0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 02:03 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
You dodged the question.

I have no obligation to answer leading questions to your satisfaction.
Quote:
My question made it quite clear that your ideas are just another progressive attempt to violate the Constitution.

You have too high an opinion of your conversational skills.
Quote:
Talking about "rights being recognized" is talking about Constitutionality.

No, it's talking about social relations which are independent of constitutional concerns. In your hypothetical case the collection of a fee would indicate that the medical procedure was a privilege, not a right.
Quote:
When you avoid answering the question, that is dodging the question.

When you ask a question solely to prompt a particular response I am not compelled to provide the answer you wish to hear.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 02:51 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
I have no obligation to answer your leading questions to your satisfaction.

When you dodge challenges to your ideas, you make it clear that your ideas are without merit and are unable to withstand scrutiny.

If someone poses a challenge to my ideas, you'll never see me shy away from mounting a vigorous defense.

On the other hand, my ideas are actually defensible. That makes it a lot easier for me to defend them.


hightor wrote:
You have too high an opinion of your conversational skills.

That is incorrect. My assessment of my question is accurate.


hightor wrote:
No, it's talking about social relations which are independent of constitutional concerns.

That is incorrect. Recognizing a right is upholding the Constitution.


hightor wrote:
In your hypothetical case the collection of a fee would indicate that the medical procedure was a privilege, not a right.

Yes. Exactly. That is why your proposed tax on ammo is unconstitutional.


hightor wrote:
When you ask a question solely to prompt a particular response I am not compelled to provide the answer you wish to hear.

You can dodge challenges to your ideas if you like, but all that does is show that your ideas are indefensible.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 03:25 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
That is why your proposed tax on ammo is unconstitutional.

First thing, it's not "my" proposed tax on ammo. Baldimo brought up the idea:
Quote:
They want to implement taxes or fee's on every process of either getting a gun or buying the ammo or require insurance to use a Constitutional Right.

And secondly, as I've pointed out several times, consumers in many states already pay a tax on ammo and it has never been challenged as unconstitutional.
Quote:
You can dodge challenges to your ideas if you like, but all that does is show that your ideas are indefensible.

No, because you don't "challenge my ideas", you simply ignore them and state your repetitive talking points.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 03:52 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
First thing, it's not "my" proposed tax on ammo. Baldimo brought up the idea:

He brought it up as an example of the abuses that progressives try to inflict on the American people. You then proceeded to try to justify and defend the idea.


hightor wrote:
And secondly, as I've pointed out several times, consumers in many states already pay a tax on ammo and it has never been challenged as unconstitutional.

It appeared from your earlier description that you are referring to a sales tax that applies to all (or at least most) sales. In other words, a typical state general sales tax.

If you are referring to a tax that targets ammo specifically, then that tax is likely to be struck down as unconstitutional at some point.


hightor wrote:
No, because you don't "challenge my ideas", you simply ignore them and state your repetitive talking points.

That is incorrect. I challenged your ideas (or at least, the ideas that you were trying to justify and defend), and I proved them unworkable and unconstitutional.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Nov, 2019 10:46 pm
@Baldimo,
Both a Mustang with a 4 cylinder and a Mustang with a 8cly are still Mustangs even though they may have thousands of different parts. It is the same for assault weapons.

I was working with a welder who was connected with the biggest drug ring in town in town. He paid the down payment on house by letting the drug ring store a very large load of pot in his house. He decided to show me how to convert a semi-automatic assault weapon to a full-automatic assault weapon. He had a gun magazine and showed me where to order the three pieces. He said you had to order them separately they could not be ordered from one place. Eventually the drug dealer was busted and he gave him a ride to federal prison. Why he told me I’ll never known I had no interest in guns but I will always remember that incident. I would not be surprised if had not been converting them. He was skilled mechanic also.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Where did you get your law degree? The second amendment does not say that and the supreme court has ruled that you do not have the right to any weapon whatsoever for any purpose whatsoever.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You want to cite all these natural rights but you can’t say when they started, when they were written down, and where there are written copies. You just want to pull them out of thin air.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The founding fathers were free to take whatever they wanted from laws that were in existence at the time but they were not bound by them either that is why we have constitution in the first place, to show what laws they decided to accept.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If that is what the founding fathers did there are no such things as natural rights.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Assault weapons are assault weapons and only minor changes are necessary to convert the semi into an automatic.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
20/20 recently did a story on the shooting on the Arizona college campuses there were three wounded and one killed. Was that a fist fight or a mass shooting? I see you have still never posted a source for your definition of an assault weapon. Did you just make it up?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most time I can easily check a source on my own and either confirm it or debunk it but I can’t find that definition of an assault weapon anywhere.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Republicans who were taking the NRA blood money cast the deciding votes on that bill. You might not like the law but the law is still the law. If you can’t figure how a long knife mounted on the business end of a gun makes it more dangerous you need to watch a war movie where they overrun another army’s position. In close combat a bayonet was superior to the guns of their time.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is not supposition the Virginia Tech shooting shows how many people can be killed with a pistol if you chain the doors. In the short period after they started allowing guns in school there have already but 30 incidences were the guns have been accidently discharged or the children have got their hands on the guns. A good guy with a gun is more dangerous than a bad guy with a gun. Most mass murderers will shoot until they run out of ammunition or their gun jams. Most massacres are over in two minutes after the shooter commit suicide. Someone that wants to commit suicide is afraid of nothing. There is a term for it “suicide by cop.” You might think you are King Kong as long as you have a gun in your hand and that the world will tremble but that is just a gun nut fantasy. Someone intent on committing suicide and taking others with him fears nothing or nobody. Most mass murderers have no problem killing people, that is what they came to do.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are confusing two different things, there are mass shootings and massacres. Almost all massacres are done with assault weapons. Your definition is not real and carries no weight an assault weapon is an assault weapon.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The three parts make up the trigger mechanism.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
How do you thing a semi-automatic assault weapon is converted? Think they just put a stick on the trigger to hold it down? They put in the actual pieces that were designed to make it fully automatic.

Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Nov, 2019 10:07 pm
@oralloy,
Semi-automatic assault weapons are assault weapons under the legal definition in America.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I read the whole article and that definition does not appear in that article anywhere. The article tells you a lot about the development of the StG 44 but your definition is not there. That is what I thought you just made it up.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Nov, 2019 10:06 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Zimmerman called the cops to report a suspicious person. The police dispatcher asked Zimmerman if he was following the suspicious person? Zimmerman said that he was following the suspicious person. The police dispatcher told him “not” to follow him. That alone shows that the gun bully provoked the confrontation.

Following someone is not provoking them. Only someone who was up to no good would feel the need to attack someone who is following them, or someone who is violent.

Quote:
There are no marks found on Martin other than the gun shot wounds and a small scratch on one finger. If Martin had been beating the hell out of Zimmerman his knuckles would have been torn up.

Except that wasn't the report by Zimmerman and the witness who saw what was going on. He was beating his head into the concrete, not punching him. If you had followed the case, you would know this, instead you repeat facts that have already been disproven in a court of law.

Quote:
Zimmerman insisted that Martin was on top of him beating him but Martin’s body was found face down in the grass. If Martin was on top of Zimmerman and he rolled him off his body, would have been found face up. One witness reported only hearing an argument before the shots are fired.

Forensics disagree with your claims. The bullet path through Martins body confirms what Zimmerman said. Martin was on top of him and he shot up into Martin.

Quote:
Would it not make you nervous to have stranger follow you at night?

No, it wouldn't, there are strangers all over the place. The only stranger in the neighborhood that night was Martin, he didn't live there, his father didn't live there, they were visiting his fathers girlfriend, no family of Martin's live in that neighborhood.

Quote:
Martin was staying with his relatives he had been there 7 days by the time he was murdered by Zimmerman. If Zimmerman had actually been watching, instead of looking to murder someone, he would have known Martin was staying there.

You do realize that you are making a claim that just isn't true. No family of Martins lived there, it was his dad's girlfriends house.
Quote:
Trayvon Martin
Main article: Trayvon Martin
Trayvon Benjamin Martin was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, who were divorced in 1999. He was a junior at Dr. Michael M. Krop High School and lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida.[6][7][8] On the day he was fatally shot, he and his father were visiting his father's fiancée and her son at her town home in Sanford, Florida. She lived in The Retreat at Twin Lakes, a gated community Martin had visited several times before.[9][10][11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin

Quote:
It is a law designed to sell guns.

