I'm not a Tom Cruise fan but I have to admit that he did a good job in Valkrie. The movie stayed pretty close to the actual story but did dramatize a little at the end. What surprised me is that so many were in on the plot to kill Hitler but Hitler's people never found out about it until the plot was carried out.
How many thousands would have lived if the plot had succeeded? But the plotters did botch it.
It looks like a good movie, and I plan on seeing it. Another good movie is Gran Torino. I think that was the first movie I've been to where most of the audience applauded at the end.
Thank you so much! I'll have to see if I can find myself one of those mugs ;) I'm up for the challenge of being a Navy wife. Of course I will have a pretty fantastic sailor by my side :)
There are reports of gun and ammunition sales being up. Not surprising as the best thing for the shooting industry and the NRA is a Democrat in the White House. Unknown to most of the general public was the fact that during the “assault” weapons ban under the Clinton Administration the price of those “banned” guns still legal to be purchased tripled in value. Further, ammunition was being bought by the case lot. With the election of Obama and the Dems gaining power in Congress the winds of gun control are blowing again. Gun control will not work in this nation.
Firstly, as a crime prevention measure, most gun control politician’s ignorance of firearms is only exceeded by their naïve view of criminals. No matter what laws are passed, criminals will always obtain the tools necessary to accomplish their crimes. In other words, as England with its stringent gun laws has learned but won’t admit, there is a gun for every criminal that wants one.
Secondly, the government has no way of knowing where all the guns are. Since 1968 we have had quasi registration in the form of filling out the mandatory federal paperwork when a gun is sold. However, that only applies to gun dealers and only those guns sold after 1968. Millions of guns have changed owners perhaps multiple times making them impossible to trace and a lot of gun owners believe that what the government doesn’t know, they don’t need to know. It is estimated that there are over 200,000,000 firearms in private hands in this nation. To use a tired expression, “do the math“.
I think it's not that criminals will respect the gun ban (they won't). Rather, if gun ownership is banned, then every time someone has a gun, the police will know they are a criminal and be able to act accordingly. Now, some folks are permitted to have guns, so police can't just assume they are criminals. ;-)
Yeah, what about those guns that have been passed down in the family. We have some of that kind. Congress is not made up of real people in touch with the real people. :-)
Re:meditationis It'll be so nice to know we're being robbed by criminals, since they'll have guns. It'll be so sad to know that and not be able to defend ourselves.
A man with a gun is a citizen, a man without a gun is a subject. Thing is, Christians have to obey the law regardless of whether or not the government has any way of enforcing it. If Caesar passes a law requiring Amerikans to turn their guns over, they have to do it.
Yeah, I don't know what they're thinking. If guns are banned, the criminals will still find ways to obtain them. But the law abiding citizens who now have a hidden weapon permit and can intervene when needed will be gone, and we will be completely defenseless. Comforting...
I often have difficulty with the church “laws” and regulations based on one or a few verses without consideration of other verses that may deal with the same subject. I would like to offer an example. Understand that my experience with brethren may not have been the same as yours. Further, I believe the Bible serves as its own best commentary.
In Matthew 5:33-37 Jesus said:
34 But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God,
35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
36 And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black.
37 Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from evil.
Some of our brethren and even those in the denominations taught that this meant one could not hold up their hand and swear in a court of law. In some oaths the swearee was allowed to say “I affirm” to avoid this “violation” of scripture. But here is the problem.
Matthew 26:62-65
62 And the high priest arose and said to Him, "Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?"
63 But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, "I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!"
64 Jesus said to him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven."
Here Jesus remained silent until the high priest placed Him under oath, the oath of the temple “by the living God“. Jesus did not refuse the oath but after given it, answered the high priest’s question. It would seem obvious that brethren basing the above hard and fast conclusion on Jesus’ statement in Matt. 5 would establish a contradiction. I am sure we can all agree that Jesus did not contradict Himself and that by the inclusion of other scriptures have a better understanding of what Jesus meant in Matt 5.
Good song. 1972, what a good year. I'm of the 70's.
Now if you keep up all this positive stuff about Sarah Palin you are going to owe your wife a walk on the beach!
