Root Cause of Most Mass Shootings in America

[Rigby5]

In my lifetime, I have seen a transition in the shootings

In the 60s and 70s it was assasination
JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, Reagan, Ford..

In the 70s and 80s it became serial killings
Son of Sam, BTK, Zodiak killer, DC Sniper

After the 80s it became mass killers
Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Parkland

Change in family structure after the 70s, more broken homes with fatherless boys raised by single mothers, and the advent of social media and the spread of fame and techniques of mass shooters.

Doesn’t account for the transition from assasination to serial killer to mass killer

Kennedy's shooter.....father died before he was born......broken home....

There is perhaps nothing crazier in the modern historical profession than the refusal of people who really should know better to acknowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist, murdered JFK for political reasons. He was also unhinged, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Oswald was a Communist. He had previously defected to the USSR, but was allowed to return after growing disillusioned. He then became a partisan of the Cuban Revolution, and visited the Cuban embassy in Mexico, trying to defect to Cuba. He was very angry about hostile U.S. policy toward Cuba, and before he killed JFK tried to kill well-known anti-Communist Edwin Walker.

Yet somehow, every November, instead of reminding us of these facts, “mainstream” historians gaslight us and sometimes explicitly state that JFK was the victim of “right wing hate.” They then complain in other contexts about how conservatives purportedly won’t accept “reality.”

The left spent the 1950s and early 60s decrying McCarthyism as a “witch hunt,” i.e., not just that McCarthy was a lying demagogue (which he was), but that there was no domestic Communist threat, whatsoever. Acknowledging that a domestic Communist assassinated a beloved Democrat president ruins the witch-hunt narrative. That narrative has been a huge propaganda advantage for decades, and the won't let it go.

Huh..gotta admit..I never have once heard that JFK was a victim of Right-wing anything. I've always held the view that Oswald was acting as an agent of USSR...JFK had the Kremlin seriously worried that he was going to start..and win..a nuclear war. As we know now..the USSR was a paper tiger as regards its nuclear forces. JFK just wouldn't stop pushing.
So they had a mentally disturbed ex-marine defector with a Russian wife--who better to pull a trigger--Jack Ruby's killing Oswald clipped the loose end...and Ruby's death made it the perfect crime.

Anyone would have been better than someone with a Russian wife.
And Russia was not at all afraid of Kennedy.
Kennedy was much more leftist than the pentagon or the Dulles brothers.
Kennedy is the last person that Russia would have wanted dead.
Kennedy had given in to the Russians on the Cuban MIssile Crisis, and removed our nuclear ICBMs from Turkey.
Kennedy was the most pro-Russia president we ever had.

It doesn't change the fact that JKF was murdered by a communist.

No, Oswald was a US veteran who likely was pretending to want to work for Russia or Cuba, and saw through the ploy.
If he really was a communist, then he would have gone to a country with a large communist party, like Sweden, Italy, France, etc.

Obviously you don't want to believe that Communist murdered JFK, even though it is an historical fact.

How are you on the fact that a Palestinian murdered RFK?

There are lots of communists in the US and Europe.
Have you ever heard of one of them wanting to go to Russia or Cuba?
Of course not, because Russia and Cuba were never remotely communists.
There was nothing communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative.

Communism/Socialism doesn't work. It fails constantly, and with each failure we are assured that if only the sophomore class as Santa Cruz state could implement it, that it would be utopia. History, on the other hand, more strongly supports the finding that Utopians are Murderers.

Here are the facts:

In order to make sure everything is "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative" there is a small group that controls a large group, who claim they will wondrously use their authority only for the good of everyone. That's a lie. They use their power to secure wonderful things for themselves and those that are connected to the group that has assumed control.

Our Framers identified this and dispensed with it by explaining that for angels, seperation of power, checks and balances are not necessary, but men are not angels and cannot be trusted with unchecked power.

Now, back to your fraud. Once people realize that effort gets them nothing more, and nothing less than the slothful, everyone quits working, which puts the lifestyle of the small group at the top at risk. When they are at risk, they reach for the whip.

When a small group uses force to control a large group, at some point there will be violent revolution and the large group will slaughter the small group.

Interestingly, William Bradford brought both Communism/Socialism and Free Labor/Free Markets to the New World, and he got both out of the bible. The Plymouth Rock Colony first tried socialism, based on a passage in Acts, and it failed miserably, with empty stomachs, they starved and died. Interestingly, this community in Acts also fell on terrible times of want and had to be bailed out with charitable giving by the other Churches in Asia Minor.