Wrong, it's a law designed to protect law biding citizens from attack by bad people. People were getting killed when they tried to "retreat", so the laws were changed. You have a natural Right to protect yourself.

Quote:
In states that don’t have a stand your ground law you have a duty to walk away from a confrontation and not escalate the situation. It is a law designed to make murder legal, when legal to shoot an unarmed man it is murder.

Do you have any stats that there is less crime in those states vs the states that allow you to not retreat? It's funny that you think an unarmed man is not a threat to someone. There are plenty of cases of people getting punched in the face and falling and hitting their head on the ground and dying.

Quote:
Volatile situations are usually produced by contributions from both parties that are involved. It is hard for one person to fight with themselves. The stand your ground law lets idiots pretend to be macho.

That just isn't the case. People want to fight others who have done nothing all the time, it's a bully mentality. Go check out youtube, plenty of unprovoked fights all over that site.

Quote:
It was a political massacre it had not happened since Watergate and of course it took Watergate to cause such a massive victory. This was the biggest political massacre for the democrats since Watergate.

What kind of crack are you smoking? Does it come in flavors? You are really going to compare 38 winning seat to 63 winning seats and call it a political massacre? You don't know how to count do you? 63 wins is a much bigger "massacre" than 38 seats.

Quote:
The Republicans cast the deciding votes on the 1994 assault weapon ban and at that time there wasn’t a 93% public outcry to do something with gun control.

So? Is that suppose to mean something today? You still don't have the votes to pass any more federal guns laws, and you won't have the votes as long as the DNC is so anti-gun.

Quote:
That was still a record gain for the democrats.

Record gain? Got any facts to back up this claim? I know MSM tried to make it seem like a bigger deal than it was, but they are bias for the Dems and don't ever tell news stories straight.

Quote:
In 2010 it was the KKK and the Neo-Nazis driving that because they had a black president the racists were going nuts and the rich were manipulating the public over Obamacare.

Keep telling yourself lies.

Quote:
You are right there would be no impeachment if the Republicans controlled the house.

That's because there was no crime. Did you watch any of the hearings over the last few weeks? It was a disaster for the Dems, none of their witness's had any information. Sure they tried to make it seem that way with the opening statements, but under questioning, their claims fell apart.

Quote:
The supreme court has decided the question and they have made it extremely clear the second amendment is not absolute and you are not entitled to any weapon whatsoever for any purpose whatsoever.

No such ruling has been made, that's why you can't provide the actual court case.

Quote:
When you continue to believe that second amendment is absolute you are lying to yourself.

Of course it's absolute, the 2nd Amendment is the only amendment that has the phrase "Shall not be infringed". No other amendment has such a phrase, including the 1st Amendment, which is considered our most important Amendment.

Quote:
There may be semi-automatic rifles but there is a world of difference between them an assault weapons.

You are correct, assault weapons have a selective fire switch and semi-auto rifles do not. That's the major difference.

Quote:
Assault weapons were created with one purpose in mind and that is to massacre people that is the reason they fire so many rounds in such a short period of time.

Semi-auto rifles do not fire at the rate at which you think they do. Stop confusing full auto rifles with semi-auto rifles.

Quote:
Mass shooting are one thing but massacres are much more severe. Just today a 13-year-old was arrested because he had planned a school massacre with his older brother’s AR-15. He could not keep his mouth shut or there would have been another 50 school children dead.

Sounds like the reporting systems are working. According to the FBI, these type of people will talk to others about what they want to do, it's the job of the people around them to pick up on what they are saying and turning them in.

Quote:
The legal definition of an assault weapon has nothing to do with a selective fire switch and never will.

That's because the law was written by people who didn't know what they were talking about, much like you.

Quote:
Watch and see how Remington marketed assault weapons.

Do you really think they are going to find any info that shows what you claim about massacres? Those guns were marketed just fine, this is a weak case that will likely result in a Remington win and attorneys fee's for the company for a phony lawsuit.






Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Nov, 2019 10:14 am
@hightor,
Quote:
So what? The right to bear arms is still recognized even if all types of weapons aren't available or there's a tax on ammo or you have to buy insurance.

This makes it harder for lower income people to own weapons. Should only the rich have the means to protect themselves?

Quote:
If there weren't such a problem with gun violence none of these proposals would have even arisen. People are demanding that something be done; lawmakers are responding.

We don't have the problem you think it is. The MSM and the anti-gun politicians are making the problem seem much worse than it really is. On average there are 13k murders with guns per year. When you look at the weapons used in such crimes, the guns you want to ban the most are responsible for the least amount of kills per year. 297 by lasts years count.

Quote:
Monkey see, monkey do — given the context I'm not that convinced that they were all serious.

So what you are saying is that not a single one of those candidates has a mind of their own? They follow the pack?

Quote:
Polls show that open borders and free healthcare for illegal immigrants are not going to get them votes. Of course, if some illegal immigrant is apprehended and needs medical attention it should be given as a matter of course but it's not as if anyone wants to attract illegal immigrants with the promise of free healthcare for all.

That's exactly what the left is trying to do. Offer free **** in hopes they will flood into the country and then the left will push for amnesty. Boom, just like that, a whole lot of new voters for the DNC.

Quote:
It won't make me feel better but it will make you look stupider. Why refer to the political parties by the titles of their national committees? They are different entities with different functions to fulfill.

Difference without distinction, don't hide the money arms from the "political" arms of the parties. I have no loyalty to either party, but you sure do go to some lengths to protect the DNC from criticism.

hightor
 
  2  
Reply Mon 25 Nov, 2019 10:57 am
@Baldimo,
Quote:
This makes it harder for lower income people to own weapons.

Lower income people tend to be the ones committing property crimes so less weapons would be better overall.
Quote:
Should only the rich have the means to protect themselves?

The rich have options for protecting themselves other than firearms.
Quote:
So what you are saying is that not a single one of those candidates has a mind of their own?

I'm saying that none of them wanted to stand out from the pack and give a thoughtful nuanced answer. I fault the candidates to some extent but I really feel that the venue, with so many people on stage at once, is the core problem.
Quote:
That's exactly what the left is trying to do.

It's despicable and will probably backfire. I suspect it will be dropped or modified once a nominee is chosen.
Quote:
Boom, just like that, a whole lot of new voters for the DNC.

The "DNC" isn't running. It's not on the ballot. Anywhere.
Quote:
I have no loyalty to either party, but you sure do go to some lengths to protect the DNC from criticism.

No, I'm not "protecting" anyone; if you want to criticize the Democrats, criticize the Democrats, not the national party committee. You tend to use "DNC" as a bogeyman for everything you don't like about the Democratic Party. That usage is lazy and imprecise.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 25 Nov, 2019 11:06 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Both a Mustang with a 4 cylinder and a Mustang with a 8cly are still Mustangs even though they may have thousands of different parts. It is the same for assault weapons.

According to you, those mustangs can go the same speed and have the same off the line acceleration, they are the same exact car.

Quote:
I was working with a welder who was connected with the biggest drug ring in town in town.

I'm going to list this under "stories that didn't happen".

Quote:
Where did you get your law degree? The second amendment does not say that and the supreme court has ruled that you do not have the right to any weapon whatsoever for any purpose whatsoever.”

Proof, links facts? Like a majority of what you post, you have no proof of your claims. What you pass for info, is actually un-educated opinion.
My proof is in the phrase "Shall not be infringed." Notice how all you anti-gunners ignore it?

Quote:
You want to cite all these natural rights but you can’t say when they started, when they were written down, and where there are written copies. You just want to pull them out of thin air.

It's the Bill of Rights, what is so hard to understand? Inalienable Rights? You are trying way to hard to limit the Rights of others.

Quote:
The founding fathers were free to take whatever they wanted from laws that were in existence at the time but they were not bound by them either that is why we have constitution in the first place, to show what laws they decided to accept.

Once again, you are trying to hard to prove something that I have already said. This was a pointless paragraph.

Quote:
If that is what the founding fathers did there are no such things as natural rights.

the Bill of Rights would disagree with your claim. You continue to prove you don't have the faintest idea of what the purpose of this country was and the ideals behind it's founding. They wanted a little govt and maximum Liberty and Freedom, you don't have the slightest idea of what those things are. You want maximum govt power and very little liberty for the people.

Quote:
Assault weapons are assault weapons and only minor changes are necessary to convert the semi into an automatic.

Wrong, extensive work is required to make a semi-auto rifle into a full-auto rifle. Do it wrong, and the gun won't work. That's why you have seen ZERO converted guns used in a mass shooting, it's harder to convert than you think.

