NeuroTypical

Your research leaves a little to be desired, HG. Glocks have three different safties. You mentioned the trigger safety, there is also the firing pin safety and the "drop safety" where the trigger bar stays guided along the safety ramp that makes firing impossible unless something is pulling the trigger. Your assumptions about what makes a gun safe also needs some work. External safeties, the little switches that say "safe" and "fire", are only as useful as a shooter's head can make it. But if you're right, I'm sure you'll have no problem finding the study that says Glocks are involved in more accidental shootings per 1000 than other handguns. Since you're doing all this heavy research and all. Would you mind posting the link when you find it? Both my wife and I own Glocks. I also did a bit of research too once, and I gained the opinion that they're among some of the safest, highest quality firearms on the planet. I'd sure like to know if that's not the case, but I need more than a bunch of exclamation points and accusations of neanderthal gunsmithing by some random guy on the internet. Perhaps you could educate us here - when someone accidentally shoots themselves with something that isn't a Glock, who's fault is it?

I'm just seeing world-class business savvy, and little else here. Interesting to consider the similarities and differences between Marriott and the Chick-Fil-A guy: 1. Both personally support the traditional institution of marriage, and are on record with pretty clear statements. 2. Both run (however that is correctly worded) companies that seek to foster atmospheres of inclusion and diversity, both for employees and customers. One goes about quietly supporting organizations that advocate traditional marriage. He's discovered and spotlighted (probably not his idea), and run through the media ringer. People think about Chick-Fil-A in polarized terms - love 'em or hate 'em. The other goes about loudly claiming the spotlight focusing on #2, while still reminding everyone of #1 in ways that hit paragraph nine of stories. People think about marriott in pretty polarized ways too - love 'em or hate 'em.

They did a broadcast of a temple dedication in various stake centers. I remember he gave comments on the temple and it's history, then he said something like "So now I'm going to offer the dedicatory prayer, so bow your heads and close your eyes!" It's difficult to describe - he captured the sternness of a slightly annoyed primary president, and combined it with his sparkling eye and loving good humor. I miss him.

I'm not opposed to it, except that we do so dang much with the quarter-of-a-percent of the population serving now, I'm afraid we'd start looking for trouble if that rose to five percent.

Agree completely.As I idly think about the people I know personally, three have lost fingers via power tools, maybe a dozen have been injured in car accidents, a few have been injured during military service, at least three fatal car accidents, and three suicides (one drugs, two gun). I suppose I can see where you're coming from - we live on a planet full of potentially dangerous stuff.

Hi brianhess, A repentant heart and transparent honesty are two indications that someone is on the right track. This is the only thing from your post that I or my wife can't personally identify with on some level. You don't need to go into any details here, but it sounds like there may be something here that may be standing in the way of you progressing. Such matters can be tricky, and what "resolved" looks like may or may not be apparent right now. But I can testify that just about every dumb thing a human being can do to himself or someone else, can be repented of, resolved, and forgiven by the Lord, here in this life.As you consider temple matters, maybe consider one of the questions you'll be asked in the Temple Recommend interview: "Have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?"

Mistyped - fixed. (But yeah, we all must be concerned about the third sphere.)

I can't really agree with the use of the word "danger" here.Consider: "If there are keys and gas, then anyone within the vicinity of a car is in danger." "If there are kitchen knives, then anyone within throwing distance of the kitchen is in danger." "If there is electricity, then anyone within the vicinity of an electrical outlet is in danger." Depending on who is estimating, there are around two-hundred and seventy million privately owned firearms. That's 88 firearms for every 100 people. A portion of these are being carried around legally by citizens - around six million citizens. You'd think if "anyone within the vicinity of a discharge" was in danger, we'd here about unintentional shootings more. As things stand now, (for example), about as many children die each year in gun accidents as by pulling TVs down on top of themselves. Yes, the US has a problem with gun violence, but it's not "anyone within the vicinity of a discharge" who gets shot - it's the people who get intentionally shot. Around six million conceal-carry permit holders. Consider - you're surrounded by them pretty much wherever you go. They've got live ammo in their firearms. You can't see them because the guns are concealed. But you don't seem to think you're in danger until you can see the weapon? How come? Although I think open carry people are mostly immature bratty teenagers, I'm in more danger from the bratty teenager behind the wheel of a car.

