Evacuated

The Peacemaker, also called the Frontier, the Model P, and the Equalizer was firstly widely used by the army. During the mid-1860Â’s the army was looking to replace their slow and fragile percussion pistols, so they tested the .44-caliber Colt revolver, which they rejected for being robust and unreliable. However, during the 1870Â’s William Mason and Charles Brinckerhoff designed and created the .45-caliber centerfire Colt Single Action Army. The army immediately recognized the gunÂ’s potential: they used it as their official service weapon until the World War II.

So what?....Collateral damage maybe, but the threat is gawn.....isn't it?

You didn't use your spell-checker again!!!!!

"Several appropriate applications"....@JWInsider
I like this one:
Regardless of any homespun ideas and highfalutin' aspirations held by the religious leaders of Jesus day, the basic "denarius" wage they had agreed with the master of the vineyard was that described early on in the history of the "vineyard" at Exodus 19:5-6:
"Now if you will strictly obey my voice and keep my covenant, you will certainly become my special property out of all peoples, for the whole earth belongs to me. You will become to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ 
To realise this would involve far more than the miserable attempt they made of justifying themselves as righteous by keeping a set of self-invented legal interpretations  that had the effect of obsoleting the instructions given by the master. "you make the word of God invalid by your tradition" Mk.7:13.
Peter made it clear that another group would become recepients of that "denarius" at 1Pet.2:9:
"But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation",.
In speaking to his fellow anointed Christians (spritual Israelites), Peter showed the "denarius" to include the responsibility to: "declare abroad the excellencies” of the One who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light".
Of course there was no way that the religious hypocrites who had engineered the death of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:36) would take any delight in this "denarius". In reality, it would include accepting the one who they had wilfully murdered to be their King & High Priest, (Acts 2:36), submitting to water baptism in his name, (Acts 2:38.) And then there was his ransom sacrifice. This served  as the only genuine means of obtaining a "righteous"standing before God, invalidating their fake certifications. They would have to acknowledge that they had been duped into the engineering of the payment of this ransom, (Acts 5:30). Additionally, with submission to Christ's role as head of the Christian congregation (spiritual Israel), they would be required to testify publicly to all of this in taking the message of the "kingdom" to the entire inhabited earth. (Matt.28:18-20).
To make matters worse, they would have to accept the same "denarius", all shoulder-to-shoulder, as that paid to a rag-tag group of "unlettered and ordinary", "accursed" ones, late arrivals on the scene, with no pedigree or credentials! In fact, they would have even to submit to one of these as holding the "keys to the kingdom.....!!!!   
On the positive side, some of these 'full-day' workers were quite happy to accept this same "denarius", along with the 11th hour workers, as recorded at Acts 6:7:
"Consequently, the word of God continued to spread, and the number of the disciples kept multiplying very much in Jerusalem; and a large crowd of priests began to be obedient to the faith."

Wow! Where did you get this statistic from???

That's interesting. Where did you hear that? Do you have the reference?
Yes indeed. Revelation 22:18-19.
I wonder if the Catholic Church has noted that text as well?

My experience of the vast majority of disfellowshipped ones who are courageous and humble enough to attend the Memorial is that they are well appraised of their position and do their best to avoid any embarrassing interaction.
 

My experience of the vast majority of disfellowshipped ones who are courageous and humble enough to attend the Memorial is that they are well appraised of their position and do their best to avoid any embarrassing interaction.
 

Some people think the first description of a probable dinosaur fossil bone discovery can be found in a book written around 300 AD by the Chinese scholar Chang Qu.  He describes the finding of “dragon bones” at Wucheng, in what is now Sichuan Province (south-western China).