Bradford, at a complete loss, but honest enough to admit error, went back to the scriptures, and found Jesus' parable of "The Talents" and Bradford changed approach, now each person had their own plot, they could produce as they wished, trade freely, and keep the gains of their industry. Productive labor dramatically increased and the colony thrived.

Our Constitutional system is the oldest surviving democracy in the world, and one of the oldest surviving governments in the world. By guaranteeing that Sovereign Power is held by The People, rather than the government, the large group has no need for violent revolution in order to regain power, because we already have the power.

Now, our rights are quite an annoyance to the wanna be totalitarians, but, that's tough shit. In our Constitutional system you will never be able to force others to participate in your failed social experiments. If you want to form a voluntary system that is "communal, collective, collaborative, and cooperative" you are free to do so. So, what's stopping you? Go do it and show us all how "wonderful" it is.

Wrong.
First of all, communism and socialism do not require everything to be "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".
Second is that as long as it is kept local, then you can't get a distant and unresponsive group in control who does what they want.
Look at any union and you never see that happening because if those with delegated authority get out of hand, then they are voted out.
The only way they can then get abusive is if they no longer allow elections, and then they are not "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".

You are totally wrong.
Under socialism and communism, more efforts gets you more results.
The only thing socialism or communism does is ensure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

When each person has their own plot of land and can grow what they want, that is socialism.
Under capitalism one person uses force to control all the land and not allow anyone else to grow anything.
There is no profit in everyone having their own plot, because then they are self sufficient and don't have to buy anything.

You don't know what you are talking about, you don't even understand capitalism and socialism...you doofus.....

Socialism has the government controlling all the land, you dumb ass, not capitalism.....

You really should try learning about capitalism and socialism.....you have it all mixed up.

Wrong.
The whole point of communism and socialism is to ensure individuals all get access instead of all the resources being hoarded by the wealthy elite who control the means of force.
Socialism and communism came up by people like Marx around 1800 because of the abuses of the aristocracy and the wealthy corporate capitalists of the industrial revolution.
Socialism and communism are against strong central government.
If you look at the Bolshevik revolution, you will find that the main players were the Anarchists, who did not believe in coerceive government at all. The closest to them these days, would be the Libertarians.
You have been totally taken in by the anti communist propaganda, which is all lies.
Why do you think we helped Stalin instead of stopping him?
That is because he was actually a total capitalist who murdered all the real communists and socialists.

And in socialist countries the wealthy elite have all the resources while everyone else eat zoo animals and pick through garbage.....you don't know what you are talking about....you are talking about socialism and communism as if we were in the 1920s before 100 million people were murdered by socialist and communists and entire countries were put into poverty by their policies.....while their socialist and communist elite became wealthy....

Capitalism, free markets and the rule of law have lifted more people out of poverty in a shorter period of time than any other system........

You don't know what you are talking about....

Read some Walter William, Thomas Sowell, Milton Friedman and in particular, to really learn how stupid socialism is...read "The Road To Serfdom," by Friedrich Hayek......and you know what...read "The Law," By Friedrich Bastiat......it is a short work and will help you understand why socialism and communism are stupid.

Communism/Socialism routinely fail to feed their people, which is a fundamental failure.

Name an example, which can't be Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela or any obviously capitalist dictatorship.

 

[Rigby5]

In my lifetime, I have seen a transition in the shootings

In the 60s and 70s it was assasination
JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, Reagan, Ford..

In the 70s and 80s it became serial killings
Son of Sam, BTK, Zodiak killer, DC Sniper

After the 80s it became mass killers
Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Parkland

Change in family structure after the 70s, more broken homes with fatherless boys raised by single mothers, and the advent of social media and the spread of fame and techniques of mass shooters.

Doesn’t account for the transition from assasination to serial killer to mass killer

Kennedy's shooter.....father died before he was born......broken home....

There is perhaps nothing crazier in the modern historical profession than the refusal of people who really should know better to acknowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist, murdered JFK for political reasons. He was also unhinged, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Oswald was a Communist. He had previously defected to the USSR, but was allowed to return after growing disillusioned. He then became a partisan of the Cuban Revolution, and visited the Cuban embassy in Mexico, trying to defect to Cuba. He was very angry about hostile U.S. policy toward Cuba, and before he killed JFK tried to kill well-known anti-Communist Edwin Walker.

