The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

Do you know the difference between murder and a mass murder?

One of the first mass murders in America was at the University of Texas at Austin. Charles Whitman killed 16 and wounded 31 in 1966.

I looked through your list. The FBI defines a mass murder as 4 or more people so some of those on the list are not mass murder.

The weapon was only listed in a few of the smaller mass murders

The most recent figures show that 60,000 people a year are killed with guns every year in the United States.

AR-15 assault style weapons are the tools that is needed to commit mass murder. You can dig a small ditch with a shovel but if you need to dig a ditch 10 feet deep you need a backhoe. Even that 14-year-old school shooter knew he needed an assault weapon. He just could not find his dad’s assault weapon the day of the shooting. The result he only killed one with a hand gun. If you want to commit mass murder you need an assault weapon.

These guns will not stop anyone with an AR-15 and body armor

We know what pass as a good reason to limit the first amendment. The classic case is someone yelling fire in a crowded theater. Of course, the theater is not on fire but yelling fire might cause some people to be injured running for the door. There are also other cases that place limits on the first amendment.

What we do know about guns is 50,000 people are killed each year in America and no other civilized country in the world has even a fraction of those deaths.

To believe that second amendment is unlimited is a foolish position.

Far more people are killed in one shooting than killed in the theater.

Sounds like a hell of a good reason to me.

No army fights a war with hand guns.

There are some school shootings with hand gun that are personal or among gang member. If you have a personal score to settle with one-person handguns work. But if you are a professional school shooter like Nikolas Cruz, you carefully study other school shootings and study the weapons to find the one that will kill the most people. The school shooting that involve only one or two people killed are not reported nationally the story is of only local interest. What gets national attention is mass murder and those are not done with handguns they are done with weapons designed exclusively to commit mass murder.

Your trying to make apples look like oranges. Mass murders are not done with hand guns.

A pistol grip does not change a thing

It may be easy to see other people’s children as simply insignificant but if it were your children or grandchildren gunned down for no reason it would be a good reason for restrictions.

I don’t care if every gun made by the gun manufacturers has a pistol grip as long as the assault weapons are banned.

The times they are a changing. There is assaying in archology that it changes one funeral at a time. The old generation clings to old ideas and theories until they are buried.

I believe if it were your children or grandchildren it would be a good reason for restrictions

The Heller decision is very clear that dangerous and deadly weapons can be banned.

The case was bought by someone who could not register a hand gun in Washington DC. It had nothing to do with modern weapons.

There are 50,000 good reason each year.

Until the gun nut across the road starts setting off atomic bombs the most dangerous thing he can get his hands on is his AR-15.

The M-16 is just a modified AR-15.

The AR-15 is just a machine gun in sheep’s clothing.

The Heeler decision has nothing to do with civil rights

If the fairy tale were true I would not want to be you. I don’t think a just god would be so forgiving.

The tea tax would be a part of English law.

Why are the gun laws in England so restrictive?

They are based on the same case law you cite.

The early settlers of America came from several different countries. So, we could just pick and chose what laws we wanted?

If you want to follow English law then you have to follow their current gun laws that are part of English common law. You can’t have it both ways.

You simply can’t say we have to follow this English law but disregard all others.

So, it would not surprise me that some judges tried to adopt some archaic laws from old England.

The bill of rights is specific

There were several sources for bill of rights some stretching back to ancient Greece but I don’t see any argument to base our laws on those of ancient Greece.

You are the one that is trying to establish a right to a gun by citing ancient English law cases.

The English laws are far stricter than those in America if that is were you derive your right to own a gun you would have a problem.

The law is indeed alive

Pistol have nothing to with an assault weapon ban.

Pistol grips have nothing to do with an assault ban.

Pistol grips were legal under the 1994 assault weapon ban.

The freedom of speech is limited as are other rights. The good reason for limiting the freedom of speech is the possible injury or death of someone in a theater after someone yells fire! If that hold the massive amount of people killed and injured by guns would be a good reason. Just because you want to live in a war zone does not mean the rest of America’s population wants to.

There has never been a pistol grip ban

Nobody is planning to ban pistol grips

For somebody that pretends to know a lot about guns you can’t tell difference between the handle and the gun.

Assault weapons are designed to commit mass murder and we have many examples of exactly that.

Pistol grips are just a handle.

The pistol grip makes absolutely no difference it is the number of bullets fired per minute and the massive 100 round clips that make the kill rate so high.

Pistol grips were not banned assault weapons were. It wasn’t called the 1994 pistol grip ban.

The second amendment didn’t grant you a right to a pistol grip.

