0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2019 10:39 pm
@Baldimo,
Gun owners are violent, as a group they are much more violent than normal people. Just yesterday we had a gun nut that fired five bullets into a car with a family in it during a road rage incident. Another gun nut decides to take the police on a after a car chase shoots one officer before he is killed in a hail of bullets. Another woman was shot in her leg in another incident. This is just one more day of gun violence. Gun violence is continuing to escalate. When I was a child the gun nuts just brandished their guns, now they kill people at the slightest provocation. Now the Republicans have changed the law to make murder by gun nut legal. If a gun nut “feels” threatened, he can kill anybody for little or no reason. When the murder rate is 19 times what it is in civilized countries it is guns that are at fault.
____________________________________________________
In this case we are just talking about the murder rate in America compared to the murder rate in Japan. Suicides are not considered murders.

____________________________________________________
That vague comment has a name it is called the truth.

____________________________________________________
Anybody that believes that they have a gun in the house to protect their family is living a lie because the people most likely to die by that gun are the very same family members. The risk to family members is far higher than any imagined criminal activity.

____________________________________________________
I think the statistic is correct the majority realize the real danger to their family is the gun.

____________________________________________________
Currently only 30% of Americans own a gun. The demographics of gun ownership show that only 16% of democrats own a gun.

____________________________________________________
The 900 rounds is the specification given by the manufacturer of the AR-15. That is the design capability that can be exploited by using accessories like bump stocks. Using the words arms can only grant a right to what existed at the time. The founding fathers may have been smart, but they were not fortune tellers. They could not see into the future if they could have the second amendment would have landed on the cutting room floor.

___________________________________________________
The founding fathers could not see into the future. Technology will no doubt be able to supply a weapon make that “arms” that could destroy the whole planet and you would still use the same lame argument.

____________________________________________________
It second amendment is read clearly without the BS from the gun manufacturers it only grants the gun technology that exists at the time.

___________________________________________________
I don’t of any police shooting that is considered a mass shooting.

____________________________________________________
I don’t know of one mass murder who killed 58 people with a hammer. Do you? Maybe in an episode of the Twilight Zone or a Beatles song.

____________________________________________________
In New York you might see Police with assault weapons here you seldom see one. Patrolmen have their Glock and a shot gun.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 7 Jan, 2019 11:27 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Gun owners are violent, as a group they are much more violent than normal people.
No they aren't.

Zardoz wrote:
Now the Republicans have changed the law to make murder by gun nut legal. If a gun nut “feels” threatened, he can kill anybody for little or no reason.
The right to self defense underpins all modern government.

Zardoz wrote:
When the murder rate is 19 times what it is in civilized countries it is guns that are at fault.
Wrong. Statistics show very clearly that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
In this case we are just talking about the murder rate in America compared to the murder rate in Japan.
Cherry picked data has no validity.

Zardoz wrote:
Anybody that believes that they have a gun in the house to protect their family is living a lie because the people most likely to die by that gun are the very same family members. The risk to family members is far higher than any imagined criminal activity.
Only in households where there would have been a homicide anyway even without the gun.

Zardoz wrote:
The 900 rounds is the specification given by the manufacturer of the AR-15. That is the design capability that can be exploited by using accessories like bump stocks.
Bump stocks are illegal. No semi-auto can fire 900 rounds per minute.

Zardoz wrote:
Using the words arms can only grant a right to what existed at the time. The founding fathers may have been smart, but they were not fortune tellers.
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be allowed to censor political opinions on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
The founding fathers may have been smart, but they were not fortune tellers. They could not see into the future if they could have the second amendment would have landed on the cutting room floor.
Not at all. The Founding Fathers would have been horrified at the way the left wants to violate civil liberties for fun. They would have made extra sure that the Constitution contained provisions to prevent the left from preying on Americans.

Zardoz wrote:
The founding fathers could not see into the future.
Irrelevant.

Zardoz wrote:
Technology will no doubt be able to supply a weapon make that “arms” that could destroy the whole planet and you would still use the same lame argument.
Restrictions on such a weapon could be justified with a good reason. Therefore restrictions would be allowed under the Heller ruling.

Pointing out that it is wrong to violate people's civil liberties is hardly a lame argument. Civil liberties are what make America a great country to live in.

Zardoz wrote:
It second amendment is read clearly without the BS from the gun manufacturers it only grants the gun technology that exists at the time.
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be allowed to censor political opinions on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
I don’t of any police shooting that is considered a mass shooting.
So you were wrong about AR-15s being made for mass murder.

Zardoz wrote:
In New York you might see Police with assault weapons here you seldom see one. Patrolmen have their Glock and a shot gun.
Police have AR-15s nearly everywhere in America.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2019 03:44 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
No they aren't.

Yes they are.
Quote:
The right to self defense underpins all modern government.

It's not even mentioned in the Constitution.
Quote:
Wrong. Statistics show very clearly that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

Common sense shows it does.
Quote:
Cherry picked data has no validity.

It often can and does.
Quote:
Only in households where there would have been a homicide anyway even without the gun.

Evidence? Proof? Corroboration?
Quote:
Bump stocks are illegal. No semi-auto can fire 900 rounds per minute.

Consumer demand means that some other similar device will be invented and sold to violent members of the gun community
Quote:
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be allowed to censor political opinions on the internet.

Illogical conclusion.
Quote:
Not at all. The Founding Fathers would have been horrified at the way the left wants to violate civil liberties for fun. They would have made extra sure that the Constitution contained provisions to prevent the left from preying on Americans.

You have no idea what the Founding Fathers "would have been horrified at" — you're just using them as convenient puppets for conveying your own prejudices.
Quote:
Irrelevant.

It's relevant to any discussion about the Founding Father's beliefs with respect to today's.
Quote:
Civil liberties are what make America a great country to live in.

Only the free exercise of one of those civil liberties involves a citizen's right to terrorize, wound, and kill others with a deadly weapon. We won't miss it when it's amended out of existence.
Quote:
So you were wrong about AR-15s being made for mass murder.

Conclusion doesn't follow.
Quote:
Police have AR-15s nearly everywhere in America

Then why don't you see them everywhere in the country?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2019 06:16 am
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
Yes they are.
Cite evidence to back up your claim that gun owners are more violent than non gun owners.

hightor wrote:
It's not even mentioned in the Constitution.
That is irrelevant to the fact that the right to self defense underpins all modern government.

hightor wrote:
Common sense shows it does.
When your common sense is contrary to all the facts, you should take that as a sign that you are wrong about everything.

Why do people who support fascism or oppose civil liberties always claim common sense?

hightor wrote:
It often can and does.
In that case, a comparison of Taiwan and Switzerland proves that putting guns in civilian hands lowers the homicide rate.

hightor wrote:
Evidence? Proof? Corroboration?
The claim that "a gun will be more likely to kill a family member than an intruder" is based solely on the fact that domestic violence is more common than intrusion from outsiders.

A comparison of Switzerland and Taiwan shows that civilian gun ownership actually reduces homicide rates.

hightor wrote:
Consumer demand means that some other similar device will be invented and sold to violent members of the gun community
Such a device would be illegal under the same standards that prohibit bump stocks.

hightor wrote:
Illogical conclusion.
Wrong. If civil liberties do not apply to modern technology, then there is no free speech on the internet.

hightor wrote:
You have no idea what the Founding Fathers "would have been horrified at" — you're just using them as convenient puppets for conveying your own prejudices.
Wrong. The Founding Fathers clearly valued civil liberties, were concerned that people in the future would try to violate civil liberties, and took steps to protect civil liberties from those who would violate them.

hightor wrote:
It's relevant to any discussion about the Founding Father's beliefs with respect to today's.
It is not relevant to the question of whether civil liberties continue into the present.

hightor wrote:
Only the free exercise of one of those civil liberties involves a citizen's right to terrorize, wound, and kill others with a deadly weapon. We won't miss it when it's amended out of existence.
In other words, leftists hate our freedom just as much as the 9/11 hijackers did.