Yet somehow, every November, instead of reminding us of these facts, “mainstream” historians gaslight us and sometimes explicitly state that JFK was the victim of “right wing hate.” They then complain in other contexts about how conservatives purportedly won’t accept “reality.”

The left spent the 1950s and early 60s decrying McCarthyism as a “witch hunt,” i.e., not just that McCarthy was a lying demagogue (which he was), but that there was no domestic Communist threat, whatsoever. Acknowledging that a domestic Communist assassinated a beloved Democrat president ruins the witch-hunt narrative. That narrative has been a huge propaganda advantage for decades, and the won't let it go.

Huh..gotta admit..I never have once heard that JFK was a victim of Right-wing anything. I've always held the view that Oswald was acting as an agent of USSR...JFK had the Kremlin seriously worried that he was going to start..and win..a nuclear war. As we know now..the USSR was a paper tiger as regards its nuclear forces. JFK just wouldn't stop pushing.
So they had a mentally disturbed ex-marine defector with a Russian wife--who better to pull a trigger--Jack Ruby's killing Oswald clipped the loose end...and Ruby's death made it the perfect crime.

Anyone would have been better than someone with a Russian wife.
And Russia was not at all afraid of Kennedy.
Kennedy was much more leftist than the pentagon or the Dulles brothers.
Kennedy is the last person that Russia would have wanted dead.
Kennedy had given in to the Russians on the Cuban MIssile Crisis, and removed our nuclear ICBMs from Turkey.
Kennedy was the most pro-Russia president we ever had.

It doesn't change the fact that JKF was murdered by a communist.

No, Oswald was a US veteran who likely was pretending to want to work for Russia or Cuba, and saw through the ploy.
If he really was a communist, then he would have gone to a country with a large communist party, like Sweden, Italy, France, etc.

Obviously you don't want to believe that Communist murdered JFK, even though it is an historical fact.

How are you on the fact that a Palestinian murdered RFK?

There are lots of communists in the US and Europe.
Have you ever heard of one of them wanting to go to Russia or Cuba?
Of course not, because Russia and Cuba were never remotely communists.
There was nothing communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative.

Communism/Socialism doesn't work. It fails constantly, and with each failure we are assured that if only the sophomore class as Santa Cruz state could implement it, that it would be utopia. History, on the other hand, more strongly supports the finding that Utopians are Murderers.

Here are the facts:

In order to make sure everything is "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative" there is a small group that controls a large group, who claim they will wondrously use their authority only for the good of everyone. That's a lie. They use their power to secure wonderful things for themselves and those that are connected to the group that has assumed control.

Our Framers identified this and dispensed with it by explaining that for angels, seperation of power, checks and balances are not necessary, but men are not angels and cannot be trusted with unchecked power.

Now, back to your fraud. Once people realize that effort gets them nothing more, and nothing less than the slothful, everyone quits working, which puts the lifestyle of the small group at the top at risk. When they are at risk, they reach for the whip.

When a small group uses force to control a large group, at some point there will be violent revolution and the large group will slaughter the small group.

Interestingly, William Bradford brought both Communism/Socialism and Free Labor/Free Markets to the New World, and he got both out of the bible. The Plymouth Rock Colony first tried socialism, based on a passage in Acts, and it failed miserably, with empty stomachs, they starved and died. Interestingly, this community in Acts also fell on terrible times of want and had to be bailed out with charitable giving by the other Churches in Asia Minor.

Bradford, at a complete loss, but honest enough to admit error, went back to the scriptures, and found Jesus' parable of "The Talents" and Bradford changed approach, now each person had their own plot, they could produce as they wished, trade freely, and keep the gains of their industry. Productive labor dramatically increased and the colony thrived.

Our Constitutional system is the oldest surviving democracy in the world, and one of the oldest surviving governments in the world. By guaranteeing that Sovereign Power is held by The People, rather than the government, the large group has no need for violent revolution in order to regain power, because we already have the power.

Now, our rights are quite an annoyance to the wanna be totalitarians, but, that's tough shit. In our Constitutional system you will never be able to force others to participate in your failed social experiments. If you want to form a voluntary system that is "communal, collective, collaborative, and cooperative" you are free to do so. So, what's stopping you? Go do it and show us all how "wonderful" it is.

Wrong.
First of all, communism and socialism do not require everything to be "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".
Second is that as long as it is kept local, then you can't get a distant and unresponsive group in control who does what they want.
Look at any union and you never see that happening because if those with delegated authority get out of hand, then they are voted out.
The only way they can then get abusive is if they no longer allow elections, and then they are not "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".

