Only the "believers" are surprised.

someone is always getting shafted by god.

Yeah but they usually blame it on the devil because according to the churchgoers - "God can do no wrong."

Ever been to Richmond, CA? This story probably won't surprise most people who have been there, and lived to tell about it. Suffice it to say, it's not a great place. Some neighborhoods can appear just fine, until you realize there is no one outside, at all. Pretty weird place that way. Other neighborhoods and districts are very obviously filled with trouble, but places like that exist in many cities. It's the eerily quiet neighborhoods that scared the crap outta me. Wouldn't want to walk THOSE streets at night, that's for sure.

I like how people think guns can save them, they think they're James Bond or someone from Hollywood...you know, slow motion dodge the first bullet then shoot back.

In reality, if there's a person who come up to you and just shoot you, you think you can react that fast?

What we need is more education about how to deal with your anger (Anger management).

You might be a little slow and unobservant, but my firearm has saved me on several occasions, two justifiable shootings and uncountable other situations where being armed has thwarted any hostile actions on myself and family.

Part of carrying a firearm is learning to become aware of your surroundings and assessing threat potential prior to a use of force so you are ahead and prepared if and when it occurs or removed from any danger to prevent it.

Its not just "fast draw" reaction, its preparedness.

As far as "anger management" classes go, they offer these in prisons around the country yet many released convicts continue to victimize others upon parole or release, so I guess it doesn't seem to work.

We have a right to possess firearms which we can read everyday written in the US constitution, but we also have a heavy responsibility when it comes to ownership and use. The right is often quoted but the responsibility is often overlooked. In my 50 years I have witnesses armed and trained policemen shot down in a moment with little reaction, while a homeowner makes a difficult low light head shot appear easy against multiple assailants. You just never know for sure in a gunfight, I just reserve the right to have that option available to me.

I glad you had yours when you needed it ...I enjoy your posts!

Be safe !

God had nothing to do with two people getting shot. The fact it happened in church is irrelevant. If it was gang related and these two people were tagged, it could have happened in an outhouse... either way it made it impossible to get away. If people would quit blaming God or everyone else and take responsibility for their actions the world would be a better place. God is just a "scapegoat" to justify why the world is screwed up. People's actions have screwed the world up. Was it God's fault that 3 jets flew into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? No. It was an act of vengeance because we "desecrated" their holy land by our military going into Saudi Arabia to help liberate Kuwait. We were given "free will". Each person makes a choice everyday whether to be responsible or to be irresponsible.

Riight, some people believe in a God and try to live meaniful lives through the teachings of the Bible, and others who want to believe that we all evolved from rocks and want to live their lifes anyway they see fit, just like the ones that walked into the church and shot two that wanted to believe in a God.

This better be looked into as a HATE CRIME.. and the men or boys who did it hung by the neck until dead in the public square..

Hey, Bigfoot62,

If God is an invention then how can he shaft anybody?

I'm one of those people who believe we evolved, ibinsanediego, and I have yet to go into a church (or anywhere else) and shoot someone. I don't live my life "any way I see fit", I abide by the same laws and morals as people who believe in a God, so quit stereotyping. There are millions of people in this country who believe the same things as I believe, yet those people aren't playing shoot 'em up in the streets either. One doesn't need to believe everything you believe to have a sense of right and wrong, no matter how desperately you cling to that idea.

The assumption that only the person being attacked would only be armed is the flaw in your logic A Marketer. The idea is that more and more people are getting Concealed Carry licenses (except Komifornia) so the odds are increasing that there will be someone there to stop a second shot. 160,000 here in my state and growing and there are no bloodbaths in the streets from those licensees. That is a phantom idea propagated by the antis. It just doesn't happen. Your right nothing is going to stop a person from walking up and executing a person that has no situational awareness, but I'm not that grazing sheep. I take my safety and that of my family as serious as anything in my life. The state of Komiofornia bares some of the responsibility for these deaths. The do everything they can to make it impossible to save ones own life. Governator you have blood on your hands.

I had to LOL @ the prepareness...I'm sure you hold on tight to your gun when everyone you met pull his hand out to shake your hand?

Look at my name, I know everything it is to know about your surrounding, but you can't go around labeling everyone you see as a bad or good guy and who to prepare for. Of course, you can't be 100% accurate assuming who's bad or who's good. Otherwise, you must be James Bond.