Voting for Trump will ensure that our civil liberties remain protected from the left.

hightor wrote:
Conclusion doesn't follow.
Wrong. If the weapon was designed for lawful uses, then it wasn't designed for committing crimes.

hightor wrote:
Then why don't you see them everywhere in the country?
Because you don't look inside police cars to see what weapons are in there.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2019 10:28 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Gun owners are violent, as a group they are much more violent than normal people.

You have this mistaken idea that all gun owners are the same, they are not. In fact a majority of the people you seem to complain about are people who don't legally own their guns.

Quote:
Just yesterday we had a gun nut that fired five bullets into a car with a family in it during a road rage incident. Another gun nut decides to take the police on a after a car chase shoots one officer before he is killed in a hail of bullets. Another woman was shot in her leg in another incident.

Since you usually proclaim "gun nuts" to be NRA members, how many of those incidents involved NRA members? In fact how many gun crimes are committed by NRA members?

Quote:
This is just one more day of gun violence. Gun violence is continuing to escalate.

Actually all crime appears to be down and continues to go down, that's been the trend for about 30 years now.

Quote:
When I was a child the gun nuts just brandished their guns, now they kill people at the slightest provocation. Now the Republicans have changed the law to make murder by gun nut legal. If a gun nut “feels” threatened, he can kill anybody for little or no reason. When the murder rate is 19 times what it is in civilized countries it is guns that are at fault.

Fact's, links, proof?

Quote:
n this case we are just talking about the murder rate in America compared to the murder rate in Japan. Suicides are not considered murders.

You never talk about the murder rate, you only talk about gun deaths. 60% of gun deaths are from suicide, not murder. People in Japan don't really have guns and yet they have a higher suicide rate than we do here in the states.

Quote:
That vague comment has a name it is called the truth.

No truth without facts, proof or links... You made a throwaway statement that really had no meaning.

Quote:
Anybody that believes that they have a gun in the house to protect their family is living a lie because the people most likely to die by that gun are the very same family members. The risk to family members is far higher than any imagined criminal activity.

This is one of those times when your pointless rhetoric/propaganda runs into the truth of real stats, not make believe probability stats the anti-gun nuts use. If there are 12k murders per year with a gun, you claim the majority of those are done by family members? When the stats actually point to 80% of the 12k murders are done by gang members. The very people you are most worried about shooting others are the only people who will have guns if they are made illegal.

Quote:
Currently only 30% of Americans own a gun. The demographics of gun ownership show that only 16% of democrats own a gun.

The number of gun owners in the US is higher than 30%.

Quote:
The 900 rounds is the specification given by the manufacturer of the AR-15.

That is the number for a full auto rifle, not a semi-auto rifle. You really need to stop lying, it doesn't help your cause.

Quote:
That is the design capability that can be exploited by using accessories like bump stocks.

Bump stocks have been made illegal, so you have no argument.

Quote:
Using the words arms can only grant a right to what existed at the time. The founding fathers may have been smart, but they were not fortune tellers.

Wrong again, where does it say that in the Constitution? Once again, they were much smarter than you, they knew someone like you would come along some day and play word games, they used the word "arms" very specifically. As I have pointed out many times, they knew multi round guns existed, even guns who could fire 20 rounds a minute, they still used the word "arms".

Quote:
They could not see into the future if they could have the second amendment would have landed on the cutting room floor.

Wrong again. They had fought a war of independence and were fully aware of technological advancements with guns.

Quote:
It second amendment is read clearly without the BS from the gun manufacturers it only grants the gun technology that exists at the time.

Where does it say that?




Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Tue 8 Jan, 2019 10:08 pm
I have to suspend the regular order of things tonight because the greatest living conman is trying to pull off the world’s greatest conn tonight. This is much like watching Evil Knievel trying to jump the Grand Canyon you know he is going to fail but you came to watch him crash. Trump and his businesses are responsible for bringing 10s of thousands of foreign nationals who became illegal aliens into America.

What we do know about illegal aliens is that vast majority arrive by plane with a temporary visa when the visa expires the foreign national becomes an illegal alien. What good will a wall do to stop an airplane? Trump has refused to acknowledge the real problem of illegal immigration and his part in it. The only illegal aliens that are crossing the border on foot are those that can’t afford a plane ticket. If Trump could build a 100 ft tall wall the along the whole 2,000-mile border it would not stop one foreign national from flying over it and becoming an illegal alien. Trump’s wall is a complete and total waste of $5 billion at a time when Trump has run up the deficit by $2 trillion in the last 2 years.

How anyone could vote for someone who bankrupted 7 businesses including 3 casinos that were money laundering operations? One of the FBI’s 10 most wanted, #5 on list was he arrested in Trump Tower only 3 floors below Trump’s residence. He was arrested for running a gambling and money laundering operation in Trump Tower. Of course, the guy was Russian Mafia and Trump had owned the condo he was in. The Russian Mafia runs Russia and Trump is key to their taking control of America. One thing for sure Trump wants to see more immigrants who look like him and would never say anything about the illegal Russian mafia aliens
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Wed 9 Jan, 2019 11:03 pm
@Baldimo,
I will agree that not all gun owners are the same but what is the same, is that each gun owner found it necessary to buy and keep an instrument of death near them. Most of the mass murders purchased their guns legally or got them from a family member.

____________________________________________________
There are only 5 million NRA members out of 330 million Americans so less than 5% of gun owners belong to the NRA. NRA membership is not a required field in any mass murder statistic so there is no way of knowing how many murders are committed by NRA members each year. The crime the NRA is responsible for is colluding with communist operatives to get Trump elected.

___________________________________________________
Actually, mass murders have been climbing at close to geometric rate.

“It isn’t your imagination: Mass shootings are getting deadlier and more frequent. A recent FBI report on “active shooters” from 2000 to 2015 found that the number of incidents more than doubled from the first to the second half of that period. Four of the five deadliest shooting in American history happened in the last five years, and 2017 already far exceeds any previous year for the number of casualties.”

Source: “Wall Street Journal” a right-wing publication.

____________________________________________________
Facts? It would be hard for me to document the number of times gun nuts brandished their guns at the time. Today, because of the number of mass murders, if someone chambered the shells in their shot gun and took aim at a group of children they did not want playing in a churchyard. They would be arrested. But at that time as long as you were not shot the police were not even called. You can see the cases of brandishing are turning into shooting simply by the number of shooting during road rage incidents. Road rage use to end up with a fender bender and a fist fight but now somebody dies. If someone is driving to slow in your lane there is a gun nut solution shoot the slow driver’s wife in the head that will get him out of your way.

____________________________________________________

There were 620 road rage incidents involving guns more than double than 2 years earlier. Florida led the nation with 146 incidents in the last two years. So just remember the next time you miss an approaching car in your rearview mirror and cut a gun nut off he likely to blow your brains out or maybe one of your children. Bullets or gun nuts don’t have conscious.
Source: CBS News
____________________________________________________

In this case the murder rate and only the murder rate was compared to Japan’s murder rate. The figures were in murders per 100,000. On the other hand-gun deaths count all the stupid gun nuts that actually shot themselves looking down the barrel of the gun to see if it was loaded. That is exactly the point people and Japan don’t have guns and that is why America murder rate is 19 times higher than Japan.
__________________________________________________________________________________
The source and the statistic that made it true were listed.

____________________________________________________
When a wife is murdered who is the most likely person to have murdered her? When a husband is murdered the most likely suspect is the wife. She may have to tell her lover what drawer her husband gun is in. Police investigation begin with the person closest to the victim.

____________________________________________________
The statistic put the figure at 30% and getting lower every day.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The design capability is 900 rounds per minute all you have to do is get your trigger finger in shape. That capability is in that gun all it needs is to be modified.

