0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
Zardoz
 
  4  
Reply Thu 15 Feb, 2018 09:08 pm
The Republicans have blocked every attempt to stop the school shooting in America. We can have a no-fly list for terrorist that prohibits them from flying but when the Democrats tried to make sure that terrorists could not buy semi-automatics weapons of war the Republicans put their foot down and said absolutely not. Who would want guns sold to known terrorists? The Republicans. The reason we should sell semi-automatic weapons to terrorist according to the Republicans is that a mistake might be made and someone accidently put on the list who is not a terrorist and the NRA would miss out on a gun sale. The Republicans make a big deal out of the shootings be caused by the mentally ill. So, you would think if a regulation was put in place made to keep the certified mentally ill from buying weapons of mass destruction that they would at least the Republicans would agree to that. Not a chance these people were those that were drawing social security disability checks for mental illness. The checks went to guardians because their mental illness was so severe they were not able to handle their own money but the NRA wants them to have guns. Obama had made the regulation while in office and Trump killed the regulation as soon as he took office. When Trump tells the public, he is trying to stop the mentally ill from getting guns don’t judge him by his words judge him by his actions.

Trump was making a big deal blaming mental illness but his budget eliminates the Medicaid that pays for the 50% of the treatment of mental illness in America. Trump has said only the able bodied that work will be eligible for Medicaid. He didn’t say anything about the sound of mind. Most people with mental illnesses can’t hold a jog so the streets will be full of people who can’t get their medication but on the brightside they will have plenty of guns the NRA will be thrilled. Bullet proof vest will be required for students apparel in the brave new Republican world.

They showed the picture of the shooter in FL and said here is the face of evil but that is not true the real faces of evil is all the Republicans in congress who have taken the money soaked with the blood of American’s children to block anything from being done to stop the gun violence. Trump got his speech written for him by NRA members and gave it for the third time. Rubio tried to point to a tightening up on background checks in military as a major Republican accomplishment but it was stalled in the senate. Paul Ryan tried to say nothing can be done because the weapons of mass destruction already on the street would be grandfathered. That is absurd when Marijuana was outlawed if you had a farm raising it you were not grandfathered. If you had a moonshine still before it was made illegal you were not grandfathered. The guns could be bought back. When an older generation watched as the Thompson machine guns were used to commit mass murder they were banned not grandfathered and mass murders came to an end for a generation.

Trump and the NRA create a straw man to attack. They always say mentally ill but not one of the mass murders I know of has been found innocent because of mental illness. Even with this shooter saying he wanted to be a professional school shooter he stills has the right of free speech. All he had to say was it was a joke. Just because someone decides to kill people does not make him mentally ill. If a criminal robs a bank we don’t say he is mentally ill. Other killers who kill their wives or friends are not called mentally ill.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE PARTY OF SCHOOL SHOOTINGS THEY OWN IT.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Feb, 2018 08:08 am
@Zardoz,
In your first paragraph, referring to this statement:

We can have a no-fly list for terrorist that prohibits them from flying but when the Democrats tried to make sure that terrorists could not buy semi-automatics weapons of war the Republicans put their foot down and said absolutely not.

What was the method Democrats sought to use to make sure terrorists could not buy semi-automatics?



hightor
 
  1  
Reply Fri 16 Feb, 2018 08:57 am
@Lash,
Quote:
What was the method Democrats sought to use to make sure terrorists could not buy semi-automatics?

Check out the "assault weapons" ban.

Obviously semi-autos were still obtainable (hunting rifles with blind magazines or small clips).

Quote:
The Act exempted some 650 firearm types or models, including various types of Browning, Remington, and Beretta guns, as these were viewed as primarily "suitable for target practice, match competition, hunting, and similar sporting purposes.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Feb, 2018 09:33 pm
Just another day and another Trump affair comes to light and another payoff to keep it quiet. It looks like a divorce in the White House is getting more likely. After Trump’s affair with a Playboy centerfold became public today Melania refused to walk to the helicopter with Trump and met him at the plane. This will be an extremely ugly divorce. Trump is a known wife beater and had no problem raping his first wife. It is a safe bet he will continue the wife beating and nothing upsets a wife beater like a divorce. Maybe the secret service can protect Melania from Trump. I’ll bet the secret service can tell some stories. The secret service no doubt has to keep them separated.

The latest affair is going to publish Trump’s system for concealing affairs. There is a system in place to protect the guilty it is called “catch and kill” it is just like black mail except they call it gaining influence. The publisher of the National Enquirer would catch a story as it came in pay the woman off to kill the story and then use it to gain influence over the person involved. This is similar to what the Russians do and why the FBI does background checks. If a government employee can be blackmailed or be influenced by the Russians or others he is a danger to the country. Trump’s criminal life leaves him open to blackmail of all sorts. The National Enquirer has only slightly more credibility than Fox News. Most news organizations are in the business of printing the news not killing stories but the main stream news has yet to publish the court papers that show Trump is a wife beater and rapist.