Quote:
20/20 recently did a story on the shooting on the Arizona college campuses there were three wounded and one killed.

I don't watch much TV, got rid of cable more than a year ago.

Quote:
Was that a fist fight or a mass shooting?

That was a possible self-defense shooting, not a mass shooting.

Quote:
I see you have still never posted a source for your definition of an assault weapon. Did you just make it up?

You have some nerve to challenge me on sources and links, since you NEVER provide anything to back your claims. I did post the definition, many many months ago, you ignored it like you do most of the facts I post.

Quote:
Most time I can easily check a source on my own and either confirm it or debunk it but I can’t find that definition of an assault weapon anywhere.

If you can do these things so easily, why don't you share these links? You mostly talk about "I read it in a book". Which doesn't fly on the internet and it wouldn't fly in a normal debate either.

Quote:
The Republicans who were taking the NRA blood money cast the deciding votes on that bill. You might not like the law but the law is still the law.

Actually it's not the law any more, it expired almost 20 years ago, and you are living in fantasy land if you think such a bill will pass again. The SC it taking up at least 2 new gun cases, which should be ruled on in favor of liberty and the 2nd Amendment.

Quote:
That is not supposition the Virginia Tech shooting shows how many people can be killed with a pistol if you chain the doors.

It also shows you how many people can be killed if someone doesn't have a way to protect themselves. If the doors were chained, the police were not getting in to save anyone. That's why it's important for people to be able to defend themselves, no matter where they are. Gun Free zones kill people every time there is a shooting.

Quote:
In the short period after they started allowing guns in school there have already but 30 incidences were the guns have been accidently discharged or the children have got their hands on the guns.

You have some facts to back up this claim? You don't, it's something else you are making up.

Quote:
A good guy with a gun is more dangerous than a bad guy with a gun.

Personal opinion with no facts to back you up. Did you see the good guys with a gun stop a shooting potential mass shooting earlier this year? Of course the MSM doesn't promote such stories.


Quote:
Most mass murderers will shoot until they run out of ammunition or their gun jams.

A vast majority of shooters are found with more ammo on them, most of them don't shoot all their ammo. Unless you have some facts to back up your claim.

Quote:
Most massacres are over in two minutes after the shooter commit suicide.

Do you have any facts to back up this claim?

Quote:
Someone that wants to commit suicide is afraid of nothing. There is a term for it “suicide by cop.” You might think you are King Kong as long as you have a gun in your hand and that the world will tremble but that is just a gun nut fantasy.

Sounds like you are the one living in a fantasy. Your are projecting again.

Quote:
You are confusing two different things, there are mass shootings and massacres. Almost all massacres are done with assault weapons. Your definition is not real and carries no weight an assault weapon is an assault weapon.

Assault weapons have a selective fire switch, semi-auto rifles do not.

The only difference between a mass shooting and a massacre, is the number of people killed. The problem is that you like to list everything as a mass shooting, even things that are not, like bank robberies.

Quote:
The three parts make up the trigger mechanism.

So what,that doesn't mean you can just change out a part of make a rifle full auto. There is other machine work that needs to be done, it isn't as easy as you make it sound. You have also provided zero proof that these rifles have been used in a mass shooting.

Quote:
How do you thing a semi-automatic assault weapon is converted? Think they just put a stick on the trigger to hold it down? They put in the actual pieces that were designed to make it fully automatic.

You have zero clue as to what you are talking about. You can't just swap parts and make it fire full auto. There is machining that needs to be done and if it's done wrong, the gun is ruined and you would have to buy new parts.



Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 25 Nov, 2019 09:37 pm
@Baldimo,
More bullets also mean more damage. A Thompson will only fire 600 round per minute rate while an AR-15 will fire at 900 rounds per minute rate. The Thompson was known as “the annihilator” because it annihilated everything. An AR-15 could pump another 300 rounds a minute into the crowd. The AR-15 is far more deadly. America went down this road before. Restricting the assault weapons so they are not sold to the general public at the corner gun store is an effective ban.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It was just another school shooting, like so many others, it was not a massacre because the shooter didn’t have an AR-15.
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 10:23 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
More bullets also mean more damage.

Then you should be concerned with mag sizes.

Quote:
A Thompson will only fire 600 round per minute rate while an AR-15 will fire at 900 rounds per minute rate.

The AR-15 does not fire 900 rounds per minute, it's a semi-auto rifle and it's impossible for them to shoot that fast. Only full auto-rifles can fire that fast. You have also FAILED to prove they do shoot that fast.

Quote:
The Thompson was known as “the annihilator” because it annihilated everything. An AR-15 could pump another 300 rounds a minute into the crowd.

Continue to show that ignorance. In reality, the reason for the deadliness of the Thompson had more to do with it's bullet, a .45 ACP, which is 3 times the weight and size of a .223/5.56. Oh, and the AR doesn't shoot that many rounds per minute. You have claimed this for a long time but never provided your proof of it.

Quote:
The AR-15 is far more deadly. America went down this road before. Restricting the assault weapons so they are not sold to the general public at the corner gun store is an effective ban.

Assault weapons have a selective fire switch, which the Thompson did have but the AR15 doesn't have.

Quote:
It was just another school shooting, like so many others, it was not a massacre because the shooter didn’t have an AR-15.

A majority of school shooters don't use these types of weapons. In fact if people like you and the media would stop spreading false claims about the AR, it would lose some of it's "fame".



oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 08:39 pm
@Zardoz,
Zardoz wrote:
Semi-automatic assault weapons are assault weapons under the legal definition in America.

There is no such thing as a semi-automatic assault weapon.


Zardoz wrote:
I read the whole article and that definition does not appear in that article anywhere. The article tells you a lot about the development of the StG 44 but your definition is not there.

You must have missed it. Those are the exact traits of the weapon that Germany coined the name "assault rifle" for.


Zardoz wrote:
That is what I thought you just made it up.

