O'Malley is Pissed.

[oldpink]

Well said.

Bottom line: This pastor/legislator was directly responsible for legislation that made it illegal for anyone in his congregation to have a gun that could have been used to protect themselves from the one guy to whom said legislation meant nothing.
He has no responsibility whatsoever for the evil in the heart of Shooter Boy, but his actions left his flock defenseless.
An example of a church that wasn't a "Gun-Free Zone" - Gunman killed after opening fire at church - CNN.com

 

[Alpo]

I provided that same link yesterday, so I'm familiar with that situation.

I carry a gun everywhere, but I find no issue with a church or synagogue that holds differently. Blame rests solely on the shooter.

 

[BugI02]

Had he not died in the attack, and it had been some other pastor's congregation who the sick b-d shot down, would you have laid any of the blame at the feet of SC legislators who helped ensure that, by law, churches are GFZs?

The magical thinking about GFZs was put to the test, and failed. The law did not protect him. Certainly that is a noteworthy observation?

And he was willing to live under the law he created (which was an infringement on the 2d A). That too is noteworthy.


Saying that he was in part responsible for making his church vulnerable is consistent with every single thread on INGO, where people have observed that State and federal GFZs do not protect people. When legislators pass such laws, they are responsible in part for the harm that comes to their law-abiding constituents.



Again, he didn't deserve to die.

But it was an ill-conceived law, and has now directly been proven to be of no effect in preventing 'gun violence' in his house of worship.

Absolutely. Rep inbound. Note once again cowardly shooter specifically chooses a GFZ. He wouldn't pick a popular Charleston night club because he would have got his "Last Rhodesian' a** shot up.

 

[Cygnus]

Had he not died in the attack, and it had been some other pastor's congregation who the sick b-d shot down, would you have laid any of the blame at the feet of SC legislators who helped ensure that, by law, churches are GFZs?

The magical thinking about GFZs was put to the test, and failed. The law did not protect him. Certainly that is a noteworthy observation?

And he was willing to live under the law he created (which was an infringement on the 2d A). That too is noteworthy.


Saying that he was in part responsible for making his church vulnerable is consistent with every single thread on INGO, where people have observed that State and federal GFZs do not protect people. When legislators pass such laws, they are responsible in part for the harm that comes to their law-abiding constituents.



Again, he didn't deserve to die.

But it was an ill-conceived law, and has now directly been proven to be of no effect in preventing 'gun violence' in his house of worship.

I understand your point here. I don't really disagree with it.
I do think think your point is a bit more metphysical/abstract but I get it. I think we agree on the direct responsability. I do think that this could be a point hwere GFZ's are brought into the the discussion.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

<<<<<<< Baffled how this has become about the preacher, and not the POS murderer.

Because the preacher was a member of the South Carolina legislature that is responsible for the GFZ which provided the soil for these murders to bloom.

However, controlling Black churches is a priority of the white members of the South Carolina legislature given the state's history.

Link provides some history into why things like Chuch GFZs are required in South Carolina and much of the South: Clementa C. Pinckney (1973-2015), Pastor of Mother Emanuel A.M.E. in Charleston, SC | TGC

 

[SSGSAD]

I am very happy he is angry. I hope to keep him mad forever.

I just sent, a not so nice e mail !!!!!

 

[Iroquois]

Yeah, my pastor carries.....I also carry in church...Jesus himself said "sell your cloak and buy a sword ".... Jesus went to his death willingly, I have not read anything in that book that tells me I have to let some heathern kill me for no good reason.
This pastor had every right to disarm his flock inside his church. They had every right to worship elsewhere ....gun free zones are stupid. 9 martyrs doesn't change that.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Yeah, my pastor carries.....I also carry in church...Jesus himself said "sell your cloak and buy a sword ".... Jesus went to his death willingly, I have not read anything in that book that tells me I have to let some heathern kill me for no good reason.
This pastor had every right to disarm his flock inside his church. They had every right to worship elsewhere ....gun free zones are stupid. 9 martyrs doesn't change that.

Only if they left the state. The preacher by his legislative power via his other job, made it so ALL churches were GFZs. They would have to leave the state to worship in a church that allowed guns. Not exactly a reasonable choice.

 

[Cygnus]

No "without the religious leader's permission" clause in SC's?

 

[IndyDave1776]

No "without the religious leader's permission" clause in SC's?

As reported, there is no exemption. Apparently the good pastor did not want guns in this church, therefore no one should have them in any church, which is the only way to rationally explain the vote for the law.

 

[Iroquois]

Maybe now they'll get a clue and change the law. I feel bad for everyone in this church but the pastor.
And you don't have to worship in a church, you can gather in private homes. You just don't get the tax exemption.

 

[jgreiner]

Charles Cotton, an NRA board member made the idiotic statement to that effect.


NRA official blames pastor for Charleston church shooting - NY Daily News

That guy needs some sensitivity training to say the least.

Sometimes the truth is painful. But does that mean we should ignore it? He is right, any pastor that refuses to allow his flock to defend themselves, is guilty of making his church a far less safe place. Ours allows folks to carry.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

No, its not all about the preacher. That racist douchecanoe still holds most of the blame.

However the preacher, who was also a legislator, voted to make churches GFZs to the level us Hoosiers would equate to Post Offices, courthouses, and City/County buildings.

And its not the fault of the Preacher that he was killed. Thats still squarely on the racist a**hat's shoulders. However in his other life as a legislator he (in theory) had a hand in the neutering of his congregation's ability to deal with this specific type of threat. it is by his direct action as a legislator that nobody in that building could have defended themselves even if they had been so inclined. We cannot ignore that important fact.

I dont think anyone here thinks this gentleman deserves to die for that decision. I know I dont. But to ignore his culpability in the disarmament of parishioners across the state cannot be overlooked. Responsibilities are still responsibilities no matter how uncomfortable they may be.

Sums it up for me.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Sometimes the truth is painful. But does that mean we should ignore it? He is right, any pastor that refuses to allow his flock to defend themselves, is guilty of making his church a far less safe place. Ours allows folks to carry.

Mine too. In fact, they have a task force from the eldership with plans in place, rotations, sheepdogs always on the lookout every service. It's a heavy duty to carry the responsibility of safety and security of your flock, we take it seriously.

 

[EdC]

No "without the religious leader's permission" clause in SC's?

Yes, not strictly what I would call a GFZ:

S. C. Statutes SECTION 23-31-215. Issuance of permits
A permit issued pursuant to this section does not authorize a permit holder to carry a concealable weapon into a:

8) church or other established religious sanctuary unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body;

For all I know, someone might have been armed and for whatever could be multitude of reasons, didn't follow through. Possible, but I think its safe to presume that none of the victims had a firearm with them.

 

[Cygnus]

Yes, not strictly what I would call a GFZ:

S. C. Statutes SECTION 23-31-215. Issuance of permits
A permit issued pursuant to this section does not authorize a permit holder to carry a concealable weapon into a:

8) church or other established religious sanctuary unless express permission is given by the appropriate church official or governing body;

For all I know, someone might have been armed and for whatever could be multitude of reasons, didn't follow through. Possible, but I think its safe to presume that none of the victims had a firearm with them.

Interesting. That seems to directly contradict things mentioned earlier in the thread. The preacher murdered by *****boy was presented as having voted to restrict for all churches regardless of their wishes. Seem s he did leav ethe option. One which he did not choose to exercise. If your post is correct then what he voted for did give others the option.
Int er esting