You are totally wrong.
Under socialism and communism, more efforts gets you more results.
The only thing socialism or communism does is ensure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

When each person has their own plot of land and can grow what they want, that is socialism.
Under capitalism one person uses force to control all the land and not allow anyone else to grow anything.
There is no profit in everyone having their own plot, because then they are self sufficient and don't have to buy anything.

So do what you want. In our system you just can't force anyone to join in that doesn't want to, which apparently you are totally fine with, so knock yourself out.

The US is one of the most communist and socialist countries in the world.
Everything good about the US is the collaborative, communal, and cooperative ways it allows equal opportunity, like public school, unemployment compensation, Social Security, etc.

 

[Dr Grump]

Two graphs because the first only goes to 2015 and the second starts in 1982.

View attachment 260547
View attachment 260546

Americans have always owned guns. My father and his friends took rifles to school to go rabbit hunting afterwards. Machine guns and even cannons were owned by citizens through much of American history.

So what changed during the 1960’s to start this upward trend?

I’ll offer a theory as to what occurred. If you don’t like it, fine. But offer your own theory as to the catalyst that started this.

Since 1962 school children have no longer been told they are special and we are all created equal in the image of God. This was replaced by teaching children they are no more significant than a tree in a forest. Since then the number of Christians in America has been on the decline, replaced by people who now feel no embarrassment about wanting to murder babies after they are born.

The greatest trick Satan ever played was convincing people he does not exist.

If you don’t like the theory, fine. Then offer your own without the personal attacks.

The fatherless rate in the black community went from 17% to 77% current day..
Almost all the mass shooters came from a broken home .. fix the family

Yeah...let's look at the list of black mass shooters. I'll go first:
Columbine...um, no
Vegas, er no
McDonalds...nada
Cal tech...hhmm...nope
Aurora...no again
Sandy Hook...nein

Common theme here.....

 

[Rigby5]

...
Your dope smoking commie lib professor isn't a trustworthy source. Do your own research. In the meantime if you want to live in a commune, you are free to set one up in America and live in it, but, our Constitution will prevent you from forcing us to participate in it with you, which if you are a Libertarian like you claim, you will be in hearty agreement with.

Do you respect my right to
- Own private property, enjoy the fruit of my labor, and leave my possessions to who I wish, by will?
- Freely Exchange my labor for pay, goods, or services, or to refuse to do so?
- To use lethal self defense to prevent the infliction of grave physical harm on myself or my loved ones?

You clearly know nothing of the Bolshevik revolution or the Anarchists.
They were identical in belief to the Libertarians, and the Libertarian would and should also be committed to violent revolution if the abuses of Russia were inflicted upon them.

One of the main aspects of capitalist greed greatly harming this country is the way for profit insurance companies have taken over health care as a monopoly. We still need to fix that and have public health care.

Communism allows each person to own private property and enjoy the fruits of their labor.
What communism does not allow is for someone to gain a monopoly over common resources they did not create and are essential to everyone.
As for inheritance, that is morally and ethically corrupt, that people are not equal by birth.
And of course each individual has inherent rights like to defense.

 

[2aguy]

Two graphs because the first only goes to 2015 and the second starts in 1982.

View attachment 260547
View attachment 260546

Americans have always owned guns. My father and his friends took rifles to school to go rabbit hunting afterwards. Machine guns and even cannons were owned by citizens through much of American history.

So what changed during the 1960’s to start this upward trend?

I’ll offer a theory as to what occurred. If you don’t like it, fine. But offer your own theory as to the catalyst that started this.

Since 1962 school children have no longer been told they are special and we are all created equal in the image of God. This was replaced by teaching children they are no more significant than a tree in a forest. Since then the number of Christians in America has been on the decline, replaced by people who now feel no embarrassment about wanting to murder babies after they are born.

The greatest trick Satan ever played was convincing people he does not exist.

If you don’t like the theory, fine. Then offer your own without the personal attacks.

The fatherless rate in the black community went from 17% to 77% current day..
Almost all the mass shooters came from a broken home .. fix the family

Yeah...let's look at the list of black mass shooters. I'll go first:
Columbine...um, no
Vegas, er no
McDonalds...nada
Cal tech...hhmm...nope
Aurora...no again
Sandy Hook...nein

Common theme here.....

Dipshit...just about every one of those came from broken homes.....you dumb ass...and the ones who weren't were actually mentally ill...

Sandy Hook? Did you even bother to check any of these before you listed them...

