0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Feb, 2018 11:28 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy

Can you sight any case law that establish a right to own a gun other than the second amendment?
____________________________________________________
Doing away with the second amendment would be difficult but we do not need to do away with the second amendment to control what guns that are on our streets as the ban on automatic weapons demonstrates.
___________________________________________________
Common sense limits have always been placed on rights. For instance, you have freedom of speech but you do not have the right to yell “fire” in a crowed theater for a good reason. Rights have to be balanced against the harm they cause to others. Your right to own weapons of war is not superior to the right of 17 children and adults killed in FL to live.
____________________________________________________
You could never successfully argue that you have civil right to own a gun. The Second Amendment amended the Constitution. The Civil Right are based on a law passed in 1964. Laws directly address what is prohibited. No part of the civil Rights Legislation grants you a right to own a gun.
_________________________________________________

It was an assault weapon not a pistol grip ban. There was certain specific weapon that were banned the trouble was that some similar weapons were not named in the ban. Once the ban was in place the NRA manufactureres made new models to skirt the regulations. A balance is struck between the freedom of speech and the right to yell fire in a crowded theater there must also be balanced against the growing number of children that are killed each year with AR-15.
____________________________________________________

The only way to purchase a Thompson Submachine gun is to have a collector license that is very hard to obtain. Thompsons were very common at one time every gangster had one why are they so rare now?
___________________________________________________

The Constitution granted that right. A right must have source did this right spring from nothingness.
_________________________________________________
The second amendment does not have to be removed just limited by common sense as the right to free speech currently is.

_________________________________________________________________________________.
“The Cruikshank case is nearly a century and a half and is about whites killing blacks in the old south. Most white men at the time were absolved for killing blacks at the time. In this case they slaughtered 280 blacks most of which were unarmed. This court was a miscarriage of justice at the least Any court decision that is wrong on major points is likely to be wrong on other points and later Supreme Court decisions will have nullified this one. I spent 25 years in city, state and Federal courts and I have seen some really horrendous decisions. Fabricating rights from whole cloth is not as likely to happen today.
_________________________________________________

The law never said pistol grip ban it said assault weapon ban and listed specific weapons of war.

__________________________________________________
The AR-15 was designed as a weapon of war to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. The AR-15 is the street version of the M-16 that US troops use. The only difference is that the automatic firing mechanism is disabled but it can easily made full automatic again. On the news they showed AR-15 owners cutting their guns up vowing their gun would not be used to kill people. The videos are posted on u-tube.
____________________________________________________

The NRA is an organization made up of gun manufacturers, it is an organization of gun manufacturers, it is an organization that pushes the agenda of the gun manufactures. The NRA mission is to sell as much death as humanly possible.
___________________________________________________
The AR-15 is the M-16 only a few minor parts are replaced to make it street legal.
__________________________________________________________________________________

An assault weapon is one that was designed to assault an enemy position during a war and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a pistol grip. I am sure a Sargent said here is your BB gun with a pistol grip go take that enemy position.
___________________________________________________
The definition of assault weapon according to dictionary.com is: any of various automatic and semi- automatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge designed for individual use. Did you see one word about pistol grip? There is a good reason it has absolutely nothing to do with an assault weapon.
___________________________________________________

You are right a pistol grip doesn’t make it a weapon of war or an assault weapon either for that matter. Certain weapons were designed to fight wars.
The trouble is that a rifle may kill one or two people but the mass murders are made possible with assault weapons which are designed specifically for the purpose is mass murder whether on the battlefield or the school yard.
The pistol grip has nothing to do with the number of rounds that can be fired into a crowd of school kids. The mechanics of loading rapidly as possible makes for a good murder weapon.
__________________________________________________
Good reason for existing? Do you think saving the life of 1,000 school children is at least as important then keep porn away from children. I will bet the parents of the students killed in Florida would gladly trade their children watching porn for them being killed.
Trumps already wants to stop the media and the public for saying anything bad about him. The dictators he admires the most can stop anything bad from being said about them.
If think that you are entitled to new technology why can’t you buy howitzer? It is just a gun, a big one but just a gun. Is it that you are not entitled to howitzer because you are not entitled to that technology? Nobody can possibly foresee the future or legislate future technology.
The wiretaps laws came only after the technology was developed not before. Even though there was a right in place the laws that govern were written post technology.

__________________________________________________________________________________
You have the right to own a gun. No one doubts that but you do not have a “right” to own an assault weapon.

Those automatic weapons made before 1986 are collectors items and the price went up many times. The professional school shooters can’t go to the corner gun store and buy one. Thus, not one of them was ever used in a school shooting end of problem.

I don’t care if they have six pistol grips as long as the don’t have the assault weapon loading mechanism which can chamber the bullets as fast as the trigger can be pulled that is where the ability to kill so many so fast.
___________________________________________________________________________________
The law banning the Thompson was passed in 1934 and the gun disappeared practically overnight. The gangsters of the 30s were known for their Thompsons. They would go thru towns riding the running boards and shooting up the towns. By 40s there are no gangs holding up banks with Thompson. They did not disappear on their own. The government put a stop to them.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 banned the private use of machine guns. Can’t be any clearer than that. Police were still allowed to use machine guns.
__________________________________________________________________________________
The Private use of machine guns was banned in 1934. The license to own machine guns is a federal not a state and it is expensive and hard to obtain. The professional school shooters are not going to be able to qualify.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If you were the parent of two of the children killed in FL you would think it was a damn good reason to ban the weapons of war. It is the assault weapons that will be banned there will be some semi-automatic that take much longer to chamber that might remain but the capacity of clips will be reduced to 6 maximum. These other semi-automatics are not the overwhelming choice of school shooters.
__________________________________________________________________________________
The NRA is going to face a force that they have never seen before. The gun store closed down because they were scared to death that they would pay for their crimes. The last time a generation stood up to the government was over the Vietnam war. There were demonstration and riots all over this country. I ran gas out gas near the campus and the gas station refused to sell me gas in a can because all the Molotov cocktails that were being thrown. When that temper tantrum was over and the smoke cleared America got the hell out of Vietnam. That was the entire US government. The NRA are just a bunch of slimy killers they may not have pulled the triggers but they are fully responsible for every mass murder in America. The times are a changing.
__________________________________________________
The NRA has no civil rights it is an organization not an individual. Only individuals have civil Rights.
___________________________________________________
Only a coward owns a gun is not a stereotype it is taken directly from anyone who has ever owned gun. If you ask them why they own a gun? They will tell you I am afraid that someone will break in or someone will come after me. Every time you ask a gun owner they will affirm the obvious. That fear is the coward coming out. Sorry buying a gun that is more likely to kill a family member than a burglar is foolish.
___________________________________________________
I came in late one evening and found a broken window and alarm on the stove was going off. The State Police were called to take a report. The State Policeman told me they recently busted a burglary ring. The guy was 6’6.” The burglar told the state policeman he would knock on door and if nobody came to the door they listened for a dog. The state policeman asked him wasn’t he afraid of being shot? The burglar replied he was not afraid of being shot. Only one thing scared him a big dog. They would kill a small dog and go on in but they would not enter with a big dog. The burglar knew a person with a gun would hesitate but dog asks no question he will eat you alive.
_________________________________________________
Here in WV almost everybody has a gun and some have lots of guns and most of break ins are to steal the guns.
__________________________________________________
You better read the paper your lever in Congress are jumping ship faster than rats leaving a sinking ship. When the heat is really applied and the going gets tough the tough get going. When the top political donors jump ship, the politicians won’t remain.
___________________________________________________
There is no such thing as an unconstitutional gun law short of banning all guns. The last Assault weapon ban was not overturned by the courts it expired.
___________________________________________________
Any good mechanic can change the parts and make the assault weapons fully automatic they designed to be interchangeable no if you needed to make the parts you might need a gun smith.
New recruits break their M-16 down and put them back together again and again till they can do it rapidly.
___________________________________________________
Mechanic is not science parts that are designed to fit together go together.
The day Obama was inaugurated the top Republican met and decided to obstruct everything Obama tried to do and that is documented in many books written at the time. The NRA may blow its own horn but it is total nonsense. There were a record number of Republican filibusters they never made any effort to work with Obama. The NRA is a legend in their own mind and it imagined the rest of it
Obama passing the healthcare bill infuriated the rich because it was funded by increasing their taxes they poured hundreds of million into the 2012 election to beat Obama and lost.
___________________________________________________
The Republican donor has told the governor of FL he will no longer support anyone who will not support gun control. That was widely reported on the internet. The political donor names is Al Hoffman Jr said he will no longer support anyone who does not support an assault weapon ban.
So? There is nothing that makes people madder than to realize the reason their children were killed is because the politicians were being paid million to block an assault weapon ban.
___________________________________________________
If you get a social disability for mental illness you will have been to several doctors who will have to swear that you mentally ill and specify what your mental illness is. This process takes up to two years and is generally turned down on the first try. Most have to appeal and go through it a second time and yes you will need an attorney. My wife got a disability after a knee replacement surgery and was very difficult to get. They have to know exactly what is wrong with you.
__________________________________________________
I understand that Republicans think if they repeat a lie long enough that it becomes the Truth but all 75,000 have been diagnosed with mental illness and lying about it won’t help. This is going to come back to bite the Republicans hard.
_______________________________________________
The assault weapons are dead issue the AK-47 included.
___________________________________________________
Only on dangerous people? You’re going to monitor 3 million people to see when they are going to go over the edge? Actually, the mentally ill are less likely to be violent than the general population. These professional school shooters are quite sane. They just want to kill as many people as they can.



oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 05:37 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Can you sight any case law that establish a right to own a gun other than the second amendment?

Well to start with, the Heller ruling is case law, and it isn't the Second Amendment.

There are also some nice court cases about the right that came well before the Second Amendment started protecting it:

Rex v. Gardner (1739): "And they do not extend to prohibit a man from keeping a gun for his necessary defence, but only from making that forbidden use of it. And the word 'gun' being purposely omitted in this act, the defendant is not within the penalty."

Mallock v. Eastley (1744): "the mere having a gun was no offense within the game laws, for a man may keep a gun for the defence of his house and family."

Wingfield v. Stratford (1752): "It is not to be imagined, that it was the Intention of the Legislature, in making the 5 Ann.c.14 to disarm all the People of England. As Greyhounds, Setting Dogs ... are expressly mentioned in that Statute, it is never necessary to alledge, that any of these have been used for killing or destroying the Game; and the rather, as they can scarcely be kept for any other Purpose than to kill or destroy the Game. But as Guns are not expressly mentioned in that Statute, and as a Gun may be kept for the Defence of a Man's House, and for divers other lawful Purposes, it was necessary to alledge, in order to its being comprehended within the Meaning of the Words 'any other Engines to kill the Game', that the Gun had been used for killing the Game."

Rex v. Dewhurst (1820): "A man has a clear right to arms to protect himself in his house. A man has a clear right to protect himself when he is going singly or in a small party upon the road where he is travelling or going for the ordinary purposes of business. But I have no difficulties in saying you have no right to carry arms to a public meeting, if the number of arms which are so carried are calculated to produce terror and alarm."


Zardoz wrote:
Doing away with the second amendment would be difficult but we do not need to do away with the second amendment to control what guns that are on our streets as the ban on automatic weapons demonstrates.

You would need to do away with the Second Amendment if you want to pass any gun laws that have no good justification (a ban on pistol grips for instance).


Zardoz wrote:
Common sense limits have always been placed on rights.

A law is only allowed to restrict a Constitutional right if that law can be justified with a good reason.

The term common sense is almost always invoked when a law can't be justified by any good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
For instance, you have freedom of speech but you do not have the right to yell “fire” in a crowed theater for a good reason.

Those words "for a good reason" are key. You are only allowed to have a law that restricts a right if you can produce a good reason to justify the law's existence.


Zardoz wrote:
Rights have to be balanced against the harm they cause to others.

Laws against pistol grips do not address any harm done to anyone.


Zardoz wrote:
Your right to own weapons of war is not superior to the right of 17 children and adults killed in FL to live.

Adding a pistol grip to a gun does not make it a weapon of war in the first place.

However, there are weapons of war that there is no good reason to ban (English longbows for instance). My right to have those weapons of war is superior to everything.


Zardoz wrote:
You could never successfully argue that you have civil right to own a gun.

Sure I can. The Second Amendment.


Zardoz wrote:
The Second Amendment amended the Constitution.

Yes.


Zardoz wrote:
The Civil Right are based on a law passed in 1964.

The term civil right refers to any right that is protected by law.


Zardoz wrote:
No part of the civil Rights Legislation grants you a right to own a gun.

No need to grant a preexisting right.


Zardoz wrote:
It was an assault weapon not a pistol grip ban.

An assault weapon is a long gun with pistol grips. Any ban on assault weapons is a ban on long guns with pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
There was certain specific weapon that were banned the trouble was that some similar weapons were not named in the ban. Once the ban was in place the NRA manufactureres made new models to skirt the regulations.

The NRA is a civil rights organization, not a gun manufacturer.

The assault weapon ban only addressed cosmetic features like pistol grips. When the ban was in effect, manufacturers stopped selling guns with the prohibited cosmetic features. That was not skirting the law. That was complying with it.

If you are noticing the fact that there was no substantive change to the guns under the law, what else would you expect from a law about cosmetic features?


Zardoz wrote:
A balance is struck between the freedom of speech and the right to yell fire in a crowded theater there must also be balanced against the growing number of children that are killed each year with AR-15.

The addition of pistol grips to rifles does not result in the deaths of any children.


Zardoz wrote:
The only way to purchase a Thompson Submachine gun is to have a collector license that is very hard to obtain.

That is incorrect. Only a few states require such a license and all you need to do is pay your yearly license fee, which isn't much. Probably also a standard NICS check.


Zardoz wrote:
Thompsons were very common at one time every gangster had one why are they so rare now?

Who says they are rare?

Some states do ban full-auto weapons. You won't find them in those states. And only the ones that were legally registered by 1986 are allowed. Does that make them rare?

If you want one and you live in a state where they are legal, go buy one.


Zardoz wrote:
The Constitution granted that right.

That is incorrect. The right was in existence for at least a hundred years before the Constitution was written.


Zardoz wrote:
A right must have source did this right spring from nothingness.

Actually there is a good legal argument that natural rights do in fact spring from nothingness.

However, the right was clearly written down in the English Bill of Rights in 1689, so we can avoid a discussion of natural rights and focus on that if you like. Either way the right clearly predates the US Constitution.


Zardoz wrote:
The second amendment does not have to be removed just limited by common sense as the right to free speech currently is.

You are only allowed to limit a right if you can justify that limit with a good reason.

"Common sense" is typically invoked when a restriction cannot be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
“The Cruikshank case is nearly a century and a half and is about whites killing blacks in the old south. Most white men at the time were absolved for killing blacks at the time. In this case they slaughtered 280 blacks most of which were unarmed. This court was a miscarriage of justice at the least Any court decision that is wrong on major points is likely to be wrong on other points and later Supreme Court decisions will have nullified this one. I spent 25 years in city, state and Federal courts and I have seen some really horrendous decisions. Fabricating rights from whole cloth is not as likely to happen today.

The decision did not fabricate any rights.

The Supreme Court's point that rights restrict the government and not individuals seems to still be accepted as settled law today.


Zardoz wrote:
The law never said pistol grip ban it said assault weapon ban and listed specific weapons of war.

That is incorrect. None of the weapons listed were weapons of war. Armies use weapons that have full auto capabilities. This law did not cover any full-auto weapon.

And the entire point of the law was all about whether a gun had harmless cosmetic features like pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 was designed as a weapon of war to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. The AR-15 is the street version of the M-16 that US troops use. The only difference is that the automatic firing mechanism is disabled

The fact that an AR-15 is not full auto means that it is not an M-16 and is not a weapon of war.