LOL@ stopping a second shot...You can stop a second shot without a firearm. Why no one outside of his vision tackled him? Tackle from behind? Tackle from the side?

C'mon how big is this church? Don't tell me there was no one near him to tackle him after the first shot or second...Who said to be like a grazing sheep like you said?

The last person I would consider a expert in human condition is a marketing person. I manipulate every attempt to pin down my desires by focus groups and registration cards that you rely on to try to suck money out of weak minded sheep. Marketing people are one step above snake oil salesmen.

The shooting in a church was a message to the two young guys who were shot. Part of the message was .... we're so bad that we don't give a crap if we decide to shoot you in a church.

Another part of the message was .... you had better do what we want because the next time we'll just kill you. The kids were not killed because they have something the shooters want.

The shooters were giving the "victims" a message. Frankly, I wish that our police did not have to contend with this gang violence. I'd rather they just lock up all the gang members.

Wow! Can't believe that there are those that would use this as an opportunity to bash God or religion when this clearly is the fault of mankind. It is almost blatantly obvious that the two people who were shot got financially involved with those that did the shooting. People are imperfect even though they attend church services. Some people attend church services because they are imperfect.

You obviously don't know anything about marketing Andy...Yeah marketers don't understand human condition, so that is why we studied them and not make assumptions (unlike many people who think they're an expert @ everything).

You better vote Democrat then if you don't like people like me, Republicans just give us more powers to manipulate sheeples like you to buy our crap.

And you know nothing about gun owners or concealed carry. Your freaking arrogance is hilarious.

A Marketer..........................You show your own ignorance. I can fire 5 shots from my 22 pistol in less time than it will take me to write this sentance. They will also be more accurate than the five fired in the church. I can fire 5 shots from my 45 almost as fast and about as accurately. You might (if you have perfect reflexes) manage to stand up at the fifth shot. You could not stand up and tackle me before the second shot ar even the third.

And we're talking about reaction time responding to gun shots...I don't care how many shots you can fire at random with a given start time. All I care is how fast can you respond to a shot by a random gunman.

Let me guess, you're going to increase your reaction rate by holding your gun tight everywhere you go? I wonder where will you hide your guns @ a swimming pool...

It's quite funny because all this time I've been talking about you can't really defend yourself with a gun because human reaction time is just too slow...

and Mac proves my point because he can shoot his victim dead before his victim can respond back. Why does it matter if his victim has a gun or not? The gun would be useless anyway.

When I feel like I'm in a bad area I do keep a hand on a gun in my pocket in its holster. I carry two guns. One strong side one week side. It's important to me that I practice and be proficient with my guns. I take classes to become more proficient each year. You react how you train. I suggest making blind assumptions based on no first hand knowledge makes your view point irrelevant. You don't' care about anyone safety just your political leanings and its agenda of "guns are bad!"

larry,

what did you evolve from? where is your proof justifying your opinion? where is the missing link?

Where yours about "God"?

dave, how about this?

1. a newborn baby

2. todays sunset

3. dna

4. a snowflake

5. a human eye

6. a human brain

7. infinity

8. you

9. me

10. Jesus

I'm all for more gang intervention units; search and seizure of weapons of today's hoodlums..this is terrorism of the worst degree and martial law should protect Good Americans from this Nonsense....

Yeah but they usually blame it on the devil because according to the churchgoers - "God can do no wrong."

They are right. Of course since you don't believe in God then it really doesn't matter. But if there is an all knowing Creator God then he can do no wrong. Sin, or lawlessness, according to the Bible, is the transgression of Gods law. God cannot violate his own laws therefore He must be without sin, or as you put it, can do no wrong.

And who says anyone was shafted by God. Several shots were fired in the church (at least five according to one witness), yet only two were wounded and no one killed. Hmmmm. Maybe God was watching out for them after all.

And make gun owners and the NRA pay for it through increased taxes on firearms sales.

And make gun owners and the NRA pay for it through increased taxes on firearms sales.

Yeah, that's the solution. Not! Your user name explains it all.

If everyone was armed, this probably would not have happened!! Remember, "An armed society is a polite society"!!