___________________________________________________
Somebody will have already designed something that is better than the bump stock to take advantage of AR-15 design capability.
____________________________________________________________________________________
You can call it guns or you call it arms it does not change anything. Arms has no future connotation nor does gun. Courts have already settled this by ruling dangerous and deadly weapons can be banned. If your interpretation were correct the courts could not rule that way.

___________________________________________________
Just because there had been improvements in the past in guns it does not necessarily follow that there will be improvements in the future. The second amendments can only grant what the definition of arms was at that moment in time any thing in the future was left up to the government or to a new amendment.

____________________________________________________
For the second amendment to grant the gun technology of the time no other language was necessary but to grant future technology the language would have to be included stating that amendment granted to a right to all future technology. Only an activist judge could come up with your interpretation.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2019 12:13 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
That is exactly the point people and Japan don’t have guns and that is why America murder rate is 19 times higher than Japan.
That is incorrect. Statistics are clear that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
The source and the statistic that made it true were listed.
Cherry picked data has no validity.

Zardoz wrote:
The design capability is 900 rounds per minute all you have to do is get your trigger finger in shape.
That is incorrect. Semi-autos do not fire that fast.

Zardoz wrote:
That capability is in that gun all it needs is to be modified.
ALL guns can be modified to fire full auto. Modifying them thusly is already illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
Somebody will have already designed something that is better than the bump stock to take advantage of AR-15 design capability.
If they do, their design will already be illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
You can call it guns or you call it arms it does not change anything. Arms has no future connotation nor does gun.
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be free to censor political opinions on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
Courts have already settled this by ruling dangerous and deadly weapons can be banned. If your interpretation were correct the courts could not rule that way.
That is incorrect. Courts have never ruled that civil liberties do not apply to modern technology.

Zardoz wrote:
Just because there had been improvements in the past in guns it does not necessarily follow that there will be improvements in the future. The second amendments can only grant what the definition of arms was at that moment in time any thing in the future was left up to the government or to a new amendment.
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be free to censor political opinions on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
For the second amendment to grant the gun technology of the time no other language was necessary but to grant future technology the language would have to be included stating that amendment granted to a right to all future technology.
If you were correct about civil liberties not applying to modern technology, Trump would be free to censor political opinions on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
Only an activist judge could come up with your interpretation.
No. Only an activist judge would rule that civil liberties do not apply to modern technology.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2019 01:27 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
I will agree that not all gun owners are the same but what is the same, is that each gun owner found it necessary to buy and keep an instrument of death near them. Most of the mass murders purchased their guns legally or got them from a family member.

Here we go again, switching between mass murder and gun murders to fit your argument. You can't even come close to proving the average gun owner is violent, this can be proven with the simple math on guns. How many gun owners vs murders per year... Notice how you never ever mention who or where a majority of the violent crime in this country. Instead you try to label gun owners as violent, with no stats to back it up. It's all emotion and no fact.

Quote:
There are only 5 million NRA members out of 330 million Americans so less than 5% of gun owners belong to the NRA.

Sorry, but don't confuse Americans with the total population of the US. I'm hoping that with this next census we get an actual count of Americans.

Quote:
NRA membership is not a required field in any mass murder statistic so there is no way of knowing how many murders are committed by NRA members each year.

Sorry to tell you, but if any mass shooter had been an NRA member, the media would have found out about it and reported it. The police investigating the crime would be doing a background check on the person to find out their affiliations. Don't play dumb, this weak attempt at smearing the NRA is proof enough that you are wrong. The media would love nothing more than to expose a mass shooter as an NRA member.

Quote:
The crime the NRA is responsible for is colluding with communist operatives to get Trump elected.

That's funny, if you think 50 million pushed Trump over the top, then you are more diluted than I thought. When you look at the money spent by Hillary, more the $1 billion, with a B, 50 million wasn't ****.

Quote:
Actually, mass murders have been climbing at close to geometric rate.
Source: “Wall Street Journal” a right-wing publication.

If you had bothered to actually read the entire article instead of just the first paragraph, they don't blame the mass shootings on guns, they blame the media and their coverage of the shootings. Exactly as I have already said to you in past posts. Guns have nothing to do with what these people do, guns are just the tools they use. Mass shootings are the equal to a slow motion riot, each of these shooters as the article points out, had a fascination with another shooter and attribute what they are doing to past shooters. Nice attempt at propaganda though.

Quote:
Facts? It would be hard for me to document the number of times gun nuts brandished their guns at the time.

Considering you were a bureaucratic building inspector, I don't blame them, you were likely trespassing on their property. They aren't gun nuts, they were citizens protecting their property from someone like you, a pencil pusher with a little bit of power, who likely abused it every chance he got. You've already voiced your hate and dislike for the "greedy" as you call them, how many "greedy" people did you target with your ticket book?

Quote:
If someone is driving to slow in your lane there is a gun nut solution shoot the slow driver’s wife in the head that will get him out of your way.

Continue to discredit your argument with equating gun owners to gun nuts. The people who do these things were doing them long before they had a gun. It's a flaw in the person, not what they chose to do with the gun. 147 incidents in FL, how many CC holders are there in FL, and in each case was the person a CC holder?

Quote:
In this case the murder rate and only the murder rate was compared to Japan’s murder rate. The figures were in murders per 100,000. On the other hand-gun deaths count all the stupid gun nuts that actually shot themselves looking down the barrel of the gun to see if it was loaded. That is exactly the point people and Japan don’t have guns and that is why America murder rate is 19 times higher than Japan.

Guns have no bearing on murder, just as they have no bearing on suicide. Japan isn't the US and in more ways then we can count, so we don't equate, our populations and cultures are not the same, yet Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US does... why? Culture!

Quote:
The statistic put the figure at 30% and getting lower every day.

Lets get real, it's actually 42% of households have guns. The "30%" number claims to be for people in the house who actually own the gun.

When it comes to rights, you have a funny way of determining who should and shouldn't get rights. In one post you claimed that 1% of a group was enough to change the laws and grant things, yet when it's 42%, nah, they can't have **** and majority rules. This is why your form of "democracy" isn't valid.

Quote:
The design capability is 900 rounds per minute all you have to do is get your trigger finger in shape.

No it's not, that's for a full auto weapon with an unlimited supply of rounds. Neither of which the civilian AR is made to do. You really need to stop confusing the M16/M4 with the AR-15.

Quote:
That capability is in that gun all it needs is to be modified.

It's illegal to modify the gun to fire this way. Bump stocks have been banned and anything that comes close to what you describe will also be banned. There is no support for such devices except at the fringes of the gun world.

Quote:
Somebody will have already designed something that is better than the bump stock to take advantage of AR-15 design capability.

The design capability of the AR is that of a semi-auto rifle, one trigger pull, one bullet fired. As I noted before, they will be banned as well.

Quote:
You can call it guns or you call it arms it does not change anything. Arms has no future connotation nor does gun.

You have no Constitutional basis for such a claim. If they meant muskets, they would have said muskets. One of the FF was an inventor, they were much smarter than you are, they knew what they were doing. Having just fought a war for their freedom from a tyrant, they knew what they were doing.

Quote:
Courts have already settled this by ruling dangerous and deadly weapons can be banned.

Nothing has really been banned, yet, just restricted. You can own a full auto gun, as long as it was made before 1986 and you can pass the more broad background check to get a Class III permit to have them. Once that's done, it's the matter of affording the weapons it's self, they are very expensive since they are rare, starting at $15k.

Quote:
If your interpretation were correct the courts could not rule that way.

The courts have ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment more often then they have ruled against it. Heller is a perfect example. Just recently in July of 2018, the very Liberal 9th Circuit ruled in favor of being able to carry guns in public. The 9th covers anti-gun CA.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-court/us-appeals-court-upholds-right-to-carry-gun-in-public-idUSKBN1KE28C

Quote:
Just because there had been improvements in the past in guns it does not necessarily follow that there will be improvements in the future.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself of such a silly argument? At the time of the founding fathers, guns had been around and improved upon for hundreds of years. The modern day gun was invented because of the desire to make a cannon portable, that's the historic truth about guns. China invented the "fire lance" in the 10th century and by the 14th century guns were being used in different parts of europe.