If you have rental property and you deny a black family the right to rent it you will finally understand what civil rights are. Civil Rights legislation came in 1964 not 1791.

The same English laws you cited are part of English Common law and are binding on the English but not on America.

The founding fathers took inspiration for our laws from countries all of the world both past and present but that does not mean the laws of those countries were binding on America.

The founding Fathers decided what rights would be enshrined to be protected.

The US constitution is an original document that does not depend on any prior documents. They adopted what they wanted and rejected what they didn’t

The old English cases had to do with having guns to hunt with they were afraid the guns would kill out all of the game animals.

Compelling or not all rights have common sense limits and mass murder is not one of them.

The pistol grips are not banned either.

You’re right pistol grips don’t kill people assault weapons do.

If a good reason to limit the freedom speech is human life then the same applies to the second amendment.

Oralloy do they really allow you that much computer time in your nursing home?

The second amendment is never referred to as a civil right for a reason, it isn’t.

The civil rights legislation came about in 1964 and does not even mention guns.

Hand guns are not used for mass murder though they can be used to settle a score with a couple of people.

Assault weapons are made for mass murder.

was designed to fight wars with as well as assault weapons.

Semi-automatic rifles were not designed for mass murder only assault weapons.

Did you hear that Remington has filed for bankruptcy? Remington was evidently the maker of the AR-15 style assault weapon used in the FL shooting they called it a Bushmaster according to one source. They are filing bankruptcy it seems the sale of assault weapons is down without the highly profitable assault weapons the gun manufacturers will go bankrupt.

Anything that is semi-automatic can be converted to automatic.

The AR-15 was a semi-automatic to start with. Chambering the shell is the hard part get the trigger to pull automatically is far easier.

The primary cause of mass casualties with an assault weapons is the ability to deliver so many rounds so quickly before people can take cover.

The number of bullets fired along with the velocity make for very effective mass murders.

It would be easy to design a stock that would absorb most of or all of recoil.

Maybe the semi-automatic can’t chamber the bullets fast enough.

When you kill 59 at a time you have to be doing something right and that is the choice of guns specifically designed for mass murder.

I don’t think the shooter at Newtown would change clips until the gun stopped firing.

The Heller decision does not list any specific weapons

but it does make it very clear that limits can be placed on the second amendment.
____________________________________________________
“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever for any purpose whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

There would be private ownership of atomic bombs if the second amendment right was unlimited.

The 1994 assault weapon ban tells you that pistol grips are completely legal only when combined with other features like folding stocks or grenade launcher is there a problem.

Grenade launcher would cause a problem because the military can’t keep control of all their grenade.

If professional school shooter could get their hands on grenades it would be whole different ball game.

Most likely more school children are killed with AR-15s than varmints.

It seems a number of dead people is always a good reason to limit rights.

A pistol grip is not a problem without a grenade launcher.

Let say modern weapons of war we won’t worry about antique weapons of war.

You are just about to see what a good reason to ban assault weapons is.

Pistol grips don’t fire bullets but assault weapons do.

No court in America is going to mandate that our children must live in a battlefield.

That civil rights section about discrimination was part of our contract and I spent hours arguing with the city attorney about it. He was very adamant that it was limited to discrimination because of race, color creed, sex and country of origin and that might not be the whole list but I am sure there was nothing about gun ownership.

Do you really believe there are no semi-automatics on the battlefield?

The NRA serves one function and that is to sell death to children. The people with guns are violating the right to life.

The fact that the NRA was taken over by the gun manufacturers is well documented.

The NAACP is a civil rights organization

the NRA is organization of death.

Do you really want grenade launcher on assault weapons?

You can have a pistol grip if you can do without a bayonet mount. Sorry there is no ban on pistol grips.

If there were no such law the streets would be full of machine guns and howitzers.

I don’t care if pistol grips are banned I just want the assault weapons banned.

You don’t need a pistol grip to kill school children.

The overthrow of the government was the prime driving force to justify the second amendment. When the founding fathers created a new government, they could not be sure that it would not get out of control. That justification has been used over and over to justify the existence of guns even though it is absolutely preposterous now.

Guerrilla warfare became obsolete with the advent of atomic weapons.

If the rights already existed it would have been redundant to write the bill of rights.

The constitution grants a right to free speech it does not establish a limit like yelling fire in a crowded theater. The rights were granted but limits were established by courts and laws.

It is already established that killing people allows the government to limit those rights.

But then pistol grips are not banned.
The subject was guns not pistol grips.

