TexasCHLforum.com

dale blanker wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

EHooper02 wrote:I really only have one question:

If what he said wasn't wrong, why has it been deleted and you have been left to defend his statement?

Understand your board is probably under a lot of fire right now, and I'm certainly not trying to add to that. Just something to think about, I feel.

Only Charles can answer your question, but I can tell you this. In the current climate in America, you don't have to say anything wrong to be assaulted on the internet. All you have to do is say something that people disagree with. What Charles said was that the Pastor opposed carry in churches, which is a fact, and some of the dead could be alive if carry had been allowed in the church, which is also a fact.

What is not a fact is that Charles blamed the victims for their deaths. That is a blatant misrepresentation of what he said. It's not surprising. It happens on both sides of the political aisle by people who don't care about truth but only care about promoting their own agendas.

What is really unfortunate about the quote is the timing of it - not what the grieving pastor's family and other victims' families needed to hear now. I don't think the comment was malicious but maybe thoughtless and tacky. Charles must have thought this and hence the removal.

Charles' comment was no more ill timed than the leftist anit-gun zealots who can't even wait for the bodies to grow cold before using them as the platform for their own personal agendas. The difference is that Charles was speaking the truth - had someone in that bible class been legally armed, there would have been a different outcome. Pastor/State Senator Pinckney was in the position to not only provide the public with the legal means to defend themselves, he had the final say in that regard within his own church (as I understand SC handgun and self-defense laws). Now, the sorry excuse for what passes as media took the twisted interpretation of what Charles said and has continued to run with it. But that doesn't change two main facts in all of this. The killer is 100% responsible for the deaths of 9 innocent people. And Pastor/State Senator Pinckney's actions (or lack thereof) did have negative consequences.

News media were twisting words, no one said who to blame. All that was said, some armed Citizen there could have stopped the killer. Otherwise, why people hire armed security detail?

baldeagle wrote:

dale blanker wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

EHooper02 wrote:I really only have one question:

If what he said wasn't wrong, why has it been deleted and you have been left to defend his statement?

Understand your board is probably under a lot of fire right now, and I'm certainly not trying to add to that. Just something to think about, I feel.

Only Charles can answer your question, but I can tell you this. In the current climate in America, you don't have to say anything wrong to be assaulted on the internet. All you have to do is say something that people disagree with. What Charles said was that the Pastor opposed carry in churches, which is a fact, and some of the dead could be alive if carry had been allowed in the church, which is also a fact.

What is not a fact is that Charles blamed the victims for their deaths. That is a blatant misrepresentation of what he said. It's not surprising. It happens on both sides of the political aisle by people who don't care about truth but only care about promoting their own agendas.

What is really unfortunate about the quote is the timing of it - not what the grieving pastor's family and other victims' families needed to hear now. I don't think the comment was malicious but maybe thoughtless and tacky. Charles must have thought this and hence the removal.

Thoughtless and tacky? When did the truth become thoughtless and tacky? Another church in SC was attacked by a shotgun wielding cretin. The difference is, nobody was killed, because the church members, one of whom had a CHL and was armed, took him down when he entered the church.

There is absolutely no doubt that not all nine of those people would have died if even ONE of them had been armed. The cretin reloaded FIVE times. After the first shot, I'm plugging that guy right between the eyes.

Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

***SNIP***

dale blanker wrote:
Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

Charles stated the obvious & the families werent aware of his comments for the simple reason, he didnt communicate them to the family.They heard them from mad mother shannon watson & the rabid gotcha media pushing an agenda. shannon watson cared more about scoring points then she did the suffering of the families.

Human nature being what it is you can bet money that everyone impacted by this has played the "what if" game, and considering the overwhelming blow to the families, Charles comments amounted to a gnat in a hurricane.

Now, you be honest, do you think Charles' comment was valid?

dale blanker wrote: Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

Well both Mr. Cotton and Obama spoke very quickly on the subject but its because both are very passionate about the subject. And no the family probably was not bothered as much by Obama's statement but I'm willing to bet it's not because of the timing but because it's the way they probably feel also, wanting gun control or guns banned period. While Mr. Cotton's statement wasn't in line with their views, timing wouldn't of matter one bit. Mr. Cotton could of posted that a month from now and Watts along with everyone else that already has jumped all over it would of still done the same thing, timing had nothing to do with it. I have seen several other groups post the same info Mr. Cotton posted about in the same statement all over facebook and other social sites and yet no one jumping all over them or making a big stink out of it. So you might ask yourself why Mr. Cotton then, well it's cause of whom he is. They view this as their chance to harm NRA, pro-gun rights and put both in dismay, also honestly it fits their agenda. Myself I hope Mr. Cotton does not end up losing anything over this cause many feel the same way he does and feels the same statement he made. Just if some normal nobody special said it certain people would not of twisted it around making it sound like other wise. It only happened cause of who said it and not what actually was said.

Jim Beaux wrote:***SNIP***

dale blanker wrote:
Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

Charles stated the obvious & the families werent aware of his comments for the simple reason, he didnt communicate them to the family.They heard them from mad mother shannon watson & the rabid gotcha media pushing an agenda. shannon watson cared more about scoring points then she did the suffering of the families.