Exaggeration is a feature of this area of debate and (for me) has no place in informed discussion on such a serious matter.
I haven't seen any analysis on the religious persuasion of child abusers and agree that some apostates contribute to fueling the biased reporting on the religious identity of child abusers who are or may have been connected at some time with Jehovah's Witnesses.
I recognise that the reporting on the religious identity of child abusers amongst religions other than Jehovah's Witnesses is biased toward "clergy" or other religious officials. However, in view of their imaginary office, I still view them just as members. Obviously, a cursory look at the vast numbers of reported child abuse cases indicates that the proportion of non-clerical membership of various religious groups engaging in this crime must be higher than commonly perceived.
And as you have now explained that your "never" means "rarely", I hold to my view.
 
21 Nov 2007 JW Press release.pdf

Actually this is a valid point but is also an overstatement. The word "never" exaggerates. The Roman Catholic church, as an example, has received considerable publicity over this matter, albeit with a focus on clergy crime. 
This topic provokes strong reactions wherever it is raised, not least because it seems to be one of the final frontiers of morality left in this broken system. Many Jehovah's Witnesses have little detailed knowledge of the topic from a media perspective, both because of it's extreme distastefulness as well as the aforementioned negative media bias with it's apostate links.
It is difficult to get a rational grasp on the matter, even more so on the real facts behind what appears in the media. I have found the factual element of what has been posted on this forum to be very useful along with links to information sources. The various viewpoints expressed, including those I do not share, have been enlightening. 
In field ministry recently, I met the director of a national mental health organisation. He is known for having very strong and negative views on Jehovah's Witnesses in general, and particularly in the area of handling child abuse. He is not averse to loudly disputing with Witnesses on the street, hailing facts and figures to support his views to such an extent that most cannot engage with him. The information I had gleaned from postings here was very useful, and I was able have have a fact-driven conversation with this vociferous man, with an insight into his pattern of thinking. At least the level of emotion  and speech volume was reduced, and I think that being able to engage rationally and factually was a factor in that. A position held in ignorance of facts in an emotional exchange is guaranteed to fuel an angry reaction.
Hopefully, this topic will generate a useful contribution.

This subject is unlikely to subside.
@AnneOMaly has related that "there is a campaign to have the UK JWs' child abuse allegation procedures officially investigated due to failings that have come to light in high profile cases over the past few years." This thread was started. due to publicity around the issue. The Times has reported on the campaign, (although a subscription is required to get the full account).
The campaign includes pressure to include the matter in the investigation, currently in the UK, of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which has commenced hearings despite an extremely shaky start.  https://www.iicsa.org.uk/investigations.
So with this backdrop, don't miss an enlightening BBC drama looking at a particular series of incidents in Rochdale, UK. This illustrates some context around this disgraceful crime, and provides insight regarding the failings of institutional response, highlighting something of the general social and institutional environment that all, including Jehovah's Witnesses, find themselves within, particularly in the UK.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08r8pvh/three-girls-series-1-episode-1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08r8s12/three-girls-series-1-episode-2
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b08r8vp5/three-girls-series-1-episode-3
As these are time limited links, the drama is also available on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_V35N7SgUU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gglEX3LdFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILMaglVyU4c
 

35       Q.   And do you see yourselves as Jehovah God's         
36       spokespeople on earth?         
37       A.   That I think would seem to be quite presumptuous to         
38       say that we are the only spokesperson that God is using.         
39       The scriptures clearly show that someone can act in harmony         
40       with God's spirit in giving comfort and help in the         
41       congregations, but if I could just clarify a little, going         
42       back to Matthew 24, clearly, Jesus said that in the last         
43       days ‐ and Jehovah's Witnesses believe these are the last         
44       days ‐ there would be a slave, a group of persons who would        
 45       have responsibility to care for the spiritual food.  So in         
46       that respect, we view ourselves as trying to fulfil that         
47       role.

Great minds...................................................

Great minds...................................................

Thinking about this further from a legal perspective, it was a lawyer who stated (Rom.2:14-15):
"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves.  They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused."
Wouldn't this seem to add a perspective to the obvious connection between various ancient legal codes?