Yeah, open carry folks are mostly a bunch of immature teenagers that make the rest of us look bad. I also agree with this:

We all have two spheres in our lives. The first, is our sphere of concern. Basically, we draw a big circle, and everything that falls within the circle, is something we care about or are concerned about. This can be a very big circle, as we tend to care about starving children in Africa, and the environment, as well as our in-laws children. The second circle, is our sphere of influence. Here we draw a circle, and everything that falls within the circle is something we actually have power to sway, influence, even control. This, unfortunately, pretty much always is a smaller circle. It has you in it, and probably your spouse and children to a certain extent, friends who value your input, your vote, people within your stewardship, and some other things and people. Anyway, people can get very frustrated when something in their sphere of concern needs something, and they can't do anything about it. But the deal is - we can make wise efforts to make our sphere of influence larger. But we can only make efforts - they don't always work. The priesthood is something that lives in the sphere of influence - where priesthood holders can help and serve and whatnot, but only if they offer and someone accepts that influence. Friends and in-laws can either be in this circle or out of it, again, depending on how you go about offering, and whether they are receptive or not. They write books on how to expand your circle of influence. I'm hardly an expert at it, and can't advise much. But I do know that when someone falls outside of your circle of influence, and you desparately want them to be inside, it can be a very difficult and frustrating state of affairs. Thinking about things in this way sometimes helps me clarify what my role actually is. It helps me understand the actions I can/should, and can't/shouldn't take, and ultimately helps me be less frustrated when something is in my sphere of concern, but outside my sphere of influence.

Well, it's a conceal-carry firearms permit, not a "gun permit". And no, it's not any gun - only handguns that are legal (no full-auto machine guns, no sawed-off shotguns, etc.) And no, you don't get a carry permit for a gun, you get a permit for a person. Yes. It's sort of a beefed-up reciprocity law. If you live in California and can't carry legally, but you travel extensively and want to carry where it's legal, you get a Utah permit that makes it legal. What's the problem? I know a few truckers and traveling sales reps and whatnot who are happy these programs are in place. I've idly thought of getting a UT permit, even though I live in CO. But there's not much point of me doing so, because the list of states that recognize my CO permit, are pretty much the same states that recognize a UT permit. [Picturing hoardes of armed drunk cowboys from Wyoming lined up at the state border, just waiting to pour into your neighborhood? Law-abiding enough to take training courses and pay fees and get fingerprinted, but law-breaking enough to bring mayhem and horribleness to UT.] Col. Cooper has better information.

You have no kids, right? That is a very good thing. Advice: For the love of pete, do not drag innocent kids into this mess. Wait until you have a year or two on planet earth as a stable, mature, no-longer-out-of-control-destructive man. Your marriage may or may not last. Do NOT bring kids into it as a way of staying together.

http://www.pensacolafishingforum.com/attachments/f22/68576d1356023071t-genius-gun-control-retards-zombie-zone-jpg

Hi Irock! Kudos for wanting to go into important things with your eyes wide open. Our church history is fascinating and often overwhelming. Plenty of stories of fallible man of beeing fallible and human. I spent around a decade delving into criticisms of my faith and it's members, and seeing if we had answers, and what they were, and if I found them acceptable. For the most part, we do have answers/explanations/additional relevant context for just about every single thing that gave me pause, including the two you mention. FAIR is a good place to go to see what we have to say about things, although the search function isn't the greatest. FARMS, aka the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship - Home is another good place, with great scholarly reviews of books going back over a decade. But they've got a pretty good search function on their website. (One trick is to document the source of the particular criticism troubling you, and search for reviews of that source.) But at the end of the day, the only good reason to be a Mormon, is you believe God wants you to be one. You can't reach that conclusion by looking at our apologetics, you can only get there through prayer and direct communication with your Father in Heaven. The Book of Mormon tells you how to go about doing that. Happy searching!

Maybe clever and certainly vile, but it's basically the same old "someone you don't know shows up saying you need to give them money" deal. There's nothing interesting or new about preying on people's fears and ignorance. Hey everybody on the planet - if someone you don't know shows up and says you owe them money, they might be scamming you. It doesn't matter if it's a popup pretending to be law enforcement, or the toner guy calling your office demanding payment for a printer you don't have, or a guy from Zimbabwe telling you that your $200 will get you millions, or your distant aquaintance who contacts you via Facebook to say they're trapped in Heathrow airport, or the guy you just hit in the parking lot demanding a hundred bucks or he'll sue, or an interesting job opportunity that requires you to 'buy in', or the guy who saw your car ad and runs a consignment shop and is certain he can find a buyer for a thousand more than you're asking, or anything else. Think humans - does whatever you're looking at involve you taking money from you, and putting it at them? Then it might be a scam. No really.

Columbine changed the way police responds to shootings. Before Columbine, training and procedure was "stay put and call for reinforcements". After Columbine, it's all about rapidly engaging the shooter even if there's just two of you, because just disrupting can stop the body count from growing. And people try shootings in and out of gun-free zones. It's just that they get to kill many more people in a zone than out of one. (It makes me sad to say it, but today's shooting at the Texas college? Gun-free zone.)