Infidelity causes problems in any marriage like one woman said of her husband he just didn’t understand that he had to stop dating after he got married. Trump may be the first president taken down by a first lady.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Fri 16 Feb, 2018 10:10 pm
It fairly simple you already have a no-fly list for terrorists those names are simply added to the list who can not legally purchase guns not only semi-automatic but guns of any type. Middle East Terrorist organizations were advertising in the News Papers for people to emigrate to America go to their local gun stores and legally buy assault weapons go to shooting ranges and learn to shoot them and then attack a school or mall in America. Think what would happen with a group of trained shooters instead of one in a mall or school. Think what happened in that mall in Africa where it had to be blown it up to get the terrorist.

In some countries they worship a god in America we worship the gun. In America the gun has become a male phallus symbol. My guns bigger than yours and I can kill more people faster than you can.

You can target practice with a pistol or a single shot rifle. Even those that own assault rifles will tell you they are just “shi** and giggles guns.” How does that compare to the lives of thousands of school children be killed for shi** and giggles? That is what the shooters think. No gun range in the world has 3,000 moving targets. These guns were designed as weapons of war to kill large numbers of people in shortest possible time. Why not make tanks legal they are just a bigger gun you could use schools for target practice after all someone might want to target practice with a tank.

We have been here before and when the Thompson submachine guns were banned life went on. Thompsons were state of the art and at the time but the semi-automatic assault rifles are far superior to the Thompson now. The Republicans are telling the school shooters, by their inaction, to just wait they will see they get better guns and better ammunition and be able to kill even more.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Sat 17 Feb, 2018 08:36 pm
@Fido,
Every American now knows beyond any reasonable doubt that the Russians interfered in the 2016 presidential election and that interference was focused on helping Trump win the election. What remains to be proved is that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians or whether they were just unknowing Russian dupes. If they were unknowing Russian dupes they remain so. We know for a fact that Trump and his family were re-tweeting the false Russian propaganda. Did they re-tweet the stories even though they knew they were untrue because it would give them plausible deniability if it was pointed out that they were false? The Russians spent over a million a month planting false stories is America social media using American identities and social security numbers. The false stories often were posted using what appeared to be an American grass roots organization, like Farmers for a Better America which would get them some limited exposure in America social media but imagine how much more exposure the group got if Trump or his family re-tweeted it. Those false Russian organizations would get millions more hits when Trump and family re-tweeted them which they did. The Trump family re-tweeting gave the Russian a counterfeit legitimacy in the minds of many Americans they would not have otherwise had access to. Is that collusion? If you drove a friend to gas station and he goes in and robs the station killing the clerk in the process and you drive him away you are considered an accomplice. Trump may not have been guilty of giving the Russians a ride but he sure helped spread the Russian lies and that is what the Russians were doing in America. It is as if Trump went into the gas station and held the gun on the attendant while his buddy cleaned out the register.

Mueller indictment indicted 13 Russians and three Russian companies for actively working for Trump in the 2016 presidential elections. They organized and set up political rallies for Trump prior to the election as wee as post-election rallies for Trump after he was elected. Trump claims that the indictments exonerate him but they in no way address the question of collusion that is still under investigation. Trump thinks if someone in Vermont beats a parking ticket it exonerates him. The scary part is that that the all intelligence agencies have warned Trump that the Russians are planning to interfere in this year’s congressional election and the 2020 presidential election and Trump is not going to do one thing to stop the Russians. Trump knows that the Russians are responsible for his election and he does not want to do a thing to stop them from getting him re-elected. Trump colluded with the Russians when at a campaign rally in FL he publicly asked the Russians to hack into Hillary’s e-mail account, steal the 30,000 e-mails and publish them, promising the Russians they would be richly rewarded.

0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 18 Feb, 2018 09:52 pm
It looks like another member of Trump’s campaign staff is going to plead guilty this week. Rick Gates, a deputy campaign manger for the Trump campaign remained on board through the Trump transition. Gates was a longtime business partner of Paul Manafort who has also been indicted. Gates and Manafort had worked extensively with the Russians close to the Russian government to lobby American politicians for support of Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine. Millions of dollars changed hands and neither Gates or Manafort registered as agents for a foreign government, as required by law.