Quote:
The second amendments can only grant what the definition of arms was at that moment in time any thing in the future was left up to the government or to a new amendment.

I'll say it again, you have no Constitutional basis for such a claim. Is the internet and cell phone technology not covered by the 1st Amendment? All courts have ruled that technology has no bearing on Constitutional rights.

Quote:
For the second amendment to grant the gun technology of the time no other language was necessary but to grant future technology the language would have to be included stating that amendment granted to a right to all future technology. Only an activist judge could come up with your interpretation.

More foolishness along the same line I've already disproved. Where's the new Constitutional amendment for cell phones and the internet and the right of free speech, the tech of the time was the printing press and the quill. Abortion isn't even mentioned in the Constitution, where's that Amendment if it's Constitutional? Take your BS somewhere else.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2019 10:08 pm
@oralloy,
Do you not understand the difference between Japan and Americas murder rate is because of the number of guns in America and that is not only with Japan but twelve other countries? This is not a contrived study, this is simply a reporting of cold hard facts. Was your study done by the gun manufacturers association and the Russians?

____________________________________________________
Cherry picked? It is either a murder or it isn’t. It is a simple matter of counting the murders in America and the murders in Japan. There is no possible way to cherry pick that.

____________________________________________________
We know for a fact that Las Vegas shooter fired 1,000 rounds in 10 minutes and he was changing guns during that time period. The AR-15 still has that design capability.

____________________________________________________
Murder is also illegal but that never stopped one mass murderer.

____________________________________________________
Only bump stocks are illegal other modification to make an AR-15 simulate an automatic are not.

____________________________________________________
Courts have already upheld regulations on guns. There was an assault weapon ban and the gun manufacturers association did not overturn it they let it expire after 10 years.

____________________________________________________
The internet is just a delivery system for free speech, just as the paper boy is, or radio waves. The Internet does not alter free speech any more than the paperboy does.

____________________________________________________
Free speech has not evolved since 1976 whether spoken person to person, printed in a newspaper, broadcast on television, or posted on the internet. Only the method of delivery changed over time.

____________________________________________________
It is wishful thinking on your part that you can make amendments to the second amendment.

oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 10 Jan, 2019 10:35 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Do you not understand the difference between Japan and Americas murder rate is because of the number of guns in America
I understand that it is not the reason for the difference. Statistics are very clear that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
and that is not only with Japan but twelve other countries? This is not a contrived study, this is simply a reporting of cold hard facts.
Cherry picked data has no validity.

Zardoz wrote:
Cherry picked? It is either a murder or it isn’t. It is a simple matter of counting the murders in America and the murders in Japan. There is no possible way to cherry pick that.
Sure there is. You are ignoring all of the countries with lots of guns and a low homicide rate. And ignoring all of the countries with few guns and a high homicide rate.

Zardoz wrote:
We know for a fact that Las Vegas shooter fired 1,000 rounds in 10 minutes and he was changing guns during that time period. The AR-15 still has that design capability.
That is incorrect. Semi-autos do not fire that fast.

Zardoz wrote:
Murder is also illegal but that never stopped one mass murderer.
True. In thousands of years of civilized history no one has ever come up with a way to stop people from deciding to kill other people.

Zardoz wrote:
Only bump stocks are illegal other modification to make an AR-15 simulate an automatic are not.
It is illegal to modify a gun to make it full auto no matter how the modification is done.

Zardoz wrote:
Courts have already upheld regulations on guns.
Only regulations that can be justified with a good reason are allowed.

Zardoz wrote:
There was an assault weapon ban and the gun manufacturers association did not overturn it they let it expire after 10 years.
It was a shameful era. The courts were not upholding the Constitution then.

Zardoz wrote:
The internet is just a delivery system for free speech, just as the paper boy is, or radio waves. The Internet does not alter free speech any more than the paperboy does.
Luckily your ideas about civil liberties not applying to modern technology are wrong. Thus we have free speech on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
Free speech has not evolved since 1976 whether spoken person to person, printed in a newspaper, broadcast on television, or posted on the internet. Only the method of delivery changed over time.
Luckily your ideas about civil liberties not applying to modern technology are wrong. Thus we have free speech on the internet.

Zardoz wrote:
It is wishful thinking on your part that you can make amendments to the second amendment.
I'm not trying to change the Second Amendment. I want it to stay just the way that it is.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 11 Jan, 2019 11:17 pm
@Baldimo,
You can’t prove that people that purchase chainsaws did so to cut down trees some claim they just like to hear the sound the saws makes. But what we do know is that most did purchase a chainsaw to cut trees down. Just as most people purchase a gun to kill people with whether real or imagined. When you purchase a gun for “protection’ you are hoping you can kill an intruder before he kills you. In your post you were talking about gun owners in general.
____________________________________________________
I know that you like lies and the right is making a big effort to make sure a good portion of America’s population is not counted just like the right made a big effort to stop minorities from voting. You like Trump believe the only Americans are those who look like him.

____________________________________________________
The NRA is a private organization and as such does not have divulge who is a member and no subpoena can be used to get the information. The fact is that some gun manufacturers automatically buy an NRA membership for anyone that buys their gun. Since most mass murderers buy their gun legally it would be hard for them not to be an NRA member. It is not like the NRA requires members be sane. Do you think the police would also check if someone belonged to the local country club?

____________________________________________________
It took very little to put Trump over the top. He actually lost the popular election by 10 million votes and his electoral margin was razor thin determined by only a few thousand votes in three states. So, $50 million could easily determined the election.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Guns are just tools for sure but if I had no mechanic tools, I could not build a racing engine, there is no substitute for the right tools. Tools are the most import part of the equation whether murder or building a racing engine. Blaming the media is like the twinkie defense, the twinkie gave me a sugar high and that is why I killed them. The media has been some form of media around for a thousand of years but the big increase in mass murders can be traced directly back to the birth of the AR-15.

____________________________________________________
I never had a gun pulled on me while I was a Compliance Officer or a Union President though some members wore them like in the old west. The incidences I related took place when I was a small child. Gun nuts are cowards and were more likely to brandish guns at children. If they brandish their guns at adults, they took the chance that it would be another gun nut and he might shoot first. The only time I had to have somebody arrested for assault was A guy came up behind me intent on clubbing me with a 2x6. He had threatened to kill me after towing 25 of his cars off. He was a gun nut and had shot three people including his son. I warned the people that took my job to always take back up when dealing with him. After I retired several body parts were found in the river that went behind his property. The next year he was arrested for disposing of body parts at a car wash. What can I say he was a typical gun nut.

____________________________________________________
How do you think the guy that was pissed because the other driver was going slow would kill the other driver’s wife? Throw a rock at her, no it takes a gun. The right tool for the right job.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Guns have nothing to do with murder? Just as a chainsaw has nothing to do with cutting down trees. We are not talking only about Japan the murder is far higher than any other civilized country. ____________________________________________________________________________________
Your 43% is arrived at by say the husband owns the gun, then counting the wife as owning the same gun and then counting the family dog as owning the same gun. The figure is 30% and falling.

____________________________________________________
The design capacity of the AR-15 is 900 rounds a minute the semi-automatic AR-15 and automatic AR-15 are exactly the same gun only the trigger mechanisms is different and the semi-automatic can be modified the capability is there.

____________________________________________________
In most jurisdictions, adultery is also illegal. It is in violation of the law only after the fact. Most mass murderer’s goal is to kill 50 people or so, they are not going to worry about a gun regulation. That is not a deterrent.

____________________________________________________
The bump stocks made a semi-automatic fire like an automatic. The real work is using the exhaust to chamber the next round.
____________________________________________________
Have you heard of wishful thinking? In your case it is wishful reading you are readings things that are not there.