No. Nazi Germany made it up in 1944.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 12:20 am
@Baldimo,
What you will find all across the country is that union shops make more, they have better benefits and they have a say about what takes place in the work place. In right to work states the employees make far less and do not have decent benefits. If you took a job and you were told that you will receive free legal services and lawyers to negotiate future wage increases and improved benefits it would be nice. It you have a problem on the job or get fired, we will spend 10s of thousands of dollars to represent you it would be quite a deal. But the problem is when lawyers is told that he will have to represent you for free, the lawyer would refuse. When you have a shop that is not closed the free loaders figure it out, they can get the expensive services for free, and that is what they do. I have been a union president in both open and closed shops and most people, even in an open shop are willing to pay for the services they receive. They also pay for the services of the deadbeats even if they complain about.
I think if someone is hired and decides not to join the union, they should not receive benefit of the strikes and the 10s of thousands of hours put in to get the wages and benefits. They should start out getting paid the pre-union wage $2.10 and hour and paying $800 a month for their insurance. They should not receive the wages and benefits the union fought for.
Open shops weaken unions and cause discord because the free loaders always rub in the fact, they get the same services for nothing. No lawyer would provide those services for free. Right to work just frees up another $10 million to put in the CEO’s pocket.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You still can’t get it through you head that the supreme court has ruled that the second amendment right is not unlimited and that you “can’t have any type of weapon whatsoever for whatever purpose whatsoever.” That makes my point. According to you the supreme court doesn’t understand rights either.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shall not be infringed is not a stand-alone statement it only applies to the words “a right to keep and bear arms. It does not change the meaning of those words. Felons and the mentally ill could take the government to court and say their rights to a gun shall not be infringed and win. All the mentally and criminal degenerates have an absolute right to a gun under that clause.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most court decisions make sense especially those that end up affirmed by the supreme court. I have been party to some really lame court decision but once they were appealed to state supreme court they would be remanded back to lower court and the lower court judge would have to straighten his decision out or be overturned again. In the 80s we sued the city over a parity clause in our contract. We signed first of the three bargaining units to sign a contract. We were told that no other bargaining unit would receive more. When the police were given a much larger raise. We sued and lost in circuit court appealed to the state supreme court, won, it was remanded back for a jury trial. After we won the circuit court judge wanted to overrule the jury verdict but our attorney reminded him that he got him overruled once and would do it again.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The governing statement is only a right to keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed only applies to the first statement. If the first statement means that you are entitled to an arm to bear shall not be infringed does not widen that statement to say you are entitled to any weapon whatsoever. Shall not be infringed does not make it any wider or more inclusive. And the supreme court has very carefully explained to you the limits of the second amendment.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump thinks the truth is a lie and his lies are the truth and that is typical with most psychopaths. Anybody in the United States is subject to be investigated even the president. The republicans were investigating Clinton sex life and they saw nothing at all wrong with it. The republicans can dish it out but they can’t take it. There is nobody above the law for a reason. A judge ruled that Trump was not a King even if he believed it. No one should fear an investigation if they haven’t done anything wrong. City council assigned a police captain to investigate me, there was a shootings and vandalism directed at local businessmen who were trying to interfere with ongoing contract negotiating. I didn’t lose any sleep over it, I knew I didn’t do anything and after weeks of investigation they could not even find that I spat on the sidewalk. The republican idea that Clinton can be investigated but Trump can’t, is totally absurd. If Trump had nothing to hide, he had nothing to worry about. Trump is advocating state-controlled media where he decides what is true and what isn’t and Trump has set a record for most lies told by any president. Your source is another republican lie sheet that was a recently a local newspaper before it went bankrupt. No doubt it is printed in the back of someone’s garage. Obama never advocated taking broadcast license away from major new organizations because he absolutely can’t stand to see the truth spoken.
It is called the art of mis direction, the republicans spent years investigating Hillary far more than have been spent investigating Trump. The Republicans want everybody else in America investigated to take the heat off of Trump. Your source no doubt is run by the Russian military. There is absolutely no way that the 97% is correct. Journalists are just a cross section of the country and the divide is much closer to the middle. Fox news journalists no doubt contributed 97% to Clinton. When you see something that is absurd it is usually absurd. Many of the television stations are controlled by right wing organizations.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Whenever there is a disagreement about what the terms of a contract mean it goes to court. Rights are the same way if there is a disagreement on what is meant by the writing it is resolved by the courts. Thus, you do not have “a right to any weapon whatsoever for any reason whatsoever.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The right to keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed is talking only about that right it in no way expands in anyway the first statement.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What you don’t understand is the right to keep and bear arms is fully met if you have a musket to bear. Everything else is subject to the government deciding what guns will be permitted in America. I was never proven wrong because that is what the second amendment says.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In the first place you never had inalienable rights that word was never in the Declaration of independence. The word was unalienable rights. There is nothing that can’t be taken away if Trump wins the Russians will take over and you will see what rights you have then. The good news Trump will finally get to build his hotel in Moscow.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you can’t infringe anyone’s gun rights you can’t take them from a felon. What you are saying is if someone commits a crime, he can be stripped of all of his rights. So, if you got caught speeding you should lose all your rights.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Heavily restricted is an effective ban as long as you keep them out of the corner gun store and require a license to own one makes all the difference.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I am not using your made-up definition of an assault weapon. The definition I am using is the legal definition of an assault weapon. Eighty percent of the top ten highest body count massacres use assault weapons.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More guns, more deaths. It just a matter of time before one of those full automatics is stolen and used in a massacre. Putting even more assault weapons on the streets will only result in more school children being slaughtered.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The best way to even this out is to take all the assault weapons and melt them down that way the wealthy won’t have anything that the poor can’t have.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There is a reason our troops are armed with assault weapons and not pistols and it is body count.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The problem you have is that there may be more than one word that has the same meaning. Use of one word would be the same as using the other.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When the constitution was written it was written for people not fetuses. How absurd can you make the argument, to cells, four cells, eight cells? It was very simple line for the founding fathers the line was at birth.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Abortion was certainly not prohibited by the constitution because the founding fathers believed in freedom and if you don’t have freedom of your own bodily functions you have no freedom.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The supreme court can reverse itself if new information changes things but it is rare for the supreme court to overrule the supreme court.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The supreme court has overruled itself about as frequently as you have been struck by lightning.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The tipping point about guns in America has been passed a long time ago. You will see more gun control bill passed in the next decade than the last 20 years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The second amendment only provides a bare minimum it only allows you an arm to bear. It was a very fair ruling. The supreme court will have to rule with the ever-increasing rate of massacres and school shootings in mind.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Semi-automatic assault weapons are assault weapons, you don’t get to make up the definition.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But it means a lot to families of those who have been massacred with assault weapons.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:25 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
What you will find all across the country is that union shops make more, they have better benefits and they have a say about what takes place in the work place.

The Union is dying, people don't want to be part of a union anymore. When given the option of leaving and keeping their dues, they leave. They don't like the idea of their money going to political campaigns they disagree with.

Quote:
In right to work states the employees make far less and do not have decent benefits.

That only applies to certain types of jobs and industries, usually blue collar and a majority of Americans don't do blue collar work. I live in Northern CO, and some of the best paying jobs are divided into 2 categories, Oil field or technology companies, both pay their workers very well, provide excellent benefits and don't have unions. In fact my biggest problem with my benefits is that in 2014, my insurance premiums doubled and there was nothing my company could do about it, they were stuck thanks to federal law.

Quote:
If you took a job and you were told that you will receive free legal services and lawyers to negotiate future wage increases and improved benefits it would be nice.

I've never needed such "legal services and lawyers" to work with my employer on my wage increases before, I let my work speak for it'self. If they are cheap, I'll just go to another company that will pay me better. 20 years ago I was making min wage, today I'm closing in on 6 digits and should be there next year.

Quote:
It you have a problem on the job or get fired, we will spend 10s of thousands of dollars to represent you it would be quite a deal. [/quote
My father was a union steward and eventually the VP of his union, I've seen what happens with shitbag employees who keep their jobs because of the Union, when they should have been fired.

[quote]But the problem is when lawyers is told that he will have to represent you for free, the lawyer would refuse.

Those lawyers aren't free, people pay their dues for those things, stop with the "free" crap you leftists love to throw around.

Quote:
You still can’t get it through you head that the supreme court has ruled that the second amendment right is not unlimited and that you “can’t have any type of weapon whatsoever for whatever purpose whatsoever.” That makes my point. According to you the supreme court doesn’t understand rights either.

Which ruling was that?

Quote:
Shall not be infringed is not a stand-alone statement it only applies to the words “a right to keep and bear arms. It does not change the meaning of those words.

The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. This in no way gives the Federal govt the right to restrict what someone can own. Your minimum view on Rights is scary and totalitarian.

Quote:
Felons and the mentally ill could take the government to court and say their rights to a gun shall not be infringed and win. All the mentally and criminal degenerates have an absolute right to a gun under that clause.

Except they can't. In the case of felons, they have done something that prevents them from being able to enjoy their full rights, it wasn't an arbitrary vote to remove those rights. In the case of someone with mental issues, it will depend on how serious their mental issues are, but it isn't the same as it is with felons.

Quote:
Most court decisions make sense especially those that end up affirmed by the supreme court.

They have been wrong before and will be wrong again. The further the judges are from the meaning of the Constitution, the more likely they are to rule incorrectly and from an activist point of view.

Quote:
We signed first of the three bargaining units to sign a contract. We were told that no other bargaining unit would receive more. When the police were given a much larger raise. We sued and lost in circuit court appealed to the state supreme court, won, it was remanded back for a jury trial. After we won the circuit court judge wanted to overrule the jury verdict but our attorney reminded him that he got him overruled once and would do it again.

Do you really think you deserve to be paid more than the police dept? You were nothing more than a building inspector with a ticket book.

Quote:
The governing statement is only a right to keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed only applies to the first statement. If the first statement means that you are entitled to an arm to bear shall not be infringed does not widen that statement to say you are entitled to any weapon whatsoever. Shall not be infringed does not make it any wider or more inclusive. And the supreme court has very carefully explained to you the limits of the second amendment.

When you have to spend this many words to try and discredit the 2nd Amendment, you know you are in the wrong. It is written in plain english and easy to understand. It's the activists like you who try to claim it says something it doesn't say.

Quote:
Anybody in the United States is subject to be investigated even the president.

That's true, but the Feds must have a good reason to investigate anyone. They can't suspect a crime and tear their lives apart to find it. As we learned in the Mueller report, the Feds had no case to investigate against Trump and we are going to find all that out with the release of the Durham Report, Horowitz is already working the criminal side of the findings.

Quote:
The republicans were investigating Clinton sex life and they saw nothing at all wrong with it.

It was much more than his sex life, it was the cover-up and the lying that got him in trouble. He was trying to find a job for Lewinsky to keep her quiet about the affair. With the way the DNC protected Bill and made such issues non-political, it's funny to see them picking on Trump for his private life.

Quote:
No one should fear an investigation if they haven’t done anything wrong.