What is of particular interest is what happened at the Republican convention. A proposed plank in the Republican party platform called for: providing lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine’s military after the 2014 Russian invasion. The Trump campaign killed the plank replacing it with one calling for “appropriate assistance.” This would be equivalent to having someone taking millions from the Hitler and when Hitler invaded France a political plank would changed to say that we would provide “appropriate assistance.” They always say follow the money and that is exactly what Mueller is doing. This will be the fourth guilty plea of Trump’s cronies. An NFL receiver once said, that as he got older he began to hear foot-steps whenever he caught a pass. Those foot-steps have led to many retirements. Trump should begin to hear foot-steps as they are getting much closer. Even when Trump is convicted and locked up in jail he will still be saying “fake news” even when the bars slam shut.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2018 02:10 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Obviously semi-autos were still obtainable (hunting rifles with blind magazines or small clips).

The assault weapon ban was focused on pistol grips on rifles, not on whether a gun could be used for hunting.

Any rifle can be used for hunting in fact, presuming that it fires bullets suitable for the game being hunted.

There is nothing about a rifle that controls the size of a detachable magazine that is attached to it. If a rifle accepts detachable magazines at all, it can accept a 100 round magazine. This is the case regardless of whether the rifle has a pistol grip.

The law did also limit magazine size to no more than 10 rounds, but the ban on pistol grips did not have anything to do with this limit.

Since there is no reason to ban pistol grips, any such ban is a civil rights violation. It is an established principle that a law can only impact a constitutional right if there is a very good reason to justify that law.

Since there is no reason to ban pistol grips, people who support such bans have no reason to justify their bans. They are violating people's civil rights solely because they enjoy violating people's rights.

Since there is no reason to ban pistol grips, when liberals devote 100% of their energy to imposing such a ban, it is pretty easy for the NRA to defeat them. Wacky pointless proposals are always easier to defeat.

Since bans on pistol grips are civil rights violations, the courts will inevitably strike down all such laws that make it past the NRA's opposition, also striking down any attached magazine limits as collateral damage unless the laws were written with severability in mind.

In short, by focusing all of their energy on banning pistol grips on rifles, the gun control movement is helping the NRA to ensure that no further gun control legislation will ever become law.

I encourage the gun control movement to continue self-sabotaging. The cratered remains of Obama's second term after he exhausted his entire reserve of political capital in the 2013 gun control debacle is the reason why Trump is our president right now.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2018 08:49 am
oralloy,

I think you are confusing civil rights with Constitutional right granted under the constitution. The second amendment grants citizens the right to bear arms. The civil rights movement was not to ensure that people had the rights to buy weapons of war to kill as many school children as possible. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 “ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” Nothing there about pistol grips. There is a couple of hundred years of difference between the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act. The second amendment can only grant a right to the state of the art of guns in 1791 when it was adopted. Under the second amendment you have a right to a muzzle loader a bag of powder and a lead ball.

Can guns be legally banned. Yes, every court in America has affirmed the right of the government to ban guns that were not grandfathered. When the Thompson submachine gun was banned it not only banned that gun but hundreds of other fully automatic weapons. To this day and all of the court challenges automatic weapons have remained banned. So, yes, we can and will decide what guns will be banned despite all of the NRA money soaked with the blood of thousands of children. Can imagine how many more children would be killed if fully automatic weapons were available at every corner gun store and pawn shop? America is governed by We the People not the NRA. If people decide they don’t want their children living in a shooting range they will change things. In every great battle there comes a turning point and you are witnessing that turning point now. There is a point when it looks like one side has an overwhelming advantage only to be routed.

The NRA gave Trump over $11 million in the last election and spent $13 million to defeat Hillary all that money is soaked in blood. After Trump took office he made sure another 75,000 certified mentally ill people could buy guns and the NRA proudly crowed about their accomplishment.
_________________________________________________

“Today marks a new era for law abiding-gun owners, as we now have a president who respects the right to keep and bear arms.”

The NRA statement after Trump granted the restored the right to 75,000 mental patients to buy guns 10 days into his term.

___________________________________________________

These people cannot be trusted with dollar bill they have payees to handle their money but the NRA wants to make sure they have an AR-15 and Oralloy, one may live up the street from you.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2018 08:51 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
oralloy,
I think you are confusing civil rights with Constitutional right granted under the constitution.

The term "civil right" refers to any right that is legally protected. This includes rights protected by the Constitution.


Zardoz wrote:
right granted under the constitution. The second amendment grants citizens the right to bear arms.

The Constitution doesn't grant rights. It protects preexisting rights. The right to keep and bear arms existed long before the Second Amendment started protecting it.


Zardoz wrote:
The civil rights movement was not to ensure that people had the rights to buy weapons of war to kill as many school children as possible. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 “ended segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” Nothing there about pistol grips.

An assault weapon is not a weapon of war. It is merely a rifle with a pistol grip on it.

Since a law is only allowed to impact a Constitutional right if there is a good reason for that law, and there isn't a good reason for banning pistol grips, any such ban is unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a couple of hundred years of difference between the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act. The second amendment can only grant a right to the state of the art of guns in 1791 when it was adopted. Under the second amendment you have a right to a muzzle loader a bag of powder and a lead ball.

