Church Of Christ...We hate the sin and love the sinner, but will kill a bitch at a moment's notice.

I am going to go after this a second time. It is nice you found this, but we are talking about armed security. There are state licensing requirements for employing armed security and they do not go away because you have volunteers. If you are going to employ armed security as a commercial entity you will have to have insurance coverage and have licensed individuals perform that function. Some volunteer functions are different because they require state licensing and conform to state regulations established by OSHA and other regulatory agencies. It may not be OSHA that regulates armed security, and that might fall under another regulatory agency within the state, but I am quite sure you cannot just go out and label yourself an armed security guard and start volunteering for your church. So your general OSHA guidelines would need to be expanded upon.

So yes you are still wrong.

 

It's a church, and churches are exempt from all sorts of regulations that non-religious organizations have to comply with. For example, if you want to open a daycare, you have to undergo all kinds of background checks and your facility has to be inspected. If a church wants to open a daycare, most states just say, "Have fun!" and the church opens the daycare center.

 

It's the New Year period. People won't have been keeping up to date as much as usual.

Public policy ought not to be based on individual incidents or media narratives about a "good guy with a gun".

This sums up my thoughts on the matter.

 

You research is literally pulled from your ass. All the hard statistics in this country say otherwise.

 

Churches are exempt from taxation, but not from laws and codes. My mother was actually director of a daycare for a church related charity organization and they had to adhere to the regulations of local daycare providers in the area. There may be some difficulty in investigating a church due to their adherence to the need for warrants and protecting their own, but they are not above laws and regulations like that. Things like soup kitchens still have to abide by health code standards. This is why old food from restaurants cannot be given away as charity and it has to be thrown out. There are regulations to what you can do. If you are going to donate food to a charity there are regulations that you have to abide by even if you happen to be going through a church to do it.

 

There are seven links to the relevant statistics in what I posted. So clearly not all.

Of course, feel free to offer something to the contrary.

 

How about the video in this thread?

 

We see @Marso advocating shooting military people in the face.

 

Which video, and at what point in it is the relevant evidence presented?

 

You have presented a ton of true statistical evidence. You have made your point Since @Marso cannot refute any of the statistics or make any argument against them I have to declare you the winner in this case. I could give some time to marso to actually make a counter point but you have truly proven your point with citations and evidence to back it up. If anyone else agrees do more than just give rep, Kindly tell marso he has failed. If anyone wants to take up the banner that has been so beaten into the dirt feel free, but make a new point or be pummeled at this spot.

 

That's a lot of stuff to go through, but two things. I couldn't find where the study addressed gun owners having their own guns used against them at all...much less how often it happens. The study was looking into whether or not people in possession of a gun are more or less likely to be assaulted...in Philly. Furthermore, it looks to me like they were looking at gun possession period. Not legal gun possession or legal concealed carry for defensive use. It also goes on to say this..

"However, compared with control participants, shooting case participants were significantly more often Hispanic, more frequently working in high-risk occupations1,2, less educated, and had a greater frequency of prior arrest. At the time of shooting, case participants were also significantly more often involved with alcohol and drugs, outdoors, and closer to areas where more Blacks, Hispanics, and unemployed individuals resided. Case participants were also more likely to be located in areas with less income and more illicit drug trafficking (Table 1)."

So what are those "high-risk occupations" that most people in the study were involved in? The links just go back to the same page. Maybe I'm reading too much into it (and if I am, then shame on me), but it looks to me like many of the gun owning victims of gun crimes may have been involved in criminal activity themselves (High-risk occupations)?

That's just comparing apples to elephant seals. The former link shows murder rates without regard to if the victim was armed or not, and the latter defensive use rates. They just show that murder rates are higher than defensive use rates (Duh.)

 

There is so much in this post...I just can't....you are one truly disturbed individual. I say this not because of just this post but because it clearly encapsulates most of your other posts I've read.

 

Here's your "bunch of white priviledged texass trumpanzee guntards" that got shot sweetie:

 

"He shot the security guards who were a threat first."

Neither man shot was a security guard.

"This was the type of person Jesus was supposedly preaching charity and help for."

Jesus wasn't a pacifist. Jesus also never told his followers to not defend themselves from attack while also preaching that a person like the shooter is someone who needs charity and help.

"If the news he had shown up asking for help and was denied is true"

He had been helped previously by this church but as is so often the case he went too far and was asked to leave.

"If we look at the reality they could have saved a shitload of money, gave the guy a few bucks, not hired a bunch of armed thugs to keep them safe, and had a metal detector and denied people access who had firearms and no one would have died."

As I said the guy did receive help from this church but his behavior led the church to ask him to stop. It's why he went to this church with the shotgun. Also how is a metal detector going to stop someone intent on shooting? You must not understand how metal detectors actually work. They detect metal. They don't stop those with ill intent.

"This was a bunch of white priviledged texass trumpanzee guntards."

This tells me you couldn't have watched the video. Clearly in the video there are black Americans in that church.

 

QUESTION NOT THE ACCEPTED NARRATIVE!

 

Why do people actually engage with Tererun? Y'all bored or something?

 

He’s the new Dayton.

 

Now with twice the feet!

 

yep - I brought up the fact that one of the victims was black. But you know Tererunt - fast on the stereotype trigger no doubt!

 

"Instead they let in every white guntarded evangelical trump supporter into their prayer meeting and suffered the consequences. This happened to the right people." - Tererump

HOLY FUCKNUTS! Let's dig into this a bit:

1) every white guntarded evangelical trump supporter
2) This happened to the right people

Whoa Nelly! If oldfella had been describing an inner city Memphis shooting and said that this happened to "the right people" I'd be strung up by my short & curlies! Talk about a racist hypocrite double-standard motherfucker - damn Tererunt you take the cake!

 

+1 for that Simpson's referrences

 

I am ASTONISHED that you picked up on that. Bravo.

 

In the video, we see the shooter approach the black man first, and speak to him. We then see the man point toward the door. Given what we now know about the shooter now, I wonder if the man knew his history and was asking him to leave. And that's when the shotgun came out.

 

I blame Junior Walker!

 

Apparently you can do exactly that in Texas since the new law past in September.

Doesn't say squat about state regulations other than the carry permits.

:ETA: Here's the actual statute...

So it seems to me that "Volunteer Security Services" are regulated unless they're for churches as long as they don't wear something that identifies them as security.

 

Sensational phrasing aside, there's a difference between rooting for people to die for things beyond their control and noting the irony of people voting and not voting for things that shoot them in the ass later.

This is the 2nd church shooting in this state in the same calendar year and the third or fourth to make national headlines.

No one deserves gunning down but a good number of the people in that congregation specifically bought into the gun culure BS. I feel as sorry for them as I do for any Aussie cuckservatives whose house burned down this summer there and after the alt-right- turned on their token homo Milo Yannoimapenis.

Maybe God's teaching them a lesson.

TLDR:

 

Must be due to that tin foil hat that it wears

 

How many people were killed in the first church shooting?

 

Oh fuck. For some crazy reason, I seemed to have mixed up the time line and the Air Force church shooting happened in 2017.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...fire-in-texas-church-killing-multiple-people/

The fact that such a sentence in possible in American English is not something to play gotcha over, but my initial point thanks. The state is witnessing a pattern caused directly by their own inaction. It's every much their doing just like NIMBYism making California homelessness an issue by voting down every damn affordable housing unit because they "don't want traffic" (which is code for "too many beaners and niggers," but our racists are smarter than to just come out and say it

They played themselves, and I'm not sitting shiva for them.