You must support the Patriot Act and the NDAA.
That's the problem with the power of the federal govt, they have unlimited resources and will find something on just about anyone if they want to. If they can't find the crime they were looking for, they will keep digging and hand it off to other federal depts to dig further, IRS, DEA, FDA, EPA, they have a million different ways to come after you, our Federal govt was never mean't to be this powerful.

Quote:
If Trump had nothing to hide, he had nothing to worry about.

Where's the Liberty and Freedom in such an unAmerican statement. You seemed to have learned nothing from our own US history.

Quote:
Your source is another republican lie sheet that was a recently a local newspaper before it went bankrupt. No doubt it is printed in the back of someone’s garage.

Haha, you are trying to discredit the source instead of the actual facts they talk about. What an utter failure of a talking point on your part. The media is exactly this bias in their political leanings and coverage. I'm going to guess you spend a lot of time reading Vox and Buzzfeed...

Quote:
Obama never advocated taking broadcast license away from major new organizations because he absolutely can’t stand to see the truth spoken.

He did worse, he had journalists put under investigation and had their phones tapped and computers hacked. Have you checked Obama's record on whistle-blowers? He actually had them arrested and sent to jail. Everything you accuse Trump of, the left has already done.

Quote:
Journalists are just a cross section of the country and the divide is much closer to the middle. Fox news journalists no doubt contributed 97% to Clinton. When you see something that is absurd it is usually absurd.

That 97% is correct, the media is not a cross section of America, they are a cross section of liberal and leftists. You might have a more middle ground perspective at the local level in news, but not at the big national levels and boards.

Quote:
Many of the television stations are controlled by right wing organizations.

I'm going to guess from your point of view, that anyone to the right of Stalin is a right-wing person?
I provided my source on the issue, how about you try and back your claim with a source. You've spent more time calling most of what I post "russian provided" then you've spent actually providing your own sources.

Quote:
Whenever there is a disagreement about what the terms of a contract mean it goes to court. Rights are the same way if there is a disagreement on what is meant by the writing it is resolved by the courts. Thus, you do not have “a right to any weapon whatsoever for any reason whatsoever.”

I'm still waiting for the court case where the SC said this. You keep repeating your opinion but no source.

Quote:
The right to keep and bear arms. Shall not be infringed is talking only about that right it in no way expands in anyway the first statement.

There is no period between arms and shall. It's a comma. You can't change the writting of the amendment to fit your own opinion.
Here is the actual writing:
Quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Quote:
What you don’t understand is the right to keep and bear arms is fully met if you have a musket to bear.

We do not have a minimalist take on the Constitution. There is no mention of a musket in the 2nd. It says arms, which was used as a generic term on purpose, to allow the right to be open for advancements in technology. They fully intended for us to be able to fight against the govt if they became tyrannical, the left and activists judges have weakened the power of the US population.

Quote:
In the first place you never had inalienable rights that word was never in the Declaration of independence. The word was unalienable rights.

I've already posted my reply to this nonsense and it proves you are wrong, again.

Quote:
There is nothing that can’t be taken away if Trump wins the Russians will take over and you will see what rights you have then. The good news Trump will finally get to build his hotel in Moscow.

You are the one who is limiting Rights and want to hand them out like they are drivers license, which is a privilege. You are the one who wants to make the Federal govt the supreme power in the US, with no say in things from the states.

Quote:
If you can’t infringe anyone’s gun rights you can’t take them from a felon. What you are saying is if someone commits a crime, he can be stripped of all of his rights. So, if you got caught speeding you should lose all your rights.

I guess you don't understand the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony. There are levels of crimes and they all come with different punishment.

Quote:
Heavily restricted is an effective ban as long as you keep them out of the corner gun store and require a license to own one makes all the difference.

It's good to know you support unlimited rights as long as you can afford them, that makes you a bad liberal but a good leftist.

Quote:
I am not using your made-up definition of an assault weapon. The definition I am using is the legal definition of an assault weapon.

You are using a political definition, which has no place in the real world. An actual assault weapon has a selective fire switch, which semi-auto rifles do not have.

Quote:
Eighty percent of the top ten highest body count massacres use assault weapons.

Gotta love how you are restricting the definition of things to meet your strict criteria for restriction. How many mass shootings have had AR-15 involved? You won't answer that because you know the majority of mass shootings have been done with weapons that are not semi-auto rifles. That's why you try to limit the types of shootings you want to look at.

Quote:
More guns, more deaths.

Once again, the stats disagree with you. We have over 250 million guns in the US, and there are only 12k murders with guns per year, of those 12k gun murders, only 297 were done with semi-auto rifles. That's like less than 1% of gun deaths.

Quote:
It just a matter of time before one of those full automatics is stolen and used in a massacre. Putting even more assault weapons on the streets will only result in more school children being slaughtered.

You are living in a fever dream. Since you can't point to any modified rifles being used in a mass shooting, you start fantasizing about mass shootings with full auto rifles, you are one sick person.

Quote:
The best way to even this out is to take all the assault weapons and melt them down that way the wealthy won’t have anything that the poor can’t have.

Sorry, that's not how our Rights work. You don't get to take away something you think might be used wrong. You have to have facts on your side and none of the facts are on your side. It's the reason the anti-gun groups ignore the 2013 CDC study on gun violence. It didn't fit their propaganda so they scream lies about having funding blocked. Well Obama ordered a study and it didn't turn out like he wanted.

Quote:
There is a reason our troops are armed with assault weapons and not pistols and it is body count.

You really are a special kind of dumb, the military issues handguns, the M9, which is a Beretta 92F semi-auto pistol. The military actually has assault weapons, they have selective fire switches and can fire at the rates you claim semi-auto rifles can fire at.

Quote:
When the constitution was written it was written for people not fetuses. How absurd can you make the argument, to cells, four cells, eight cells? It was very simple line for the founding fathers the line was at birth.

Abortion isn't mentioned in the Constitution, according to you, if it's not specifically written into the Constitution, then it isn't a Constitutional Right. You next claim that abortion was a legal theory... legal theories are not Constitutional Rights. So therfore based on your own theories on the Constitution, abortion isn't constitutional.

Quote:
Abortion was certainly not prohibited by the constitution because the founding fathers believed in freedom and if you don’t have freedom of your own bodily functions you have no freedom.

Go ahead, keep talking out of both sides of your mouth, it's interesting to see you squirm like a worm on a hook to push your "constitutional theories".

Quote:
The supreme court can reverse itself if new information changes things but it is rare for the supreme court to overrule the supreme court.

This just proves that the court has not always ruled via the Constitution and instead of ruled based on their own political opinions. It's funny that you think guns which are mentioned in the Constitution should be banned, but you think abortion which isn't listed in the Constitution, has unlimited protections in the Constitution.

Quote:
The tipping point about guns in America has been passed a long time ago.

Leftists love to use language like this. They think it makes their ideas sound more popular than they really are. You have failed to prove how few people actually own guns.

Quote:
You will see more gun control bill passed in the next decade than the last 20 years.

No you won't. The left's laws on guns are being overturned in favor of Liberty.







Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Thu 28 Nov, 2019 12:18 am
@Baldimo,
It might not have anything to do with gun control but it has everything to do with the NRA and mass murderers. It shows the right’s mind set if the government does something they don’t agree with, it gives them license to massacre the general public for retaliation and you think these people should have tanks and heavy artillery.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
At one time the most common reason given to own a gun was hunting, now one of the more common reasons given by those on the right to justify owning a gun is to violently overthrow the government. Timothy McVeigh doesn’t seem so radical when the rest of the rights think they need a gun to violently overthrow the government.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Timothy McVeigh was just trying to overthrow a government “he did not like.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Who is stirring hate in America today? The racist bigot Trump. Trump is taking these crazies and aiming them like a gun and pulling the trigger. Who on the left has condemned and single out a particular race of people as “gang members,” prostitutes,” “drug dealers,” and calling them an infestation and agreeing with his crowds at his rallies that they should be killed?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are putting guns in the hands of children is a cold hard fact because it has already happened. Gun nut in school leaves a gun in an unlocked locker and a ninth grader finds and is wandering around school with a loaded weapon. Don’t tell me it won’t happen because it already has, along with holes blown through the walls and ceilings of class rooms. Over “30 accidents” already some with children injured. There is absolutely no such thing as a safe gun.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Don’t you understand it has already happened and that is a fact. If people can forget and leave their babies in the back of a parked car do you think they would do any better with a gun. Think about some of your teachers would you really want them to have a gun? Like the cop said he would run screaming from the school if teachers were allowed to carry guns. He works there every day and that is his expert opinion.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It has not been a case or two it has been thirty “accidents” with guns in school and there will be many more with students killed and injured by gun nuts.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We already know that there have been thirty incidences of guns being accidently discharged in schools and at three students have already been injured. The fact is students have been injured by gun nuts demonstrating gun “safety. You and I both know gun nuts routinely injury themselves at home with their guns what makes you think it would not happen in schools? There are actual police reports of the gun “accidents” in schools.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What this world coming to when first graders keep beating up their teachers. You think all first-grade teachers should have guns to shoot those pesky first graders who refuse to mind.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is why people kill people, they were angry. A teacher involved in a fight with a teenager is just like Zimmerman. So, you are advocating killing school children now. I guess that is a way to get read of the problem students.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The facts are out there all you have to do is run a search.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gun manufactures knew full well that assault weapons were designed with one purpose in mind, the outright massacres of human beings and like any drug pusher, they pushed them on the public. Guns are designed to kill people, they kill their wives, husbands, children and even themselves.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
”Arming teachers has already led to a slew of gun accidents in school” there is my source.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You might say two incidents but of course you would be wrong. Wherever you find guns, accidents are sure to follow.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The definition of a mass shooting is very simple it is any shooting that kills or injures four or more people. It does not come with a list of exemptions, for crimes, murder suicides, or cloudy days. If there were any exemptions, they would be listed in the definition of mass shootings.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Polls are used to determine many different things and are usually accurate. Most gun owners love to brag about their guns that is why they are so frequently robbed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You have to follow the definition and there are no exceptions, for road rage, any type of crimes, or shootings that took place on the 13th day of the month. What you want to is claim that the motive determines whether it is a mass shooting. In your mind the only thing that qualifies as a mass shooting is a random shooter shooting four or more people.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The extremists are no longer rare in the Republican party they have become main stream under Trump who even says the Neo-Nazis and KKK members are “fine people” they help put Trump over the top in the last election and he knows it. We have managed the borders for hundreds of years before Trump came along and they will be managed long after he is gone. Trump has been responsible for bringing more illegal aliens into America than anyone else. Trump followers are out killing people and throwing acid in the face of American citizens.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Martin was living there at the time and had been for a week. He was staying at his uncle house.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The only reason Martin is dead is because Zimmerman did not do what the Police department told him to do. They told him to stop following Zimmerman. When Zimmerman refuse to follow the police department’s orders he was responsible for what happened.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The police department told Zimmerman to stop following Martin. If you were being followed at night by a stranger would you not feel threatened. Zimmerman had assumed, he had police powers, and believed he could enforce the law. Actual witnesses say that it was only an argument and there are no marks on Martin that would show that an attack took place.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Everything from the position of the body, to the lack of injuries to Martin, to witness statements say that Zimmerman was the aggressor. Even the police department knew Zimmerman was the aggressor and ordered him to stop. Martin was not following Zimmerman, Zimmerman was following Martin.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That still makes Zimmerman bigger than Martin. If there had been a fist fight there should have been some marks on Martin. Zimmerman is running on adrenaline and should have done a lot of damage to Martin.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If Zimmerman had stopped following Martin when the police department told him to it would not have mattered if Martin was seven feet tall.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Travon was not the bully Zimmerman was following him after the police department told him not to.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Martin had no marks on his hands other than a small cut if he had done that much damage too Zimmerman, Martin knuckles would have shown damage.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The fight took place because Zimmerman did not stop following Martin as instructed by the police department.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zimmerman is a bully and will continue to instigate fights and if you check his prior record you will find he instigate fights all through school. The man is criminal and has a criminal attitude. In 2005 Zimmerman shoved an undercover alcohol control agent trying to make an arrest. He was put in a pretrial diversion program, no doubt anger management. Zimmerman was starting fights in 2005.
Zimmerman was known to beat his finance who got a restraining order against him.
Zimmerman criminal record is far to long to cover in this post.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There was a stand your ground case on this evening where a man thought he heard his neighbor make a threat against him. He got his gun and went next door and fired thirty-one shots into the neighbors. After he shot them several times, he knelt over them and put bullets in their heads. His lawyer was making the point that as long as he felt threatened, under the stand your ground law, he is entitled to go to their house and kill them. They may have not said a thing but as long as he “felt” threatened he is entitled to kill them. The case is yet to go to trial. The stand you’re your ground law is based on what the aggressor “feels.”
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 29 Nov, 2019 12:04 am
@Baldimo,
The stand your ground cases are far more common than you may realize because they don’t all get a lot of publicity. Why put the effort in to commit the perfect crime when you can murder anyone right out in public and use the stand your ground law to get out of it. You are a professional hit man and this guy’s wife offers you $50,000 to murder her husband so she can collect on his million-dollar life insurance policy. The hit man can try to get away with murder and take a chance of being caught or he can simply pick a fight with him and after the husband get the best of him pull out his gun and blow him away in a crowed room. It is justifiable homicide. As more people realize how useful the stand your ground law is, legalized murder will become common. Got a girl-friend with a husband, he is sure to fight with little prodding and you get to spend his life insurance with his grieving widow. A fist fight use to be just a fist fight but now it is a one-sided gun fight.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fist fights have been common for a long time and most bullies are cowards at heart and need their pocket book in a fist fight because they won’t get close enough to hit you with their hands unless you been blinded by a drink thrown in your face.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trick questions are one thing but actual replies are another.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is exactly how that law works. Zimmerman was the aggressor and the police had told him to stop following Martin and that is exactly how that worked.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I quoted verbatim from the article on the 2018 election it concerned the Democrats not the Republicans. If you are a runner and set a personal record (PR) for a half marathon it may not be a PR for another runner.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is a fact that the democrats took control of all branches of government in Virginia and one of the biggest issues was gun control for the first time in 25 years.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Where do you see anything about republican in “the biggest gains for democrats in a generation?”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It was posted on Trump web site that he would eliminate any income taxes for those making under $50,000 when he got elected that was taken down and replaced with billion tax cuts for landlords like Trump and chump change for those making under $50,000. This is how Trump got the suckers to vote for him in the first place and when they got their $1.48 tax cut, they went gee! I got that Trump tax cut. That is how you tell that those who voted for Trump are not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Matter fact many are paying far more income tax after the Trump “tax cut.” If a democrat had done the same thing, they would impeach them for lying. Trump could have refused to sign any tax cut that did not meet his promised tax cut but Trump got such a big tax cut for himself he could not turn it down. Trump’s administration designed the tax cut and submitted to congress.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
People have downloaded the Trump tax cut from his website and it is referenced in several books.
Trump absolutely loves a good lie it is how he got ahead.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The actual studies show the less educated you are the more likely you are a Trump voter. I can see it in my family and in-laws. It seems the less you know the more likely you are to vote for Trump.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The book is now out written by Fusion GPS telling you the Republicans paid for over 50% of that report. They were interviewed on television. Washington Free Beacon is owned by a deep pocket Republican donor. Now you and the rest of the Republicans can read the whole truth from the horse’s mouth who took the Republicans checks. All these Republicans have businesses front so they can take the contributions off of their taxes.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Now that the book is out there and all the Fox News lies have been exposed, it seems it is you who was blinded by all the lies on the right. The actual Truth is out there and it will never be found on the right’s propaganda media.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Read all about from the people that have the Republican checks and weep.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The real story is that little birdie Putin whispering Trump’s ear while all 17 US intelligence agencies investigated the Ukraine hoax and told Trump it was far worse than Sandy Hook massacre conspiracy theory that all the first graders were actors. Trump would much rather believe everything Putin says and takes Putin side against all 17 US intelligence agencies. Trump guilty of extorsion and will shortly be impeached. It is not a turn around all of the US intelligence agencies told him it was nonsense in the first place.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All 17 US intelligence agencies back me up only the lying right media back you up and Putin of course.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No, all 17 US intelligence agencies have specifically investigated the Ukraine conspiracy theory and told Trump it was nothing more than a conspiracy theory but Trump believes Putin. He knows that Putin has no motive to lie, like the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Trump may have met his match in Putin, he is a far better liar. Trump’s lies are so outrageous that nobody believes them but Putin is a master of the black art.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is the case. When Putin told Trump that Russia didn’t interfere in the 2016 election Trump believed every word of it and that is why he believes that it was just Ukraine framing Russia.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump lifted the key sanction put on Russia on June the 27 for interfering in the 2016 election. The democrats tried to override Trump’s actions but the Republicans sided with Russia. The specific sanctions lifted were on companies owned by a close Putin ally. Trump replace the real sanctions with cosmetic sanctions on air planes and yachts. Trump removed the sanctions on Putin’s close friends in June and did not put others in place until three months later because he knows it will be a campaign issue but when Putin your best what are you going to do?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Look at the board directors of any US company and you will find a diverse group of people whose expertise is in any number of areas. Heads of corporations make hundreds of millions of dollars and the board directors sets those salaries and they also make huge amounts of money. The average compensation for an Oracle Corp board member is $552,899 that is the average so you can bet some board members make over a million. Most of the top 25 corporations fall somewhere in that range. That is not unreasonable for a board member of a large corporation.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Board member of a corporation are more about making connections than expertise in the specific field of the company. You of course mean like Trump’s daughter being granted 40 patents in China as soon as Trump was elected a process that takes years. Political contributions are about access an anyone that is connected in any way to someone in politics can take advantage of that connection to gain access. Welcome to the world of politics everybody does it and it is not illegal. Trump family has taken far more advantage of this than anyone before. Kushner was going broke but after Trump election foreign countries rushed in to loan him 100s of millions of dollars at extremely favorable interest rates to buy access. It is not a crime to try and gain access.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When Trump’s European Ambassador gave Trump a $1,000,000 for his inauguration committee low and behold, he got to be an Ambassador with no experience whatsoever that is how politics works.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Even Billy Carter was given a job pushing beer because his brother was president. Everybody want access, campaign contributions are one way, networking is another. It is just like you discovered a cave man’s club and think it is a new invention, political influence is as old as politics. Each director brings something to the table.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Just like Trump’s daughter and her husband, it is the same exact thing foreigner’s trying to curry favor. The investigations are over, there was no wrong doing and they are a closed case. Don’t you think it was funny that Trump’s personal attorney is doing the investigating while all the US intelligence agencies have investigated and closed the case?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, you believe all these other directors who know nothing about the company specialties and are making the same or more than Biden son are shady. Your source is published in the same form as the National Enquirer and the information is just as true. Why do you pollute your mind with absolute garbage like that?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Biden’s son has not done anything that every other president child in the last 200 years hasn’t done. They take advantage of the cards they were dealt. We could pass a law saying they could not take a job of any kind while their dad is president, governor, senator or mayor because someone might say their employer was trying to buy access but until then it is legal, like it or not.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 30 Nov, 2019 12:16 am
@Baldimo,
Guns are tools and they are made for a purpose and that purpose is killing people.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When weapons of war are designed, they are designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time. Killing is there intended purpose.
Ninety-three percent of people have watched as the most important lesson their children learn in school now is how to hide from a mass murderer with an assault weapon. That is what is changing minds.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Since I didn’t do the studies is often hard to find a particular study.
“A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2,000 and 2,013”
Try that study.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What lesson do you think you learned from 9/11? Whether you had assault weapons or you didn’t would not have made any difference. The only thing that 9/11 didn’t teach us was to stay out of the middle east and forget about the Republican Project for a New American Century to make the middle east over in our image.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are right any study that returns a result of between 500,000 and 2.5 million is laughable.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Criminals are not the smartest people but there is no point risking their lives breaking into houses for chump change. If they break in to steal something, they make sure no one is home. If they broke into a house and start beating the guy up there was something personal going on. Did he not pay for his drugs? Did he rip them off? Didn’t pay for a gambling debt? The two men could have shot and killed him as soon as they got in the house. If someone was there to kill him, he would have been dead as soon as the door opened. It is not like in the movies where the actor has to deliver his lines before he shoots the guy. It is very obvious something else was going on.
“Give me everything you got”
You are not that naïve to believe they wanted his children’s milk money. Instead of complying the guy decides to fight with two men with guns.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The police will be looking for the same thing the robbers were looking for.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If the intruders were pistol whipping the guy his wife could have easily shot them with a pistol. She only shot one intruder she could have done that wit a pistol.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are trying to make this incident the reason for everyone needing an AR-15. It is just another opportunity to say look mine is bigger than yours. That is not a gun, this is a gun.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That was another one of the incidents you posted where the idiot with the AR-15 was firing bullets through the wall.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The ruling that the bill of rights are not rights at all just restriction on the government. The person is not real it is his shadow that is real.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What you fail to understand is the government grants those rights and can take them away. A felon or someone with mental problems has his right to keep and bear arms taken away. What the government the government can take away. There is no such word as inalienable in the Declaration of Independence the word is unalienable.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A contract is a contract plain and simple and the Bill of Rights is a contract with the American people.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There is no right to privacy if the census can ask such detailed questions but then all rights are limited.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The point was Trump resents the really big crowd at the World Series chanting “lock him up.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You notice the emails were not found but that did not stop the Russians from trying. In thirty minutes after Trump had authorized the search the Russian had broken into the DNC server. They did not find Hillary’s deleted emails but they got all of political research on the Republicans that the Democrats had. The Russians used the stolen material to pit one faction of the Democratic party against the other that suppressed voter turnout. There is no question the DNC server was hacked by the Russians. The FBI discovered the Russians had broken into the DNC server and notified the DNC. The first time the FBI notified the DNC went to a low-level employee and the FBI had to follow up later.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Who do you think hears these cases and enforces them? The government is the one that enforces these law suits? It is government laws that make these suits possible in the first place.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most major social media sites are no longer going to accept the lying political adds. That about puts the Republicans out of business.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That has everything to do with it. Romney does not pay the actual tax rate on the money he earns and then he tells lies about the people making less than he does.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In your gun nut fantasy world, everything is black and white. It is the good guys and the bad guys but the real world is not that way. You fantasize about shooting the bad guy breaking into your house but reality it is the neighbor who you are fighting who gets shot. I am sure you watched the shows where the good friends get into a fight over a child stealing a birthday present and that feud escalates and ends up with a couple of people being shot to death.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have known of several cases where neighbors killed each other and been around several others who would if they had a gun. One guy was killed over a parking place in a parking lot full of empty places. Have gun will kill.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What do you want to bet that the people making death threats are more likely to own guns and those guns give them the courage to make the death threats? Better death threats then being assonated, like some presidents.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The fact that Trump was raised with mobsters can be found in the Trump biographies. The family fortune was accumulated by Trump’s grandfather’s whore houses. The trouble with you is you don’t read.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When you have somebody, who is disturbance in your place of business you have every right to ask them to leave.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have never seen anyone thrown out of a sporting event for booing a player. Sometimes the boos are deafening after a race. I was at a race where one of the drivers was the brother of the promoter. That driver was in the lead in a 50- lap race that paid $5,000 to win. It was getting foggy and they ended the race at 35 laps and the promoter’s brother won. The crowd not only booed they tried to tear the scorer’s stand down. Nobody was thrown out.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 1 Dec, 2019 12:05 am
@Baldimo,
A Bernie supporter killing two people does not even compare to that life long NRA member and champion of rightwing politics Timothy McVeigh killing 184 innocent people including kids in a day care center.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ninety three percent of people are tired of their children developing post traumatic stress disorder just from going to school and being under constant threat of a gun nut with an assault weapon is going to kill them.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That part of the Declaration of Independence is the justification from breaking away from England not from destroying what the founding fathers built. It appears you don’t know why the Declaration of Independence was written in the first place. Who gets to decide “when a government has become destructive to these ends?” So, you believe the government can be altered to eliminate the second amendment because it has become destructive to these ends.”
You must realize that coming up with a consensus opinion to overthrow the government would be next to impossible so that would leave with us with a small group of radicals who understood nothing about government trying to overthrow the government. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The country will not be turned over to a small group of the radical right the majority will decide on any changes to the government like eliminating the second amendment. That is the way the founding fathers intended for us to be able to change the government. The government was designed to have elections to change the government not long and bloody revolutions every twenty years or so where first one faction takes power than the other faction stages a long bloody revolution to take back power.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Take the bible for instance it is written down so everyone should know its intent in theory but in practice each church thinks they know the bible’s intent and each church fractures and the people who believe they know the bible’s intent form a new church based on their interpretation of bible. The Christian faith has fractured like a dropped mirror. Government would be the same except the supreme court is set up as the arbitrator to determine the intent. The federalist papers and anti-federalist papers are not binding documents they are just the opinions of a few of the founding fathers and nothing more.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You just don’t understand the point. You just can’t imagine what you would like and say that was really the intention. You had a chance to write down exactly what you meant that is why we have written contracts in the first place. Otherwise there would be no need for written contracts and you would just go into court and say that was my intention.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All these rightwing organization from the Neo-Nazis to the KKK have managed to go from fringe nut cases to mainstreaming their philosophy on Fox News. The opinions of the fringe right have creeped into the wider group of rightwing who now justify those ideas without regard to their origin. If the constitution makes one thing clear, it we the people who will decide what rights we have.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump lost the election and only an antiquated system put in place to apse slave holders let him steal the election. We no longer have slaves in America so the electoral college should be abolished. The system is fully designed suppress voter turnout and make votes worthless. In the vast majority of states there is no reason to vote in a presidential election. If you live in California there is no reason for a Republican to bother to vote. New York is the same, Republicans should not bother. In WV it is the other way around there is no need for democrats to vote. Kentucky is the same. Most states are reliably Democratic or Republican in any election only a few battle ground states determine the election. The principal the country was built was one man one vote and that is being violated. Only one office in the land is not decided by majority vote. Then people wonder why voter turnout is so low. If your vote isn’t going to count why bother? When the Republicans start losing every election based on the electoral college is when there will be a huge outcry to abolish slave holder’s rules in our election system. These two minority presidents changed the course of history for the worse.
Your definition of assault weapons is something made up on the fly the real definition is set out in the 1994 assault weapon ban. Gun manufacturers and experts in that field were involved in making the 1994 assault weapon ban.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is easy to ignore the supreme court decision but it makes the law of the land. Some laws are passed by the legislature others are mandated by court decision.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have been threatened several times with a gun when I was a child. If a gun nut has a gun, he is going to threaten people or far worse. Guns not only threaten people they kill enough people each year to make a pile of bodies that would reach the sky.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Those are not projections those were actual incidents, gun nuts shooting people during road rage incidents has become so common in California they should declare it a sport.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I watch at least an hour of news stories each day in addition to what I read. When I find a story on the computer that has good information, I log it as a favorite and refer back to it but on television I can record the show and keep for a few days but I can’t always give you a search parameter that will locate. The other FBI study shows the problem to be far worse. The FBI was being used to help schools pick out the rightwing gun nut types before they massacred the children.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In the definition of a mass shooting as being a shooting where four or more people are wounded or killed where do you see it restricted to a public place? We are only worried about the shooting not the backdrop. If it is not in the definition it is not there. So, you believe if a mass shooting takes place in someone back yard it is not a mass shooting but if it takes place in the alley it is a mass shooting? Do they send a survey crew out to determine if the victims are on private property or in a public place? What if they fall on the line do, they count them as ½ a victim?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Even your definition said “especially” when a human being kills another. What do you think they meant by the word “especially?” Suicide may be a subset of murders but murder is the act of killing a human being and if you kill yourself you have killed a human being.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I posted several of the stories along with the article listing 30 incidents by now no doubt another 20 have occurred. Where ever guns go deaths are sure to follow.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is extremely easy to find the top ten mass murders. Simply search for “top ten mass murders.“ The problem is that it calls up the top 18 or top 22 but you can just take the top ten off of the list.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have posted many sources but the best I can do with a book is list the title of the book.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I did read your definition, the trouble you didn’t. You saw what you wanted to and ignored the rest.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is not in the definition of mass shooting. Do you really think public or private property has anything to do with mass shooting? I get a picture of a survey crew being called to make the determination whether the victims are on private or public property. What if the victim is shot on private property but runs into the street to die? What if the shooter was standing in the street but the victims were on private property? Why would we want to separate the mass shootings? To make the gun manufacturers look less bad? So, we could hide the problem?