If existing gun laws were FULLY ENFORCED this probably would not have happened, especially in California. The problem is that existing gun laws are not enforced. When something like this happens as a result the liberals have a good excuse to cry for more gun laws. They will not be happy until all our citizens are like those in the UK, lambs for the criminals to slaughter with impunity.

LOL I always have laugh at the ones who blame guns.. CARS kill more people than guns.. should we ban cars also?

I believe Doctors also kill more people thru medical mistakes than guns.

for all you weak minded people, guns do not kill people, people kill people. if we use your analogy then we need to make matches illegal because that would stop arson. what needs to be changed is the hearts of the people. these gang bangers grow up in homes mostly void of a good male role model, they are surrounded by drug abusers and here nothing but negative about the whole world. they see their only way out is thru crime and hate. so evil begets evil. pretty simple premise.

throwing government money at the problem or banning guns will not help. if you ban guns, then the only people with guns will be criminals. think about it rationally. criminals do not obey the law or they would not be criminals, but your saying if there are laws banning guns, the criminals will obey that law. that is absurb to say the least.

lastly, i understand why kids end up in gangs, but that is not an excuse for their behavior. gangs should be handled as the low life criminals that they are with NO mercy. prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and executed if they commit a capital crime. gang crimes are organized criminal activity and should be handled as such.

..except in the Catholic churches where the priests do the "pat- downs."

Debating the gun issue here is about as dumb as it can get. These men were outlaws. They would have had guns, gun laws or not. Making fire arms illegal would only put firearms in the hands of those with illegal intentions.

If everyone was armed, this probably would not have happened!!

People would have still gotten shot.

Remember, "An armed society is a polite society"!!

Not really, it may turn into another trigger-happy hot zone.

37 states with concealed carry laws and it hasn't happened yet.

There are a lot of fools running around out their carrying guns for protection that have no idea what they would do if ever confronted with a situation where they needed to use it. How many of those people have ever pointed a loaded gun at another human being? Out of those, how many have pulled the trigger? Out of those, how many have actually killed someone. Killing a man is not an easy thing to do for Joe Schmo average out there. But for these thugs that shot up the church killing is just another day at the office. They wouldn't bat an eye before killing you but you might hesitate for just a half a second. That's all the time they would need to shoot first.

I'm not against owning guns. What I have a problem with is the attitude of some of these "Wyatt Earp" wannabes out there that think they can handle a life and death situation they have never been in.

So the solution is to arm all the people in the congregation?????????

What an idiot thing to suggest.

It might have turned out differently if the pastor had had a gun.

It's hard to convince anti-gun people that law abiding people have the right to be armed; even in church.

My comment was directed towards What we need.....

So, instead of jumping to conclusions about who is or isn't anti-gun. you might give a little more thought to being an intelligent gun owner and not a Rambo-wannabe.

Now you are jumping to conclusions. I am an intelligent gun carrying citizen. I have been for a long time without having to use my Rambo skills.

While my heart goes out to the victims, we have to realize this is merely the latest shooting in a house of worship.

Prior to this we had the abortionist in Kansas, the shooting at the Unitarian Universalist church in Tennessee and others.

Of course, the worst was the initial attack on the Branch Davidians in Waco by Janet Reno and her baby burners. The government planned the attack for a Sunday morning when the members were at worship.

lawyer,

Regarding your post 3-1. Far more intelligent to have all the parishoners armed than to pass yet another law that will be ignored by the killers.

Tina-293371

It might have turned out differently if the pastor had had a gun.

That's true. The pastor would probably be dead.

Why would you assume he would lose?

Lots of reasons but for starters, the gunmen would have already had their guns out shooting. Where would the pastor have his gun? As soon as the shooters saw him going for it, BANG! Also being a pastor he might entertain second thoughts about taking someones life whereas the gunmen have no problem with that at all.

The criminals often shoot...and hit very little.

So, claiming that being prepared doesn't matter can't/won't help...doesn't apply in the vast majority of situations.

drbacon

As soon as the shooters saw him going for it, BANG!

You are assuming that the shooters have fish eyes and are just as busy watching everyones hands as they are shooting...if they are hitting what they are shooting they barely knew everyone else was there let alone what they were doing with their hands...a bystander may literally have seconds to draw, take careful aim, and fire. It's not like this is the movies where everyone knows everything all the time...

Besides, the alternative is to stand there and die.

Yes, you are a simple man.