Thinking about this further from a legal perspective, it was a lawyer who stated (Rom.2:14-15):
"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves.  They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused."
Wouldn't this seem to add a perspective to the obvious connection between various ancient legal codes?

Good points and good questions, too. I am just working through some of this material myself. Last fall, I clicked a few pages onto my iPhone of several books to check out in full at a later time. These included Wright's (2009) "Inventing God's Law - How the Covenant Code of the Bible Used and Revised the Laws of Hammurabi." The book is partially previewed on Google Books. Some of the other pages of material are only on my iPhone, though. I'm not planning to buy the book. It's at several libraries.
I should say that the book appears to break new ground on tying the Mosaic Law (he abbreviates CC, for Covenant Code) to the Laws of Hammurabi (he abbreviates LH). But a book that breaks new ground is also, in part, only one voice against several. So it would be good to acknowledge a few of the other major views about the relationship between CC and LH. Note, too, that LH becomes a kind of shorthand not just for the Laws of Hammurabi exclusively, but also the Laws of Eshnunna and other similar sets of laws with a relationship to LH.
One point is that we don't really know the exact dates of either the LH or exactly when the last adjustment was made to the CC either. Another point is that we should expect similarities in both oral traditions, legal needs, and legal practice with respect to the lifestyle of Semitic and Mesopotamian nations. All had similar issues with respect to slavery, marriage, divorce, murder, rape, theft, land, livestock, accidents, etc.. As Wright himself mentions:
For example, the Covenant Code, the Laws of Hammurabi, the Laws of Eshnunna, and the Roman Twelve Tables, all have burglary laws that speak about killing a burglar (see chapter 9). These cannot all be related by literary influence. Several of the other points made in comparison to the view of other scholars are not applicable to a faith-based view of the scriptures (textual redaction theories, etc.).
Wright makes a distinction between the "do this/do that" (apodictic) laws, and the "if this...then that"(casuistic) laws, and this distinction is useful for his thesis. But you are apparently right, @Gone Fishing, that the 10 commandments themselves stand outside these sets of laws as unique. 

Very interesting, but not alarming. I am sure Moses Egyptian education would have exposed him to Hammurabi's code as well as whatever system existed in Egypt (although apparently it is not so clearly preseved for us as the Mesopotamian). There would be no need to "reinvent the wheel" in setting out a form and structure for a law code to govern the affairs of a nation at that time, would there?
I believe the only part of the Mosaic Law actually written by a non-human agency is the decalogue? Is there a similar listing of this nature in the Hammurabi code? 
Also, is there a similar comparison chart on sanctions? And how about matters of hygiene? 
I have just found a copy of the Code of Hammurabi in a 2nd hand book shop ( I love those places). Time to dust it off methinks!
 

Very interesting, but not alarming. I am sure Moses Egyptian education would have exposed him to Hammurabi's code as well as whatever system existed in Egypt (although apparently it is not so clearly preseved for us as the Mesopotamian). There would be no need to "reinvent the wheel" in setting out a form and structure for a law code to govern the affairs of a nation at that time, would there?
I believe the only part of the Mosaic Law actually written by a non-human agency is the decalogue? Is there a similar listing of this nature in the Hammurabi code? 
Also, is there a similar comparison chart on sanctions? And how about matters of hygiene? 
I have just found a copy of the Code of Hammurabi in a 2nd hand book shop ( I love those places). Time to dust it off methinks!
 

*** w14 8/15 p. 10 par. 19 What Is the Role of Women in Jehovah’s Purpose? ***
The small group of Bible Students has grown to some 8,000,000 Witnesses of Jehovah today (2015). More than 11,000,000 other individuals show interest in the Bible and our work by attending the annual Memorial of Jesus’ death. In most lands, the majority of those present are women. Also, women make up the greater number of over 1,000,000 full-time Kingdom proclaimers worldwide. God has indeed granted faithful women the privilege of participating in the fulfillment of the psalmist’s words: “Jehovah gives the command; the women proclaiming the good news are a large army.”—Ps. 68:11.
This is interesting because it shows that the potential for increase in the numbers of witnesses at present is also mostly female. However, I am sure it will even out somewhat in the resurrection.
I wonder what the male/female ratio on this forum is? Participation is likely majority female hands down with almost 11% of total postings by @Queen Esther alone.