Our rights have never been constrained to cover only obsolete technology. If that were the case, the government would have the power to censor the internet as much as it wanted since there was no internet in 1791, and the police could wiretap anyone they wanted without any search warrant since there were no telephones in 1791.


Zardoz wrote:
Can guns be legally banned. Yes, every court in America has affirmed the right of the government to ban guns that were not grandfathered.

In the 2008 Heller decision the US Supreme Court ruled that ordinary citizens have the right to possess modern handguns in their homes.


Zardoz wrote:
When the Thompson submachine gun was banned it not only banned that gun but hundreds of other fully automatic weapons.

The only Thomson submachine guns or other full-auto weapons that have been banned are the ones made after 1986.

Any Thomson submachine gun or other full auto weapon that was legally registered by 1986 is grandfathered.


Zardoz wrote:
To this day and all of the court challenges automatic weapons have remained banned.

Well it is a bit hard to see how full-auto is terribly useful for self defense.


Zardoz wrote:
So, yes, we can and will decide what guns will be banned despite all of the NRA money soaked with the blood of thousands of children.

The NRA will stop you.

If despite the NRA you manage ban something without justification (a ban on pistol grips for instance) the courts will end up striking the unjustified law down.


Zardoz wrote:
Can imagine how many more children would be killed if fully automatic weapons were available at every corner gun store and pawn shop?

I know of no attempts to make full auto weapons easily available, so there seems little point to worrying about this possibility.


Zardoz wrote:
America is governed by We the People not the NRA. If people decide they don’t want their children living in a shooting range they will change things. In every great battle there comes a turning point and you are witnessing that turning point now. There is a point when it looks like one side has an overwhelming advantage only to be routed.

We saw that happen during the 2013 gun control debacle. Obama spent his entire reserve of political capital trying to get a ban on pistol grips passed over the objections of the NRA.

The end result was his second term was shattered and he was not able to achieve anything else due to the exhaustion of his political capital.

After 6 years of a do-nothing presidency, the voters wanted a change and elected Trump.

It is unlikely that the Democrats are eager to repeat their catastrophic defeat and suffer even more damage.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA gave Trump over $11 million in the last election and spent $13 million to defeat Hillary all that money is soaked in blood. After Trump took office he made sure another 75,000 certified mentally ill people could buy guns and the NRA proudly crowed about their accomplishment.
_________________________________________________

“Today marks a new era for law abiding-gun owners, as we now have a president who respects the right to keep and bear arms.”

The NRA statement after Trump granted the restored the right to 75,000 mental patients to buy guns 10 days into his term.

___________________________________________________

These people cannot be trusted with dollar bill they have payees to handle their money but the NRA wants to make sure they have an AR-15 and Oralloy, one may live up the street from you.

Nothing about that law had anything whatsoever to do with mental illness.

Inability to balance a checkbook does not mean that someone is mentally ill. Nor does it mean that they are unsafe with guns.

No bloodshed was caused by Trump's support of civil rights.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 19 Feb, 2018 10:14 pm
The gun store that sold the FL shooter, Nikolas Cruz, the AR-15 has closed down indefinitely. It seems the merchants of death are afraid they will be killed in retaliation for the 17 killed at the high school. Suddenly the merchants of death are getting to know what is like to be on the wrong side of their merchandize. This shooting is causing a major political uprising that didn’t happen in Sandy Hook after 26 people were gunned down, 20 first graders among the dead. The Parkland FL high school was a very large school with 3,000 students that are at the right age to be politically active. First graders are not likely to be politically active and will just quietly suffer from post-traumatic stress.

How likely was there to be a shooting at the Parkland, FL high school. So likely that one policeman gave his son a bullet proof vest to wear at school. At least in the mind of that policeman it was not whether a shooting would happen but when. Sending your child to school in bullet proof vest may become commonplace in the years to come. It will be what the well-dressed student wears.

When Trump signs a bill in the White House he usually has a crowd and has the press take pictures but there was one bill Trump signed that the press was not allowed to take pictures of the signing of HJ Resolution 40. The White House staff photographer took pictures but the White House will not release any copies. So, what was HJ Resolution 40? It was the bill that gave 75,000 mentally ill people the right to buy assault weapons. These people suffer not from a temporary mental illness, they have serious life long mental problems so serious they are receiving social security benefits for a severe mental illness. Couple that with Trump’s move to take away Medical care for anyone who does not work full time will make America’s mass murder epidemic much worse. Most people with a severe mental illness cannot hold down a job and depend on Medicaid for treatment of their mental illness. Trump’s policy will put another 500,000 mentally ill on the streets with no care for their mental illness. The criteria that disqualifies you from buying an assault weapon is that you were hospitalized “against” your will. Therefor a bullet proof vest might be a good idea at work also.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 12:24 am
Oralloy

Are you related to Trump? Or just think like him? In all the arguments about gun rights even from the NRA cite the second amendment. The right to bear arms is a very specific right under the second amendment. Take that out of the constitution and suddenly all the arguments for owning a gun are done.
Civil Rights definition: are the rights of an individual to receive equal treatment under the law.