Politicians need to be seen as 'doing something'. Legislators can only legislate - it's the only thing they can do. Executives have to lead - they can't legislate - so they need to be seen as leading or proposing legislation. *shrug*

I have two girls. I do everything I can to have my gun only in one of two places - either locked away in our combination-lock gun safe, or safely strapped to me in it's holster. A keyed safe isn't a good idea in my opinion - kids will find the key.My wife and I have exposed our kids to guns from a young age. They've been allowed to handle them, I've answered every question they have. I got them a little pink .22 single shot rifle, and told them I'd take them shooting as soon as they could safely operate it. It took a year or two before they were both ready, then I took them both separately, and we had a fun afternoon picnic of learning safe handling and plinking at cans. Lily, just a thought, but if you ever tire of living with such fear of guns, you could probably get rid of that fear if you learned about them from a responsible knowledgeable person, and learned to safely handle one. Not sure what state you're in, but I'm guessing you could probably find an NRA first-time shooter class pretty easily. You wouldn't need to buy one or become a gun-nut like me or anything - I'm just making the suggestion as a way of getting over your upset stomach and whatnot.

When my wife works with alcoholics, she uses a disposable cell phone with a disposable phone number. She's switched cell phones more than once. Here's what she's willing to do: * Person comes to her with hard luck story. * She helps person find resources and help. * She is willing to put up with late night phone calls, 3am crisis help, favors, whatever it takes - as long as the person is PROVING they're taking advantages of the help and resources and favors. * Once the person starts missing meetings, or deviates from the agreed plan more than once or twice, then my wife says goodbye, and if necessary, ditches the cell phone. Because for every one person who genuinely needs and accepts help and gets better, there are twenty people who basically live lives of constant promise-breaking and lying about needs. These people stay broken - it is their 'normal'. These folks move leechlike from host to host, bleeding them dry one body at a time before moving on to the next host. It's hard when you know and love one of these people. But it's important to know what help looks like, and what justifying or enabling destructive nonsense looks like. Morningstar, people who are friends with alcoholics are very, very familiar with your story. I can't begin to number the times I've heard the exact same story. One lady my wife was working with decided she liked staying drunk more, so my wife said goodbye, and then the lady found my phone number and started calling me at 3am. It takes about 3 weeks of silence, and then two months later it will start up again requiring more silence, and then one last time maybe 6-12 months after that. Then they start to get the hint. If they threaten suicide, you threaten to call the police. If they threaten to go driving if you won't help or listen, you threaten to call the police. If they call you from the ER because 'you wouldn't help', call whatever party has stewardship over them and tattle on them. If they are supposedly grown adults, then yeah, it just takes being strong.

Hi Aria and welcome back.

Yep - he was getting a little prideful there, one of Joseph's admitted faults. I hope I can live a life where my faults are buried on page 408 of volume 6 of some set of books. I'm wondering if you could put in words why this quote makes you doubt the truthfulness of the book of Mormon or Joseph Smith's role as prophet. Do you think a prophet is perfect?

Ok - hang on a minute. Exactly how do you know this? Are you one of the daughters? Was there ever a formal accusation or a trial? Was he ever arrested? There are times when people know things about someone, and there are times when there's gossip and heresay and false accusations. How do you know one way or the other? So wait - I'm still confused. When was he in seminary? Before his 18 month prison sentence or after? What charge was he convicted of?I want to make sure I'm understanding correctly. Is this the sequence of events? 1. Guy allegedly molests daughters 20 years ago. Nobody did anything about it, but somehow everyone "knows" about it. 2. Guy goes on to be active in church and hold callings, including seminary. 3. Guy is convicted of molesting his 7 yr old granddaughter and serves 18 months in prison. 4. Guy is coming back, and you are worried he'll be around kids again. Is that everything in the right order? If so, you should not have to worry about him having a calling in leadership or with the youth, because of his conviction.

Wait - what? You mean after he got out of prison, for sexual abuse of a child, he served in seminary? As in, seminary around the youth? Are those the facts?Something is very wrong here if those are the facts.

Forcing anti-gun teachers to endure firearms training is a horrible idea. Even worse would be demanding they actually carry a firearm. Allowing interested teachers to get a permit and carry a firearm is an absolutely wonderful idea. And it can be done without cost to the govt - just let teachers go get themselves certified and bring their own guns. Honestly, eliminating gun-free-zones on govt property like schools would go far to eliminate large body count mass-shootings on those properties.

It's a mistake. Business relationships aren't about 'helping out'.