The editor needs to do his own research and not rely on progressive attacks and talking points. If he did, he would have some credibility.

First, if he listened to Trump directly he would have heard of a "temporary" hold on immigration from "certain" countries where specific violence is defined.

Second, it is a clear point that Hilary started the entire birther movement during the 2008 race (yes, it was HER campaign, this HILARY owns it!)

Third, the vast, vast majority of violence this political season has been perpetrated by progressives......the little at a Trump rally done by conservatives resulted in arrests, while the progressive violence went mostly unlawed.

Fourth, you need to learn what the words r****t and misogyny mean.

Fifth, he's a politician, so YES, he lies. Understood. However, even by the bar of politics Hilary is considered a liar. Wow!

......along with the paste!

Donna,

No mansplaining involved.......just politicalsplaining!

Per the earlier post, "assault ...entered the American lexicon in the late 1980s, originated as a political ploy by gun control advocates or as a marketing ploy by gun retailers"

Folks who actually shoot all these things tell me it's very, very simple: if it can shoot fully automatic, it's an assault weapon.

I hear this from special forces guys, cops, hobbyists, and h****rs at a 100% clip, so I'm buying it.

Blurryeyed wrote "Art, mine is one of 10s of millions of voices that our government has no interest in hearing."


I'm not sure I have ever read truer words on this site!

Robert,

Nice post. Note that Cali doesn't allow this type rifle legally, yet it was used in San Bernadino.

This is an interesting column from today's WSJ:

"In the wake of the Orlando terrorist massacre, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats have called for reinstating Bill Clinton’s ban on “assault weapons.” If her version works as well as her husband’s did, the terrorists will have won.

From 1994 to 2002 Congress barred the sale of 18 types of rifles and shotguns that had “military style” attributes. This definition was purely political because the difference between a regular rifle and what Washington calls an assault weapon is mostly cosmetic.

This is one reason the ban had a negligible impact on gun crime. So-called assault rifles accounted for about 2% of gun crimes prior to the ban, and the percentage of murders committed with rifles today (2% in 2014) is less than the 3% in the last year of the ban. Overall gun crime fell after 1994, though numerous studies, including one commissioned by the Department of Justice, attribute this to better background checks and other measures. The studies found no link to the ban and reduced crime.


The rifle ban also didn’t matter when it ended. The gun homicide rate remains about half (3.8 deaths per 100,000 people) of what it was prior to the seven deaths per 100,000 in the early 1990s. The media this week are full of stories about gun-death rates, without bothering to note that most of the surge is occurring in cities like Chicago that have the strictest gun laws. Heather Mac Donald nearby has a better explanation for the crime resurgence.

As for stopping terrorism, California is among the states that continued to ban assault weapons after the federal version expired. But that didn’t stop the San Bernardino k**lers, who used modified rifles that violated the law. France’s strict gun laws also didn’t stop the Paris assailants.


There are some 350 million guns in America, including as many as 10 million AR-15 rifles like the one used in Orlando. If Democrats want a ban to have any chance of working, they will have to v**e for and enforce a nationwide program of confiscation. The ban Democrats are pushing would be meaningless.


What has reduced gun deaths are better background checks, but Democrats are now politicizing this success. They are insisting that anyone whose name appears on the FBI’s terror watch list should be banned from buying guns. But we know that names are mistakenly on the list. The GOP alternative would alert Justice if someone on the list tries to buy a gun, triggering a special court proceeding and 72-hour investigation. Democrats say that’s not enough, no doubt because it doesn’t provide the gun-control wedge issue they want.

By the way, how about enforcing existing law? Handguns account for more than 80% of gun crime, and the primary way felons obtain firearms is through “straw purchasing”—that is, using friends or relatives without criminal records to buy the guns for them. The Justice Department prefers not to prosecute straw purchasers on grounds that they aren’t the main problem. But surely the deterrent signal would get around if Justice began to prosecute some of these gun gophers.

We’re sorry to have to dev**e space to this remedial gun-control education, but most of the press corps takes this assault-weapon ban seriously. No one else should"

I disagree with you (I think) strictly on anthropological terms.........humans are predatory and thus cannot "all be equal all the time", thus I don't see c*******m as having any realistic good at all.