____________________________________________________
All sort of restrictions on guns have been put in place all across the country and upheld in court.

____________________________________________________
Gun nuts always site the Heller case as a grand victory, but it is like Custer claiming a great victory at little big horn. This case destroys the gun nut argument that the second amendments entitles them to any gun that was ever invented because the decision makes it extremely clear that access to dangerous and deadly weapons can be regulated. In this decision they won the battle but lost the war.

____________________________________________________
Hammers have been around much longer than guns but there is little to no improvement in hammers. A hammer 200 years ago is basically the same today. So there no reason for the founding fathers to believe that guns would be any different.
____________________________________________________
Your wishful reading has been shot down by many court decisions.

____________________________________________________
The courts decision show beyond any and all doubt that your reading of the second amendment is just wishful reading.

oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 12 Jan, 2019 12:00 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Just as most people purchase a gun to kill people with whether real or imagined.
Most people who purchase hunting rifles are not planning to kill people.

Most people who purchase skeet shooting shotguns are not planning to kill people.

Zardoz wrote:
When you purchase a gun for “protection’ you are hoping you can kill an intruder before he kills you.
That is incorrect. The goal is incapacitation of the intruder. It doesn't matter if the intruder dies so long as he is prevented from inflicting harm.

Zardoz wrote:
the big increase in mass murders can be traced directly back to the birth of the AR-15.
Nonsense. AR-15s do not make people decide to become murderers.

Zardoz wrote:
Guns have nothing to do with murder?
Correct. Statistics show that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
We are not talking only about Japan the murder is far higher than any other civilized country.
Other civilized countries have a strong social safety net that prevents poverty.

Zardoz wrote:
The design capacity of the AR-15 is 900 rounds a minute
That is incorrect. Semi-auto guns do not fire that fast.

Zardoz wrote:
the semi-automatic AR-15 and automatic AR-15 are exactly the same gun only the trigger mechanisms is different
Since they are different, they are not the same.

Zardoz wrote:
and the semi-automatic can be modified the capability is there.
ALL guns can be modified to make them full auto.

Zardoz wrote:
Most mass murderer’s goal is to kill 50 people or so, they are not going to worry about a gun regulation. That is not a deterrent.
The left isn't pushing gun laws to prevent murders. Their only goal is to violate civil liberties for fun.

Zardoz wrote:
The bump stocks made a semi-automatic fire like an automatic. The real work is using the exhaust to chamber the next round.
Bump stocks are illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
Have you heard of wishful thinking? In your case it is wishful reading you are readings things that are not there.
That is incorrect. Baldimo is correctly stating constitutional law.

Zardoz wrote:
All sort of restrictions on guns have been put in place all across the country and upheld in court.
Restrictions that have no justification will be struck down soon enough.

Zardoz wrote:
Gun nuts always site the Heller case as a grand victory, but it is like Custer claiming a great victory at little big horn. This case destroys the gun nut argument that the second amendments entitles them to any gun that was ever invented because the decision makes it extremely clear that access to dangerous and deadly weapons can be regulated. In this decision they won the battle but lost the war.
Heller only permits restrictions that can be justified with a good reason. The ruling means that we are entitled to any gun that there is no justification for restricting.

Zardoz wrote:
Your wishful reading has been shot down by many court decisions
That is incorrect. The Supreme Court agrees with Baldimo.

Zardoz wrote:
The courts decision show beyond any and all doubt that your reading of the second amendment is just wishful reading.
That is incorrect. The Supreme Court agrees with Baldimo.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 12 Jan, 2019 10:15 pm
@oralloy,
Most people that purchase hunting rifles do so because they enjoy killing animals and it is but a short step from killing animals to killing people. One thing we know about serial killers is they start with torturing and killing animals and move on to torturing and killing people.

____________________________________________________
Even police are taught to shoot to the center of mass, they shoot to kill. A wounded animal is far more dangerous and the same applies to humans. A shot to incapacitate could end up with the intruder killing them. If you aim a gun at someone you shoot to kill.
____________________________________________________
The AR-15 makes mass murder possible. It is hard to commit mass murder when you have to reload your shot gun each time you fire. The AR-15 was designed for mass murder that why it fires so many bullets so quickly.

____________________________________________________
When you compare other countries where guns are not as easily available to America their murder rate is far lower some near 20 times lower. The only real difference is the availability of guns.

____________________________________________________
I don’t think poverty has anything to do with mass murder. Mass murderers don’t kill people because they are poor, they kill people because they can afford assault weapons. So, you are saying capitalism causes the much higher murder rate.
____________________________________________________________________________________
The capacity to fire 900 rounds a minute is designed into the AR-15 by changing a few parts it is fully automatic.

____________________________________________________
It is a simple matter of installing parts the gun is the same only the trigger mechanism is different.

____________________________________________________
All guns were not designed to kill large numbers of people on a battlefield. This is what the AR-15 was designed to do making it an excellent weapon for mass murder.

____________________________________________________
The left pushed and passed an assault weapon ban the right and gun manufacturers made sure it was not extended.

____________________________________________________
Just because the bump stocks are illegal won’t stop a mass murder who wants to kill 50 people. What are they going to do to him the punishment for killing 50 people will be far more severe and they would not bother to even charge him with that violation? The only way to stop is to ban the AR-15 and other assault weapons.

____________________________________________________
If your wishful thinking were correct there would be no gun regulations on the books.

____________________________________________________
If your wishful reading were correct there could be no justification for any gun regulation because there would be an absolute right to own atomic weapons because they are arms also.

____________________________________________________
Dangerous and deadly is a very good justification.

___________________________________________________
The supreme court has laid the ground work for future gun regulations.


oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 12 Jan, 2019 11:26 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
it is but a short step from killing animals to killing people.
Nonsense.

Zardoz wrote:
Even police are taught to shoot to the center of mass, they shoot to kill.
The goal of shooting center of mass is rapid incapacitation.

Zardoz wrote:
A shot to incapacitate could end up with the intruder killing them.
Not if the intruder is incapacitated.

Zardoz wrote:
If you aim a gun at someone you shoot to kill.
The goal of shooting center of mass is rapid incapacitation.

Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 makes mass murder possible.
Mass murder has been possible for thousands of years.

Zardoz wrote:
It is hard to commit mass murder when you have to reload your shot gun each time you fire.
The AR 15 does not load any faster than many other ordinary guns.

Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 was designed for mass murder
You already acknowledged that this is incorrect when you agreed that police do not use them for committing murder.

Zardoz wrote:
that why it fires so many bullets so quickly.
The AR 15 does not fire any faster than many other ordinary guns.

Zardoz wrote:
When you compare other countries where guns are not as easily available to America their murder rate is far lower some near 20 times lower.
That is incorrect. There are a number of countries with less gun availability and a much higher murder rate.

Zardoz wrote:
The only real difference is the availability of guns.
That is incorrect. The only real difference is the level of poverty.

Zardoz wrote:
I don’t think poverty has anything to do with mass murder.
It has something to do with murder however.

Mass murder does not account for very many deaths.

Zardoz wrote:
Mass murderers don’t kill people because they are poor, they kill people because they can afford assault weapons.
That is incorrect. Pistol grips do not transform people into mass murderers.

Zardoz wrote:
So, you are saying capitalism causes the much higher murder rate.
No. I am saying poverty causes a higher murder rate.

Zardoz wrote:
The capacity to fire 900 rounds a minute is designed into the AR-15
That is incorrect. Semi-autos do not fire that fast.

Zardoz wrote:
by changing a few parts it is fully automatic.
ALL guns can be modified to become full auto.

Zardoz wrote:
It is a simple matter of installing parts the gun is the same only the trigger mechanism is different.
ALL guns can be modified to become full auto.