If it weren't a gun, it would be a knife or a ballbat. It has nothing to do with the weapon, it has everything to do with evil.

I, too, am very sorry to hear of such violent, evil behavior. Do these perpetrators think (there's that T word again) that somehow harming another will ever profit for them? It all comes back around, it always has, it always will.

As for violating any place of worship or contemplation, what a sad reflection it is upon these evil ones. For whatever "reasoning" they used, this was a place of trying to turn one's self in a better direction. Violating that effort was abominable. The whole incident was abominable.

If it weren't a gun, it would be a knife or a ballbat. It has nothing to do with the weapon, it has everything to do with evil.

I keep hearing this from the more committed second-amendment advocates. What I never hear is a reference to a story where a loan perpetrator killed multiple adults with a knife or a bat.

Still waiting...

Restricting gun ownership in America will not prevent all murders. It will prevent a large proportion of the spreel-killings, such as the one which happened in Alabama just 4 days ago.

Dear Dman, before modern guns, loan perpetrators were killing multiple adults and children with swords. Another weapon of choice for loan perpetrators was the long bow and in some cases, the cross bow. Oh, and don't forget the compound bow. Other weapons of choice by loan perpetrators were spears, javelins, axes, and many, many others. If you go back far enough, the weapons of choice by loan perpetrators were sticks and stones. If you read the history of the development of weaponry, you'll learn this there.

As China and other countries have proven, taking guns away only takes guns away from the majority of the citizenry. The gangsters will still have them, and the majority of the citizenry will be at the gangsters' mercy.

If some of the people in the named church would have packed their 45s or 38s to church under their suit coats or in their purses, this story would most likely have played out a little differently.

Take a look at the UK. They outlawed ALL guns and KNIVES several years ago. There violent crime is now occurring at a rate that is the highest in Europe and even above South Africa. The people not only do not have guns, they no longer have the right to defend themselves. Not even in their own homes. Crime is up and getting worse every day. The criminals are armed with knives, clubs and even guns. The average homeowner might have a kitchen knife but they would go to jail if they hurt someone defending themselves. Better to die I guess.

It seems to be overlooked but the recent news stories about "shooting" incidents always seem to be in California or NY where they have the most stringent anto firearm laws, yet seem to have more criminals armed and more shootings per capita than anywhere else. The other news stories have been on college campuses where they also have "gun free" zones and anti firearm rules.

Maybe, just maybe thats why the criminals arm themselves with illegal weapons and attack more in those area's, because they know their victims will be unarmed????

dman - "SAID" I keep hearing this from the more committed second-amendment advocates. What I never hear is a reference to a story where a loan perpetrator killed multiple adults with a knife or a bat.

Three killed in Las Vegas last Saturday with a battle axe

ASK ANSWERED...

"loan perpetrator" ...you mean like a guy at the finance company?

ASK ANSWERED...

Police say an ax-wielding man on a rampage in a central valley neighborhood critically wounded his disabled sister-in-law Thursday before severely injuring a woman and killing her 4-month-old son.

Ex-jock - The man killed his (bolded for your benefit) disabled sister-in-law, wounded a woman and her his 4-month-old son. Just how does a man attacking babies and disabled adults equate to killing multiple adults?

I guess it is true, most ex-jocks never learned to read and COMPREHEND...

It seems to be overlooked but the recent news stories about "shooting" incidents always seem to be in California or NY where they have the most stringent anto firearm laws, yet seem to have more criminals armed and more shootings per capita than anywhere else.

...and yet, azrancher, two out of the last three incidents occurred outside that area, in Alabama and Virginia respectively. I guess "always" doesn't always mean "always" in your neck of the woods.

Nobody would deny that committed criminals will not be dissuaded by laws outlawing guns. But if guns were not bought and sold so commonly in this country then they would be less obtainable, by any means and perhaps, just perhaps, people like Professor Bishop would be unable to commit multiple murders with an illegally obtained gun.

dman read beyond the first sentance if your attention span is that long. He covers the school shootings.

Take a look at the UK. They outlawed ALL guns and KNIVES several years ago.