You may need to aim a gun if you are trying to kill individual where he is the only one standing. A bullet off to one side or the other would miss. But mass murders are committed on crowds if a bullet misses and individual it will hit someone else standing on either side. A mass murderer doesn’t care who he kills he just wants to kill as many people as possible. One mass murder said he wanted to kill 150 school children.

They said it was impossible for a human being to run a four-minute mile also.

The rest of gun is the same as an automatic it is only the trigger mechanism that is altered.

both gun chambers shells at the same rate so the speed would be limited to the number of times you could pull the trigger. I was able to pull the trigger finger 106 times a minute on the first try with practice I would be much faster.

This gun debate has been going on for years so there have been thousands gun owners questioned and they all agree for the most part that the guns are just good for sh*** and giggles

but we all know they are good for mass murder.

The police need these guns because a pistol is useless against someone with an AR-15.

Forty years ago, policemen looked like policemen but now many policemen look and dress in full military garb with body armor. What caused this was the gun manufacturer flooded the street with military weapons.

Policemen carried 357s after a bank robbery in Los Angles where the suspect were armed with semi-automatics and in full body armor. The police didn’t stand a chance until one of the policemen went into a local gun store and got an assault weapon. The FBI also had a shootout with bank robbers in FL where they were badly out gunned. The gun manufacturers made a fortune as the FBI and police department throughout the land had to replace their hand guns with 9 millimeters

The AR-15 is very special or it would not be the bases for the M-16.

The only thing that really matters is how many bullets it can fire in a minute.

The AR-15 was not designed as a hunting weapon it is not a hunting rifle it is an assault weapon.

The AR-15 certainly qualifies as a weapon of mass destruction after George W Bush widen the definition after they couldn’t find any WMDs in Iraq.

Pistol grips are not the problem they are just a diversion created by the NRA.

A converted AR-15 is still an AR-15. Ninety-nine percent of the gun is the same.

It come down to how fast you can pull the trigger.

Archaic weapons of war are not a problem.

Pistol grips have never been illegal.

I would not believe anything from the communists or the NRA. If they gave Trump permission why did it not receive any publicity. The NRA being for gun control would be a big deal.

Did they also give Trump permission to take the assault weapons as he said he would?

Pistol grips are not the problem.

The NRA is only interested in one thing making absolutely sure that the next school shooter has an assault weapon. They want to protect the right of school shooters to buy assault weapons.

No one should have to live in a war zone because 5 million people want to play soldier.

The AR-15 and the copy-cat weapons are confirmed mass murder weapons.

Remington filed for bankruptcy to protect itself from legal judgements.

This is how the NRA is financed it established fact the NRA is paid so much for each gun sold by some gun manufacturers just because you don’t believe it does not make it untrue. The article I listed documents that.

Since before the time the crime is committed no one knows for sure whether it will actually be committed then no one could ever be ever convicted as an accessory but yet many people are convicted as an accessory.

Pistol grips are not illegal.

The Supreme court also says we can place limits on guns.

When is the last time you saw a school shooting done with a full automatic? The fact they have been illegal since for 32 years might have something to do with it. That kept the NRA from flooding the streets with them.

Most of mass murders are committed with assault weapons.

There was a shooting at a Michigan College last week where two people were killed likely with a hand gun.

Pistol grips are legal that is not a loophole.

If combined with certain other features there is a problem.

In an arms race atomic bombs are considered arms. The second amendment gives you a right to bear arms so therefore the second amendment gives you the right to atomic weapons? Unless there are limits.

There are laws against murder but that hasn’t stopped one mass murder yet.

If all semi-automatics chambered at the same speed the inventor of the AR-15 would not have needed to get a patent for the AR-15.

Pistol grips have always been legal they were never banned.

When you see the first howitzer that does not belong to the military let me know.

Pistol grips are not the problem.

Constant mass murder is a great reason.

Pistol grips are legal.

There are modern laws to govern modern technology just as there are laws to govern guns.

Mass murder is a great reason.

Oh yes, he did baby bush and crew changed that definition of weapons of mass destruction.

An atomic weapon may kill more people but mass murders will catch up one day. One bomb in Hiroshima killed only 39,000 in a few years the mass murders will surpass that number.

You are fixated on pistol grips but it was assault weapons that were banned.
School shooters have no problem knowing what an assault weapons are they could care less about a pistol grip.

If there is no difference in semi-automatic an assault weapons why are the assault weapons the ones used in mass murders?

If machine guns are banned because they are dangerous it follows assault weapons should also be banned.

Mass murders are as good a reason as any other.

There are exceptions to every rule and you’re reaching for the exception not the rule. The vast majority of mass murders are committed with assault weapons.

You can’t solve a problem by saying there is an exception so we will just throw our hands up and do nothing.