Zardoz wrote:
All guns were not designed to kill large numbers of people on a battlefield. This is what the AR-15 was designed to do making it an excellent weapon for mass murder.
That is incorrect. The AR 15 is just an ordinary gun and is no different from many other ordinary guns.

Zardoz wrote:
The left pushed and passed an assault weapon ban the right and gun manufacturers made sure it was not extended.
This is because the left thinks it is fun to violate people's civil liberties, and because the right values and defends civil liberties.

Zardoz wrote:
Just because the bump stocks are illegal won’t stop a mass murder who wants to kill 50 people. What are they going to do to him the punishment for killing 50 people will be far more severe and they would not bother to even charge him with that violation?
True. If a criminal does not care about gun laws, he will not comply with them.

Zardoz wrote:
The only way to stop is to ban the AR-15 and other assault weapons.
That is incorrect. Banning pistol grips will not do anything to stop crime or save any lives.

Zardoz wrote:
If your wishful thinking were correct there would be no gun regulations on the books.
The Heller ruling is not wishful thinking.

All these unjustifiable gun regulations will be struck down as soon as Trump appoints enough judges who support the Constitution.

Zardoz wrote:
If your wishful reading were correct there could be no justification for any gun regulation because there would be an absolute right to own atomic weapons because they are arms also.
The Heller ruling is not wishful reading.

Restrictions on atomic weapons can be justified. So can restrictions on many other weapons.

What cannot be justified is restrictions on pistol grips.

Zardoz wrote:
Dangerous and deadly is a very good justification.
Not when the weapon in question is neither dangerous nor unusual.

Zardoz wrote:
The supreme court has laid the ground work for future gun regulations.
Only if those gun regulations can be justified with a good reason.

They have laid the groundwork for striking down all gun regulations that have no justification.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 13 Jan, 2019 11:02 pm
@oralloy,
It is a known fact that serial killers don’t start killing people. They start out killing and torturing animals. Killing is an acquired taste.

____________________________________________________
Police are taught to shoot to kill. The reasoning behind aiming at the center of mass is that if you are off target you still will do a lot of damage.
____________________________________________________
Do you think you are going to shoot the gun out of the intruder’s hand? That only happens in the movies.

____________________________________________________
There are no known mass murderers that killed 58 people before the AR-15 was invented and all of the mass murders with over 40 victims were done with assault style weapons.

____________________________________________________
If the AR-15 didn’t load faster than other semi-automatic rifles the army would not have made the M-16 (the military version of the AR-15) the weapon of choice for the military. When you need to kill a lot of people and kill them quickly the AR-15 is your best bet.
____________________________________________________
The police are in course of their business are required to kill people. That is not murder. The police still carried 357 up to a few years ago but when faced with a shootout with armed robbers armed with military assault weapon the police didn’t stand a chance. The police have them because every gun nut in America has one.

___________________________________________________
If this were a fact the mass murderers would not bother to buy AR-15s. They would just buy any old semi-automatic rifle and kill 58 people. The trouble is the actual mass murders show your argument to be totally bogus. The mass murderers are the experts and they all agree to kill large number of people quickly you absolutely must have a military assault style weapon.

____________________________________________________
List the countries that have more guns than America? You can save some time by admitting there aren’t any?

____________________________________________________
Poverty has nothing at all to do with mass murder. The Las Vegas shooter was a millionaire. Assault weapons are expensive and someone living in poverty could never afford one.

____________________________________________________
If you have 58 people killed in one mass murder that is a lot of people. You will never stop the gun nuts from killing their wives and children when they come home late, but we can make mass murders extremely hard to commit. We know that most mass murders are made possible by military style assault weapons that were designed to kill large numbers of people quickly it is a simple matter of banning military weapons.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Mass murders kill because they enjoy killing and arming them with the best military assault style weapons makes absolutely no sense. ____________________________________________________________________________________
Then you must be saying that capitalism causes mass murder because capitalism causes poverty. I don’t think people commit mass murder because they are poor. Mass murderers represent a large cross section of the economic spectrum.

____________________________________________________
The AR-15 can fire that fast and it can be modified to fire that fast and even if it only killed 100 people a minute it is an abomination that should not be on the streets.
____________________________________________________
All guns might but the military chose the AR-15 platform to wage wars with.
I wonder why the military experts did not choose one of those other guns? Maybe the experts know something.

____________________________________________________
The military experts make big buck to choose the very best weapon for the job.
_________________________________________________________________________
The right to live without being murdered by a mass murderer far exceeds any other extraneous rights.

____________________________________________________
But the path of least resistance comes into play. The harder society makes it to commit mass murder the fewer will happen.

____________________________________________________
There is simply no good reason for military style assault weapons to be on the streets.

____________________________________________________
It is extremely hard for supreme court decision to be overturned and the Heller decision is the law of the land every bit as much as the second amendment. The only judges Trump will have to worry about is those that are putting him in jail or having him hung for treason.

____________________________________________________
Restrictions on atomic weapons can justified just as an assault weapon ban can be justified for exactly the same reasons, they are both dangerous and deadly military weapons.

____________________________________________________
I don’t know of anything that is more dangerous and deadly than the weapons that killed 58 people and shot 422 others.

____________________________________________________
The supreme court ruling that dangerous and deadly weapons can be regulated says it all.
____________________________________________________
Do you know of any guns that are not dangerous and deadly? You should be able to read the writing on the wall.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2019 03:11 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
It is a known fact that serial killers don’t start killing people. They start out killing and torturing animals. Killing is an acquired taste.
That does not change the reality that there is a significant difference between a hunter and a murderer.

Zardoz wrote:
Police are taught to shoot to kill. The reasoning behind aiming at the center of mass is that if you are off target you still will do a lot of damage.
The goal of this damage is to rapidly incapacitate the target.

Zardoz wrote:
Do you think you are going to shoot the gun out of the intruder’s hand?
Of course not. I spoke only of shooting at the center of mass.

Zardoz wrote:
There are no known mass murderers that killed 58 people before the AR-15 was invented
None before the invention of the telephone either. Or the Volkswagen Beetle.

Zardoz wrote:
and all of the mass murders with over 40 victims were done with assault style weapons.
If that is true, pistol grips certainly did not make the murders any worse.

Zardoz wrote:
If the AR-15 didn’t load faster than other semi-automatic rifles the army would not have made the M-16 (the military version of the AR-15) the weapon of choice for the military.
The AR-15 does not load any faster than any other semi-auto.

Zardoz wrote:
When you need to kill a lot of people and kill them quickly the AR-15 is your best bet.
It is no deadlier than any other semi-auto rifle.

Zardoz wrote:
The police are in course of their business are required to kill people. That is not murder.
So you were wrong to say that it is a weapon made for mass murder.

Zardoz wrote:
If this were a fact the mass murderers would not bother to buy AR-15s. They would just buy any old semi-automatic rifle and kill 58 people.
They do. AR-15s are far from the only weapons used by mass murderers.

Zardoz wrote:
The trouble is the actual mass murders show your argument to be totally bogus.
That is incorrect. Nothing about mass murders changes the fact that AR-15s are no more deadly than any other semi-auto rifle.

Zardoz wrote:
The mass murderers are the experts and they all agree to kill large number of people quickly you absolutely must have a military assault style weapon.
That is incorrect. They have very low expertise.

Zardoz wrote:
List the countries that have more guns than America? You can save some time by admitting there aren’t any?
I never said there are countries with more guns than America. Although off hand I don't know that there aren't.

Zardoz wrote:
Poverty has nothing at all to do with mass murder.
It has everything to do with murder however.

Mass murder does not influence homicide rates all that much.

Zardoz wrote:
Assault weapons are expensive and someone living in poverty could never afford one.
When restrictions against mass importation of 35 dollar AK-47s are lifted, that will change.

Zardoz wrote:
If you have 58 people killed in one mass murder that is a lot of people. You will never stop the gun nuts from killing their wives and children when they come home late, but we can make mass murders extremely hard to commit.
Bans on pistol grips do nothing to make mass murder more difficult.