English longbows are weapons of war however, and I have every right to have those.


Zardoz wrote:
but it can easily made full automatic again.

I suspect that a law against converting them to full-auto would pass Constitutional muster.

Not as easy as you think though. Unless you are a trained gunsmith, the likely result is that you will ruin your gun.

And good luck trying to find a trained gunsmith who is willing to do illegal modifications for a stranger.

You would also need to have the parts to do the conversion.


Zardoz wrote:
On the news they showed AR-15 owners cutting their guns up vowing their gun would not be used to kill people. The videos are posted on u-tube.

So long as the gun is their own property there should be nothing wrong with that.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is an organization made up of gun manufacturers,

That is incorrect. They are not involved in the manufacture of guns.


Zardoz wrote:
it is an organization of gun manufacturers,

That is incorrect as well. The gun manufacturers are represented by the NSSF.


Zardoz wrote:
it is an organization that pushes the agenda of the gun manufactures.

That is extremely incorrect. The gun manufacturers have no objections to assault weapons bans for example.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA mission is to sell as much death as humanly possible.

That's just silly.


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 is the M-16 only a few minor parts are replaced to make it street legal.

Replacing those M-16 parts makes it not an M-16.

That's why it is called an AR-15 and not called an M-16.

Although what the weapon is called doesn't really matter. What matters is the fact that it is no more dangerous than any other semi-auto rifle, and therefore you cannot come up with a good reason for banning it.


Zardoz wrote:
An assault weapon is one that was designed to assault an enemy position during a war and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a pistol grip.

Laws against assault weapons do not address any weapons used in war. They only address pistol grips on semi-auto rifles.


Zardoz wrote:
I am sure a Sargent said here is your BB gun with a pistol grip go take that enemy position.

No weapon covered by the assault weapons ban would ever be issued to any soldier. Armies prefer weapons with full auto or burst fire capabilities.


Zardoz wrote:
The definition of assault weapon according to dictionary.com is: any of various automatic and semi- automatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge designed for individual use.

The law banning assault weapons did not cover any full auto weapons. Nor did it focus on cartridge power. It focused on pistol grips and other cosmetic features.

Are you claiming that any semi-auto that fires an intermediate power cartridge is an assault rifle? You're going to make a lot of hunters mad when you try to ban their hunting rifles.


Zardoz wrote:
Did you see one word about pistol grip?

I saw that the definition you cited had nothing whatsoever to do with the guns that are covered under assault weapons legislation.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a good reason it has absolutely nothing to do with an assault weapon.

Pistol grips have everything to do with assault weapons. The entire point of assault weapons legislation is to ban cosmetic features like pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
You are right a pistol grip doesn’t make it a weapon of war

I know.


Zardoz wrote:
or an assault weapon either for that matter.

That is incorrect. Assault weapons bans are entirely about harmless cosmetic features like pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
Certain weapons were designed to fight wars.

Yes. Like English longbows (which I am legally allowed to have).

However, no weapon that is covered under assault weapons legislation was ever designed to fight wars.


Zardoz wrote:
The trouble is that a rifle may kill one or two people but the mass murders are made possible with assault weapons which are designed specifically for the purpose is mass murder whether on the battlefield or the school yard.

That is incorrect. Adding a pistol grip to a gun does not make it any more deadly.


Zardoz wrote:
The pistol grip has nothing to do with the number of rounds that can be fired into a crowd of school kids. The mechanics of loading rapidly as possible makes for a good murder weapon.

True. That's why bans on pistol grips are pointless and cannot be justified.


Zardoz wrote:
Good reason for existing? Do you think saving the life of 1,000 school children is at least as important then keep porn away from children. I will bet the parents of the students killed in Florida would gladly trade their children watching porn for them being killed.

Bans on pistol grips will not save a single life.


Zardoz wrote:
Trumps already wants to stop the media and the public for saying anything bad about him. The dictators he admires the most can stop anything bad from being said about them.

If you had been correct about the Bill of Rights only applying to technology from 1791, Trump would have that power as well.


Zardoz wrote:
If think that you are entitled to new technology why can’t you buy howitzer? It is just a gun, a big one but just a gun.

I probably can buy one if I live in a state that doesn't forbid it.

If I can afford it that is.


Zardoz wrote:
Is it that you are not entitled to howitzer because you are not entitled to that technology?

No. Whether gun restrictions pass muster has nothing to do with entitlement to technology. It has only to do with whether the restriction can be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
Nobody can possibly foresee the future or legislate future technology.

True.


Zardoz wrote:
The wiretaps laws came only after the technology was developed not before.

My point exactly. If you had been correct about our rights only applying to technology from 1791, we would have no wiretap laws right now.


Zardoz wrote:
you do not have a “right” to own an assault weapon.

That is incorrect. The fact that no one can justify a ban on pistol grips means I do have that right.


Zardoz wrote:
Those automatic weapons made before 1986 are collectors items and the price went up many times. The professional school shooters can’t go to the corner gun store and buy one. Thus, not one of them was ever used in a school shooting end of problem.

OK.


Zardoz wrote:
I don’t care if they have six pistol grips

Then you don't object to assault weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
as long as the don’t have the assault weapon loading mechanism which can chamber the bullets as fast as the trigger can be pulled that is where the ability to kill so many so fast.

No such mechanism. Assault weapons use the same sort of mechanism that other semi-autos use.


Zardoz wrote:
The law banning the Thompson was passed in 1934 and the gun disappeared practically overnight.

The ban was passed in 1986, and all Thompsons already legally registered by 1986 were grandfathered and are around today.


Zardoz wrote:
The National Firearms Act of 1934 banned the private use of machine guns.

No it didn't. Machine guns remain legal to use today, unless you live in a state that bans them.


Zardoz wrote:
Police were still allowed to use machine guns.

So are people who legally own them.


Zardoz wrote:
The Private use of machine guns was banned in 1934.

No it wasn't. Machine guns remain legal to use today, unless you live in a state that bans them.


Zardoz wrote:
The license to own machine guns is a federal not a state and it is expensive and hard to obtain.

No such license exists. People who live in a state that requires machine gun owners to have a federal license get a "curio and relic" license. Those are neither expensive nor hard to obtain.

Many states don't require the owner to have a federal license at all.


Zardoz wrote:
The professional school shooters are not going to be able to qualify.

They might have trouble with the CLIO signoff.


Zardoz wrote:
If you were the parent of two of the children killed in FL you would think it was a damn good reason to ban the weapons of war.

That is incorrect. I'd still have no objection to the possession of English longbows.


Zardoz wrote:
It is the assault weapons that will be banned

No chance of that. By insisting on something as trivially pointless as a ban on pistol grips, you make it quite easy for the NRA to defeat your entire agenda.

And the courts will be waiting to strike down any assault weapon ban that makes it past the NRA.


Zardoz wrote:
there will be some semi-automatic that take much longer to chamber that might remain

No such weapon. Semi-autos all operate at the same speed.

And good luck if you try to ban all the semi-auto hunting weapons. Some hunters believe you if you tell them you aren't out to ban their guns. They'll surely notice if you do start banning their guns.


Zardoz wrote:
but the capacity of clips will be reduced to 6 maximum.

No chance of that ever being passed. The NRA would stop it easily.

And any attempt to reduce handguns that far will likely be struck down by the courts. 10 rounds is likely the minimum that the courts would allow you to reduce handguns to.


Zardoz wrote:
These other semi-automatics are not the overwhelming choice of school shooters.

If school shooters were unable to choose a weapon with pistol grips, they would simply choose one without pistol grips and then kill the same number of people.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is going to face a force that they have never seen before.

We've seen it before. We'll have no trouble stopping it.

Your focus on pistol grips will be quite helpful. If you can get the gun control movement to devote 100% of their energy to the fight over pistol grips, they'll have no energy to push anything else after we defeat them on pistol grips. So keep it up.


Zardoz wrote:
The gun store closed down because they were scared to death that they would pay for their crimes.

I haven't been following that story, but I would think a gun store owner would be equipped to gun down anyone who tried to attack them.


Zardoz wrote:
The last time a generation stood up to the government was over the Vietnam war. There were demonstration and riots all over this country. I ran gas out gas near the campus and the gas station refused to sell me gas in a can because all the Molotov cocktails that were being thrown. When that temper tantrum was over and the smoke cleared America got the hell out of Vietnam. That was the entire US government.

The people of South Vietnam didn't have a say in whether the US abandoned them.

The American people are defending their own freedom here. They are not going to give up and let a bunch of bratty kids take their freedom away from them.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA are just a bunch of slimy killers they may not have pulled the triggers but they are fully responsible for every mass murder in America.

Nonsense. Defense of civil rights does not make someone responsible for the crimes of other people.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA has no civil rights it is an organization not an individual. Only individuals have civil Rights.

The NRA is an organization that protects the civil rights of individuals.


Zardoz wrote:
Only a coward owns a gun is not a stereotype it is taken directly from anyone who has ever owned gun.

No, it is a bigoted stereotype. And like all bigoted stereotypes, it is completely untrue.


Zardoz wrote:
If you ask them why they own a gun? They will tell you I am afraid that someone will break in or someone will come after me.

I doubt the Olympic biathelon medalists acquired their guns because they feared a break in.


Zardoz wrote:
Every time you ask a gun owner they will affirm the obvious. That fear is the coward coming out.

No. Even if you focused only on people who do have such a fear, having fear does not make someone a coward. All brave people experience fear.


Zardoz wrote:
Sorry buying a gun that is more likely to kill a family member than a burglar is foolish.

Guns are only more likely to kill family members if you are unsafe or are violent. If you are responsible, they are not more likely.


Zardoz wrote:
You better read the paper your lever in Congress are jumping ship faster than rats leaving a sinking ship.

No they aren't.


Zardoz wrote:
There is no such thing as an unconstitutional gun law short of banning all guns.

That is incorrect. Any gun law that cannot be justified with a good reason is unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
The last Assault weapon ban was not overturned by the courts it expired.

The courts were not enforcing the Second Amendment then. They will be enforcing the Second Amendment in the future.


Zardoz wrote:
Any good mechanic can change the parts and make the assault weapons fully automatic they designed to be interchangeable

The change requires more specialized knowledge than that. You need to drill holes in the right places. Those places are not marked. If you drill in the wrong place you've ruined the gun.

And you also need to have the parts to begin with.


Zardoz wrote:
no if you needed to make the parts you might need a gun smith.

A gunsmith wouldn't manufacture parts. They'd be able to assemble the parts without ruining the guns though. If they had the parts.


Zardoz wrote:
New recruits break their M-16 down and put them back together again and again till they can do it rapidly.

I doubt they are trained to drill holes in their guns and add new parts to them.


Zardoz wrote:
Mechanic is not science parts that are designed to fit together go together.

The parts don't simply fit together. You need to do a bit of surgery on a gun to convert it to full auto.


Zardoz wrote:
The day Obama was inaugurated the top Republican met and decided to obstruct everything Obama tried to do and that is documented in many books written at the time.

That is Democratic Propaganda to obscure Obama's failures as a president. The Republicans tried working with him in his first term.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA may blow its own horn but it is total nonsense.

Nope. Obama really did expend all of his second term political capital trying to ban pistol grips over the objections for the NRA.

And the NRA really did stop him cold.


Zardoz wrote:
There were a record number of Republican filibusters they never made any effort to work with Obama.

Yes they did.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is a legend in their own mind and it imagined the rest of it

Nope. Obama really did expend all of his second term political capital trying to ban pistol grips over the objections for the NRA.

And the NRA really did stop him cold.


Zardoz wrote:
The Republican donor has told the governor of FL he will no longer support anyone who will not support gun control.

The Republicans have plenty of other donors.

There is also the fact that the House Democratic leadership has friendly relations with us and will not pass something that we dislike.


Zardoz wrote:
The political donor names is Al Hoffman Jr said he will no longer support anyone who does not support an assault weapon ban.

There are plenty of other donors who don't hate civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
If you get a social disability for mental illness you will have been to several doctors who will have to swear that you mentally ill and specify what your mental illness is.

Obama's executive order was not targeted at people with mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
I understand that Republicans think if they repeat a lie long enough that it becomes the Truth

The Republicans don't lie any more than the Democrats do.


Zardoz wrote:
but all 75,000 have been diagnosed with mental illness

No they haven't. Nothing about the executive order targeted people with mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
lying about it won’t help.

Luckily for me then I don't lie.


Zardoz wrote:
This is going to come back to bite the Republicans hard.

Not really.


Zardoz wrote:
The assault weapons are dead issue the AK-47 included.

I know. Not only is it trivially easy for the NRA to defeat such a measure, the courts would strike it down if it made it past the NRA.

It's a convenient issue. When the gun control people devote 100% of their energy on a pointless issue that they will be defeated on no matter what, they have no energy left to do anything else after their defeat on that issue.

It's like they intentionally self-sabotage.


Zardoz wrote:
Only on dangerous people?

Yes.


Zardoz wrote:
You’re going to monitor 3 million people to see when they are going to go over the edge?

No.


Zardoz wrote:
Actually, the mentally ill are less likely to be violent than the general population. These professional school shooters are quite sane. They just want to kill as many people as they can.

I know.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 03:21 pm
@Lash,
Lash

I am sorry that I overlooked your post. Terrorists names would be on placed on a master list of those who cannot buy guns just as they are on a no-fly list. When they show up at the airport security keeps them from boarding a plane. If they failed the background check when they returned to purchase the guns they would be turned down.

I was recently a gun store that also sold storage buildings. As I was waiting to be waited on a woman was trying to make a deal by trading guns for other guns she wanted. The owner would not make the trades until her background check came through and told her to return in a couple of days. She left only to return in a few minutes. When she opened the trunk of her car it was stacked full of guns. If she was on a terrorist watch list she would not be able to buy even more guns. She was a little bit of pretty and a whole lot of crazy. I would steer clear of her. So far, she has not shot up a high school but with the number of guns she had I am sure she would have a shot at the record. There had to be a few AR-15 in the pile of guns.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 03:33 pm
@Zardoz,
People have the right to due process. That is part of the Constitution too.

The terrorist watch list has no due process, so it will never be used as a justification for banning guns.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 06:55 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy

You are telling me that if we had some information before 9/11 hat the terrorists were going to fly the planes into the World Trade Center but no solid proof that we would have to let them kill, 3000 people? That we could not place them on a no-fly list without due process? Sorry due process can come after the fact not before it.

Anyone can sue and contest the governments actions, that is due process. When doing an investigation, you may have a pretty good idea what is taking place without solid proof. There is no constitutional amendment that gives you have a right to fly on an airplane.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 08:26 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy

You are telling me that if we had some information before 9/11 hat the terrorists were going to fly the planes into the World Trade Center but no solid proof that we would have to let them kill, 3000 people? That we could not place them on a no-fly list without due process? Sorry due process can come after the fact not before it.

A temporary emergency measure with due process coming soon after would be OK.

But that due process would have to come soon after.


Zardoz wrote:
Anyone can sue and contest the governments actions, that is due process.

Due process needs to give innocent people an accessible way to challenge an unjust result.


Zardoz wrote:
There is no constitutional amendment that gives you have a right to fly on an airplane.

True. But there is one that protects our right to have guns suitable for self defense.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Wed 21 Feb, 2018 09:53 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy

I think you should start a pool to see how soon one of the 75,000 mentally ill people that Trump signed a law to allow them to buy AR-15s will commit a mass murder with another pool for the number of people murdered. For instance, you could take 6 months and 25 people. If enough people participated in national pool you might win as much as the lottery.