Nice to see you commenting again @Gone Fishing 

I agree with the comment by JWI on the speculative nature of scenarios in connection with the cities of refuge. I haven't investigated cities of refuge in a historical context simply because reliable information seems rather scant.
Apart from the setting out the provision in Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua,, there doesn't appear to be any reference to the use of the provision in the Hebrew Scriptures, like for example, the cameo appearance of Ruth with reference to the provision of "levirate" marriage.
There is a lot of what I term as higher-critical gobbledegook on the matter, but really only of some academic interest (to me). Perhaps, rather like the Sabbath Year and Jubilee provisions, there was little adherence to the legislated procedure over the years. (Compare Jer.2:34 "Even your skirts are stained with the blood of the innocent poor ones, though I did not find them in the act of breaking in")
Anyway, with regard to TTH's comment, this manslayer, self assessesed as "guiltless", has rather missed the point. Where human blood has been shed there is no "guiltlessness" as the basis for the Mosaic provision makes clear at Genesis 9:5-6. Anyone of that opinion was not thinking in harmony with Jehovah God's view of the matter of shedding human blood in any circumstance, and would be putting themselves greatly at risk of an execution of judgement without mercy.

I agree with the comment by JWI on the speculative nature of scenarios in connection with the cities of refuge. I haven't investigated cities of refuge in a historical context simply because reliable information seems rather scant.
Apart from the setting out the provision in Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua,, there doesn't appear to be any reference to the use of the provision in the Hebrew Scriptures, like for example, the cameo appearance of Ruth with reference to the provision of "levirate" marriage.
There is a lot of what I term as higher-critical gobbledegook on the matter, but really only of some academic interest (to me). Perhaps, rather like the Sabbath Year and Jubilee provisions, there was little adherence to the legislated procedure over the years. (Compare Jer.2:34 "Even your skirts are stained with the blood of the innocent poor ones, though I did not find them in the act of breaking in")
Anyway, with regard to TTH's comment, this manslayer, self assessesed as "guiltless", has rather missed the point. Where human blood has been shed there is no "guiltlessness" as the basis for the Mosaic provision makes clear at Genesis 9:5-6. Anyone of that opinion was not thinking in harmony with Jehovah God's view of the matter of shedding human blood in any circumstance, and would be putting themselves greatly at risk of an execution of judgement without mercy.

I agree with the comment by JWI on the speculative nature of scenarios in connection with the cities of refuge. I haven't investigated cities of refuge in a historical context simply because reliable information seems rather scant.
Apart from the setting out the provision in Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua,, there doesn't appear to be any reference to the use of the provision in the Hebrew Scriptures, like for example, the cameo appearance of Ruth with reference to the provision of "levirate" marriage.
There is a lot of what I term as higher-critical gobbledegook on the matter, but really only of some academic interest (to me). Perhaps, rather like the Sabbath Year and Jubilee provisions, there was little adherence to the legislated procedure over the years. (Compare Jer.2:34 "Even your skirts are stained with the blood of the innocent poor ones, though I did not find them in the act of breaking in")
Anyway, with regard to TTH's comment, this manslayer, self assessesed as "guiltless", has rather missed the point. Where human blood has been shed there is no "guiltlessness" as the basis for the Mosaic provision makes clear at Genesis 9:5-6. Anyone of that opinion was not thinking in harmony with Jehovah God's view of the matter of shedding human blood in any circumstance, and would be putting themselves greatly at risk of an execution of judgement without mercy.