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The perpetrator was Adam Peter Lanza (April 22, 1992 – December 14, 2012), who lived with his mother, Nancy Lanza, in Sandy Hook, 5 miles (8 km) from the elementary school.[145]

Vegas?
He was a son of Benjamin Paddock, a bank robber who was on the FBI's most-wanted list between 1969 and 1977.

2017 Las Vegas shooting - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[2aguy]

Two graphs because the first only goes to 2015 and the second starts in 1982.

View attachment 260547
View attachment 260546

Americans have always owned guns. My father and his friends took rifles to school to go rabbit hunting afterwards. Machine guns and even cannons were owned by citizens through much of American history.

So what changed during the 1960’s to start this upward trend?

I’ll offer a theory as to what occurred. If you don’t like it, fine. But offer your own theory as to the catalyst that started this.

Since 1962 school children have no longer been told they are special and we are all created equal in the image of God. This was replaced by teaching children they are no more significant than a tree in a forest. Since then the number of Christians in America has been on the decline, replaced by people who now feel no embarrassment about wanting to murder babies after they are born.

The greatest trick Satan ever played was convincing people he does not exist.

If you don’t like the theory, fine. Then offer your own without the personal attacks.

The fatherless rate in the black community went from 17% to 77% current day..
Almost all the mass shooters came from a broken home .. fix the family

Yeah...let's look at the list of black mass shooters. I'll go first:
Columbine...um, no
Vegas, er no
McDonalds...nada
Cal tech...hhmm...nope
Aurora...no again
Sandy Hook...nein

Common theme here.....

Do you understand that of the 10,258 murders in the United States, the majority of the victims and the majority of the shooters are black males murdering other black males and that both victim and shooter are usually involved in crime? And come from broken homes?

 

[Zorro!]

...
Your dope smoking commie lib professor isn't a trustworthy source. Do your own research. In the meantime if you want to live in a commune, you are free to set one up in America and live in it, but, our Constitution will prevent you from forcing us to participate in it with you, which if you are a Libertarian like you claim, you will be in hearty agreement with.

Do you respect my right to
- Own private property, enjoy the fruit of my labor, and leave my possessions to who I wish, by will?
- Freely Exchange my labor for pay, goods, or services, or to refuse to do so?
- To use lethal self defense to prevent the infliction of grave physical harm on myself or my loved ones?

You clearly know nothing of the Bolshevik revolution or the Anarchists.
They were identical in belief to the Libertarians, and the Libertarian would and should also be committed to violent revolution if the abuses of Russia were inflicted upon them...

Fake News. Communism and Socialism are the most murderous ideologies in world history. Libertarianism has zero murderous history.

... One of the main aspects of capitalist greed greatly harming this country is the way for profit insurance companies have taken over health care as a monopoly...

Yes. Our anti-trust laws enable us to break up harmful monopolies.

... We still need to fix that and have public health care...

A government monopoly? That's your "Libertarian solution"?

...As for inheritance, that is morally and ethically corrupt, that people are not equal by birth.
...

Fake News. There is nothing unethical about my working hard and leaving an inheritance to my children. If another blows everything and leaves nothing to their children that's their choice. My hard work passing on a benefit onto my children is neither unfair nor corrupt, it's simply the natural outworking of our respective choices.

But, if you want to set up a commune with voluntary participation and no use of wills, you are more than free to do so.

 

[Zorro!]

In my lifetime, I have seen a transition in the shootings

In the 60s and 70s it was assasination
JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, Reagan, Ford..

In the 70s and 80s it became serial killings
Son of Sam, BTK, Zodiak killer, DC Sniper

After the 80s it became mass killers
Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Parkland

Change in family structure after the 70s, more broken homes with fatherless boys raised by single mothers, and the advent of social media and the spread of fame and techniques of mass shooters.

Doesn’t account for the transition from assasination to serial killer to mass killer

Kennedy's shooter.....father died before he was born......broken home....

There is perhaps nothing crazier in the modern historical profession than the refusal of people who really should know better to acknowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist, murdered JFK for political reasons. He was also unhinged, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Oswald was a Communist. He had previously defected to the USSR, but was allowed to return after growing disillusioned. He then became a partisan of the Cuban Revolution, and visited the Cuban embassy in Mexico, trying to defect to Cuba. He was very angry about hostile U.S. policy toward Cuba, and before he killed JFK tried to kill well-known anti-Communist Edwin Walker.