One sure thing there will be two big losers when it happens, the Republican Party and the NRA.
_________________________________________________________________________
If you read “hj resolution 40” that Trump signed that restored the right to own an AR-15 to “those who meet certain criteria, including that benefit payments are made through a representative payee because the individually is mentally incapable of managing them.” The key words are “mentally incapable.” This of course includes a grab-bag of mental illnesses as well as those with extremely subpar IQs, bipolar, schizophrenic and other sever mental deficiencies such as autism and Asperger’s. You may remember the shooter at Sandy Hook, who killed 26 was autistic. Another feature of this bill is that many of these people may have lost gun rights for stays in mental hospitals but that will be wiped out by Trump’s bill. Many, no doubt be at a local gun range site target practicing with their AR-15s as we speak.
____________________________________________________
“The NRA is about as good a source of information as the communist party is. Only Trump truly believes.
____________________________________________________
Some people cling to fantasies hundreds of years beyond when there was any truth to them. A group of farmers with rifles may have been able to overthrow a government 200 years ago. Warfare has changed a group of farmers that tried to face down a modern military with state of the art weapons is an impossibility and to cling to that fantasy is foolish.
____________________________________________________
We have established your only right under the constitution to bear arms is what arms were state of the art at the time it was written, a muzzle loader, a bag powder, and a lead ball. We have also established that the government can by law draw a line, no howitzers for individuals for instance. No Thompsons, no assault weapons on other occasions. The American people will ultimately decide where that line will be drawn, the NRA be damned.
____________________________________________________
By the way I hope you are not a Russian bot as Russian’s are now taking up the gun debate.
____________________________________________________
Did you see the big bill boards in Kentucky that had a message “Kill the NRA” they were located along a major highway near a big city? The people are finally beginning to understand who is really responsible for the school mass murders in our schools.

___________________________________________________
The assault weapon ban in 1994 is very specific in defining assault weapon and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. In order for a semi-automatic to be banned it had to have a detachable magazine and two or more of the following: a folding or telescopic stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor, grenade launcher, or pistol grip. Having a pistol grip alone would not cause a semi-automatic to be banned without one of the other features.
__________________________________________________
I think you believe that the NRA is an all-powerful organization that dictates to the president. The fact is the power of the NRA is transitory. Politicians are fickle and as long as the political wind is blowing your way they are with you a 100% but when the political winds start blowing the other way, they will abandon you. The heat is on and it is hard to justify letting school children continue to be murdered in mass. Someone playing king of the mountain seldom remains on the top.
__________________________________________________________________________________
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 22 Feb, 2018 02:37 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
I think you should start a pool to see how soon one of the 75,000 mentally ill people that Trump signed a law to allow them to buy AR-15s will commit a mass murder with another pool for the number of people murdered.

Inability to balance a checkbook does not mean that a person is mentally ill.


Zardoz wrote:
One sure thing there will be two big losers when it happens, the Republican Party and the NRA.

No chance of that.


Zardoz wrote:
If you read “hj resolution 40” that Trump signed that restored the right to own an AR-15 to “those who meet certain criteria, including that benefit payments are made through a representative payee because the individually is mentally incapable of managing them.” The key words are “mentally incapable.”

Inability to balance a checkbook does not mean that a person is mentally ill.

More importantly, inability to balance a checkbook does not mean that a person is dangerous with a gun.


Zardoz wrote:
This of course includes a grab-bag of mental illnesses as well as those with extremely subpar IQs, bipolar, schizophrenic and other sever mental deficiencies such as autism and Asperger’s. You may remember the shooter at Sandy Hook, who killed 26 was autistic.

It also includes all the other disabled people who can't balance a checkbook.


Zardoz wrote:
Another feature of this bill is that many of these people may have lost gun rights for stays in mental hospitals but that will be wiped out by Trump’s bill.

That is incorrect. The bill only repeals Obama's executive order against disabled people who can't balance their checkbooks.


Zardoz wrote:
“The NRA is about as good a source of information as the communist party is. Only Trump truly believes.

Can you point out a single untrue thing that the NRA has ever said?


Zardoz wrote:
Some people cling to fantasies hundreds of years beyond when there was any truth to them. A group of farmers with rifles may have been able to overthrow a government 200 years ago. Warfare has changed a group of farmers that tried to face down a modern military with state of the art weapons is an impossibility and to cling to that fantasy is foolish.

I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. No one that I know of is trying to overthrow the government.

However, history shows that guerrilla warfare is not as easy to stamp out as you portray.


Zardoz wrote:
We have established your only right under the constitution to bear arms is what arms were state of the art at the time it was written, a muzzle loader, a bag powder, and a lead ball.

That is incorrect.

If the Bill of Rights only applied to technology from 1791, then Trump would be free to censor your posts on the internet. He would also be free to wiretap you without a search warrant. Both telephones and the internet came only after 1791.

In addition, the Supreme Court confirms in the Heller decision that people have the right to have modern weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
We have also established that the government can by law draw a line,

Yes, but only if they can justify that drawn line with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
no howitzers for individuals for instance. No Thompsons,

While it is hard to see how those weapons would be covered under self defense, those weapons are legally available for individuals to possess unless their state law forbids it.


Zardoz wrote:
no assault weapons on other occasions.

That is incorrect. There is no good reason for banning pistol grips, so any such ban is unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
The American people will ultimately decide where that line will be drawn, the NRA be damned.

No they won't.


Zardoz wrote:
By the way I hope you are not a Russian bot as Russian’s are now taking up the gun debate.

If I were a bot you would probably find it easy to defeat my position.


Zardoz wrote:
Did you see the big bill boards in Kentucky that had a message “Kill the NRA” they were located along a major highway near a big city?

I haven't seen them.

The KKK wanted to kill civil rights advocates too.


Zardoz wrote:
The people are finally beginning to understand who is really responsible for the school mass murders in our schools.

The only people responsible for murders are the murderers.


Zardoz wrote:
The assault weapon ban in 1994 is very specific in defining assault weapon and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. In order for a semi-automatic to be banned it had to have a detachable magazine and two or more of the following: a folding or telescopic stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor, grenade launcher, or pistol grip. Having a pistol grip alone would not cause a semi-automatic to be banned without one of the other features.

True. But there is no justification for banning those other features either.

And when manufacturers complied with this law and sold guns with just a pistol grip and none of the other features, the gun banners called it a loophole and called for banning pistol grips too. You yourself did this a few posts up.

"Pistol grip" is just a quick way to refer to all of the features that the law banned without justification.


Zardoz wrote:
I think you believe that the NRA is an all-powerful organization that dictates to the president. The fact is the power of the NRA is transitory.

That is incorrect. Our power remains absolute.


Zardoz wrote:
The heat is on and it is hard to justify letting school children continue to be murdered in mass.

Our right to have guns is not the cause of any murders.


Zardoz wrote:
Someone playing king of the mountain seldom remains on the top.

We're not playing king of the mountain. We're defending civil rights.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Feb, 2018 12:59 am
@oralloy,
Oralloy

The Heller case decision clearly states that “the Second Amendment rights are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manor whatsoever for whatever purpose.” One of the cases the court used to anchor their opinion was the United States v. Miller which “prohibited the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.” The Heller case speaks to being able to register a handgun and a requirement for a gun lock or dissemble in the home but clearly establish the right of government to ban dangerous and unusual weapons such as the AR-15.
____________________________________________________

I took law classes from two different universities. Law was not related to my major or minor but as a union president a basic understanding of the law was advantage. In arbitrations I was always up against a city attorney. Though the city attorneys had a better understanding of law overall, I often had a better understanding of labor law. I won the vast majority of my cases even when I was in my twenties. The next two cases you list are 18 century English cases. A case in England cannot be used to build a right in America any more than a case in France could be used to the same.
____________________________________________________
The law is based on common sense. The test being what would a reasonable man do? The NRA lobby has completely distorted that concept by flooding the streets of America with weapons of war. There are over 8 million AR-15 style weapons on the street of America and a million a year are sold during some years.
____________________________________________________
The four cases you list are from England Courts in 1700s and 1800s can you even imagine the level of education in that time period. Do you think we should be bound to ignorance and have to stand idly by and watch on the evening news as our children are slaughtered because someone with a first or second grade education mandated it 200 years ago? A case in England cannot be used to build a right in America any more than a case in France could be used to the same. that hold no more
___________________________________________________

Oralloy, do you have any idea why America fought the Revolutionary war? It is because we did not want to be subject to the laws of the King of England. When America got its independence, we were free to pick and choose which laws we would accept and which we would reject. Some of America laws have a bases in English Common law and some laws are handed down from France. Those court cases are no more relevant than the British tax on tea. Any attempt to manufacture a right from 18 century common law court cases is futile. His would be like using cases in city court to give people a “right” to own atomic weapons. America fought the revolutionary War to be independent of England not subordinate to England.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

When the assault weapons were banned in 1994 the second amendment was in place. In the Heller case decision, the judge clearly states that “The second amendment rights are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to carry any weapon in any manor whatsoever for whatever purpose.” In that decision the NRA won the battle but lost the war. They can register hand gun in Washington DC and don’t have to have gun locks so their children can blow their brother brains out but according to that decision assault weapon ban is legal. The court affirmed that the second amendment rights “are not unlimited.”
___________________________________________________

Commonsense, let’s talk about common sense, oralloy. Do you know why all professional school shooters prefer the AR-15? The AR-15 does the maximum amount of damage to human body far more than other guns.
___________________________________________________________________________________
“AR-15 inflict far more damage to human tissue than typical handguns, which are used in most shootings. That is largely because of the speed at which projectiles leave the weapons; they are much faster out of the muzzle of an AR-15, or similar rifle, and deliver a more devastating blow to bones and organs. Those projectiles are also far more likely to break apart as they pass through the body inflicting more damage.”

From an Internet article entitled: “America’s Rifle Why So Many People Love the AR-15”

Source NBC
____________________________________________________
Killing 20 first graders for fun and sport is an even better reason then yelling fire in a theater.
____________________________________________________

Oralloy, if you read the 1994 assault weapon ban you know that a pistol grip alone was not a reason for the ban. Now if you had a folding stock and a pistol grip or a grenade launcher, or a pistol grip with a bayonet mount, that was grounds for the ban.
__________________________________________________________________________________
There never was any law against pistols grips by themselves just the combinations were banned. Pistol grip were not the real problem as long as you stayed away from grenade launchers, bayonet mounts, and folding stocks.
___________________________________________________
I repeat pistol grips are legal combination are illegal.
One of the primary purposes of government is to protect the population both from without and within. The AR-15 was developed in 1950 as a civilian gun by a start-up company named Armalife it was so superior to anything being used on the battle field it was soon bought by Colt which made the military version the M-16. The US military needed an assault weapon that would provide the maximum number of kills. I mistakenly believed the M-16 was developed before the AR-15. The AR-15 is very lightweight compared to other guns and when you have a lot of killing to do you don’t want your arms to be tired.
__________________________________________________

You’re wrong you have no right to a weapon of war. I may have missed it but I don’t remember a school shooting in the last 500 years with an English longbow. While putting another arrow in your bow your targets would scatter and they are not much good for shooting down doors.
Words have a specific definition for a reason. If the city where you lived confiscated your guns and you went to court argued that your civil rights were violated the city would still have your guns. In a court of law terminology is extremely important. Base your case on the wrong law and you lose.
______________________________________________________________________________

You need to read the assault weapon ban it even provides pictures of banned weapons. The assault ban was extremely specific listing the manufacturer and model numbers of banned guns.
___________________________________________________
The NRA is the Gun Manufacturer’s lobbying arm in Washington they serve the self interest of the gun manufacturer. They are not concerned in the least about civil rights or they would be concerned about 50,000 Americans that are killed every year with their guns. They have only one reason to exist and that is to sell death.
_____________________________________________________
No, the assault weapon ban was very specific many of the guns were foreign and they could no longer be imported but the one gun that is most responsible for mass murder was not banned. The AR-15 evaded the ban and that is why so many children have been shot with it. How much money do you think changed hands to beat the ban with other similar weapons were banned?
_____________________________________________________
I know of no one shot with a pistol grip but then pistol grips were not banned.
___________________________________________________
I don’t know whether you get the concept or not but there are state laws and federal laws. The Thompson law is federal and states are bound by federal law they can be stricter but all states are subject to federal law. If Thompson submachine were legal we would have hundreds of wannabee Bonnies and Clydes running around shooting up gas stations.
____________________________________________________
I don’t think I have seen a crime committed with a Thompson since the 1930s there must be reason. Why wouldn’t professional school shooters buy a Thompsons in those states they were legal instead of AR-15s? No school shooter has ever used a Thompson submachine gun.
____________________________________________________
I know from posting that you think you can go to laws of other countries and claim that if the other country passed a law or foreign court decided a law in favor of someone that it gives you that right, it does not. The reason for American independence was so we would decide what law we would live under.
___________________________________________________
You simply can’t claim what is not yours by birth or country.
___________________________________________________
We broke away from England for simple reason we did not want to follow their laws. When we broke away we stopped and started writing our own. Are you saying we have to follow all of the English law’s or just the ones you cherry pick?
____________________________________________________
A good reason to limit a right, how about a stack of dead bodies from here to sky?
____________________________________________________
Common sense is the very foundation of our legal system. The NRA which constantly claims that the reason is so people can overthrow the government if it does not suit them is nonsense as a few farmers with guns would defeat the world’s strongest army.
____________________________________________________
I think there is no doubt that the Cruikshank case fabricated rights. It fabricated the right of white men to kill 280 unarmed black men. No such right existed prior to that ruling. That ruling was responsible for 1,000s of killings in south in the years to come. Blacks could be killed on main street in front of crowd of 50 people and no one would ever be punished. You know what they say about the fruit of poison tree.
_____________________________________________________
It is the old problem of whether the glass is half full of half empty. You can look at second amendment as granting a right or restricting the rights of the Federal government but either way it does not grant an unlimited right to future technology.
____________________________________________________
The M-16 was derived from the AR-15 because it’s destructive power exceeded the state of the art weapons of war. Thee destructive power is derived from the velocity from the barrel. How many times can you pull a trigger in a minute. In a minute I can pull a trigger 106 times. With practice I could pull it at least 200 times. A full automatic would make very little difference to a practiced shooter. The AR-15 was designed for mass murder. Once a few parts are exchanged the AR-15 becomes a full automatic. Do notice the number of kills continues to grow. School shooters are evolving and it is only a matter of time before one going for the record shows up with a fully automatic AR-15. In fact, the shooter in Las Vegas set a new record taking advantage of the automatic feature by using a bump stock.
____________________________________________________
The pistol grip was not the problem you could buy it on a BB gun. The combination was the problem.
_____________________________________________________
Colt started with the AR-15 changed a couple of minor parts to create the M-16. If you bought a new Ford that did not have automatic windows are you going to tell me the same model with automatic windows is not a Ford?
The country has not had one mass murder at a school with English longbow. The deer on the other hand might have a problem with it. _________________________________________________________________________________