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The second amendment is an extremely simple statement it says you get an arm to bear. It can’t get any simpler.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Mon 2 Dec, 2019 12:25 am
@Baldimo,
Rifles are not the problem, assault weapons are the problem. Assault weapons killed 59 in the Las Vegas massacre, assault weapons killed 50 in the pulse night club massacre, 24 killed with an assault weapon in the El Paso massacre this year, 9 people killed by an assault weapon the next day’s Dayton massacre, 26 killed by an assault weapon in Southerland Springs, Texas in the massacre at the First Baptist Church. That list goes on forever, you get the idea.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tools are designed by people for a purpose and the reason assault weapons were designed was to massacre as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. I have never heard of a massacre where 59 people were killed with a hammer. But with assault weapons the massacres keep happening.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The FBI studied mass murders that occurred in schools.
One study is: A study of active shooter incidents in the United States where mass casualties occurred.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think the study that looks at 160 massacres lists all the massacres but the study of 41 massacres only concerns schools.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We have a right to happiness but what makes a mass murderer happy is murdering people but his right has been restricted by law. Just as free speech is limited, you can say Trump’s wife is a whore only if you can prove it. Your second amendment right has been limited. You can’t call your local school and tell them there is a bomb there. If you do you will go to jail. All rights have limits for good reason.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There is no such thing as a statistic that has a range of 500% the best it can claim is guestimate.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A study would come with a reliable number with a possible error margin a few percentage points, not a 500% margin of error.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There are always reasons people do things. If the men had wanted to rob them, they could have waited until they were gone. The intruders had targeted that guy for a reason. If they had intended to kill them, the woman would have never made it to get the AR-15. Maybe it was the AR-15 they came after. To believe the intruders picked that house at random and just wanted to beat someone up is naive.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If you post a link, I always take time to look at it. That is alright as you get older you tend to think you did things that you didn’t.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You tend to see a fantasy world that you imagine, I have dealt with criminals long enough to know that they do things for a reason.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By the time the police showed up the intruders were no longer beating her husband, one had fled and one was dead. That type of crime occurs between players.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most people would try to take control of the situation first after all she had the drop on them. If they refused to leave or raised their gun, she could have put 30 bullets in them in a matter of seconds.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Who keeps money at their house these days? Wait I know, drug dealers and criminals. Some businesses no longer accept cash. Why do drug dealers keep large sums of cash at home? Because if they bank it the cops will know they are dealing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I read the links and none of them answer the question as to why the intruders picked that house out of thousands?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WV is a gun nut state and there are far more gun nuts here than in the rest of the country. One gun nut was shooting his gun at 1:30 am the other night. My wife was up at 4 AM and another gun nut was firing his gun on my property. I have three acres with many deer on it. It is deer season and no doubt he was spot lighting deer.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I read the story and I read your posts, they changed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is a quote from the Heller decision.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is the convoluted decision where they decided the bill of rights were not real but, the shadow they cast was real.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Instead looking it as it is, the people do have rights, you prefer to think of rights as only a se of restriction on the government. The founding fathers intended to grant rights not restrictions
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The founding Fathers knew one thing for certain you can’t play a game without rules and you can’t have a government without laws. That is why the founding fathers set up legislative branch to make laws.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Inalienable is not used in the Declaration of Independence the word used was unalienable. The only source of rights are the rights the government decides to grant. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The founding fathers designed the constitution so we could change it. That means the amendments can be changed and rights granted can be taken away.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I understand the constitution and that it can be changed. The people establish the government by voting and vests their power in the government.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The census mandates the answers to all kinds of personal questions there can be no right to privacy.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That wasn’t the only event Trump was booed at. He was booed at a sporting event in New York that week also. You can bet Trump absolutely hated it, he cannot take criticism of any type