Yet somehow, every November, instead of reminding us of these facts, “mainstream” historians gaslight us and sometimes explicitly state that JFK was the victim of “right wing hate.” They then complain in other contexts about how conservatives purportedly won’t accept “reality.”

The left spent the 1950s and early 60s decrying McCarthyism as a “witch hunt,” i.e., not just that McCarthy was a lying demagogue (which he was), but that there was no domestic Communist threat, whatsoever. Acknowledging that a domestic Communist assassinated a beloved Democrat president ruins the witch-hunt narrative. That narrative has been a huge propaganda advantage for decades, and the won't let it go.

Huh..gotta admit..I never have once heard that JFK was a victim of Right-wing anything. I've always held the view that Oswald was acting as an agent of USSR...JFK had the Kremlin seriously worried that he was going to start..and win..a nuclear war. As we know now..the USSR was a paper tiger as regards its nuclear forces. JFK just wouldn't stop pushing.
So they had a mentally disturbed ex-marine defector with a Russian wife--who better to pull a trigger--Jack Ruby's killing Oswald clipped the loose end...and Ruby's death made it the perfect crime.

Anyone would have been better than someone with a Russian wife.
And Russia was not at all afraid of Kennedy.
Kennedy was much more leftist than the pentagon or the Dulles brothers.
Kennedy is the last person that Russia would have wanted dead.
Kennedy had given in to the Russians on the Cuban MIssile Crisis, and removed our nuclear ICBMs from Turkey.
Kennedy was the most pro-Russia president we ever had.

It doesn't change the fact that JKF was murdered by a communist.

No, Oswald was a US veteran who likely was pretending to want to work for Russia or Cuba, and saw through the ploy.
If he really was a communist, then he would have gone to a country with a large communist party, like Sweden, Italy, France, etc.

Obviously you don't want to believe that Communist murdered JFK, even though it is an historical fact.

How are you on the fact that a Palestinian murdered RFK?

There are lots of communists in the US and Europe.
Have you ever heard of one of them wanting to go to Russia or Cuba?
Of course not, because Russia and Cuba were never remotely communists.
There was nothing communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative.

Communism/Socialism doesn't work. It fails constantly, and with each failure we are assured that if only the sophomore class as Santa Cruz state could implement it, that it would be utopia. History, on the other hand, more strongly supports the finding that Utopians are Murderers.

Here are the facts:

In order to make sure everything is "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative" there is a small group that controls a large group, who claim they will wondrously use their authority only for the good of everyone. That's a lie. They use their power to secure wonderful things for themselves and those that are connected to the group that has assumed control.

Our Framers identified this and dispensed with it by explaining that for angels, seperation of power, checks and balances are not necessary, but men are not angels and cannot be trusted with unchecked power.

Now, back to your fraud. Once people realize that effort gets them nothing more, and nothing less than the slothful, everyone quits working, which puts the lifestyle of the small group at the top at risk. When they are at risk, they reach for the whip.

When a small group uses force to control a large group, at some point there will be violent revolution and the large group will slaughter the small group.

Interestingly, William Bradford brought both Communism/Socialism and Free Labor/Free Markets to the New World, and he got both out of the bible. The Plymouth Rock Colony first tried socialism, based on a passage in Acts, and it failed miserably, with empty stomachs, they starved and died. Interestingly, this community in Acts also fell on terrible times of want and had to be bailed out with charitable giving by the other Churches in Asia Minor.

Bradford, at a complete loss, but honest enough to admit error, went back to the scriptures, and found Jesus' parable of "The Talents" and Bradford changed approach, now each person had their own plot, they could produce as they wished, trade freely, and keep the gains of their industry. Productive labor dramatically increased and the colony thrived.

Our Constitutional system is the oldest surviving democracy in the world, and one of the oldest surviving governments in the world. By guaranteeing that Sovereign Power is held by The People, rather than the government, the large group has no need for violent revolution in order to regain power, because we already have the power.

Now, our rights are quite an annoyance to the wanna be totalitarians, but, that's tough shit. In our Constitutional system you will never be able to force others to participate in your failed social experiments. If you want to form a voluntary system that is "communal, collective, collaborative, and cooperative" you are free to do so. So, what's stopping you? Go do it and show us all how "wonderful" it is.

Wrong.
First of all, communism and socialism do not require everything to be "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".
Second is that as long as it is kept local, then you can't get a distant and unresponsive group in control who does what they want.
Look at any union and you never see that happening because if those with delegated authority get out of hand, then they are voted out.
The only way they can then get abusive is if they no longer allow elections, and then they are not "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".