The problem we are having with the AR-15 is just now evolving to full automatic with the bump stocks. The use of a bump stock does not require anyone with mechanical ability. The gun becomes fully automatic because it is designed to shoot that way. Courts decisions are clear the government can decide which weapons are legal. The parts for the conversion are available mail order. The only problem is that all the parts for the conversion can not be bought from the same place. Two separate orders must be placed to two different dealers but why bother when you can buy a bump stock?
____________________________________________________
Anybody that doesn’t believe that the NRA is not a gun manufacturer association should ask to see where the billions of dollars spent on elections comes from. It didn’t come from yearly membership dues. The NRA spent $24 million on the presidential race in 2016 alone. Wake up and follow the blood-soaked money it did not fall from heaven.
___________________________________________________
The NRA is spending billions in political donations to crooked federal, state, and local politicians The NRA buys huge chunks of TV time. They ran ½ hour infomercials several times before the 2004 election and all the local gun nuts were running around shouting the sky is falling. That money comes directly from the gun manufacturers.
____________________________________________________
The gun manufacturers may also be represented by NSSF. Did the NSSF spend $24 million in the last presidential election? How many politicians are endorsed by the NSSF? Everyone knows who is endorsed by the NRA.
The assault weapons are priced up to $2,000 and they are the most profitable guns sold by gun manufacturers. Never ever underestimate self-interest as a motive. The gun manufacturers might need to deny it in case of the coming lawsuits and need an outside organization they control like the NRA to push their agenda.
___________________________________________________
There is no way you can deny they are a merchant of death. Fifty thousand die from guns each year most them are the gun owner (suicides, or being shot with the gun they supplied) or family members of gun owner shot accidently or on purpose. If that ain’t selling death I don’t know what is.
If I replace the parts in an AR-15 to make it fully automatic it will not go to court house and changes its name it is still an AR-15.
____________________________________________________
If the AR-15 is no more dangerous than other semi-automatics why do professional school shooters prefer it 99 to 1?
____________________________________________________
Read the 1994 assault weapon ban you have absolutely no clue.
____________________________________________________
The AR-15 was such an efficient killer of men that it outclassed every other weapon of war on the planet and the US military modified to make it even more efficient. Everything about the M-16 is AR-15 with only slight modifications.
____________________________________________________
One of the features the assault weapons ban concentrated on was high capacity clips some held a hundred rounds. Where would these be used? In a wars and school shootings. Do you consider those cosmetic? I can assure no self-respecting shooter is going into a school with a six-round clip?
If you had a semi-automatic that had a six-round clip and it took a minute to chamber those rounds it would not be used in school shootings.
You would have no problem buying a pistol grip as long as you could do without a grenade launcher.
____________________________________________________
I looked at the pictures of the banned assault weapon and they are some of the most dangerous guns in the world. The original patent on the AR-15 has expired and copycat weapons are being manufactured all over the world and imported into the US.
_____________________________________________________
There is a reason that English longbows are not used to fight wars today. A man with a rock would kill you before you could bull back the bow.
____________________________________________________
Eugene Stoner, the designer of the AR-15, showed the military that he could design far more effective at killing people than anything they had.
___________________________________________________________________________________
There is a big difference between a mechanical object such as a gun and freedom of speech. Mechanical objects evolve. The freedom of speech however is much the same as it was during 1791.
_____________________________________________________
There is no state where you can buy a howitzer because it is prohibited by federal law.
_____________________________________________________
It has everything to do with technology as new technology comes along we must decide where to draw the line. No doubt guns will continue to evolve one day guns may not fire bullets but focused light that can cut a person in half in less than second. A school shooter may be able to use laser beam to kill 500 people instead of 17. The NRA will claim it is great for target practice. A decision will have to be made as where to draw the line.
Wire tap problems are problems in philosophy which extend the right of privacy into new technology.
____________________________________________________
Wire taps don’t kill school children, Guns on the other hand are far more dangerous than they were in 1791. There were no mass murders of school children in 1791. The government is tasked wit a duty to protect the children and it fails when it allows weapons of mass destruction on every street corner.
____________________________________________________
Pistol grips are not the problem they don’t make the high-powered bullets and muzzle velocity that shatter the ribs.
____________________________________________________
A pistol grip does not an assault weapon make.
____________________________________________________
There is a difference in speed of cars, my wife’s Rogue might make a 100, my 370z will do a 153. Semi- automatic will not all chamber rounds at the same speed. A $2,000 AR-15 will chamber rounds much faster than semi-automatic rifle because it is state of the art.
____________________________________________________
Something changed the machine guns disappeared overnight.
____________________________________________________
When I see a school, shooting done with a Thompson I will believe that are readily available on the street.
_____________________________________________________
English longbows are obsolete as weapons of war.
___________________________________________________
Oralloy, do you not understand this problem is getting worse and is accelerating. There will be far more school shooting and the number of students killed will get higher. There are at least a million potential school shooters out there the majority will never act on their impulses. The shooter in FL had carefully studied other school shootings so he would not make the same mistakes. By studying the other school shootings, he knew he had to have an AR-15 to pull it off. These professional school shooters are very professional.
_____________________________________________________
The courts did not strike down the 1994 assault ban and they will not strike down the next one either.
____________________________________________________
All semi-automatics may operate on the same principal but not at the same speed.
____________________________________________________
Assault weapons and high capacity clips are the targets hunting rifles with small clips will escape the ban.
____________________________________________________
The shooter in FL used 30 round clips if you can’t hit a target with deer 6 rounds someone should take your gun away.
_________________________________________________
The second amendment gives you a right to bear arms not to a 30-round clip.
__________________________________________________
I don’t know that any of the AR-15s used in the school shootings had a pistol grip.
_____________________________________________________
Previous shootings have caused outrage that did not last but each shooting has caused the outrage to increase at a geometric rate and the affects of this shooting is for the first time showing Republican politicians to jump ship as well as mega Republican donors.
_____________________________________________________
Orally if history has taught us anything it is that anybody can kill anyone. It would be easy to be waiting outside and when store closed open up on him with an AR-15 you could put 30 rounds in him before he got his hand in his pocket. That is the problem with gun you might own a thousand but they won’t protect you if someone is determined to kill you.
___________________________________________________
We have went from shooting in post offices, to work places, to restaurants to school shooting. The solution may come to shootings when the NRA holds meetings. That would give the NRA a brand-new point of view if the shooting happened to them on a regular basis.
__________________________________________________
If you know the true history of Vietnam you know the French were exploiting them. The French were shipping all the food out of the country while the people starved to death. Initially Ho Chi Minh tried to enlist the help of the United States before accepting the communists. The domino theory was just that a theory that history proved wrong but a good portion of a generation was killed for nothing and the slaughter would have continued.
_________________________________________________
Those bratty kids are on the verge of being very politically active adults. If you spent four hours hiding in closet thinking you were going to be killed any minute it would change priorities.
__________________________________________________
In our society they call them enablers and they are more at fault then the ones that pulled the trigger. The bill boards in Kentucky is expressing the sentiments of many Americans.
___________________________________________________
The NRA is an organization that spreads death throughout America.
If a guy tells you he must have gun because he is afraid his house might be broken into, or someone is out to get him. It says it all.
The Olympic biathlon medalists acquired their interest in guns much earlier and probably for the same reasons.
____________________________________________________
Their fear is so all consuming they will put their family lives at risk. I worked with guy who went on vacation. He got a call his son committed suicide. When he got home he had to scrape his son’s brains off the ceiling. No gun, no suicide.
__________________________________________________
Statistics show that is who is most likely to be killed. The husband and the wife get in a fight and in anger one shoots the other to end the argument. Your teenager comes in late and they think he is a burglar he is shot and killed. Guns are unsafe at any speed.
__________________________________________________

Rubio was one of the first to change his mind. Kasich and Rubio were both Republican presidential contenders. As the heat is turned up more will shun the NRA. Rubio was asked if he would continue to take the NRA blood money at a public meeting by a survivor of the FL shooting. He could not stutter fast enough. He has taken 3 million dollars.
____________________________________________________
You cannot stretch the 2nd amendment to cover all the technological developments in the last 200 years.
____________________________________________________
The NRA would have used all of their best attorneys in attempt to overturn the 1994 ban and they could not.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Lots of mechanical operations require holes be drilled in a precise place. Some car accessories require up to twenty holes. If you miss you have trashed a $20,000 car they are not marked either. That is a pretty common skill.
___________________________________________________
The parts are available.
______________________________________________________
Someone built the AR-15 and that is a big thing now many people are building there own AR-15 by ordering parts on line. The people building their AR-15 have no obvious skills. One guys wife was even building one.
Sorry there is no propaganda the Republican blockade was widely reported at the time. The NRA was the very least of Obama’s troubles.
___________________________________________________
The NRA could not stop a bus let alone Obama. The NRA has a very narrow focus and can affect only gun legislation.
___________________________________________________
There are a few Democrats who take the blood money from the NRA but they will not survive the next election. They are closet Republicans.
_______________________________________________
Their may be plenty of Republican donors but very few mega donors and when the stampede starts you better not get in the way.
___________________________________________________
When you get social security for mental illness that is the reason you get social security.
__________________________________________________
These people cannot be trusted with their own money. This is what gives the NRA a bad name.
___________________________________________________
Anyone that doesn’t believe that Trump is not the world’s greatest liar is just not right. First Trump said he thinks school teachers should be armed a day later he denies it the day after that he proposes it.
____________________________________________________
The order target people who got social security for mental illness and mental defect. One them will be coming to your neighborhood with his new AR-15.
____________________________________________________
You may not lie in your mind but you can convince yourself that reality isn’t reality.
___________________________________________________
When you put guns in the hands of people who are not competent to handle a dollar there is no way it won’t bite you.
___________________________________________________
Frequent mass murder is not a trivial issue asked anyone of those children who called their parents to say goodbye as that AR-15 was killing people in the background. The problem will not go away until the guns go away and right now that is by far the most important political issue in America.
_______________________________________________________
The fact the mentally ill are less likely to be violent is the scary part because that means the shooters are sane and much more likely to do long range planning and learn from the mistake of other school shooters. The NRA spokeswoman just says the guy was nuts to shift the blame. No mass murder has ever been found innocent by reason of insanity. There are people who just enjoy killing people it makes them feel powerful and many experience a sexual high when killing.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 23 Feb, 2018 07:06 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
The Heller case decision clearly states that “the Second Amendment rights are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon in any manor whatsoever for whatever purpose.” One of the cases the court used to anchor their opinion was the United States v. Miller which “prohibited the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.”

This does not change the fact that the Heller ruling confirms our right to have modern weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
The Heller case speaks to being able to register a handgun and a requirement for a gun lock or dissemble in the home but clearly establish the right of government to ban dangerous and unusual weapons such as the AR-15.

That is incorrect. The AR-15 is neither dangerous nor unusual. It is just like any other semi-auto rifle.


Zardoz wrote:
I took law classes from two different universities. Law was not related to my major or minor but as a union president a basic understanding of the law was advantage. In arbitrations I was always up against a city attorney. Though the city attorneys had a better understanding of law overall, I often had a better understanding of labor law. I won the vast majority of my cases even when I was in my twenties.

I helped with an amicus to the US Supreme Court in the Heller decision.

Although, my role was minor. The lawyers wanted to produce a glossary of gun terms. They needed to cite a reputable source for each gun term and had no idea where to find such a source. I suggested SAAMI's online definitions.

They didn't use many definitions from SAAMI because their definitions were too arcane, but my suggestion broke the mental logjam and gave them inspiration where to turn for the definitions that they ultimately did use.


Zardoz wrote:
A case in England cannot be used to build a right in America any more than a case in France could be used to the same.

That is incorrect. The Supreme Court is free to borrow from the jurisprudence of other countries if it chooses to.

More to the point though, the Second Amendment protects that very right from English Common Law.

So to learn what the right that is being protected means, we have to look to what the right meant when it was being applied in English Common Law.

To quote the US Supreme Court in the Heller ruling:

The United State Supreme Court wrote:
it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it "shall not be infringed." As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), "[t]his 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 . . . ."16

Between the Restoration and the Glorious Revolution, the Stuart Kings Charles II and James II succeeded in using select militias loyal to them to suppress political dissidents, in part by disarming their opponents. See J. Malcolm, To Keep and Bear Arms 31-53 (1994) (hereinafter Malcolm); L. Schwoerer, The Declaration of Rights, 1689, p. 76 (1981). Under the auspices of the 1671 Game Act, for example, the Catholic James II had ordered general disarmaments of regions home to his Protestant enemies. See Malcolm 103-106. These experiences caused Englishmen to be extremely wary of concentrated military forces run by the state and to be jealous of their arms. They accordingly obtained an assurance from William and Mary, in the Declaration of Right (which was codified as the English Bill of Rights), that Protestants would never be disarmed: "That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law." 1 W. & M., c. 2, §7, in 3 Eng. Stat. at Large 441 (1689). This right has long been understood to be the predecessor to our Second Amendment.



Zardoz wrote:
The law is based on common sense. The test being what would a reasonable man do?

That is incorrect. The test is whether a good reason can be presented to the court to justify the restriction of a right.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA lobby has completely distorted that concept by flooding the streets of America with weapons of war.

That is incorrect. They are not in any way weapons of war. And since there is no good reason to ban pistol grips, the NRA is not distorting anything.


Zardoz wrote:
The four cases you list are from England Courts in 1700s and 1800s can you even imagine the level of education in that time period. Do you think we should be bound to ignorance and have to stand idly by and watch on the evening news as our children are slaughtered because someone with a first or second grade education mandated it 200 years ago?

Level of education in the past is hardly a reason to get rid of civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, do you have any idea why America fought the Revolutionary war? It is because we did not want to be subject to the laws of the King of England. When America got its independence, we were free to pick and choose which laws we would accept and which we would reject. Some of America laws have a bases in English Common law and some laws are handed down from France. Those court cases are no more relevant than the British tax on tea. Any attempt to manufacture a right from 18 century common law court cases is futile.

That is incorrect. The US kept on using English Common Law after we split from England. And the Founding Fathers made sure that the US Constitution protects all common law rights. Any common law rights that were not protected by name were given protection by the Ninth Amendment.


Zardoz wrote:
When the assault weapons were banned in 1994 the second amendment was in place.

True. But the courts were not enforcing the Second Amendment then.

They will be enforcing the Second Amendment in the future.


Zardoz wrote:
In the Heller case decision, the judge clearly states that “The second amendment rights are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to carry any weapon in any manor whatsoever for whatever purpose.”

Yes. The test is whether a restriction on a right can be justified with a good reason.

That isn't the exact wording of course. The actual term is compelling interest I believe. But that's what it amounts to in layman's terms.


Zardoz wrote:
In that decision the NRA won the battle but lost the war.

Setting aside for a moment the fact that the NRA wasn't the one pursuing the case.... No. The ruling was a great step forward in the cause for protecting our rights. We didn't lose anything.


Zardoz wrote:
They can register hand gun in Washington DC and don’t have to have gun locks so their children can blow their brother brains out but according to that decision assault weapon ban is legal.

That is incorrect. The lack of any good reason to ban pistol grips means that any such ban is unconstitutional.


Zardoz wrote:
Commonsense, let’s talk about common sense, oralloy.

Why do people who oppose civil rights always claim common sense?


Zardoz wrote:
Do you know why all professional school shooters prefer the AR-15? The AR-15 does the maximum amount of damage to human body far more than other guns.

That is incorrect. Deer hunting rifles do vastly greater damage.

Try a .270 Winchester if you want to see big damage to a body.


Zardoz wrote:
“AR-15 inflict far more damage to human tissue than typical handguns, which are used in most shootings. That is largely because of the speed at which projectiles leave the weapons; they are much faster out of the muzzle of an AR-15, or similar rifle, and deliver a more devastating blow to bones and organs. Those projectiles are also far more likely to break apart as they pass through the body inflicting more damage.”

That is the case for ALL centerfire rifles.

The rounds used in most AR-15s are actually pretty weak as far as damage goes when compared to rounds like the .270 Winchester.


Zardoz wrote:
Killing 20 first graders for fun and sport is an even better reason then yelling fire in a theater.

That is why laws against murder are allowed by the Constitution.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, if you read the 1994 assault weapon ban you know that a pistol grip alone was not a reason for the ban. Now if you had a folding stock and a pistol grip or a grenade launcher, or a pistol grip with a bayonet mount, that was grounds for the ban.
__________________________________________________________________________________
There never was any law against pistols grips by themselves just the combinations were banned. Pistol grip were not the real problem as long as you stayed away from grenade launchers, bayonet mounts, and folding stocks.
___________________________________________________
I repeat pistol grips are legal combination are illegal.

Even if the pistol grip had been the only feature that was banned pointlessly, that alone would make the ban unconstitutional.

However, there are also no justifications for banning any of the other features either. Or any combination of the other features.