If we can save nine out of ten school children by banning assault weapons then we should do that.

The Virginia Tech shooting was on a college campus not a high school. The shooter Seung Hui Chow first killed a female freshman and a male resident assistant in a dormitory. When the police arrived, they suspected girl’s boyfriend. Meanwhile the shooter proceeded to class room building where he chained and locked several main doors. That is the reason the shooter could kill so many people with hand guns. They were locked in the building.
The Las Vegas shooter nearly doubled the Virginia Tech shooters kills.
Forty-nine killed at the Pulse nightclub.
Twenty-seven killed at Sandy Hook elementary.
_________________________________________________________________________________
The Las Vegas shooter more than quadrupled the Fort Hood Army base shooter.
____________________________________________________
I am not saying guns don’t kill people but again the Las Vegas shooter more than quadrupled the shooter at the immigration center.
____________________________________________________
Again the Las Vegas shooter kills nearly five times Momentum Securities shooter.

Last year was the deadliest year in ten years and it was made possible by assault weapons.

I noticed every shooting you listed was more than 10 years old. But in the last year and ½ we have had the Parkland FL shooting killing 17, the pulse nightclub shooting killing 49 and the Las Vegas shooting killing 59 and injuring 841. That is a 125 killed. The shooting you list are over the last 19 years totaling 70. If you bring it down to number of people killed per year in mass murders with handguns it would be 3.7. Killed with assault weapons per year it would be 83.3. Do you see a problem there?

The gun manufacturers don’t want you to know the number of people that are killed by guns.

They not only don’t want you to know they went out of their way to keep that a secret by passing a law in congress to keep statistic from being gathered about guns.

When I posted a figure of 60,000-gun deaths I had a source for that figure and I listed that source in the post. The paragraph started out talking about traffic deaths but ended talking about gun “incidents” which included those injured with guns so that is mistake on my part.

The Center for Disease Control published a figure of 38,658 deaths by guns for 2016 which is 5,658 more than your claim of 33,000 and gun deaths.

Since 1968 there have been 1,516,863 guns deaths on United states territory. “Since the founding of the United States there have been 1,396,733 deaths in war.

That averages 30,337-gun deaths per year for 50 years. More gun deaths since 1968 than all the wars fought by the United States throughout history. That illustrates how big the gun problem is.

I have seen other sources that list 50,000 gun death a year. The reason the figure is all over the place is the NRA passed a law to keep stastic s from be gathered that could be used to promote gun control.

How can you and the CDC publish numbers on gun deaths and then in the same space complain that they have been blocked?

It's widely supposed that Congress enacted a "ban" on federal funding for gun violence research in 1996. That isn't quite true, says Mark Rosenberg, a gun violence expert who was head of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the time. But the truth is even more demoralizing.

Infuriated by CDC-funded research suggesting that having firearms in the home sharply increased the risks of homicide, the NRA goaded Congress in 1996 into stripping the injury center's funding for gun violence research – $2.6 million. Congress then passed a measure drafted by then-Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) forbidding the CDC to spend funds "to advocate or promote gun control." (The NRA initially hoped to eradicate the injury center entirely.)

The Dickey Amendment didn't technically ban any federally funded gun violence research. The real blow was delivered by a succession of pusillanimous CDC directors, who decided that the safest course bureaucratically was simply to zero out the whole field.

Remarkably, that approach has continued to the present day [2016]: After the Newtown massacre of schoolchildren in 2012, President Obama issued an executive order instructing the CDC to "conduct or sponsor research into the causes of gun violence and the ways to prevent it." But the agency has refused unless it receives a specific appropriation to cover the research. Congress played its obligatory role in acting as the NRA's cat's-paw by repeatedly rejecting bills to provide $10 million for the work.

But without additional funding the CDC is unable to investigate gun violence and research causes and solutions.

When it comes down to someone with a hand gun trying to take down someone with AR-15 with body armor or without it is like bringing a knife to gun fight. That is why they make bigger and better guns.

If you had a clear shot at someone armed with an AR-15 back is the only way someone with a hand gun would be able to stop someone with an AR-15

otherwise the US Army would just issue handguns and not bother with the M-16.

They would have a word for teachers armed with hand guns in a gun fight with someone armed with an AR-15, that word would be dead.

If your armed with an AR-15 body armor is probably not necessary.

The police are trained to fire at center of mass and training becomes second nature in an emergency. The police training is so intense and repetitive that it is second nature.

Firing at someone face might be a bit tough if you have a hundred bullets a minute come your way from an AR-15. It would be bad for your aim and might make you a little unsteady.