You are totally wrong.
Under socialism and communism, more efforts gets you more results.
The only thing socialism or communism does is ensure equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

When each person has their own plot of land and can grow what they want, that is socialism.
Under capitalism one person uses force to control all the land and not allow anyone else to grow anything.
There is no profit in everyone having their own plot, because then they are self sufficient and don't have to buy anything.

So do what you want. In our system you just can't force anyone to join in that doesn't want to, which apparently you are totally fine with, so knock yourself out.

The US is one of the most communist and socialist countries in the world...

Fake News.

... Everything good about the US is the collaborative, communal, and cooperative ways it allows equal opportunity, like public school, unemployment compensation, Social Security, etc....

Fake News. Those are simply things we chose chose to handle collectively rather than solely individually, there is nothing incompatible with our system and these endeavors.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The root cause of mass shootings in the US is the same root cause for ripping innocent drivers from their cars during a so-called peaceful protest or shoots a retired cop defending a small business during peaceful protests. God forbid that same root cause is the impetus for a Bernie Sanders supporter to shoot up a baseball field of defenseless Republican Congressmen.

 

[Rigby5]

Two graphs because the first only goes to 2015 and the second starts in 1982.

View attachment 260547
View attachment 260546

Americans have always owned guns. My father and his friends took rifles to school to go rabbit hunting afterwards. Machine guns and even cannons were owned by citizens through much of American history.

So what changed during the 1960’s to start this upward trend?

I’ll offer a theory as to what occurred. If you don’t like it, fine. But offer your own theory as to the catalyst that started this.

Since 1962 school children have no longer been told they are special and we are all created equal in the image of God. This was replaced by teaching children they are no more significant than a tree in a forest. Since then the number of Christians in America has been on the decline, replaced by people who now feel no embarrassment about wanting to murder babies after they are born.

The greatest trick Satan ever played was convincing people he does not exist.

If you don’t like the theory, fine. Then offer your own without the personal attacks.

The fatherless rate in the black community went from 17% to 77% current day..
Almost all the mass shooters came from a broken home .. fix the family

Yeah...let's look at the list of black mass shooters. I'll go first:
Columbine...um, no
Vegas, er no
McDonalds...nada
Cal tech...hhmm...nope
Aurora...no again
Sandy Hook...nein

Common theme here.....

Do you understand that of the 10,258 murders in the United States, the majority of the victims and the majority of the shooters are black males murdering other black males and that both victim and shooter are usually involved in crime? And come from broken homes?

Look at the murders by year and you see a spike during prohibition, and now with the war on drugs.
There is no reason to blame Blacks when it is Congress who created the incentive for turf wars, large amounts of unsecured cash, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

...
Your dope smoking commie lib professor isn't a trustworthy source. Do your own research. In the meantime if you want to live in a commune, you are free to set one up in America and live in it, but, our Constitution will prevent you from forcing us to participate in it with you, which if you are a Libertarian like you claim, you will be in hearty agreement with.

Do you respect my right to
- Own private property, enjoy the fruit of my labor, and leave my possessions to who I wish, by will?
- Freely Exchange my labor for pay, goods, or services, or to refuse to do so?
- To use lethal self defense to prevent the infliction of grave physical harm on myself or my loved ones?

You clearly know nothing of the Bolshevik revolution or the Anarchists.
They were identical in belief to the Libertarians, and the Libertarian would and should also be committed to violent revolution if the abuses of Russia were inflicted upon them...

Fake News. Communism and Socialism are the most murderous ideologies in world history. Libertarianism has zero murderous history.

... One of the main aspects of capitalist greed greatly harming this country is the way for profit insurance companies have taken over health care as a monopoly...

Yes. Our anti-trust laws enable us to break up harmful monopolies.

... We still need to fix that and have public health care...

A government monopoly? That's your "Libertarian solution"?

...As for inheritance, that is morally and ethically corrupt, that people are not equal by birth.
...

Fake News. There is nothing unethical about my working hard and leaving an inheritance to my children. If another blows everything and leaves nothing to their children that's their choice. My hard work passing on a benefit onto my children is neither unfair nor corrupt, it's simply the natural outworking of our respective choices.

But, if you want to set up a commune with voluntary participation and no use of wills, you are more than free to do so.

Wrong.
You don't know anything about socialism or communism.
For example, the best proof they work is how families are not run for profit.
And neither socialism nor communism has ever caused a single death, because there is not profit in them to cause violence.