Zardoz wrote:
One of the primary purposes of government is to protect the population both from without and within. The AR-15 was developed in 1950 as a civilian gun by a start-up company named Armalife it was so superior to anything being used on the battle field it was soon bought by Colt which made the military version the M-16. The US military needed an assault weapon that would provide the maximum number of kills. I mistakenly believed the M-16 was developed before the AR-15. The AR-15 is very lightweight compared to other guns and when you have a lot of killing to do you don’t want your arms to be tired.

That's probably why it is so popular with varmint hunters.


Zardoz wrote:
You’re wrong you have no right to a weapon of war.

That is incorrect. The Glock 17 is a weapon of war. I have the right to have one.


Zardoz wrote:
I may have missed it but I don’t remember a school shooting in the last 500 years with an English longbow. While putting another arrow in your bow your targets would scatter and they are not much good for shooting down doors.

That does not change the fact that it is a weapon of war and I have the right to have it.


Zardoz wrote:
Words have a specific definition for a reason. If the city where you lived confiscated your guns and you went to court argued that your civil rights were violated the city would still have your guns.

Not if the city didn't have a good reason for seizing my guns. American courts are pretty good about protecting civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
You need to read the assault weapon ban it even provides pictures of banned weapons. The assault ban was extremely specific listing the manufacturer and model numbers of banned guns.

That does not change the fact that it was all about banning guns because of features that there is no justification for banning.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is the Gun Manufacturer’s lobbying arm in Washington they serve the self interest of the gun manufacturer.

That is incorrect. They do not represent gun manufacturers.


Zardoz wrote:
They are not concerned in the least about civil rights or they would be concerned about 50,000 Americans that are killed every year with their guns.

It's silly to pretend that they don't defend civil rights when you are objecting to their defense of civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
They have only one reason to exist and that is to sell death.

That's just silly.


Zardoz wrote:
No, the assault weapon ban was very specific many of the guns were foreign and they could no longer be imported but the one gun that is most responsible for mass murder was not banned.

That does not change the fact that it bans weapons because of features that there are no good reasons for banning.


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 evaded the ban

That is incorrect. The AR-15 complied with all the useless cosmetic changes when they were required by law.


Zardoz wrote:
I know of no one shot with a pistol grip but then pistol grips were not banned.

That is incorrect. The assault weapons ban was all about pistol grips and other features that there is no reason to ban.


Zardoz wrote:
I don’t know whether you get the concept or not but there are state laws and federal laws. The Thompson law is federal and states are bound by federal law they can be stricter but all states are subject to federal law.

Note that when I point out to you that machineguns and howitzers are legal, I say "unless you live in a state where they are prohibited".


Zardoz wrote:
If Thompson submachine were legal we would have hundreds of wannabee Bonnies and Clydes running around shooting up gas stations.

All Thomson submachine guns that were legally registered by 1986 remain legal to own.


Zardoz wrote:
I don’t think I have seen a crime committed with a Thompson since the 1930s there must be reason. Why wouldn’t professional school shooters buy a Thompsons in those states they were legal instead of AR-15s? No school shooter has ever used a Thompson submachine gun.

I mentioned the CLIO signoff before. My view hasn't changed.


Zardoz wrote:
A good reason to limit a right, how about a stack of dead bodies from here to sky?

Pistol grips are not the cause of any pile of dead bodies.


Zardoz wrote:
Common sense is the very foundation of our legal system. The NRA which constantly claims that the reason is so people can overthrow the government if it does not suit them is nonsense as a few farmers with guns would defeat the world’s strongest army.

No one that I know of is trying to overthrow the government.

However, history shows that guerrilla movements are not so easy to defeat as you are claiming.


Zardoz wrote:
I think there is no doubt that the Cruikshank case fabricated rights. It fabricated the right of white men to kill 280 unarmed black men. No such right existed prior to that ruling.

They did not create any such right. Nor did they claim that any such right already existed.

Their actual claim, that rights only restrict the government, is considered good law to this day.


Zardoz wrote:
It is the old problem of whether the glass is half full of half empty. You can look at second amendment as granting a right or restricting the rights of the Federal government but either way it does not grant an unlimited right to future technology.

It can be limited only if that limitation is justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
The M-16 was derived from the AR-15 because it’s destructive power exceeded the state of the art weapons of war. Thee destructive power is derived from the velocity from the barrel. How many times can you pull a trigger in a minute. In a minute I can pull a trigger 106 times. With practice I could pull it at least 200 times.

Not while aiming with any degree of accuracy.


Zardoz wrote:
A full automatic would make very little difference to a practiced shooter.

The Las Vegas shooter was practiced. Are you saying that bump stocks did not vastly increase his rate of fire?


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 was designed for mass murder.

That would be news to all the people who use it for hunting, self defense, or target shooting.

Why do we supply police officers with this gun (true full auto versions no less)? Do we really want the police to go around murdering people?


Zardoz wrote:
Once a few parts are exchanged the AR-15 becomes a full automatic.

Maybe they should pass a law against converting a weapon to full auto unless it is already a legally registered machine gun.


Zardoz wrote:
Do notice the number of kills continues to grow. School shooters are evolving and it is only a matter of time before one going for the record shows up with a fully automatic AR-15. In fact, the shooter in Las Vegas set a new record taking advantage of the automatic feature by using a bump stock.

A few paragraphs up you were claiming that full auto didn't make much difference.


Zardoz wrote:
The pistol grip was not the problem you could buy it on a BB gun. The combination was the problem.

Even if the pistol grip had been the only feature that was banned pointlessly, that alone would make the ban unconstitutional.

However, there are also no justifications for banning any of the other features either. Or any combination of the other features.


Zardoz wrote:
Colt started with the AR-15 changed a couple of minor parts to create the M-16. If you bought a new Ford that did not have automatic windows are you going to tell me the same model with automatic windows is not a Ford?

Full auto versions of the guns are not the same model as semi-auto-only versions.


Zardoz wrote:
The country has not had one mass murder at a school with English longbow. The deer on the other hand might have a problem with it.

That does not change the fact that it is a weapon of war and I have the right to have it.


Zardoz wrote:
The problem we are having with the AR-15 is just now evolving to full automatic with the bump stocks. The use of a bump stock does not require anyone with mechanical ability. The gun becomes fully automatic because it is designed to shoot that way.

Sounds like maybe there is justification for restricting bump stocks.


Zardoz wrote:
Courts decisions are clear the government can decide which weapons are legal.

Only if the government passes laws that can be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
Anybody that doesn’t believe that the NRA is not a gun manufacturer association should ask to see where the billions of dollars spent on elections comes from. It didn’t come from yearly membership dues. The NRA spent $24 million on the presidential race in 2016 alone. Wake up and follow the blood-soaked money it did not fall from heaven.
___________________________________________________
The NRA is spending billions in political donations to crooked federal, state, and local politicians The NRA buys huge chunks of TV time. They ran ½ hour infomercials several times before the 2004 election and all the local gun nuts were running around shouting the sky is falling. That money comes directly from the gun manufacturers.

Hardly crooked. They merely support civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
Did the NSSF spend $24 million in the last presidential election? How many politicians are endorsed by the NSSF? Everyone knows who is endorsed by the NRA.

The gun manufacturers have no objections to unconstitutional gun laws. Because of this, the NSSF does not fight these laws as the NRA does.


Zardoz wrote:
The assault weapons are priced up to $2,000 and they are the most profitable guns sold by gun manufacturers. Never ever underestimate self-interest as a motive.

They cost just as much and are just as profitable if they comply with the pointless cosmetic changes imposed by bans on assault weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
The gun manufacturers might need to deny it in case of the coming lawsuits and need an outside organization they control like the NRA to push their agenda.

No such lawsuits are coming. If anyone sues a gun manufacturer, the case will be thrown out of court, and their homes and retirement funds will be seized by the courts to pay the gun manufacturer's legal bills.


Zardoz wrote:
There is no way you can deny they are a merchant of death.

Sure I can. They are not responsible for any deaths.


Zardoz wrote:
Fifty thousand die from guns each year most them are the gun owner (suicides, or being shot with the gun they supplied) or family members of gun owner shot accidently or on purpose.

They'd be just as dead if they were killed with different weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
If that ain’t selling death I don’t know what is.

Nothing is. Murderers are responsible for their own murders.


Zardoz wrote:
If I replace the parts in an AR-15 to make it fully automatic it will not go to court house and changes its name it is still an AR-15.

Such conversions tend to be illegal.


Zardoz wrote:
If the AR-15 is no more dangerous than other semi-automatics why do professional school shooters prefer it 99 to 1?

They don't. They prefer ordinary handguns to any sort of assault weapon.


Zardoz wrote:
Read the 1994 assault weapon ban you have absolutely no clue.

I know everything about the 1994 assault weapons ban.


Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 was such an efficient killer of men that it outclassed every other weapon of war on the planet

How would it compare to a barrage of thermonuclear warheads?


Zardoz wrote:
Everything about the M-16 is AR-15 with only slight modifications.

The conversion to full auto is a pretty significant modification.


Zardoz wrote:
One of the features the assault weapons ban concentrated on was high capacity clips some held a hundred rounds.

And if the law focused on them alone without all the nonsense about cosmetic features, it could have been justified as having a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
Where would these be used? In a wars and school shootings.

Varmint hunters use them.


Zardoz wrote:
If you had a semi-automatic that had a six-round clip and it took a minute to chamber those rounds it would not be used in school shootings.

It takes less than a second to chamber a round.


Zardoz wrote:
You would have no problem buying a pistol grip as long as you could do without a grenade launcher.

There is no reason to ban the other features either. Like I said before, pistol grip was just an easy way of referring to all the features that there are no reasons for banning.


Zardoz wrote:
I looked at the pictures of the banned assault weapon and they are some of the most dangerous guns in the world.

Hardly. Full auto weapons are much more dangerous.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a reason that English longbows are not used to fight wars today. A man with a rock would kill you before you could bull back the bow.

If so, that doesn't change the fact that they are a weapon of war and I have the right to have them.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a big difference between a mechanical object such as a gun and freedom of speech. Mechanical objects evolve. The freedom of speech however is much the same as it was during 1791.

So I guess Trump is free to censor all your posts on the internet?


Zardoz wrote:
There is no state where you can buy a howitzer because it is prohibited by federal law.

That is incorrect. Ownership of howitzers is not prohibited by federal law and they can be owned in any state that does not forbid them.


Zardoz wrote:
It has everything to do with technology as new technology comes along we must decide where to draw the line. No doubt guns will continue to evolve one day guns may not fire bullets but focused light that can cut a person in half in less than second. A school shooter may be able to use laser beam to kill 500 people instead of 17. The NRA will claim it is great for target practice. A decision will have to be made as where to draw the line.

The Courts require this drawn line to be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
Wire tap problems are problems in philosophy which extend the right of privacy into new technology.

Had you been right about our rights not applying to new technology, there would be no such extension.


Zardoz wrote:
Wire taps don’t kill school children,

That does not change the fact that if you had been correct about rights not extending to new technology, Trump would be free to wiretap you without needing a search warrant.


Zardoz wrote:
Guns on the other hand are far more dangerous than they were in 1791. There were no mass murders of school children in 1791. The government is tasked wit a duty to protect the children and it fails when it allows weapons of mass destruction on every street corner.

Weapons of mass destruction are nuclear weapons, biological weapons, chemical weapons, and radiological weapons.


Zardoz wrote:
Pistol grips are not the problem they don’t make the high-powered bullets and muzzle velocity that shatter the ribs.

That is why you can't justify any bans on pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
A pistol grip does not an assault weapon make.

That is incorrect. Assault weapons are just long guns with things like pistol grips added on them.


Zardoz wrote:
There is a difference in speed of cars, my wife’s Rogue might make a 100, my 370z will do a 153. Semi- automatic will not all chamber rounds at the same speed. A $2,000 AR-15 will chamber rounds much faster than semi-automatic rifle because it is state of the art.

That is incorrect. They do not chamber rounds any faster than any other semi-auto.


Zardoz wrote:
Something changed the machine guns disappeared overnight.

Machine guns can still be acquired to this day if you live in a state that allows them.


Zardoz wrote:
English longbows are obsolete as weapons of war.

That does not change the fact that I have the right to have them.

The Glock 17 is a modern weapon of war, and I have the right to have that as well.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, do you not understand this problem is getting worse and is accelerating. There will be far more school shooting and the number of students killed will get higher. There are at least a million potential school shooters out there the majority will never act on their impulses. The shooter in FL had carefully studied other school shootings so he would not make the same mistakes.

Pistol grips have nothing to do with that.


Zardoz wrote:
By studying the other school shootings, he knew he had to have an AR-15 to pull it off.

If he thought that, he didn't know as much as he thought he did. The pistol grip did nothing to help him.


Zardoz wrote:
The courts did not strike down the 1994 assault ban and they will not strike down the next one either.

There isn't going to be a next one. If anyone even tries, the NRA will use it to defeat the entire gun control agenda, just like the last time around.

And if such a ban did pass, the courts would indeed strike it down.


Zardoz wrote:
All semi-automatics may operate on the same principal but not at the same speed.

No. They all operate at pretty much the same speed.

You might be able to use a high speed camera to find differences of a thousandth of a second or something. But nothing that would impact rate of fire.


Zardoz wrote:
Assault weapons and high capacity clips are the targets

If so then you've already lost. If you go after pistol grips again, the NRA will have no trouble stopping your entire agenda, just like they did the last time around.


Zardoz wrote:
hunting rifles with small clips will escape the ban.

There's not going to be any ban.


Zardoz wrote:
The shooter in FL used 30 round clips if you can’t hit a target with deer 6 rounds someone should take your gun away.

Who said anything about needing six rounds to hit a deer?


Zardoz wrote:
The second amendment gives you a right to bear arms not to a 30-round clip.

If you focused on large magazines alone, you would have a chance.

Your insistence on focusing on pistol grips though dooms you to defeat by the NRA.


Zardoz wrote:
I don’t know that any of the AR-15s used in the school shootings had a pistol grip.

Can you point out any AR-15s that don't have a pistol grip?


Zardoz wrote:
Previous shootings have caused outrage that did not last but each shooting has caused the outrage to increase at a geometric rate and the affects of this shooting is for the first time showing Republican politicians to jump ship as well as mega Republican donors.

You can find people who hate civil rights anywhere. Most people still support civil rights however.


Zardoz wrote:
Orally if history has taught us anything it is that anybody can kill anyone. It would be easy to be waiting outside and when store closed open up on him with an AR-15 you could put 30 rounds in him before he got his hand in his pocket. That is the problem with gun you might own a thousand but they won’t protect you if someone is determined to kill you.

Maybe police officers shouldn't have guns then. If they are of no use in defending yourself then the police have no need for them.


Zardoz wrote:
We have went from shooting in post offices, to work places, to restaurants to school shooting. The solution may come to shootings when the NRA holds meetings. That would give the NRA a brand-new point of view if the shooting happened to them on a regular basis.

Trying to murder people who are equipped to defend themselves is generally a bad idea.


Zardoz wrote:
If you know the true history of Vietnam you know the French were exploiting them. The French were shipping all the food out of the country while the people starved to death. Initially Ho Chi Minh tried to enlist the help of the United States before accepting the communists.

That does not change the fact that the people of South Vietnam didn't have a say over whether we abandoned them. The American people on the other hand are not going to allow their rights to be violated.


Zardoz wrote:
The domino theory was just that a theory that history proved wrong

That is incorrect. The Soviets really were out to forcibly conquer the entire world.


Zardoz wrote:
a good portion of a generation was killed for nothing and the slaughter would have continued.

Actually the slaughter was already over. The Tet Offensive was the North's last gasp.

Those kids died for nothing because after we had defeated the Communists and merely needed to keep sending aid to the South, the Democrats cut off all aid to the South because they wanted Communism to conquer the world.