More half-truths and outright falsehoods. British gun laws have always been far more stringent than those of the United States. In 1997 laws were passed virtually outlawing the ownership of hand guns. Carrying concealed weapons has been outlawed there for more than half a century. Yet as of 2000, the United Kingdom ranks 46th in its murder rate (.014 per 1000) The United States ranks 24th (.042 per 1000). For rape, the comparative numbers are UK: 13th (.142 per 1000) vs the U.S.: 9th (.301 per 1000). In burglaries, the UK does have a higher incidence rate (13.832 per 1000) vs. 7.0999 per 1000). Ironically this is the one crime where British gun laws might be thought a deterrent (see below).

The people not only do not have guns, they no longer have the right to defend themselves. Not even in their own homes.

...and in England possession in the home of a shot gun, or other smooth bore weapon having a minimum barrel length of 24" is legal. Bob5ford's reference to the British being prohibited from fighting back, even in self-defense of themselves in their homes, may be a reference to the case of Tony Martin, who accosted two men aged 33 entering his home illegally. When he displayed the shotgun, they attempted to flee and both were shot, one fatally while attempting to flee through a window. He (Mr. Martin) was convicted of murder.

Even in the United States, you are not allowed to shoot criminals in the act of flight, only for the defense of oneself or others.

I didn't know that the 14 year old that got shot was a loan perpetrator. Did I miss this in the story?

And I didn't mention a word about the second amendment. Violent and evil people will always find a way to be violent and evil, whether it be gun, sword, battle ax, ballbat, road rage, or even their bare hands. I see no excuse for this violence, at all.

I did read his entire post, mac. Where I come from, always means "always" and the Virginia shooting incident to which I was referring was in a rural area (Appomattox ,VA on Jan. 21, 2010), in a private home. I guess your misunderstanding is not too surprising; there is a new incident of this sort almost every week, sometimes two. While many have occurred in California, our most populous state, almost every large state, from Massachusetts to Florida and from New York to Washington has had its share. In fact the worst recent event occurred in Texas, on an army base. Was that a gun free zone too?

I didn't know that the 14 year old that got shot was a loan perpetrator. Did I miss this in the story?

zapper - Did I reference you or your response directly?

zapper - Also, the person who got shot, whatever their age or gender, is customarily referred to as the victim, not the perpetrator, on loan (?) or otherwise.

dman - I was just trying to illustrate point..Things do not kill people, people do.

As for your personal attack on me and or my level of reading comprehension..I could care less !

You don't know me !

dman - "SAID" just perhaps, people like Professor Bishop would be unable to commit multiple murders with an illegally obtained gun.

Isn't she linked to a BOMB plot at Harvard..We all know bombs can't kill multiple people.

U.S. F.B.I. data from 1980 -1998 - Types of weapons used in murder.

43%-57% - guns

17%-23% - knifes

5%-11% - blunt force

1% 9% - other (poison, drowning, etc.)

If we take away guns, do you really think people who want to kill you will just go away. I think the other numbers would just increase.

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE...PERIOD!

ex-jock - your circumstance you cited did not accurately parallel the cases being discussed, or the specific circumstances I cited ...and you did not even get your own facts straight; you said 3 people were killed by an axe-wielder in Las Vegas and the actual number of people killed were 2, a disabled woman and a baby. The third victim was wounded and is expected to survive.

Isn't she linked to a BOMB plot at Harvard..We all know bombs can't kill multiple people.

Yes, she was investigated, but never charged and... (reading comprehension needed here), the bomb never went off; it was a failed attempt. We all know that undetonated bombs can't kill anybody ...I think?

BTW: If you hadn't included your somewhat loud, "ASKED ANSWERED" tag line on your original post, I might have been gentler in my criticism.

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE...PERIOD!

Yes, and people with guns kill more people than people with knives and blunt objects. Or do you really believe that Professor Bishop could have killed 3 people and wounded 3 others with a knife, a bat or poisoned brownies?

dman-353357

Yes, and people with guns kill more people than people with knives and blunt objects. Or do you really believe that Professor Bishop could have killed 3 people and wounded 3 others with a knife, a bat or poisoned brownies?

Sometimes it happens dman, guns make it easier but that doesn't mean it can't happen. A few articles from Japan where stabbings are all the rage:

7 dead 10 injured:

http://news.sg.msn.com/regional/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3827014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihabara_massacre

1 dead 7 injured:

http://www.gamegrep.com/news/8023-one_dead_seven_injured_in_a_stabbing_spree/

8 dead 15 injured:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2001/06/44393

So to answer your question, I do think that if Bishop was motivated enough she could have killed 3 and wounded 3 with a knife.