In fact, I see c*******m as having caused more murders than any other "event" in history.

I see capitalism as the perfect society, whether it be pure or, even better, the one we had until recently where there were SOME controls and regulations, but not strangulation !😄

Donna,

Here is my re-post. its si pole and followed by most who have little agenda in the matter:

"Excellent question, and obviously there is no agreement on this among our elected i***ts. The gun used in Orlando, by the way, was NOT an "assault rifle" using the following wide-spread use:

"It is debated whether the term “assault weapon,” which entered the American lexicon in the late 1980s, originated as a political ploy by gun control advocates or as a marketing ploy by gun retailers. What is certain is that “assault weapon” is not a technical term, a term of art used by firearms manufactures, or a military term. The closest match in any of those categories is the term “assault rifle,” which is a military term referring to a medium-caliber, shoulder-fired rifle that allows the shooter to select between semiautomatic mode (the gun fires one bullet per pull of the trigger) and either fully automatic (the gun continues to fire bullet after bullet, as long as the trigger is depressed) or three-shot-burst mode (the gun fires three bullets per pull of the trigger). Because "assault weapons," as defined by state and federal law, are semiautomatic only and can fire in neither fully automatic mode nor three-shot-burst mode, they are not assault rifles. (THIS article explains the current laws restricting civilian ownership of assault rifles—aka machine guns—in the United States and explains why those weapons are not part of the ongoing debate over gun control in America.)

Please note your own goobly gook, incorrect spellings, lack of proof reading, etc., which I already documented for you, Einstein.

Glass houses and all that...........

Thanks for the clarification. It seems the c*******t party membership in America was about 50,000 out of about 150 million Americans at the time (of course, one wonders who the hell went around and counted them?)


I think the big issue back than was that the c*******t movement in America was centered in some very influential quarters (Unions, Hollywood, writers, etc), and the movement started way before Joe Mac and went in way after him.....he just used it so loudly to gain advantage.

Please note the spelling, oh sensitive one:

"res·ur·rec·tion - noun - the action or fact of resurrecting or being resurrected. (in Christian belief) Christ's rising from the dead."

Perhaps if you proof read your posts we could get your point 😄

[quote=Croce]You may have something worthwhile to say but unless you take the time to proof read your posts before hitting send I cannot clearly determine your point.
Also there is an edit button so you can go back and correct your original errors.[/quote



Between autocorrect and typing on a small phone screen, I think I do okay. I'm still on the phone, but having a tissy fit over "instututionalized" dropping an "n" and some random caps from autocorrect seems pretty minor and doesn't warp the point at all.

If is offends your sensitivities, then go to a safe place and ponder it.

He did.....as I stated. I took your post as saying there was no c*******t movement in America at that time, and if so that would be factually incorrect.

Why not? Gay marriage is not even an issue in this e******n cycle......the ones trying to make it an issue appear to be the progressive left.

Excellent question, and obviously there is no agreement on this among our elected i***ts. The gun used in Orlando, by the way, was NOT an "assault rifle" using the following wide-spread use:

"It is debated whether the term “assault weapon,” which entered the American lexicon in the late 1980s, originated as a political ploy by gun control advocates or as a marketing ploy by gun retailers. What is certain is that “assault weapon” is not a technical term, a term of art used by firearms manufactures, or a military term. The closest match in any of those categories is the term “assault rifle,” which is a military term referring to a medium-caliber, shoulder-fired rifle that allows the shooter to select between semiautomatic mode (the gun fires one bullet per pull of the trigger) and either fully automatic (the gun continues to fire bullet after bullet, as long as the trigger is depressed) or three-shot-burst mode (the gun fires three bullets per pull of the trigger). Because "assault weapons," as defined by state and federal law, are semiautomatic only and can fire in neither fully automatic mode nor three-shot-burst mode, they are not assault rifles. (THIS article explains the current laws restricting civilian ownership of assault rifles—aka machine guns—in the United States and explains why those weapons are not part of the ongoing debate over gun control in America.)"

Do some research....there were c*******ts involved throughout the U.S. At the time. Now, McCarthy was an ass using it to try to gain advantage, but to say it didn't exist is nuts.