As long as we take all the assault rifles you have been treated equally and your civil rights have not been violated. You can not own a Thompson submachine gun and neither can anyone else. So, there is no violation of your civil rights.

Did the right to own a Thompson Submachine gun exist before the Constitution. If the right to bear arms existed before the Constitution why bother to put in in the Constitution. There is a simple way to end this argument take a case that was argued before the court remove the second amendment and the case fails. I have never seen a court case about guns that sighted any preexisting “right” to bear arms.

Lots of guns have pistol grips including all pistols. The AR-15 was designed as a weapon of war as other assault weapons also and they used by armies around the world. In order for NRA gun manufacturers to sell to professional school shooters they are modified slightly to keep them from firing fully automatic because they would be illegal. Every gun with a pistol grip is not an assault weapon. It is easy to pick out the weapons designed for war and the copy cat versions. We know what specific weapons are used in mass murder. Guns used frequently in mass murders is an excellent reason to ban any weapon.

The technology was state of the art when the second amendment passed. No one can see into the future there was no possible way the founding fathers could foresee the problem of mass murder of school children we are facing today. They can only pass a law that covers the technology of the time. There no concept under the law that entitles anyone to future technological advances because it completely changes the equation. Do you really think the Internet is not censored? If it wasn’t all 10 years old would be bombarded by adds for porn every 2 seconds. The wiretap laws evolved based on right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

The Heller decision is about hand guns and assault weapons are not hand guns. The ban on automatic weapons has been in place since 1934 and all the NRA lawyers could not break it. That tells you that you may have a right to bear an arm but also tells the government can place limits on the type of guns sold or possessed.

The Thompson submachine guns were banned in 1934 and the mere possession of one subject to heavy penalties. Certain collectors with a very expensive gun license can still own them.

Someone with a semiautomatic can fire nearly as many rounds as a fully automatic as we found out in Las Vegas. So, if you don’t need a full automatic you don’t need a semi-automatic to fire a hundred rounds a minute either.

The NRA is about to encounter an overwhelming force in this country. These children that are scared to go to school every day because the frequency of mass murder in schools nearly every day are becoming adults and the NRA is going to do exactly what the gun store in FL that sold the AR-15 that killed 17 people close up because they are afraid they are going to eat the guns they sold. Only a coward owns a gun if it is not required for your job. That is what the NRA is and that is why they own so many guns they are afraid of their own shadow. That is why you buy a gun in the first place you’re afraid. A brave man dies only once but a coward suffers a thousand deaths. What the NRA doesn’t understand is that gun owners are a minority in America now and you can see the demonstrations against guns getting bigger. The biggest political donor in FL has told the politicians he will no longer contribute to any politician who is progun, the governor included. The NRA has bought the government and the court system but that won’t last. In ever political movement there is a tipping point and we are way past the tipping point now. Have you heard the NRA speaking out lately? No, they crawled into a hole and covered their head after the mass murders took place?

The streets are full of guns that can be converted to fully automatics in a few minutes. You may not know of any attempt to make the weapons fully automatic but one of the shooter’s friends in FL told him how he could make the AR-!5 fully automatic and where to buy the parts. I had a buddy 30 years ago show me where I could buy the parts to make a semi-automatic fully automatic. It lucky the FL shooter didn’t convert his AR-15 to fully automatic.

When Obama was elected a meeting was held by Republicans they decided they would block every single thing Obama did. The NRA had nothing at all to do with the Republican obstruction. It would not have mattered if Obama let everyone in America have tank to protect their home.

The Russians got Trump elected. He actually lost election by 3 million votes and got in on a technicality let over from the slave era. The Russian effort to get Trump elected was far more sophisticated than anything ever seen in America.

The big money donors are turning away from the Republicans. List are now being compiled of who took the NRA blood money and how much. They are being published on the Internet. What you can count is several more mass murders before election day people are tired of mass murder.
Let me see if I understand that if you get social security for mental illness it has nothing to do with mental illness? Sorry the particular mental illness were listed in detail.

Trump just gave the mentally the right to buy AR-15 a year ago. Those guns are expensive It may take them some time it will happen watch. Why won’t Trump release a picture of him signing the Bill that allow the mentally ill to buy weapons of war? He is ashamed. He took $11 million dollars of the NRA’s blood money and he had to sign it.