I love people whom are so righteous..

You wouldn't talk to my face the way your talking to me on-line..TOUGH GUY !

Yes, everybody is a tough guy on the internet, including you, I guess. But even if you are big enough and tough enough to beat me in a fight, it wouldn't make your reasoning any more valid ...or your reading comprehension.

Being physically tough will only take you so far in life. Ask anybody who is in prison.

agm65ccip - Kudos for answering the question as asked. Since all of the incidents you cite involve a man armed with a knife, not a woman, I'm not sure it follows that this somewhat dumpy-looking 42-year-old could have accomplished so much hurt if armed only with a knife.

dman-353357

I'm not sure it follows that this somewhat dumpy-looking 42-year-old could have accomplished so much hurt if armed only with a knife.

Perhaps not but you are making some assumptions there...

As far as I can tell there are three main factors in an attack being successful: motivation, skills, and target.

For motivation, I don't know how long or hard Bishop thought about this. There is a big difference between her going there thinking "I'm going to kill these people" vs "I'm going to hurt these people" vs "We'll see what happens when I get there". This matters much more with a weapon that requires more technical skill such as a knife.

Skills, I don't know what Bishop's life up to now consisted of. Perhaps she trained in some form of martial arts when she was younger that would give her an advantage especially against someone that has had no such experience. I know a few ladies that look unassuming but I know that they were good at kickboxing and jujitsu and so I am not going to start a fight with them.

Target, my "third" link was a man who knifed some 8 year olds and their teachers. I think you would agree that most women would be capable of killing 8 year olds with a knife. I don't know much about Bishop's victims, but I know more than a few asian professors at the college I work at that if you threw a 30lb bookbag on their backs it would be all they could carry. I'm sure even the "dumpy-looking" bishop would be able to dominate a smaller adult.

I will completely agree with your premise that it would be much easier for Bishop to kill 3 with a gun than a knife. However to say that just because she is a woman and "dumpy-looking" means she cannot kill 3 people with a knife is glossing over some very important considerations.

dman, your post was directly under mine. You referenced my comment. That's why I asked. I still don't get the "loan" thing or where it came from. Did you mean "lone"?

I didn't know that the 14 year old that got shot was a loan perpetrator.

You are right, my comment did directly reference yours. My apologies. Regarding the second question, I was being cute regarding your misuse of the words loan, vs. lone (see above) and your designation of 14-year-old victim as a perpetrator.

agm65ccip - You too are making assumptions, or at least linking a couple of highly improbable what ifs.

What if Professor Bishop had martial arts training?

What if all of her colleagues were as weak as children?

You might just as well say, what if my daughter's Barbie Doll had a hand grenade?

Your reasoning seems tenuous. Yes, maybe if she was lucky and if she was good with a knife and if her victims were weak and immobile and if she were possessed of a truly murderous rage, she might have succeeded without a gun.

But a person with a loaded gun and even a fair degree of proficieny with fire arms needs only the murderous rage.

So no, I don't think it is likely that she would have even attempted this crime without access to a gun, and I think this is true of the vast majority of would be mass-murderers. They are cowards at heart and would never attack another adult human being unless they were holding a gun, or as the old saying goes, "God did not make all men equal; Colonel Colt did.".

galaxyJ

If some of the people in the named church would have packed their 45s or 38s to church under their suit coats or in their purses, this story would most likely have played out a little differently.

It certainly would have turned out differently. Instead of two wounded teens there would be several dead parishioners and the gunmen still probably would have gotten away.

Blasphemy

Who says there is a God!! You are taking a lot of liberties.

When GOD led the hebrews out of egypt and into sinai enroute to Israel they carried with them weapons from egypt, and "joshua" under moses armed them and trained them to defend themselves. If you read the bible (regardless of your belief in it) GOD has armed and prepared many throughout the ages to defend themelves. Only modern Christianity here in the U.S. has produced this weak non aggressive christian ideology.

Top 10 Predictions for 2010

1. The Bible will still have all the answers.
2. Prayer will still be the most powerful thing on Earth..
3. The Holy Spirit will still move.
4. God will still honour the praises of His people.
5. There will still be God-anointed preaching.
6. There will still be singing of praise to God.
7. God will still pour out blessings upon His people.
8. There will still be room at the Cross.
9. Jesus will still love you.
10. Jesus will still save the lost when they come to Him.