Zardoz wrote:
Those bratty kids are on the verge of being very politically active adults. If you spent four hours hiding in closet thinking you were going to be killed any minute it would change priorities.

They'll learn to get used to being defeated by the NRA.


Zardoz wrote:
In our society they call them enablers and they are more at fault then the ones that pulled the trigger.

No. Civil rights advocates are not responsible for the crimes of other people.


Zardoz wrote:
The bill boards in Kentucky is expressing the sentiments of many Americans.

The KKK didn't like civil rights advocates either.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is an organization that spreads death throughout America.

Nonsense.


Zardoz wrote:
If a guy tells you he must have gun because he is afraid his house might be broken into, or someone is out to get him. It says it all.

It is reasonable to not want to be robbed/raped/murdered by a criminal who breaks into your home.

And some people really do have stalkers who are out to harm them.


Zardoz wrote:
The Olympic biathlon medalists acquired their interest in guns much earlier and probably for the same reasons.

People acquire guns for all sorts of reasons.


Zardoz wrote:
Their fear is so all consuming they will put their family lives at risk.

Not having a gun can be a risk, if you end up needing one to protect yourself.


Zardoz wrote:
I worked with guy who went on vacation. He got a call his son committed suicide. When he got home he had to scrape his son’s brains off the ceiling. No gun, no suicide.

I guess that is why Robin Williams was unable to kill himself.


Zardoz wrote:
Statistics show that is who is most likely to be killed. The husband and the wife get in a fight and in anger one shoots the other to end the argument.

Only in cases where the husband was going to kill the wife even without the gun.

In cases where there is no domestic violence, that doesn't tend to happen.


Zardoz wrote:
Your teenager comes in late and they think he is a burglar he is shot and killed.

Never fire at fleeting shadows. Only fire in self defense if you are actually being attacked.

Pretty straightforward.


Zardoz wrote:
Guns are unsafe at any speed.

So are swimming pools.


Zardoz wrote:
Rubio was one of the first to change his mind. Kasich and Rubio were both Republican presidential contenders. As the heat is turned up more will shun the NRA. Rubio was asked if he would continue to take the NRA blood money at a public meeting by a survivor of the FL shooting. He could not stutter fast enough. He has taken 3 million dollars.

All sorts of people oppose civil rights. Shame on them.


Zardoz wrote:
You cannot stretch the 2nd amendment to cover all the technological developments in the last 200 years.

Sure I can. The only restrictions of the right that are allowed are those that can be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA would have used all of their best attorneys in attempt to overturn the 1994 ban and they could not.

The courts were not enforcing the Second Amendment back then. They will be enforcing the Second Amendment in the future.

The NRA is also not the group you want to go to if you want to win in court. They are the group you go to if you want to win in Congress.


Zardoz wrote:
Lots of mechanical operations require holes be drilled in a precise place. Some car accessories require up to twenty holes. If you miss you have trashed a $20,000 car they are not marked either. That is a pretty common skill.

Well if someone performs the conversion without knowing what they are doing, I guess it's their gun they are risking. Not to mention the risk of prison time.


Zardoz wrote:
The parts are available.

Well they do serve a legitimate purpose.

I suspect that legislation that restricted these parts so that they were only available to people who were licensed to use them legitimately would pass muster with the Second Amendment.


Zardoz wrote:
Someone built the AR-15 and that is a big thing now many people are building there own AR-15 by ordering parts on line. The people building their AR-15 have no obvious skills. One guys wife was even building one.

You don't need to drill holes in exact-yet-unmarked places if you are going to merely assemble parts.


Zardoz wrote:
Sorry there is no propaganda the Republican blockade was widely reported at the time.

Those reports were the propaganda. The Republican leadership was making a deal with Obama until Obama listened to liberal extremists and scuttled it.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA was the very least of Obama’s troubles.

They managed to stop him in the 2013 gun control debacle.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA could not stop a bus let alone Obama.

That is incorrect. During the 2013 gun control debacle the NRA stopped him cold.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA has a very narrow focus and can affect only gun legislation.

True.


Zardoz wrote:
There are a few Democrats who take the blood money from the NRA but they will not survive the next election. They are closet Republicans.

It has nothing to do with money actually.

If they don't survive the next election, it will be because they were replaced by Republicans who are even more pro-NRA.

Among the Democrats who have good relations with us is the House Democratic leadership. Are you accusing Nancy Pelosi of being a closet Republican?


Zardoz wrote:
Their may be plenty of Republican donors but very few mega donors and when the stampede starts you better not get in the way.

They can stampede wherever they like. The NRA will not be in their way.


Zardoz wrote:
When you get social security for mental illness that is the reason you get social security.

When you get Social Security for a reason other than mental illness, then mental illness isn't the reason you get Social Security.


Zardoz wrote:
These people cannot be trusted with their own money.

Inability to balance a checkbook does not mean that someone is unsafe with guns.


Zardoz wrote:
This is what gives the NRA a bad name.

Their defense of civil rights gives them a good name.


Zardoz wrote:
Anyone that doesn’t believe that Trump is not the world’s greatest liar is just not right. First Trump said he thinks school teachers should be armed a day later he denies it the day after that he proposes it.

Teddy Roosevelt was a bit colorful with the truth too.


Zardoz wrote:
The order target people who got social security for mental illness and mental defect.

That is incorrect. Obama's order targeted everyone who gets Social Security and can't balance their own checkbook. There was no focus on mental illness.


Zardoz wrote:
One them will be coming to your neighborhood with his new AR-15.

I'll be sure to admire it.


Zardoz wrote:
You may not lie in your mind but you can convince yourself that reality isn’t reality.

Being mistaken isn't a lie.

But more to the point, everything that I'm saying is completely correct in every respect.


Zardoz wrote:
When you put guns in the hands of people who are not competent to handle a dollar there is no way it won’t bite you.

Inability to balance a checkbook does not mean someone is unsafe with a gun.


Zardoz wrote:
Frequent mass murder is not a trivial issue asked anyone of those children who called their parents to say goodbye as that AR-15 was killing people in the background.

Pistol grips do not cause mass murder.


Zardoz wrote:
The problem will not go away until the guns go away and right now that is by far the most important political issue in America.

The guns aren't going anywhere.

And actually more compassion for those who are having mental problems and are suffering would do much to make the problem go away.


Zardoz wrote:
The fact the mentally ill are less likely to be violent is the scary part because that means the shooters are sane and much more likely to do long range planning and learn from the mistake of other school shooters. The NRA spokeswoman just says the guy was nuts to shift the blame. No mass murder has ever been found innocent by reason of insanity. There are people who just enjoy killing people it makes them feel powerful and many experience a sexual high when killing.

I suggest that future students make an effort to be more compassionate to those who are having problems and are suffering, so that they never reach the point where they snap and go on a killing spree.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Feb, 2018 10:14 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy

You can’t possibly believe those people that are getting social security for an inability to balance their checkbook. There is an easy way to find out just go to your local social security office and file for your disability social security because you can’t balance your check book. That is not grounds to get disability social security. We had a boy next door who walked in tight circles in the middle of the road for hours on end. I believe he caught a check when the family moved the house was burned to the ground so they could not move back. It was very obvious that he was a mental defective and his parents were not much better. After we moved we found his dad mowed the lawn in the nude within 100 feet from a main highway. We were not warned. The NRA only cares about the next dollar and they would sell an AR-15 at a state hospital if they could and in fact that is what HJ Resolution 40 did in effect. Why is Trump so ashamed of signing that bill? No pictures of the signing the bill have been released despite numerous requests from media outlets.
____________________________________________________

Have you watched the news lately? There are a number of businesses and banks that will no longer do business with the NRA and none of the 75,000 mentally ill that Trump granted a right to buy AR-15 were involved. Imagine what happen when they start killing people. When they try a rapist or wife beater like Trump they always hire a woman for their lawyer so the jury can look and say he hasn’t killed that woman yet. The head of the NRA was still hiding under his rock when they had the town meeting about the massacre. The NRA sent a woman to represent them. Same old story not the guns fault the shooter was a nut nothing can be done. By the end the meeting the crowd wanted to burn her at the stake. She had to be escorted out with heavy security. She looked like Hitler being escorted out of a room. It took 20 security people to surround her to get her out of the building. A few days later that low life coward Wayne LaPierre, head of the NRA, crawled out from under a rock.
____________________________________________________

Sorry Oralloy, you cannot get a social security disability check for not being able to balance a check book you have to have very serious mental issues to get a social security disability. Under Reagan they removed 50% of the people who got social security disability from the roles. They didn’t care if they were dying which many did before they got their social security. After that it became very difficult to get social security disability and yet you think not being able to balance check book qualifies you for social security disability. When I lived in town one of my neighbors had retired on social security disability. The social security investigators showed up at my house to ask questions about him. They wanted to know if he mowed his own lawn. My wife said that he did but he could only mow about six feet at a time because he can’t breathe.
___________________________________________________
I don’t know where you ever got the idea that a balancing check book has anything to do with that resolution. NRA Propaganda?
You always leave out that the reason they are disabled is not physical but mental and someone that is mentally disabled likely was placed on list that barred them from purchasing a AR-15 first place but Trump over road those lists and now the mentally ill can purchase AR-15s.
___________________________________________________________________________________
The NRA and the communist party are working together to exploit this controversy. The Russian bots are working overtime just as they did to elect Trump. The NRA is no doubt pushing that check balancing theory when they have no clue and could care less. Whenever a school shooting they say the guy is a nut but not one shooter has ever been found to be innocent by reason of insanity.
___________________________________________________

Oralloy, you should know what this has to do with since this is one of the main reason the gun lobby has used to justify gun ownership. If the population can stage an uprising than it would be a safe guard against despotic government. The population would simply stage a revolution and that is why we must have guns but in reality, it is just a pipe dream. Guerrilla warfare may work in the jungles of Vietnam but America it would be much more difficult.
_____________________________________________________


The Founding Fathers can only approve what was in existence at the time the second amendment was written. If they could see into the future and see the modern weapons of war they would restrict them to the military. Since decision in the future best be left to the future when all the unknowns are known.
___________________________________________________

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the Heller decision that says “second amendment right are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” This basically affirms what I am saying that we have the right to decide which guns will be on our streets. There is a concept in law called dead hand control and the law allows ways to stop dead hand control.
The NRA contends that the second amendment is unlimited and they can put the most dangerous and most deadly weapons on the streets and the Heller decision clearly over rules that position.
__________________________________________________

The NRA’s position is they have an absolute right to put the most dangerous weapons of war on the streets. On the news today, we found that the NRA has only five million members and most of them are crocked politicians There are 325 million Americans who don’t want their weapons of war on the streets. The line is going to be 6 round clips and no weapons of war and that is very reasonable. Otherwise it is back to a bag powder, a lead ball and a muzzle loader.
___________________________________________________
Do you believe that there is even one privately owned howitzers? It would be interesting to see who home he has blown up.
A pistol grip does not an assault weapon make.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The days of the NRA being King Kong are numbered. Only 5 million members tell us they were much like the Wizard of OZ once you look behind the curtain the Mighty Oz was just a tiny old man all along that had a huge megaphone of the gun manufacturer’s money.
___________________________________________________
I did find it pretty easy to defeat your position.
___________________________________________________

The bill boards were on the national news and they express the opinion of many of the 325 million people who are not NRA members. The people in America have finally woke up to who the real enemy is. They could put a 100,000-professional school in jail and the NRA will manufacturer more. To stop the problem, you must cut the head off the snake.
___________________________________________________
Oralloy, in the United States if I hand you a gun and you shoot the guy across the room I am held as an accessory to murder. That is exactly what the NRA did they used the gun manufacturers money to block the assault weapon ban effectively putting the guns in the hands of school shooters. This makes the NRA far more responsible than the school shooters for the murders.
_____________________________________________________
Pistol grips are not the problem but I don’t think anybody needs a grenade launcher or a bayonet mount. The major loophole in the 1994 assault weapon ban was the AR-15 which colt was selling over a million a year. Somebody got paid off for this to happen. You don’t ban all of the foreign assault weapons and that make the most dangerous assault weapon in the world exempt.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Pride goth before the fall. The major bank that puts out NRA credit cards has dropped the NRA. All three major rental car companies will no longer give NRA members a discount. This is just a beginning of a commercial avalanche.

________________________________________________________________________________

Oralloy, if the school shooter went into the school with the intention of killing 17 by beating them to death he would not have killed anyone. He was 5’ 7 “and a 130 lbs. To be able to commit mass murder he needed the AR-15 without it the crime never happens.
___________________________________________________
The NRA thought they were king of the mountain that even if millions of Americans were killed they could continue to peddle death but reality is about to set in. At that town meeting there is no doubt in my mind that the crowd wanted to burn that pompous overbearing gun pushing woman at the stake. and if there had not been so much security there she would have paid a price. You are not protecting civil rights you are trampling them.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Sat 24 Feb, 2018 08:32 pm
@oralloy,
Oralloy

You are telling me that when we have people that we have good information that they have joined ISIS, Al Qaeda or any of the hundreds of terrorists’ organization springing up all over the world. That when they went the to the gun store to buy their AR-15s the gun store owner would say sorry you are on a temporary hold but come back next week and you can buy all the AR-15s you can get into your truck. If someone has decided that he wants to be terrorist he is as dangerous this week as he is 10 years from now.

___________________________________________________
The terrorists to have access to due process they can go to court to prove that the information is faulty. The NRA does not want to miss a single sale of a mass murder weapon. The NRA equation works this way if a million people have to die so they can sell a few guns so be it. People dying is not their problem and they could care less. The NRA absolutely loves school shootings they made a huge profit on each and everyone them including the last one. As soon as the shooting happens and the talk of gun control starts the sale of AR-15 goes through the roof as every coward in the country has got to have one. I would not at all be surprised if the NRA would hire school shooters to increase sales. Before this last shooting the sale of AR-15s was in a huge slump but you can bet sales have soared now.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Anyone can sue the government. I was frequently threatened with law suits when I worked for the city. When someone started that old song, I would tell them just get in line it’s a long line.
___________________________________________________________________________________
It is true that there is no constitutional right to fly on an airplane because that technology was not even dreamed of in 1791. If the people saw fit the constitution could be amended to give them that right. A civil rights case could be filed. But an airplane can be used like a much larger bullet to kill people. Just as you don’t want certain people to own a gun you don’t want certain people on a plane.

__________________________________________________
I agree that there is a constitutional right to own a bag of powder, a lead ball, and a muzzle loader and nothing more. After that the government is free to regulate anything else. Just as there is no constitutional right to fly on airplane it is because that technology came after 1791.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 25 Feb, 2018 03:10 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
You can’t possibly believe those people that are getting social security for an inability to balance their checkbook.

No. People who got social security for other reasons were targeted by Obama because they also can't balance their checkbook.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA only cares about the next dollar and they would sell an AR-15 at a state hospital if they could

That is incorrect. The NRA cares about protecting our civil rights.


Zardoz wrote:
they would sell an AR-15 at a state hospital if they could

They don't sell AR-15s. To anyone.


Zardoz wrote:
and in fact that is what HJ Resolution 40 did in effect.

No it isn't. What it did was prevent the violation of people's rights for no good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
Why is Trump so ashamed of signing that bill? No pictures of the signing the bill have been released despite numerous requests from media outlets.

Beats me. It was a wonderful thing that he did for the American people.


Zardoz wrote:
Have you watched the news lately? There are a number of businesses and banks that will no longer do business with the NRA

The left always starts out gun control efforts by attacking the NRA for no reason just to make sure we are all riled up and ready to defeat them.


Zardoz wrote:
and none of the 75,000 mentally ill that Trump granted a right to buy AR-15 were involved.

That bill had nothing to do with mentally ill people.


Zardoz wrote:
Imagine what happen when they start killing people.

No thanks. I'm too busy to worry about things that are never going to happen.