In this country the mentally ill have no right to own a gun just as felons can’t own guns.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 04:49 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
So, what was HJ Resolution 40? It was the bill that gave 75,000 mentally ill people the right to buy assault weapons. These people suffer not from a temporary mental illness, they have serious life long mental problems so serious they are receiving social security benefits for a severe mental illness.

That is incorrect. The bill had nothing whatsoever to do with mental illness.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 06:00 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
The right to bear arms is a very specific right under the second amendment. Take that out of the constitution and suddenly all the arguments for owning a gun are done.

That is incorrect. The Second Amendment protects our rights. But we can still argue in favor of our rights without it.

We will also prevent anyone from taking the Second Amendment out of the Constitution.


Zardoz wrote:
Civil Rights definition: are the rights of an individual to receive equal treatment under the law.

That is one civil right, not the sum total of all civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
As long as we take all the assault rifles you have been treated equally and your civil rights have not been violated.

That is incorrect. Laws are only permitted to impact a Constitutional right if there is a good justification for having the law. There is no justification for banning pistol grips, so any such ban is unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
You can not own a Thompson submachine gun and neither can anyone else.

Yes I can and yes they can.


Zardoz wrote:
If the right to bear arms existed before the Constitution why bother to put in in the Constitution.

So the Constitution would protect the right.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a simple way to end this argument take a case that was argued before the court remove the second amendment and the case fails.

We will not allow the Second Amendment to be removed.


Zardoz wrote:
I have never seen a court case about guns that sighted any preexisting “right” to bear arms.

U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876)

"This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress."


Zardoz wrote:
Lots of guns have pistol grips including all pistols.

Yes. Assault weapons laws focus on pistol grips on long guns however.


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 was designed as a weapon of war as other assault weapons also and they used by armies around the world.

That is incorrect. The AR-15 is semi-auto-only. Armies use weapons with at least a burst-fire function, if not true full auto.


Zardoz wrote:
In order for NRA gun manufacturers to sell to professional school shooters they are modified slightly to keep them from firing fully automatic because they would be illegal.

The NRA is not a gun manufacturer.

AR-15s are semi-auto-only as built. They do not need to be modified.


Zardoz wrote:
Every gun with a pistol grip is not an assault weapon.

Every long gun with a pistol grip is. That is what "assault weapon" means: a long gun with a pistol grip.


Zardoz wrote:
It is easy to pick out the weapons designed for war and the copy cat versions.

Having a pistol grip on a rifle does not make it a weapon of war.


Zardoz wrote:
We know what specific weapons are used in mass murder.

If people were murdered with a rifle that didn't have a pistol grip, would they be any less dead?


Zardoz wrote:
Guns used frequently in mass murders is an excellent reason to ban any weapon.

That is incorrect. The pistol grip does not make the weapon any more useful for murder.


Zardoz wrote:
The technology was state of the art when the second amendment passed. No one can see into the future there was no possible way the founding fathers could foresee the problem of mass murder of school children we are facing today. They can only pass a law that covers the technology of the time. There no concept under the law that entitles anyone to future technological advances because it completely changes the equation. Do you really think the Internet is not censored? If it wasn’t all 10 years old would be bombarded by adds for porn every 2 seconds.

Laws protecting minors from porn are allowed because they can be justified as having a good reason for existing.

The government is not allowed to ban all political speech on the internet. Trump would not be able to prevent you from criticizing him for example.

This is because you are wrong about our rights being limited to technology from 1791. The right to free speech very much applies to the internet.


Zardoz wrote:
The wiretap laws evolved based on right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

Had you been correct about rights only applying to technology from 1791, wiretap laws would not exist, because the right to be free from search and seizure would not apply to telephones.


Zardoz wrote:
The Heller decision is about hand guns and assault weapons are not hand guns.

True. But it does say that we have the right to have guns, and modern guns at that.


Zardoz wrote:
The ban on automatic weapons has been in place since 1934 and all the NRA lawyers could not break it.

No. Since 1986. With all full auto weapons already legally registered by 1986 being grandfathered.


Zardoz wrote:
That tells you that you may have a right to bear an arm but also tells the government can place limits on the type of guns sold or possessed.

Yes, but limits on rights are only allowed if that limit can be justified with a good reason.

No one is going to come up with a good reason for banning pistol grips on a long gun.


Zardoz wrote:
The Thompson submachine guns were banned in 1934 and the mere possession of one subject to heavy penalties.

No they weren't.


Zardoz wrote:
Certain collectors with a very expensive gun license can still own them.

So as I said, they weren't banned.

Some state laws do require an owner to have a license, but that license is not expensive at all.

Federal law requires the payment of a $200 tax when the gun is registered -- also not very expensive.