Isn't It Great To Remember Who Is Really In Control,
and that; "the Word of the Lord endures forever."
( 1 Peter 1:25 )

You believe that dribble?

Meant to say drivel! However, dribble probably works too!

Isn't It Great To Remember Who Is Really In Control,
and that; "the Word of the Lord endures forever."

So was God asleep or just having an off day in Alabama 4 days ago?

I don't know how anybody can reconcile the concept of an all-powerful, all-knowing and loving God with half the crap which goes on in this world.

Is the world today the best that omnipotence can manage?

Sorry, I don't want to burst anybody's bubble. But I just cannot see a God that is both kind, loving and all powerful manifested in today's world.

Or yesterday's world either, for that matter.

Perhaps you are forgetting one basic principle here. God is not in the business of saving our sorry ass physical body's, especialy from our own stupid decisions. I think he is more interested in saving our spiritual souls.

I was not aware the NRA was able to pass laws.

Grunt:

Most criminals don't buy guns legally. Just an FYI for you.

Grunt: You mean the second amendment right. How has the bill of rights turned on people of this country?

"What changed is the conservatives are armed and dangerous to the safety of the American people"

Dear Grunt, are you saying that those gangsters who terrorized the church are conservatives, or that only conservatives carry guns, or that all conservatives carry guns, or that no liberals carry guns, or that the NRA is responsible for the 2nd amendment, or what?

grunt

California has some of the strongest gun control laws in the land, passed by many misguided liberals like yourself, who don't seem to understand that criminals are unaffected by gun control laws. In honor of your post, I just gave an NRA membership as a gift to a friend in Texas.

Three killed in Las Vegas last Saturday with a battle axe -

When will the NAA - (National Axe Association) Realize we must have axe locks, as well as 3 day cooling off period before we allow people to purchase axe's

Folks,

The anti-gun posters on this story are pretty much typical and are following a set pattern. They ask for references about something they don't believe; you give them references and they say the references are all lies. You're never going to convince them so just ignore them. I've pretty much stopped bothering with such idiocy. Due to a recent Supreme Court decision, the Second Amendment applies to individual citizens and trumps pretty much all the nutty laws being proposed anyway.

Billybob: Your last name wouldn't be Thornton, would it? LOL

Anyway, you just put the whole gun-anti-gun thing in a nutshell: Criminals are unaffected by gun control laws. I wish I could put that in all capitals.

It is the truth.

god - The attorney's and judges do in fact give rights to killers. They "interpret" the existing law to extend to the lawless more then to the law abiding. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that gives more rights to criminals then to honest citizens. You should try reading it sometime. You should also be aware that "cruel" punishment did not include hanging or firing squads when it was written.

god-

In theory our legal system should protect the innocent. I'm more concrete and look at what has actually happened to me or people I know. Indeed, in some cities, there is extreme protection given to criminals and the victims are just fodder for the police. This happened during the real estate scams. I tried to file a complaint I was met with ridicule and threats by the police themselves. This was before and during the market crash. It can be called corruption but I think it’s more from fustration and an attitude trend within some departments towards bullying of victims and a deep seeded, group supported, hate of citizens. I only say it because it happened to me some of my friends. The PD hates complainers of crime. They prefer to pick up bodies, do drug busts and give out tickets but fraud…it’s not their business. On the other hand, the PD seemingly kissed the asses of every real estate developer, financial firm, banker and home loan group they could find. Actions speak louder than words.

g,

i will not dishonor our God by using your handle since you obviously have the name to make yourself appear to be controversial. the only thing more repulsive than your name is your total ignorance of Christian beliefs.

If you hate God that is your problem and your choice, but keep your opinions to yourself until you can make one which resembles the truth. you only appear petty and bitter, much like the rest of the liberal left and quite frankly very juvenile. and besides, that no one cares that you hate God or anyone else for that matter.

I do sympathize with the people. As a person who attends church, I can't imagine having hooded hooligans parading in, marching up and down the center isle, and then whipping out guns and firing them at anyone. I also feel sympathy for the teens who were shot; however, there had to be a reason why those hooded hoodlums did what they did. I suspect that those teenage victims were into things that they shouldn't have been into and brought down someone's wrath.