Zardoz wrote:
We know that most mass murders are made possible by military style assault weapons that were designed to kill large numbers of people quickly
That is incorrect. Pistol grips do not make mass murder possible or aid it in any way.

Nor does having a pistol grip mean that a gun was designed to kill large numbers of people.

Zardoz wrote:
it is a simple matter of banning military weapons.
Banning pistol grips will not reduce or prevent mass murders in any way.

Zardoz wrote:
Mass murders kill because they enjoy killing and arming them with the best military assault style weapons makes absolutely no sense.
That is incorrect. The presence or absence of a pistol grip makes no difference to the outcome of a murder spree.

Zardoz wrote:
Then you must be saying that capitalism causes mass murder because capitalism causes poverty.
Capitalism does not cause poverty.

Mass murder does not have much impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
I don’t think people commit mass murder because they are poor. Mass murderers represent a large cross section of the economic spectrum.
Mass murder has little impact on homicide rates.

Poverty has a large impact on homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
The AR-15 can fire that fast
That is incorrect. Semi-auto weapons cannot fire that fast.

Zardoz wrote:
it can be modified to fire that fast
ALL guns can be modified to become full auto. Doing so is already illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
and even if it only killed 100 people a minute it is an abomination that should not be on the streets.
Ordinary rifles are hardly an abomination. And a semi-auto isn't likely to kill 100 people in a minute.

Zardoz wrote:
All guns might but the military chose the AR-15 platform to wage wars with.
I wonder why the military experts did not choose one of those other guns? Maybe the experts know something.
They know that a semi-auto AR-15 is no different from any other semi-auto rifle.

Zardoz wrote:
The right to live without being murdered by a mass murderer far exceeds any other extraneous rights.
The idea that it would be OK for the police to beat confessions out of suspects in order to save lives is chillingly Orwellian.

Zardoz wrote:
But the path of least resistance comes into play. The harder society makes it to commit mass murder the fewer will happen.
Banning pistol grips will not prevent or reduce mass murder in any way.

Zardoz wrote:
There is simply no good reason for military style assault weapons to be on the streets.
There doesn't have to be. The fact that there is no justification for banning them means that people have the right to have them.

Zardoz wrote:
It is extremely hard for supreme court decision to be overturned and the Heller decision is the law of the land every bit as much as the second amendment.
Yes. And Heller says that restrictions on guns are allowed only if the restrictions can be justified with a good reason.

Zardoz wrote:
Restrictions on atomic weapons can justified just as an assault weapon ban can be justified for exactly the same reasons, they are both dangerous and deadly military weapons.
That is incorrect. Adding a pistol grip to a gun does not make it dangerous and unusual.

Zardoz wrote:
I don’t know of anything that is more dangerous and deadly than the weapons that killed 58 people and shot 422 others.
Which is why restrictions on bump stocks will probably pass muster with the courts.

Zardoz wrote:
The supreme court ruling that dangerous and deadly weapons can be regulated says it all.
Yes. In particular what it says is that you are not allowed to restrict guns unless they are dangerous and unusual.

Zardoz wrote:
Do you know of any guns that are not dangerous and deadly?
Yes. Ordinary rifles and handguns are not dangerous and unusual.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 14 Jan, 2019 11:30 pm
@oralloy,
Both hunters and serial killers really enjoy killing animals. I have never understood why they call hunting a sport. In football two teams try to tear each other’s heads off but each side has a sporting chance. When a hunter blows a squirrel’s brains out there is no sporting chance for the squirrel. Hunting is strictly for the thrill of the kill.

____________________________________________________
Police are not trained to incapacitate they are trained to shoot to kill. If it is serious enough that a policeman has to fire his weapon it is serious enough that he will shoot to kill. The police killed 995 people in America in 2018. If someone points a gun at you and the shooting starts you don’t want to give him a chance to shoot back. Dead men tell no tales and they don’t shoot back either.

____________________________________________________
How are you going to shoot to incapacitate? Aim for an arm or a leg or shoot at the most vital areas.

____________________________________________________
No mass murderer has managed to kill 58 people with a telephone. Someone might manage to kill a few with a Volkswagen Beetle but nowhere close to 58.

___________________________________________________
I think there is an argument that pistol grips may make mass murder worse. A rifle held at shoulder height in crowd will have to have a downward trajectory to hit someone in the center of mass. While an assault weapon held at the center of mass height could do far more damage because it would remain at that height.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The manufacturer of the AR-15 was granted a patent because of AR-15 was far superior to any other semi-automatic. The design and spec of chambering the shells was revolutionary.
No other semi-automatic has come even close to killing as many people in a mass murder as military style assault weapons. Explain why mass murderers almost exclusively use assault weapons?
___________________________________________________________________________________
There is absolutely no doubt that military style assault weapons are designed for one reason and one reason only mass murder. There is no other possible reason to design a gun to fire 900 rounds a minute unless you need to kill 900 people a minute. The police were forced by the gun nuts with assault weapons to arm themselves wit assault weapons. In certain situations, police may be required to kill a number of criminals quickly.

___________________________________________________
It is the AR-15 or the knock off that are used in mass murders. It seems no mass murderers take their semi-automatic deer rifle to a mass murder. If the AR-15s were not far more deadly we would see mass murders using shotguns.
____________________________________________________
If the mass murderers were not experts at what they do they could not murder 58 people at a time.

___________________________________________________
The one factor that separates us from countries that have much lower murder rates is the number of guns which should surprise no one as guns are just a tool to commit murder.

___________________________________________________
A murder here or a murder there does not have the impact of 58 killed and 422 shot. Mass murder is becoming so common that at least three of the people involved were involved in second mass murder in less than one year. In this case if the first mass murderer didn’t get you the second one will.

____________________________________________________
What mass murder does is substantially increase the chances that members of general public could be murdered that they otherwise would not face.
I don’t believe you could get the box an AK-47 came in for $35 let alone the gun.

____________________________________________________
Pistol grips make assault weapons more-deadly.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
They should ban pistol grips and see if the average number of people killed in a mass murders.
__________________________________________________________________________________
A bullet fired at chest level into a crowd would do far more damage then one fired in a downward trajectory.

____________________________________________________
The pistol grips used in most mass murders is testimony in itself.

____________________________________________________
Capitalism was designed to create poverty there is no way for it not to do that.

If you are killed or your children are killed it has a severe impact on you. American children are now afraid to go to school because of mass murder is so rampant in America. When I was in school, we had fire drills now they have mass murder drills.

____________________________________________________
Any AR-15 can be modified to be fully automatic.

____________________________________________________
Do you think somebody that plans on murdering 50 people would be the least bit bothered by it being illegal to modify his AR-15? Can you modify your shot gun to be fully automatic?

____________________________________________________
The number of people killed in mass murders keep getting higher we are up to 58 and if a few of the other 422 people that were shot had died we would have already passed the 100 mark. If the shooter had been closer to the crowd instead of several floors up in a hotel room, he would have killed far more than 100. If he had fired that thousand rounds with a level trajectory his kill ratio would have been much higher.
____________________________________________________
It has now been a while since we have had a major mass murder and we are way overdo. Each mass murderer learns from the others’ mistake. The next mass murderer is likely to break the record.

___________________________________________________
Not according to the US patent office which shows the AR-15 to be light years beyond other guns.

___________________________________________________
Even the military experts will tell you that torturing suspects will get you only the information that they think you want to hear.

___________________________________________________
If you don’t want your trees cut down don’t leave your chainsaw laying around.

____________________________________________________
The courts have ruled that dangerous and deadly is reason enough to ban them. We had a number of coal mining accidents were several miners were killed but few exceed 58. So those guns are more dangerous than an explosion in a coal mine.

____________________________________________________
There is no more compelling than dangerous and deadly.

____________________________________________________
The number of people killed with assault weapons says otherwise.

____________________________________________________
The bump stock is not the problem with out the AR-15 the bump stock won’t fire one round.