Zardoz wrote:
Someone with a semiautomatic can fire nearly as many rounds as a fully automatic as we found out in Las Vegas. So, if you don’t need a full automatic you don’t need a semi-automatic to fire a hundred rounds a minute either.

It doesn't matter what we need. It matters if a limitation on our rights can be justified with a good reason.

Good luck banning semi-autos. Lots of popular hunting weapons are semi-auto. The hunting community will vote Democrats out of office if they start banning hunting weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is about to encounter an overwhelming force in this country.

LOL. I wouldn't call children throwing temper tantrums an overwhelming force.


Zardoz wrote:
the NRA is going to do exactly what the gun store in FL that sold the AR-15 that killed 17 people close up because they are afraid they are going to eat the guns they sold.

No. We are going to continue to protect our civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
Only a coward owns a gun if it is not required for your job. That is what the NRA is and that is why they own so many guns they are afraid of their own shadow. That is why you buy a gun in the first place you’re afraid. A brave man dies only once but a coward suffers a thousand deaths.

Like most bigoted stereotypes, that is pure nonsense.

People buy guns for all sorts of reasons. Recreational shooting for example. Or hunting.

People who buy guns in order to be prepared for self defense are not necessarily fearful any more than people are fearful if they wear seat belts or buy fire extinguishers.

And if someone were in genuine fear for their life, buying a gun would be a sign of wisdom, not cowardice.


Zardoz wrote:
What the NRA doesn’t understand is that gun owners are a minority in America now and you can see the demonstrations against guns getting bigger. The biggest political donor in FL has told the politicians he will no longer contribute to any politician who is progun, the governor included. The NRA has bought the government and the court system but that won’t last. In ever political movement there is a tipping point and we are way past the tipping point now. Have you heard the NRA speaking out lately? No, they crawled into a hole and covered their head after the mass murders took place?

All of our levers of power over Congress remain fully intact.

And the courts don't strike down unconstitutional gun laws because the NRA tells them to. They do it because those laws are unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
The streets are full of guns that can be converted to fully automatics in a few minutes.

Only if you have the right parts and are a trained gunsmith.


Zardoz wrote:
You may not know of any attempt to make the weapons fully automatic but one of the shooter’s friends in FL told him how he could make the AR-!5 fully automatic and where to buy the parts.

If the shooter wasn't a trained gunsmith he would have most likely just ruined his gun.

And I doubt he could have found a trained gunsmith to do the conversion for him.


Zardoz wrote:
When Obama was elected a meeting was held by Republicans they decided they would block every single thing Obama did.

That is Democratic propaganda to cover up Obama's failures as a president. The Republicans tried working with him during his first term. The deal they were making collapsed when Obama listened to leftist extremists and backed out of it.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA had nothing at all to do with the Republican obstruction.

Setting aside the fact that there wasn't Republican obstruction, what the NRA did was stop Obama's gun control effort after he wasted every last bit of his political capital on it.

The reason Obama never achieved anything in his second term is because after wasting all of his political capital attacking the NRA, he had nothing left to push any other legislation.


Zardoz wrote:
The big money donors are turning away from the Republicans.

Nonsense.


Zardoz wrote:
List are now being compiled of who took the NRA blood money and how much. They are being published on the Internet.

So?


Zardoz wrote:
What you can count is several more mass murders before election day people are tired of mass murder.

So?


Zardoz wrote:
Let me see if I understand that if you get social security for mental illness it has nothing to do with mental illness?

The law in question had nothing to do with mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
Sorry the particular mental illness were listed in detail.

Nonsense. The law did not deal with mental illness at all.


Zardoz wrote:
Trump just gave the mentally the right to buy AR-15 a year ago.

That law had nothing to do with mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
Those guns are expensive It may take them some time it will happen watch.

One part of the SHARE Act will allow cheap AK-47s to flood into the country (semi-auto-only of course). That should make assault weapons more affordable to poor people.


Zardoz wrote:
In this country the mentally ill have no right to own a gun just as felons can’t own guns.

The law is actually focused only on dangerous people. Not all mentally ill people are dangerous. In fact, most are not.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 06:32 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
The pistol grip does not make the weapon any more useful for murder.

Actually it does. It allows for quick and more controlled firing from the hip as opposed to a bolt action hunting rifle with a 26" barrel which must be raised to the shoulder and sighted. Pistol grips installed on military weapons with high capacity magazines are designed to allow the shooter to spray an area with lead rather than down prey with a single well-aimed shot. If civilians are under threat to the degree that they need assault rifles they should try getting in touch with their local or state police instead.

oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 06:50 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Actually it does. It allows for quick and more controlled firing from the hip

That is incorrect. Firing in that manner results in no accuracy whatsoever. Missing the target is not very conducive to committing murder.


hightor wrote:
as opposed to a bolt action hunting rifle with a 26" barrel which must be raised to the shoulder and sighted.

