USCCB weighs in on gun legislation
April 10, 2013
Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton, the chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, has weighed in on the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013, which is under consideration in the Senate.
“We ask you to support policies that: require effective and enforceable universal background checks for all gun purchases; and, establish a vigorous law that makes gun-trafficking a federal crime,” he said in an April 8 letter to senators. “Support provisions that: limit civilian access to high-capacity ammunition magazines; ban assault weapons.”
“I also urge you to resist amendments that would expand the use of minimum mandatory sentences as punishment for gun violations,” he continued.
Bishop Blaire’s letter mirrors the language of an “action alert” issued on April 2 by the USCCB’s Department of Justice, Peace and Human Development.
- Bishop Blaire Urges Senate To Support Policies That Reduce Gun Violence, Build Culture Of Life (USCCB)
- Full text of letter (USCCB)
- USCCB: lobby senators on behalf of assault-weapon ban, universal background checks (CWN, 4/3)
Posted by: nix898049 -
Apr. 11, 2013 5:41 PM ET USA
Would somebody please tell me what earthly good the USCCB does or has ever done?
Posted by: richardols3892 -
Apr. 11, 2013 10:46 AM ET USA
I'd point out to the poster who disapproves of the USCCB that the fault lies not with them, but with the gun lovers, the very "agenda-driven advocates of dangerous and misguided policies." How easily those people condemn our priests and bishops when their precious gun "rights" are challenged. BTW, a bishop's and a priest's vote is as valid as that of any other American. Love your guns, but love Jesus more!
Posted by: Gregory108 -
Apr. 11, 2013 2:04 AM ET USA
Does this say what I think it says? The bishop suggests a law-abiding citizen,trying to buy a gun should have a harder time, with background checks and with limitation of what he or she can buy? Meanwhile, a gun violator should not have at least minimum penalties assessed against him or her for violating gun laws. Maybe I'm not understanding it, but does he really support limiting the law-abiding citizen, but being easy on the criminal? If so,I'm surprised any lawmaker takes the USCCB seriously!
Posted by: unum -
Apr. 10, 2013 11:49 PM ET USA
Sorry, Bishop Blaire, but I won't work to advance the liberal progressive agenda ... and neither would Jesus. He knew how to "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's". Jesus would have been concerned about the mentally ill who are not helped a bit by the progressive gun control agenda. He would tell us, "Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me." The USCCB needs to put on the mind of Christ like Pope Francis.
Posted by: LACY -
Apr. 10, 2013 7:44 PM ET USA
So the good bishop knows how many rounds a gun should have, but doesn't know if the pro abortion catholic who holds public office and is complacent in the murder of 70,000,000 unborn should receive the Holy Communion .
Posted by: -
Apr. 10, 2013 7:36 PM ET USA
I did not know that our clergy as a whole were so knowledgeable in the use of firearms and school safety. I had thought that removing firearms from schools and rendering them soft targets for madmen with illegally possessed weapons was the problem. Silly me! Shall we now also put a sign on every rectory in America that says “Gun-Free Zone”? Then again, perhaps the USCCB simply delights in giving political cover to agenda-driven advocates of dangerous and misguided policies.
Posted by: Minnesota Mary -
Apr. 10, 2013 7:04 PM ET USA
Like Pat Buchanan said on "The World Over Live" with Raymond Arroyo the other night, Catholic bishops are making a mistake throwing their weight behind issues that are better left to the prudential judgment of the laity. When the "Man of Lawlessness" arrives on the scene, watch these bishops run for cover. And who will protect them?
Posted by: -
Apr. 10, 2013 12:01 PM ET USA
I suppose that in the almost 2000 year history of the church, many many silly men have served as bishop, so why should this guy be a surprise?