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You can bet the stress of being booed and chanted to lock him up sent him in to be checked by a doctor. Trump’s only one more hamburger away from a massive heart attack. Believe me they are related.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The popular vote reflects the will of the people, the electoral college the compromise with slave owners.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The problem with electoral colleges was that slaves did not count. This meant the southern states would not be fully represented. A compromise was reached where each slave would be counted as ½ a person for the purpose of electoral college giving the southern states more electoral votes. Today its only purpose is to scam the American people.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Trump absolutely hates free speech and you tell it by what he does on twitter. He would eliminate the second amendment if he could.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Both civil and criminal courts are government courts and some judges do both types of cases.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, I understand but you don’t. Romney is paid on commission just as most sales man are but while they pay taxes on their income Romney pays only on the investment rate. Romney invest nothing his clients invest their money Romney’s salary is based on what his clients’ investment returns. Romney risks nothing.

That 47% is absolute and complete lie. They are talking about the children who have no income and the seniors drawing social security that they already paid tax on that money. This how you lie with figures. Figures don’t lie but liars do figure. I have worked 50 years and almost all of them were under $50,000 and I paid income tax even when I made less than $6,000 and most years, I wrote a big check in addition to what was taken out of my check. This is a lie the rich have told so many times the gullible believe it. How many times did you make below $50,000 and not pay an income tax?
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/15/2021 at 07:44:19