Human nature being what it is you can bet money that everyone impacted by this has played the "what if" game, and considering the overwhelming blow to the families, Charles comments amounted to a gnat in a hurricane.

Now, you be honest, do you think Charles' comment was valid?

Honestly they probably still aren't aware of the statement. Mom's Demand are still trying to dig up all support and outcry they can to try and hurt NRA, Mr. Cotton as they can.

In light of everything that has happened and the aftermath, I wonder how many churches/church leadership will reevaluate their position on allowing their congregants to carry?

The shooting is so sad. We need to pray for the family's loses. I am in favor of a law allowing LE to kill the shooter with the smoking gun on the spot. An eye for an eye. No different from killing a rabid animal.

TexasCajun wrote:In light of everything that has happened and the aftermath, I wonder how many churches/church leadership will reevaluate their position on allowing their congregants to carry?

People usually fall the way they lean. If they leaned toward fear/hatred of guns that's the way they will fall. If they lean toward pro 2A that's the way they will fall. These events may push people toward a decision but it rarely changes minds.

baldeagle wrote:I am stunned by the graciousness of the families of the victims in Charleston. They are better Christians than I am.

If there could be any good from all of this listen up you who proclaim to be Christians. As Christians we are called to forgive in even the most difficult situations, if the victims families can forgive so quickly it reveals to me that they have a good grasp on what Christianity really is (unlike most people today). Too often today we get the watered down messages and feel good sermons. When the rubber meets the road and we are faced with hardships our true beliefs will show. Shortly after I became one of the redeemed, one whose name was written in the lambs book of life, I began to prepare myself for the greatest hardship I might ever face, the loss of my daughter or my wife, to something similar to the way this guy murdered those people. I knew that if I could trust in God at a time like that there was nothing that I could not overcome with the help of the Lord.
Christianity has no greater enemy than those that go around claiming to be Christians but live like the lost. Christianity is more than going to church once a week - Christianity is an entirely new way of living with the goal to serve Him. Look up what servant is in scripture, look up the Greek word "doulos" and see how Paul, James, Christ and others described themselves as servants to God. Once you understand that you will see what we are called to be and how someone can forgive in such a heart breaking situation. I applaud them for being what we are called to be and pray that I could do the same in a similar situation. I will end with one of my favorite quotes:

"Captain, my religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as in bed. God has fixed the time for my death. I do not concern myself about that, but to be always ready, no matter when it may overtake me....That is the way all men should live, and then all would be equally brave." - Stonewall Jackson

Lubbock1911 wrote:The shooting is so sad. We need to pray for the family's loses. I am in favor of a law allowing LE to kill the shooter with the smoking gun on the spot. An eye for an eye. No different from killing a rabid animal.

Sorry, but I must say that this, as written, is so very wrong. I do not ever want any one person or small group to be judge , jury, prosecutor, defense, and executioner. I would hope that no such "law" would ever be considered.

2farnorth wrote:

Lubbock1911 wrote:The shooting is so sad. We need to pray for the family's loses. I am in favor of a law allowing LE to kill the shooter with the smoking gun on the spot. An eye for an eye. No different from killing a rabid animal.

Sorry, but I must say that this, as written, is so very wrong. I do not ever want any one person or small group to be judge , jury, prosecutor, defense, and executioner. I would hope that no such "law" would ever be considered.

Such power (or burden) should never be placed in the hands of individuals. As flawed as it might seem at times, we have a constitutional process designed to protect the rights of both the victim and the accused. If we lose sight of "innocent till proven guilty", it is only a matter of time til we lose every other right.

dale blanker wrote:Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

What I highlighted in red is where your logic falls apart. Charles posted his comments on a board that is dedicated to Texas CHL holders. Those families would never have heard about his comment if it were not brought to light by anti gun people for purely political purposes.

Now I ask you, who is the real villain here... The person who voices a personal opinion, or the person who exploits that opinion for personal or political gain?

Pawpaw wrote:

dale blanker wrote:Well, the pastor was effectively accused of neglect and therefore partially responsible for avoidable deaths. I suspect the families did not need to hear that from Charles so quickly. It could have waited, don't you think?

I won't try to justify the timing of Obama's gun control comments but I suspect the family was not has bothered by that nearly as much as hearing their pastor's neglect was a major factor in the disaster.

What I highlighted in red is where your logic falls apart. Charles posted his comments on a board that is dedicated to Texas CHL holders. Those families would never have heard about his comment if it were not brought to light by anti gun people for purely political purposes.

Now I ask you, who is the real villain here... The person who voices a personal opinion, or the person who exploits that opinion for personal or political gain?

100 %

TexasCajun wrote:In light of everything that has happened and the aftermath, I wonder how many churches/church leadership will reevaluate their position on allowing their congregants to carry?

all the elders and deacons know i carry, plus i know one elder that carries also.... I dont see any thing different as one of the elders is my father-in-law and he has been talking about getting his CHL