____________________________________________________
The court ruling says nothing about unusual it is just dangerous and deadly.

____________________________________________________
If it kills people by the dozens it would be considered dangerous and deadly.


oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 15 Jan, 2019 10:07 am
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Both hunters and serial killers really enjoy killing animals.
Democrats and serial killers both breathe oxygen.

Zardoz wrote:
Hunting is strictly for the thrill of the kill.
It also provides food.

Zardoz wrote:
Police are not trained to incapacitate they are trained to shoot to kill.
That is incorrect. Their goal when shooting is to incapacitate.

Zardoz wrote:
How are you going to shoot to incapacitate? Aim for an arm or a leg or shoot at the most vital areas.
By shooting for the most vital areas.

Zardoz wrote:
No mass murderer has managed to kill 58 people with a telephone. Someone might manage to kill a few with a Volkswagen Beetle but nowhere close to 58.
Pistol grips have no impact on mass murder either.

Zardoz wrote:
I think there is an argument that pistol grips may make mass murder worse. A rifle held at shoulder height in crowd will have to have a downward trajectory to hit someone in the center of mass. While an assault weapon held at the center of mass height could do far more damage because it would remain at that height.
It is just the opposite. Firing from the shoulder allows people to aim and strike center of mass. Not firing from the shoulder prevents aiming and results in missing the target.

Zardoz wrote:
The manufacturer of the AR-15 was granted a patent because of AR-15 was far superior to any other semi-automatic.
That is incorrect. He was granted a patent because he had come up with a new design.

Zardoz wrote:
The design and spec of chambering the shells was revolutionary.
It was different. But other semi-autos were already in existence.

Zardoz wrote:
No other semi-automatic has come even close to killing as many people in a mass murder as military style assault weapons.
If so, the pistol grips had nothing to do with it.

Zardoz wrote:
Explain why mass murderers almost exclusively use assault weapons?
They don't.

Zardoz wrote:
There is absolutely no doubt that military style assault weapons are designed for one reason and one reason only mass murder.
You already admitted that this was wrong when you agreed that police do not use them to commit murder.

Zardoz wrote:
There is no other possible reason to design a gun to fire 900 rounds a minute unless you need to kill 900 people a minute.
Semi-auto weapons do not fire 900 rounds per minute.

Zardoz wrote:
The police were forced by the gun nuts with assault weapons to arm themselves wit assault weapons. In certain situations, police may be required to kill a number of criminals quickly.
And is it murder when they do so?

Zardoz wrote:
It is the AR-15 or the knock off that are used in mass murders.
That is incorrect. Most mass murderers prefer handguns.

Zardoz wrote:
It seems no mass murderers take their semi-automatic deer rifle to a mass murder. If the AR-15s were not far more deadly we would see mass murders using shotguns.
We do in fact see mass murderers using shotguns.

Zardoz wrote:
If the mass murderers were not experts at what they do they could not murder 58 people at a time.
That is incorrect. Mass murders often make dumb mistakes that limit their lethality.

The one that killed 58 people used a bump stock which is now illegal. Semi-autos are much less deadly.

Zardoz wrote:
The one factor that separates us from countries that have much lower murder rates is the number of guns which should surprise no one as guns are just a tool to commit murder.
There are countries with lots of guns and a low murder rate.

The only factor that separates us from them is our poverty rate.

Zardoz wrote:
A murder here or a murder there does not have the impact of 58 killed and 422 shot.
Statistics say otherwise. Mass murder hardly makes any difference at all to homicide rates.

Zardoz wrote:
Mass murder is becoming so common that at least three of the people involved were involved in second mass murder in less than one year. In this case if the first mass murderer didn’t get you the second one will.
Mass murder is not common at all.

Zardoz wrote:
What mass murder does is substantially increase the chances that members of general public could be murdered that they otherwise would not face.
That is incorrect. Mass murder is a very small part of the homicide rate.

Zardoz wrote:
I don’t believe you could get the box an AK-47 came in for $35 let alone the gun.
"In some parts of the world, an AK-47 can be purchased for as little as $10. In most places, one can be bought for $100 – $300, depending upon the level of hostilities in the area. Generally, the more conflict, the higher the price."
http://www.theglobalist.com/20-facts-mikhail-kalashnikov-ak-47/

Zardoz wrote:
Pistol grips make assault weapons more-deadly.
No they don't.

Zardoz wrote:
They should ban pistol grips and see if the average number of people killed in a mass murders.
Violating people's civil liberties for no reason isn't going to decrease mass murders.

Zardoz wrote:
A bullet fired at chest level into a crowd would do far more damage then one fired in a downward trajectory.
No it wouldn't.

And that's not even considering the fact that only the gun that was fired from the shoulder would hit the target to begin with.

Zardoz wrote:
Capitalism was designed to create poverty there is no way for it not to do that.
It's just the opposite -- capitalism creates jobs and products that increase our standard of living.

Zardoz wrote:
If you are killed or your children are killed it has a severe impact on you. American children are now afraid to go to school because of mass murder is so rampant in America. When I was in school, we had fire drills now they have mass murder drills.
Pistol grips have nothing to do with that.

Zardoz wrote:
Any AR-15 can be modified to be fully automatic.
Any gun at all can be modified to be fully automatic.

Zardoz wrote:
Do you think somebody that plans on murdering 50 people would be the least bit bothered by it being illegal to modify his AR-15?
No. Nor would they be bothered by modifying any other gun.

Zardoz wrote:
Can you modify your shot gun to be fully automatic?
It could be done. But it would not be legal to do so.

Zardoz wrote:
The number of people killed in mass murders keep getting higher we are up to 58 and if a few of the other 422 people that were shot had died we would have already passed the 100 mark.
That involved bump stocks, which are now illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
If the shooter had been closer to the crowd instead of several floors up in a hotel room, he would have killed far more than 100. If he had fired that thousand rounds with a level trajectory his kill ratio would have been much higher.
Not without aiming each shot he wouldn't.

Zardoz wrote:
It has now been a while since we have had a major mass murder and we are way overdo. Each mass murderer learns from the others’ mistake. The next mass murderer is likely to break the record.
Not without bump stocks, which are now illegal.

Zardoz wrote:
Not according to the US patent office which shows the AR-15 to be light years beyond other guns.
The patent office does not show anything of the sort.

Zardoz wrote:
Even the military experts will tell you that torturing suspects will get you only the information that they think you want to hear.
So if torture did save lives, would it be all right to do it?

Zardoz wrote:
If you don’t want your trees cut down don’t leave your chainsaw laying around.
Pistol grips do not cause any deaths.

Zardoz wrote:
The courts have ruled that dangerous and deadly is reason enough to ban them.
Not if the gun is not dangerous and unusual.

Zardoz wrote:
We had a number of coal mining accidents were several miners were killed but few exceed 58. So those guns are more dangerous than an explosion in a coal mine.
Only the shooting with the bump stock resulted in that many deaths.

Semi-auto guns are nowhere near as dangerous.

Zardoz wrote:
There is no more compelling than dangerous and deadly.
Except pistol grips do not make a weapon dangerous or unusual.

Zardoz wrote:
The number of people killed with assault weapons says otherwise.
That is incorrect. Pistol grips do not result in any more people being killed.

Zardoz wrote:
The bump stock is not the problem with out the AR-15 the bump stock won’t fire one round.
The government disagrees with you. They think it is a problem that bump stocks dramatically increase the rate of fire.

Zardoz wrote:
If it kills people by the dozens it would be considered dangerous and deadly.
Which is why restrictions on bump stocks are likely to pass muster with the courts.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Tue 15 Jan, 2019 10:15 am
@oralloy,
No one's interested in your regurgitated and unconvincing talking points. Don't you have a blog for posting this drivel so as not to waste band width here?
 

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 © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 03/20/2019 at 11:18:46