Ah... the "rest of the story"

Anti-gun sweaty whiners would like everybody to forget that the 9/11 maniacs chose the MOST gun-free venue in America, Commercial Aviation.

The inconvenient fact that churchgoers in much of this Nation used to carry firearms to defend against 2 and 4 legged predators also reveals the wankerness of Sheeple waiting for,and inviting, slaughter.

The Second Amendment is the carry permit for all of us that refuse to be a victim.

Wankerness

I love that word. It's British.

No, lets increase the number of law abiding citizens carry legally and pass castle law everywhere so that the pukes preying on law abider's and the pukes families can't sue them when we shoot them while they are commiting the crime.

Exactly!!! 8-)

and backwards baseball caps too. They go on WITH THE VISOR IN THE FRONT YOU IDIOTS!

you say "Middle-aged" and Menopausal like they are bad things.

Your mother is likely middle-aged and menopausal. Over 50% of the population of the world is or someday will be middle-aged and menopausal.

If you're lucky YOU TOO will get old someday. Successful cultures tend to treat their elders with respect. Maybe YOU should start making this place better by not treating your elders with such sarcasm and disrespect.

Add this as another example of why this country is headed down the road to hell.

Actualy I introduced my children to guns as soon as they could hold one and they started shooting as soon as they could hold it steady. One who is a vetanarian would, depending on her mood, either shoot you between the eyes or autopsy you while you fell screaming to the floor if you messed with her. The other is such a natural good shot that she could have competed for a spot on the olympic squad if we could have afforded the training and ammunition for her to practice.

Being "middle aged" I loved dontbelievawordofit's post! His/her description of Sarah Palin is a riot!

Mac, I agree with what you did by introducing your kids to guns. Teaching kids about guns and gun safety is an excellent idea. Guns are not the problem; people are the problem!

Hey frommycoldeadhands,

I just turned 50 last July, and I had my male menopause in my mid-thirties. I'm glad that that's over with!

my guess is disrepect of others and that a life doesn't mean much, whether taught by parents, relatives or society as awhole. everyone wants the guy next to them to believe the way they believe etc...government tries to force their beliefs more by their opinion than the laws, and the middle class are just as bad. my mother taught us that life was worth more than any amount of money. anyones life. she taught us to treat others property better than our own, etc...i've been clobbered my entire life my *ssholes. see, it wasn't my mother, or god that got me clobbered it was the very people that were not taught any better.

Debbie, you hit the nail on the head.

First Rule of Newsvine:Don't think the people who comment are representative of the majority of Americans.

nef,

i take issue with you calling me a pathetic loser. you can tag yourself with that name if you please, but until you know everyone personally then keep your name calling to yourself.

our country is in a cultural/spiritual battle drawn on moral principles of right and wrong based on the ideas this country was founded on. on one side you have a group who would like to see this country and society to decay morally in the name of progress. on the other side you have people who hold tightly to the beliefs of our founding fathers and are not willing to see a great nation crumble under the weight of this moral decay. it really has nothing to do with politics, other than that is where the battle lines are drawn. it has to do with fundamental right vs wrong, light versus dark, good versus evil.

throughout history great nations have fallen because of the very thing that is happening to our great country. and without a single exception every great nation has fallen because their society failed due to immorality of its people and leaders. i can say without reservation that there are enough people in this country who recognize this history, people who are grounded in sound moral principle who will not go down without a fight.

from the roar of the crowds across this country in the last few months, i would say with confidence, that this great nation will turn away the greatest threat we face and that is the onslaught of liberalism/socialism/ marxism we are seeing from today's leaders. if you are not up for the fight then i suggest you retreat to your corner and keep your name calling to yourself.

Liberty and freedom will prevail in the United States of America! tyranny and oppression will fail for WE THE PEOPLE will triumph!!!!

Once again armed "CRIMINALS" were able to attack "UNARMED" law abiding citizens in the "Police State of California", Were only crimianls and law enforcement are armed and they are never together at the same time. Law enforcement usually arrives 10's of minutes later.

Exactly right, car31jou,

Remember: "when seconds count....the Police will be there in minutes"

I agree with everything you say except the "government" part. The government is not in the business of raising kids.

Until parents start taking responsibility for raising their kids, nothing will change.