout troop than some bigoted jerk who doesn't respect what other people do in their private lives.  

  Realistically, aren't most individuals who write and promote books trying to sell books, or an idea or a belief system?  Would anyone so invested in attempting to gain remuneration for advocating their particular beliefs be so judged?  Because Mr. Lott is trying to make a living espousing a type of belief, does that completely negate his objectivity?

I find it amazing how people pick and choose which parts of the Bible support their views on certain subjects, while denying other parts.   I also find some of the statements made, whether they are in jest or not simply appalling.   I would ask everyone to remember that everything posted online is 'out there' forever.  As a forum dedicated to guns and gun related topics we as gun owners should represent ourselves in the best possible manner (especially in this political climate), even online.   I'm not saying you should not express your opinions / beliefs, but some of the comments left by members in this thread and the other related one have been downright foul.   Just a thought all.

Just as hospitals are for the sick, the church is for the sinners!  BUT, just as the hospitals do not endorse getting sick, the church can not endorse sin! 

Who wants to be in a stall next to a smokin' hot chick droppin' a deuce?

I won't shed a tear when any of them croak.

  Maybe this, particular guy isn't a scalper (per itchytriggerfinger's post above) but they are definitely out there and it would make me smile to think they were going to end up losing their shirts because of their profiteering.  Personally, I'd love to see ammo scalpers posting ads stating, "Hungry.  Will trade ammo for food."         I mostly agree with your post.  After the last ammo shortage, I decided to build a small but 'solid' supply of a few calibers that I shot the most.  I don't usually have the expendable cash to buy pallet-loads of ammo all at once but decided to buy a box or two extra per month.  Over the past, few years (up until the current shortage started) I have done just that and even bought a little 'extra' .22LR along the way - not enough that I still feel comfortable shooting as much as I was before the current craziness but enough that I am not desperately searching for ammo at any price.  Thing is, I have decided that when/if things go back to 'normal' I am going to concentrate even more on .22LR and .22WMR than I was, before.  I will probably also try to build more of a supply of buckshot and slugs for my shotguns.  I recently started reloading so if I can stock up on enough supplies to keep me in .38/.357 and .44 (the two I currently reload) then that should cover my centerfire needs in an 'emergency'.

I am going to sit back and watch the fireworks fly on this one.   I have an idea which side people will lean toward and suspect some intellectual replies for and against.   I suspect almost all arrest will be DNA tested in the near future and the results put in a database to check against outstanding crimes.   I can see it after a conviction, however just for an arrest seems a bit to far.

First, FDR knew Japan was going to attack us, and instead of sending the fleet to sea, and protecting our bases in the Pacific he allowed Perl Harbor to be attacked, cause a lot more deaths, and forcing America into a full scale war...  This is after we did just about everything we could do to Japan to drag us into a war with them.   And, the fact is Germany declared war on us...  I don't see how we had a choice, well except we had been funding and supplying German's enemies for 3 or 4 years violating our neutrality....  maybe if we hadn't been shipping free arms to their enemies Hitler wouldn't have declared war on us?  Who knows...   We did the right thing in WWII once war was declared, we went over there kicked butt, and then should have come home...  but that isn't what we did.   We're still sitting in bases we occupied during the end of WWII...  why exactly?    

Good, I'm glad to see that he's stuck with it.

  A choke is a small metal ring that threads into the inside of the barrel (at the far end where the shot exits the barrel).  The different sizes (thickness, really) and shapes work to change how different types of shotshells pattern.  They can be dangerous if you forget the wrong type in the barrel and shoot off a slug (barrel obstruction..!).    There is more detailed info online about the types and what they do for different purposes.    I would run without a choke for home defense; but my HD shotgun is fulla slugs and buckshot and expected to be used at just a few yards.   Chokes are, IMHO, for use in hunting applications more than defense.

  This is a gun forum, FTFY

I think we are in a ammo vacuum here in east Tennessee. I haven't seen ANY 22lr in any store in the last 5 months. Not a single box, bulk or otherwise. The last 22 I bought was 22 short I bought the first part of January. I normally shoot 2K+ a month and haven't shot that since December. Even considering building a 22 Jet just so I can use my 22 lr can. I have 22 lr but I will not fire another shot until I can buy more.   Now my local Walmart gets 22lr in a few times every week according to the workers. They said they get thousands of rounds each time but the same group of guys come in and buy all they can. Same thing for 223, 9mm and most other popular calibers.

The first that was mine was my grandfathers old S&W model 10 which was his service weapon until the late 80's.

  Yep. You can't carry when you're on a date with your sister unless she has a permit too.