The rate of fire difference there is due to the difference in action, not the pistol grip,

And aimed fire from the shoulder will result in actual control, which would be absent if firing from the hip.


hightor wrote:
Pistol grips installed on military weapons with high capacity magazines are designed to allow the shooter to spray an area with lead rather than down prey with a single well-aimed shot.

That as well is incorrect. These guns are designed to be very accurate with aimed single shots.

Pistol grips were put on the weapons because retractable stocks did not allow guns to be gripped as they had been with non-retractable stocks.


hightor wrote:
If civilians are under threat to the degree that they need assault rifles they should try getting in touch with their local or state police instead.

The question of need is irrelevant. And the pistol grip has nothing to do with the utility of the gun for self defense.

The point of a defensive weapon is to protect yourself while you are waiting for the police to arrive.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 07:41 am
@oralloy,
Sure, you can aim and fire an assault weapon accurately but it's really common in skirmishes and in mass shootings for the shooter to simply rely on a curtain of lead. Rate of fire is not an issue with a hunting or target rifle.
Quote:
And aimed fire from the shoulder will result in actual control, which would be absent if firing from the hip.

Yes, that's what I said. Pistol grips predate retractable stocks. The Thompson sub-machine gun even had a forward pistol grip.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 08:56 am
@oralloy,
Oralloy

Where did you get your information that HJ Resolution 40? The NRA? They’re not a good source of information.
___________________________________________________
“A little after a month after his inauguration, on Feb the 28, 2017 President Trump signed HJ Resolution 40, a bill that made it easier for people with mental illness to obtain guns.”

“But in fact, the rule applied to social security recipients who were not able to manage their affairs because of “marked subnormal intelligence or mental illness or incompetency, condition or disease.”

From an Internet article entitled: “White House Refuses to Release Photo of Trump Signing Bill to Weaken Gun Laws”

Source: CBS News
__________________________________________________

In the Headlines in the Herald Dispatch this morning John Kasich, governor of Ohio and a top contender in the 2016 republican presidential primary changed his position on gun control and came out in favor of “common sense gun control” that would limit on who could sell weapons such as the AR-15 commonly used in school shootings. Kasich a former big supporter of the NRA knows the political winds are shifting and a political hurricane is beginning to blow.

Trump has now come out for gun control also supporting the long-time democratic proposal for stiffer background checks.

“Your old road is
Rapidly aging
Please get out of the new one
If you can’t lend your hand
“The Times they are a changing”

Bob Dylan
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 03:14 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Sure, you can aim and fire an assault weapon accurately but it's really common in skirmishes and in mass shootings for the shooter to simply rely on a curtain of lead.

By skirmishes I presume that you are referring to the military.

They rely on belt-fed machine guns to provide their curtains of lead.

I don't know if any criminal shooting sprees have been filmed, but I suspect that the murderers made at least an attempt to aim, even if they might not have aimed correctly out of ignorance of how to do it.


hightor wrote:
Rate of fire is not an issue with a hunting or target rifle.

It can be an issue for self defense.

Regardless, pistol grips do not affect rate of fire.


hightor wrote:
Yes, that's what I said.

I misread your meaning. I thought you were saying that firing at the hip with a pistol grip had superior accuracy over aimed firing from the shoulder. I was dashing off some quick messages before going to the TV for the Olympics and not paying full attention (which is actually the situation right now as well).

Using a pistol grip may make firing at the hip more accurate than firing at the hip without a pistol grip. But the accuracy is still so low that it is meaningless. No one fires at the hip at all unless they don't know how to shoot. And if they do fire from the hip (even with a pistol grip), they are sure to miss whatever they are aiming at.


hightor wrote:
Pistol grips predate retractable stocks. The Thompson sub-machine gun even had a forward pistol grip.

The Tommygun was designed to be usable without the stock attached.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 03:16 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Where did you get your information that HJ Resolution 40?

From directly reading Obama's executive orders that were targeting people without any mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA? They’re not a good source of information.

Yes they are. Not that they were my source of information, but it is unfair to falsely accuse them.


Zardoz wrote:
In the Headlines in the Herald Dispatch this morning John Kasich, governor of Ohio and a top contender in the 2016 republican presidential primary changed his position on gun control and came out in favor of “common sense gun control” that would limit on who could sell weapons such as the AR-15 commonly used in school shootings.

Proponents of fascism and opponents of civil rights always invoke common sense. It's eerie.

It is a shame that he wants to violate our rights for no reason (unless he can come up with a good reason for banning pistol grips on a rifle). It's a good thing he lost the primary to someone who cares about freedom.


Zardoz wrote:
Trump has now come out for gun control also supporting the long-time democratic proposal for stiffer background checks.

The NRA gave him permission to do so.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 06/18/2018 at 09:41:28