Zardoz wrote:
By the end the meeting the crowd wanted to burn her at the stake. She had to be escorted out with heavy security. She looked like Hitler being escorted out of a room. It took 20 security people to surround her to get her out of the building.

People who hate civil rights are often violent. The KKK was much the same.


Zardoz wrote:
Sorry Oralloy, you cannot get a social security disability check for not being able to balance a check book

I never said you could.


Zardoz wrote:
you have to have very serious mental issues to get a social security disability.

No. There are a range of issues that people get on disability for.


Zardoz wrote:
yet you think not being able to balance check book qualifies you for social security disability.

No I don't.


Zardoz wrote:
I don’t know where you ever got the idea that a balancing check book has anything to do with that resolution. NRA Propaganda?

It comes from the fact that the executive order was directly aimed at people who don't balance their own checkbooks.


Zardoz wrote:
You always leave out that the reason they are disabled is not physical but mental and someone that is mentally disabled likely was placed on list that barred them from purchasing a AR-15 first place

Mental disorders like dyslexia are not mental illnesses. Nor are they any reason to prevent someone from having guns.


Zardoz wrote:
but Trump over road those lists and now the mentally ill can purchase AR-15s.

No one who has been adjudicated as dangerous to themselves or others can buy a gun.

If someone is mentally ill but not dangerous, there is no reason to prevent them from having guns. And they may well need a gun to protect themselves from people who prey on the mentally ill.

This is outside the scope of Obama's executive order however, which was not limited to people who are mentally ill.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA and the communist party are working together to exploit this controversy.

Umm. No.

It is the gun banners who are trying to exploit it.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA is no doubt pushing that check balancing theory when they have no clue and could care less.

The inability to manage their finances was a key component of Obama's targeting of these people. That's not going to stop being a fact.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, you should know what this has to do with since this is one of the main reason the gun lobby has used to justify gun ownership. If the population can stage an uprising than it would be a safe guard against despotic government.

It's certainly nothing to do with any argument that I'm making.


Zardoz wrote:
The population would simply stage a revolution and that is why we must have guns but in reality, it is just a pipe dream. Guerrilla warfare may work in the jungles of Vietnam but America it would be much more difficult.

Guerrilla warfare will work anywhere. But so what? If neither of us are worried about overthrowing the government, why are we discussing it?


Zardoz wrote:
The Founding Fathers can only approve what was in existence at the time the second amendment was written.

Self defense requirements now are little different from self defense requirements back then.


Zardoz wrote:
If they could see into the future and see the modern weapons of war they would restrict them to the military.

That is incorrect. They would not restrict a weapon of war like the Glock 17 to the military.

They would also not call a rifle a weapon of war just because it had a pistol grip on it.


Zardoz wrote:
Since decision in the future best be left to the future when all the unknowns are known.

That's not how things work. Americans are going to have rights forever,


Zardoz wrote:
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the Heller decision that says “second amendment right are not unlimited.” “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” This basically affirms what I am saying that we have the right to decide which guns will be on our streets.

No it doesn't. Restrictions on a right are allowed ONLY if they can be justified with a good reason.

If you can produce a good reason for a restriction, fine.

If you can't produce a good reason for a restriction, then no restriction.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA contends that the second amendment is unlimited and they can put the most dangerous and most deadly weapons on the streets

I doubt it. Can you provide a link to them saying anything like that?


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA’s position is they have an absolute right to put the most dangerous weapons of war on the streets.

I really doubt you can provide a link to them saying anything even remotely like that.


Zardoz wrote:
On the news today, we found that the NRA has only five million members and most of them are crocked politicians

No. Most of them are people like me.


Zardoz wrote:
There are 325 million Americans who don’t want their weapons of war on the streets.

No there aren't. Glocks are very popular.


Zardoz wrote:
The line is going to be 6 round clips and no weapons of war

No it isn't.

There probably isn't going to be a line at all. You are sowing the seeds of your own defeat and the NRA is going to take advantage of that.

But even if there is a line, it's not going to be that line. The NRA will never allow it. And neither will the courts.

The Supreme Court has already expressly ruled that we have the right to have weapons of war like the Glock 17.

And self defense needs require ten round magazines in handguns.


Zardoz wrote:
and that is very reasonable.

Not really. There is no reason to ban weapons of war like the Glock 17. And self defense needs require ten round magazines in handguns.


Zardoz wrote:
Otherwise it is back to a bag powder, a lead ball and a muzzle loader.

No it isn't. We have the right to have modern weapons of war like the Glock 17, and the Supreme Court has already expressly agreed with that.


Zardoz wrote:
Do you believe that there is even one privately owned howitzers?

No idea. They are pretty expensive. But some people are pretty wealthy.

Certainly no federal prohibitions against owning one however.

Get your CLIO signoff, pay for your tax stamp, pass your background check, and you're good to go. If you can afford it.


Zardoz wrote:
A pistol grip does not an assault weapon make.

There are other features too that there is also no reason to ban. But "pistol grip on a long gun" is a good summary of what assault weapons are all about.


Zardoz wrote:
The days of the NRA being King Kong are numbered. Only 5 million members tell us they were much like the Wizard of OZ once you look behind the curtain the Mighty Oz was just a tiny old man all along that had a huge megaphone of the gun manufacturer’s money.

That's not going to happen. We're going to keep defending civil rights no matter how much other people don't like that.


Zardoz wrote:
I did find it pretty easy to defeat your position.

My position remains fully secure. You have not done even light damage to it.


Zardoz wrote:
The bill boards were on the national news and they express the opinion of many of the 325 million people who are not NRA members. The people in America have finally woke up to who the real enemy is.

The KKK hated civil rights activists too.


Zardoz wrote:
To stop the problem, you must cut the head off the snake.

Our civil rights are not a problem.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, in the United States if I hand you a gun and you shoot the guy across the room I am held as an accessory to murder.

Only if you handed me the gun knowing that I was going to commit a crime with it.


Zardoz wrote:
That is exactly what the NRA did they used the gun manufacturers money to block the assault weapon ban effectively putting the guns in the hands of school shooters.

It's not like those pistol grips caused any more damage than if the rifles had not had pistol grips.


Zardoz wrote:
This makes the NRA far more responsible than the school shooters for the murders.

No. Civil rights activists are not responsible for the crimes of other people.


Zardoz wrote:
Pistol grips are not the problem

That's why any law that tries to cover pistol grips is unconstitutional. It can't be justified with a good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
but I don’t think anybody needs a grenade launcher or a bayonet mount.

The don't have to need to. The test is whether you can come up with a good reason for banning them. And you can't.


Zardoz wrote:
The major loophole in the 1994 assault weapon ban was the AR-15 which colt was selling over a million a year.

No such loophole. All of the guns that were sold fully complied with the law's pointless cosmetic requirements.


Zardoz wrote:
Somebody got paid off for this to happen.

No. All Colt did was comply with the meaningless cosmetic requirements.


Zardoz wrote:
You don’t ban all of the foreign assault weapons and that make the most dangerous assault weapon in the world exempt.

The only thing that was banned was harmless cosmetic features.


Zardoz wrote:
Pride goth before the fall. The major bank that puts out NRA credit cards has dropped the NRA. All three major rental car companies will no longer give NRA members a discount. This is just a beginning of a commercial avalanche.

That won't stop us from defending civil rights.

Leading off an effort to push gun control by attacking us for no reason is a great way to get us all riled up and ready to fight however.

Sometimes it seems like the gun control people want to lose.

Which is OK I guess. Since they are trying to violate our civil rights, it is good that they self-sabotage.

I do think I'm going to stop giving my business to companies who oppose my civil rights however.


Zardoz wrote:
Oralloy, if the school shooter went into the school with the intention of killing 17 by beating them to death he would not have killed anyone.

If he'd used a rifle that didn't have pistol grips on it, he would have been able to do the exact same shooting.


Zardoz wrote:
To be able to commit mass murder he needed the AR-15 without it the crime never happens.

That is incorrect. He could have done the exact same shooting if he'd used a rifle that didn't have pistol grips on it.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA thought they were king of the mountain that even if millions of Americans were killed they could continue to peddle death but reality is about to set in.

Let me know when it dawns on you that our power remains absolute.


Zardoz wrote:
At that town meeting there is no doubt in my mind that the crowd wanted to burn that pompous overbearing gun pushing woman at the stake. and if there had not been so much security there she would have paid a price.

People who hate civil rights, hate civil rights activists.

The KKK was much the same in their hatred.

I suspect that if they'd assaulted her, she would have shot them to death on live TV, with no charges being filed because it was self defense.


Zardoz wrote:
You are not protecting civil rights you are trampling them.

Wrong. I am protecting civil rights.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 25 Feb, 2018 03:13 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
You are telling me that when we have people that we have good information that they have joined ISIS, Al Qaeda or any of the hundreds of terrorists’ organization springing up all over the world. That when they went the to the gun store to buy their AR-15s the gun store owner would say sorry you are on a temporary hold but come back next week and you can buy all the AR-15s you can get into your truck.

If they are removed from the list because due process has determined that they are innocent, then yes they are free to come back and buy guns.


Zardoz wrote:
If someone has decided that he wants to be terrorist he is as dangerous this week as he is 10 years from now.

If due process determines that someone is innocent, then they probably haven't decided to become a terrorist.


Zardoz wrote:
The terrorists to have access to due process they can go to court to prove that the information is faulty.

Innocent people aren't terrorists.

And no. There is zero due process with the no fly list.


Zardoz wrote:
The NRA does not want to miss a single sale of a mass murder weapon. The NRA equation works this way if a million people have to die so they can sell a few guns so be it.

The NRA does not sell guns at all.


Zardoz wrote:
As soon as the shooting happens and the talk of gun control starts the sale of AR-15 goes through the roof as every coward in the country has got to have one.

Wanting to buy a gun doesn't make them a coward.

And soaring gun sales are not due to the NRA. The rush to buy guns is driven by the gun control people when they try to ban guns for no good reason.


Zardoz wrote:
I would not at all be surprised if the NRA would hire school shooters to increase sales.

You're being silly.


Zardoz wrote:
Before this last shooting the sale of AR-15s was in a huge slump but you can bet sales have soared now.

Nothing wrong with that. It's a good gun.


Zardoz wrote:
Anyone can sue the government. I was frequently threatened with law suits when I worked for the city. When someone started that old song, I would tell them just get in line it’s a long line.

They can't sue a gun manufacturer though. If they try, the case will be thrown out of court and the court will seize their home and retirement account to pay the gun manufacturer's legal bills.


Zardoz wrote:
I agree that there is a constitutional right to own a bag of powder, a lead ball, and a muzzle loader and nothing more. After that the government is free to regulate anything else. Just as there is no constitutional right to fly on airplane it is because that technology came after 1791.

That is incorrect. The Supreme Court has expressly confirmed our right to have modern weapons of war like the Glock 17.

Not to mention, if you had been right about rights not applying to modern technology, Trump would be free to wiretap you without a search warrant, and would be free to censor your posts on the internet.
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Mon 26 Feb, 2018 01:38 am
@oralloy,
Oralloy

The most important part of the Heller decision is clearly that government does have the right to decide what guns will be legal. The question before the court was specifically about hand guns, gun locks and registration of guns in Washington DC. But the ruling goes much further and has nation-wide implications far beyond the few square miles of Washington DC. Hand guns are not used by professional school shooters they want the AR-15 style assault weapons who literally tear the bodies of school children apart and deliver over 100 rounds a minute into large crowds. The Heller decision makes it absolutely clear we the people can make those murderous weapons illegal, it is not we the NRA or we the gun manufacturers that will decide.
The Heller decision states: “Like most rights the second amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever for any purpose and for whatever purpose.”
Heller does not confirm the right to modern weapons. It confirms the right of government to regulate what weapons will be on the streets of America
If we had a pervert taking these children out of school and gutting them knife he would be lynched but because he uses a gun it makes it alright so people step up to defend the gun.
___________________________________________________
The AR-15 and other assault weapons are the most dangerous and deadly weapons on the face of the earth. Just look what one 130 lb. little boy did he killed 17 including adults twice his size. They are the choice of all the armies of the world because of the damage done to human body like I said the most dangerous gun on earth. Any gun that can kill 59 people from hundreds of feet away at time is extremely dangerous.
______________________________________________________________________________
I am feel sorry for you. You must have a terrible weight on your soul for every person that was slaughtered with a gun in the last ten years since that decision.
____________________________________________________
We would still be paying the tea tax England if we were subject their laws. Certainly, we can draw inspiration from laws of any country but that is all an inspiration. If we decide to use the concept as inspiration for a law than it becomes law but it certainly does not ascend to the level of a “right.”
____________________________________________________
What of the divine right of kings? What of the tax on tea. What of all the other taxes paid to crown and king? You certainly can’t pick and chose among English statute and say we are bound by this English statute but not by that English statute. To be able to derive a right from English law you would have to take all of the English laws. I know that some court made a practice of this. We broke away from England to get out from under the laws of England. We made are own bill of right. If some English laws apply than England gun laws must also apply and they are far stricter than anything America has ever seen. There very strict gun laws are in fact derived from the cases you cite. If we adopt the strict English laws will that make you happy as you think we are bound ancient ones? Law is alive and it changes if the English are in fact bound to those laws and got a far different result and it saves the lives 50,000 people a year.
__________________________________________________
The test under law is what a reasonable man would all rights are not without limits. Assaults weapons are unreasonable trespass of the right of others.
___________________________________________________
Any army in world would love to have the assault weapons that have flooded the streets of America. The AR-15 was so deadly the US Army got rid of its obsolete weapons and rearmed the Army with the AR-15 with a slight modification. The pistol grip has nothing to do with next assault weapon ban.
____________________________________________________
Law changes for a good reason. Can you imagine living under laws written by people with a first or second education from 200 years ago? The current English gun laws are based on the same cases you want to use to justify our lack of gun regulations.
__________________________________________________________________________________
I don’t think there is one instance where the Founding Fathers said that English law was hereby adopted by the constitution. After fighting a long and bloody war with England I doubt any of the Founding Fathers would adopt English law. There were laws already in practice that would have continued to be used. You are right the US Constitution would replace English and grant any rights.
____________________________________________________
Do you believe for a minute that the same people who are sending $100s of millions to get progun politicians elected did not take the ban to court? It won’t work any better then it did before. After all, if the English cases you cite rule you may not have any guns at all. Even the police are not allowed a gun in England.
____________________________________________________
Those are the exact quotes from the Heller decision there is nothing about a compelling interest. In America we kill enough people to stretch around the globe that is far more than a compelling reason. The flu kills 50,000 people each year and it is a leading story on the nightly news each night but the fact that guns kill 50,000 has been ignored for too long.
If the NRA was progun control they won because clearly establish the right of government to decide which guns are allowed on the street. The Heller case was the NRA’s Waterloo.
_______________________________________________________________________________
If an assault weapon ban was illegal the 1994 assault weapon ban would have been overturned it wasn’t. pistol grips had nothing to do with the assault weapon ban.
____________________________________________________
We have no problem with civil rights we rent to black people but the right to own a machine gun is not listed in the 1964 bill. Civil Rights are specific and none grant the right to a gun.
__________________________________________________
If a 270 Winchester does more damage why do professional school shooters always use AR-15 or similar assault weapons? THE 270 is a bolt action single shot. There other model numbers which are semi-automatic and others that are fully automatic. Damage comes from more than the barrel velocity it how many rounds that can be fired per minute. If the 270 does so much damage why was it not chosen by armies around the world? Because it does not inflict the most.
____________________________________________________
We have yet to see a mass murder at a school done with a 270 Winchester and you must admit school shooters know their guns.
____________________________________________________
Laws against murder have no meaning to a school shooter they want to die so no law will ever stop them. The best we can ever hope to do is to keep the weapons of war out of their hands. Somebody that does one of those shooting does not plan on getting out alive and most don’t. So, there is no possible deterrent. There is one way and one way only to stop the shootings take the weapons of mass destruction away. The FL shooting is called the 2nd St Valentines massacre and of course the 1st St Valentines Massacre took place Feb 14, 1929 and it provided the motivation to get rid of the Thompson submachine gun.
____________________________________________________

Didn’t the Thompson have a pistol grip? How many of those can you find in your corner store.
____________________________________________________
Come on a grenade launchers, do you really think school shooters should have a grenade launcher?
___________________________________________________
Of course, the varmints that are killed by AR-15 these days are school children.
____________________________________________________
The Heller decision means that we the people will decide what type of weapons are legal.
____________________________________________________
Clubs were weapons of war at one time also you can have one them. Swords were used for wars also you can have one of them. How many people were killed with English Longbows last year?
____________________________________________________
Conservatives are always big on state rights until people actually wants state rights to ban AR-15 and then the Conservatives want federal protection for gun rights. Fifty thousand deaths a year is a pretty good reason.
Oralloy, you may like living in battlefield but more and more Americans have decided they no longer want to and that is why America is ruled by the majority. They do all have a common feature they are used to wage wars.
___________________________________________________
Where do you think the $130 million dollars spent on the 2016 came from? I have article for you to read that shows how the Gun Manufacturers fund the NRA: “How the Gun Manufacturers Funnel Tens of Millions of Dollars to the NRA.” Sorry but you are very wrong.
__________________________________________________________________________________The NRA would not know a civil right if it ran over them in the parking lot.

__________________________________________________________________________________
The NRA once was a grass roots organization but once it was taken over by gun manufacturers the agenda was changed and new mission was to sell death to America.
_____________________________________________________________________________-
A pistol grip alone was not enough for a ban of any weapon.
Federal law supersedes state law and both Federal and state law supersede local laws. It does not matter in anyway what state law says if it is in conflict with Federal law. The Laws against machine guns and howitzer are Federal.
Different references on internet are in conflict but the one says the National Firearms Act put a transfer tax that had to be paid by the seller when a Thompson was transferred it would be $3,500 in today’s dollars another source says the public was prohibited from owning them. Either way it killed those guns or school shooters would be using them today in school shootings.
___________________________________________________
Whether the Chief Law Enforcement Officer sign off or not there will still be a background check. That won’t save the 50,000-people killed with guns each year.
__________________________________________________
Pistol grips don’t kill school children AR-15s do.
___________________________________________________
The overthrow the government has been the primary justification used for guns in this country. My money would be on the biggest army in the world not any movement of farmers.
___________________________________________________
You need only look to what took place in the south for the next 100 years. A white man could kill a black man and nothing would be done. That court decision upheld the slaughter of 280 blacks.
____________________________________________________
That argument is absurd, the bill of rights does not restrict the government it grants a right and right the government must put limits on those rights. There are a number of horrible court decisions out of this period including the one that gives the rights of citizen to a corporation.
____________________________________________________
Fifty thousand people killed a year by guns is a good reason. After all we limited the freedom speech for a few people being killed in a crowed theater.
____________________________________________________
While you are firing a 100 rounds a minute toward a crowd you just point in the direction and pull the trigger as quickly as possible. You don’t need to aim.
____________________________________________________
You can listen to the gun fire in Las Vegas and in the FL school slaughter and Las Vegas is faster but I believe someone who practiced pulling the trigger could exceed the bump stock speed.
____________________________________________________
Every hunter that I have ever seen questioned said the AR-15s were no good for hunting they said they are strictly shi** and giggles guns. A policeman has never been involved in school shooting. Police were allowed to keep the Thompsons also.
____________________________________________________
Maybe we should just ban the AR-15 that way they can’t convert them to automatics
____________________________________________________
If you can fire as many rounds from a semi-automatic or a few less it does not make a difference.
___________________________________________________
You think that we should set idly by while thousands die and do nothing so some can own a weapon of mass destruction for target shooting with it once every two years. Those children right to live far exceeds any gun nuts right to own a weapon of war.
___________________________________________________
Every part of the AR-15 was used to make the M-16 with the exception two parts.
___________________________________________________
Is there a right to own an English Longbow? I had no idea.
The NRA is doing everything in their power to stop bump stocks from being banned.
___________________________________________________
When you compare the number of people killed by gun in America to other countries we have a problem. That is a good reason.
__________________________________________________
When you take the NRA’s blood money and do their bidding you are a crooked politician.
___________________________________________________
The Gun Manufacturers NRA scam is so effective that Cigarette manufactures tried to copy it creating another organization to do their bidding. The gun manufacturers are leading the charge to fill America’s streets with weapons of war.
___________________________________________________
Assault weapon bans have nothing to do with cosmetics they have everything to do with death of innocent children.
__________________________________________________
There will be a flood of lawsuits and you can bet many have already been paid off to keep them out of court. Some of the gun manufacturers pay the NRA for each gun they sell.
___________________________________________________
Under the law many people are convicted each year for being accessories to crimes because they supplied the guns used in the crime.
___________________________________________________
The problem is that the 50,000 people weren’t killed by other weapons they are killed by guns.
________________________________________________________________________________
In equation both parts are necessary. No gun no murder in many case. Give the FL shooter a knife and somebody would have picked up the 130 punk and pitched him down the stairs. Without the gun he is not a problem.
Fully automatics tend to be illegal? Don’t tell me you’re in favor of gun control.
_________________________________________________________________________________
If they prefer hand guns why are school shooters using AR-15s?
____________________________________________________
If you know everything about the 1994 assault weapon ban it does not show. You repeatedly tried to portray it as a ban on pistol grips which it isn’t.
Atomic weapons are not classified as guns.
___________________________________________________
Converting a AR-15 to fully automatic would be similar to putting mag wheels on your car.
_________________________________________________
Banning assault weapons is always a good idea will it be perfect? No.
____________________________________________________
I have never run into a varmint hunter. However, I once knew a mouse hunter who waited for the mouse to come out of its hole as bought the gun over his foot he fired and shot himself in the foot. Better idea is to get a cat.
It may take less than a second to chamber round but that is still 140 rounds less than assault rifle can fire in a minute
___________________________________________________
Any of those semi-automatics can be converted to full automatics.
It defies all common sense to have mass murder continuously while the solution is so simple.
___________________________________________________
I have to give Trump credit where credit is due he is already threatened to take the licenses away from any broadcasting company who says anything negative about him it will take him a while to get to me.
___________________________________________________
I don’t believe a howitzer, a dangerous and deadly weapon that fires projectiles for two miles is legal anywhere. I do remember a civil war cannon that was across the street when I was a kid.
__________________________________________________
I don’t know how you can believe that 50,00 dead a year is not a good reason.
_________________________________________________
We see where letting technology runaway got us the right to own gun is not unlimited nor should it be.
___________________________________________________
We made laws to governor wiretaps just as we will make laws to govern guns. Anyone is free to make an argument that a law violates a right but rights are not unlimited. We have wiretapped the mob, we even wiretapped Trump’s former campaign manager and about half his Russian dealing friends.
____________________________________________________
Baby Bush changed the definition of weapons of mass destruction when they could not find any in Iraq. If you can commit mass murder of 59 people you have a weapons of mass destruction.
__________________________________________________
There was no ban on pistol grip it wasn’t called a ban on pistol grips it was called a ban on Assault Weapons.
________________________________________________________________________________
The patent the inventor held for AR-15 was because the system he invented that chambered round much faster than other semi-automatics it is completely different system based on new technology.
____________________________________________________

No one has been killed with a Thompson in 60 years before the ban they killed them 7 at a time. Something changed. It wasn’t that gangsters suddenly said we aren’t going to kill people with Thompsons anymore.
As a society we have the right to decide what guns are legal and we will exercise it.
__________________________________________________
It is getting late tonight I reply to the rest of your post tomorrow evening

Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Tue 27 Feb, 2018 12:10 am
@oralloy,
Oralloy

I hope you saw that today legislation was introduced to not only ban assault weapons but make them illegal. It is called the assault weapon ban 2018. Of course, 5 million NRA members will be pissed but 325 million Americans will be thrilled that their children can go school without be slaughtered but America is ruled by the majority.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Nobody needs grenade launchers or bayonet mounts.
___________________________________________________
The 1994 assault weapon ban banned assault weapons not cosmetic. This is just NRA propaganda to kill the assault weapon ban. Very specific assault weapon makes and model numbers were banned. The AR-15 is the worst of the worst and you can bet money changed hands to keep it from being banned.
___________________________________________________
Pistol grips were legal under the ban only combinations were banned. The ban clearly states pistol grips are legal. More useless NRA propaganda’
___________________________________________________
Machine guns are automatics which are illegal and even you admit automatics are illegal. Howitzers are illegal also.
___________________________________________________
The Thompsons were taken off the streets overnight whether they were taxed out of existence or made illegal something extremely effective happened. There are a couple ways of knowing something one is to read the regulations or to see it effects.
____________________________________________________

You do not have to be accurate during a mass murder you just fire into the mass of the crowd each bullet will hit something. Firing at on individual you shoot center of mass. Shooting at a crowd is far different you just spray bullets.
___________________________________________________
I have two sports cars one of them has twin turbos the other has none yet they look identical except for minor changes they are both the same models. The AR-15 and the M-16 are like that you met them on the street you could not tell them apart.
____________________________________________________

Banning bump stocks? Here you go again advocating gun control. I see you are not in school but you do go to concerts.
____________________________________________________

Non- stop mass murders are a very good reason.
___________________________________________________
The gun manufacturers have full control of the NRA and they have never met a gun they would not endorse. The gun manufacturer take no responsibility they just push guns like a drug pusher pushes drugs.
If they ban assault weapons you are only left with hand guns and a few rifles that not nearly expensive or profitable.
____________________________________________________
The NRA has only 5 million members in a country of 330 million and the NRA has expended its political capitol. It is just left with it crooked politicians and they will be targeted and removed from office
___________________________________________________

There is a big difference in the speeds of semi-automatics that why the AR-15 was chosen as the base weapon for the M-16 and other semi-automatics were not.
____________________________________________________
The NRA will have trouble defending itself let alone interfere in the political process.
____________________________________________________
Sorry the ban is already been introduced in congress. people are tired of living in a war zone.
__________________________________________________
I thought that was the reason for guns to go hunting isn’t that what your old English law cases are about?
____________________________________________________
If the assault weapons aren’t banned it is pointless. Taking the guns off the street is going to difficult finding all the high capacity clips will be much more difficult. Guns are registered high capacity clips are not.
____________________________________________________
I just know that they were AR-15s it doesn’t matter whether they had a pistol grip.
___________________________________________________
Do you have a black family moving in next door? That is because they have civil rights.
____________________________________________________

If there was a mass murder at an NRA meeting they would run because shooting out with some one who has a AR-15 with a someone with a pistol is a loosing proposition. Two men enter but the one with the pistols dies. Even the 4 sheriff deputies would not go face the AR-15 in FL. Why? Because it was certain death.
____________________________________________________


Forty-seven thousand Americans and allies died in Vietnam to keep those people from feeding their families. For nothing and we are still paying the price the foundation of the drug problem came from Vietnam.
The theory stated that if Vietnam fell the world was lost but history shows us that communism collapsed under its own weight. If we believed in our own system that was predictable.
___________________________________________________
Are you from some alternate universe? North Vietnam won the war and the Vietcong were licking at the heels as the US as they got out of Vietnam.
_____________________________________________________
Those bratty kids on social media have already cost the NRA members millions of dollars and that is only a beginning.
____________________________________________________
Owning a gun is not a civil right and the only thing the NRA does is sell death.
____________________________________________________
The KKK was responsible for fewer deaths in a year than the NRA is responsible for in a year.
___________________________________________________
The NRA is owned by the gun manufacturers association they have one reason to exist to make a profit.
__________________________________________________

Today a huge bolder fell out of a hill and blocked all four lanes of a highway. I guess you could shoot it with your gun but I don’t believe you would stop it. All of life is a risk.
_________________________________________________
I worked with guy that put a shot gun to his head and blowed a good portion of his head off but he lived when he got out of the hospital he took a second shot and made it. They changed the health insurance and a police captain ate his gun. Guns are so much easier to reach for. Most suicides are by gun.
____________________________________________________

Most people killed in a domestic situation are killed in the heat of passion no gun means no killing in most cases.
___________________________________________________
At night when someone breaks in all you are going to see is a fleeting shadow. Burglars break in when people are asleep and don’t wake the resident until it is too late.
____________________________________________________
My mom has a swimming pool and no one has died in it but there is a nearby school and it hasn’t staged a shooting yet.
____________________________________________________
Civil rights don’t have anything to do with guns unless you won’t let blacks in your gun club.
____________________________________________________
You are about to find out how far it will stretch.
__________________________________________________
The gun manufacturers did everything in their power to stop the 1994 assault weapon ban and with all their money they couldn’t
____________________________________________________
Mass murder is a good reason.
___________________________________________________
If you mess up one AR-15 there is an unlimited supply so it makes no difference.
___________________________________________________
The best way to solve is to ban assault weapons. Here you go again pushing gun control.
____________________________________________________
If you can buy all the parts to build an AR-15 you will be able to buy M-16 parts. It might be illegal to buy a working m-16 but you could buy the parts.
The top Republicans held the meetings on the very day Obama was inaugurated. They made no secret of the meeting or the purpose.
The school shootings have taken away any political capital the NRA had.
____________________________________________________

The NRA did not stop Obama the NRA is not part of the government and does not have a vote however the crooked politicians on the NRA’s payroll are a temporary problem.
__________________________________________________________________________________
I don’t know Pelosi position on guns but if she votes with the NRA she will not survive the primary.
___________________________________________________
If social security for reason other than mental defect you get to handle your own money.
_________________________________________________
If you can’t handle a check book you damn well can't handle an AR-15 however you can have a cap pistol it makes a loud noise also.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Trump has lied so long he has no idea what the truth is.
___________________________________________________
Obama order was very specific it targeted those who got social security for mental illness. Why did Trump try to hide the fact he signed the bill?
____________________________________________________

I hope you can admire it while the bullets are coming out of it in your direction you can’t expect someone who can’t handle his money to know where the safety is.
____________________________________________________
I can believe you are mistaken.
____________________________________________________
You are pretty mentally defective if you can’t balance a check book. That is not rocket science.
___________________________________________________
An assault weapon is an assault weapon with or without a pistol grip.
____________________________________________________
The people doing the mass murders don’t have mental problems. They are angry and they enjoy killing just like you might enjoy an ice cream cone. There is no way to watch all these people all the time but we can take the assault weapons away. If you take a mechanics wrenches away he can’t fix cars.
____________________________________________________
Your solution is avoiding the problem and let thousand more children be slaughtered.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Feb, 2018 03:38 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
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.

Did you learn that shooting method in the old Army or the new Army? No one simply just fires blind. You can look up all sorts of video's on youtube that were taken by US military overseas, tell me where you see the "spray and prey" method in a firefight? You are confusing our military with terrorists, those fools "spray and prey".

hightor
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Feb, 2018 03:50 pm
@Baldimo,
(spray and pray)

You're right, my description may not jive with current military standards but we're discussing civilian mass shooters and many of them have had no training in modern infantry techniques. They are basically lone wolf terrorists who fire for effect.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Feb, 2018 04:01 pm
@hightor,
If we were discussing civilian use of guns, why did you bring the military and how they react to firefights? You tried to make the military sound like a bunch of untrained school shooters who just pull the trigger and hope they hit something...
hightor
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Feb, 2018 07:52 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote:
If we were discussing civilian use of guns, why did you bring the military and how they react to firefights?

It's the civilian mentality I'm talking about. America learned "spray and pray" at the movies.
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.08 seconds on 12/15/2018 at 12:58:05