Public health care has never been a monopoly anywhere.
It is a low cost safety net to keep other private providers from gouging.

And yes it is corrupt for you to pass on inheritance.
Why should your children be able to avoid working, just because of an accident of birth?

 

[Rigby5]

Two graphs because the first only goes to 2015 and the second starts in 1982.

View attachment 260547
View attachment 260546

Americans have always owned guns. My father and his friends took rifles to school to go rabbit hunting afterwards. Machine guns and even cannons were owned by citizens through much of American history.

So what changed during the 1960’s to start this upward trend?

I’ll offer a theory as to what occurred. If you don’t like it, fine. But offer your own theory as to the catalyst that started this.

Since 1962 school children have no longer been told they are special and we are all created equal in the image of God. This was replaced by teaching children they are no more significant than a tree in a forest. Since then the number of Christians in America has been on the decline, replaced by people who now feel no embarrassment about wanting to murder babies after they are born.

The greatest trick Satan ever played was convincing people he does not exist.

If you don’t like the theory, fine. Then offer your own without the personal attacks.

RWNJs on conservative hate radio fired up in the early 1970s, spreading racism, hatred, and conspiracy theories. Gotta have something to do with it.

Yeah, that's it. Conservative radio pissed off the left and the left went insane.

You may be right

Lol, it ain't "the left" that's gone nuts kid.

The El Paso shooter was an environmental extremist who hated immigrants because of the damage to the environment....he was also anti-corporation, and anti-automation....

the Dayton shooter....member of antifa, declared democrat and socialist who supported Elizabeth Warren and Sanders....

The left went nuts from the beginning......that is why they murdered close to 100 million people trying to create utopia...

About the only way to come up with 100 million is to add the right wing WWI, and WWII, together with the right wing Stalinism of Russia and China.

Are you stupid? Stalinism is not Right wing, neither were the socialists in Germany, china, cambodia, cuba ..........

25 million murdered by socialists in Russia, at least.

70 million or more murdered by socialists in China, at least.

1.7 million murdered in tiny cambodia by the socialists.....

Of course Stalinism is extremely right wing.
It is profit motivated for a wealthy elite.
Can't get any more right wing than that.
Russia, China, Cambodia, etc., were not at all even remotely socialist, because socialism requires a cooperative and collaborative democratic republic.
When you have a central dictatorship favoring the elite, that is right wing capitalism.

Wow...you are dumb...

Look up the Russian revolution.
It was started by many diverse groups, including socialists, communists, anarchists (libertarians), etc., but by around 1925 or so, all the actual socialists, communists, etc., had all been killed by Stalin, and Stalin was never anything but a right wing capitalist.

Fake News. Stalin was an avowed Communist and never allowed Free Markets

Fake news.
Stalin was a capitalists, and capitalist NEVER want a free market; instead they want monopolies like Stalin had.

 

[Rigby5]

In my lifetime, I have seen a transition in the shootings

In the 60s and 70s it was assasination
JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, Reagan, Ford..

In the 70s and 80s it became serial killings
Son of Sam, BTK, Zodiak killer, DC Sniper

After the 80s it became mass killers
Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Parkland

Change in family structure after the 70s, more broken homes with fatherless boys raised by single mothers, and the advent of social media and the spread of fame and techniques of mass shooters.

Doesn’t account for the transition from assasination to serial killer to mass killer

Kennedy's shooter.....father died before he was born......broken home....

There is perhaps nothing crazier in the modern historical profession than the refusal of people who really should know better to acknowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist, murdered JFK for political reasons. He was also unhinged, but the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Oswald was a Communist. He had previously defected to the USSR, but was allowed to return after growing disillusioned. He then became a partisan of the Cuban Revolution, and visited the Cuban embassy in Mexico, trying to defect to Cuba. He was very angry about hostile U.S. policy toward Cuba, and before he killed JFK tried to kill well-known anti-Communist Edwin Walker.

Yet somehow, every November, instead of reminding us of these facts, “mainstream” historians gaslight us and sometimes explicitly state that JFK was the victim of “right wing hate.” They then complain in other contexts about how conservatives purportedly won’t accept “reality.”

The left spent the 1950s and early 60s decrying McCarthyism as a “witch hunt,” i.e., not just that McCarthy was a lying demagogue (which he was), but that there was no domestic Communist threat, whatsoever. Acknowledging that a domestic Communist assassinated a beloved Democrat president ruins the witch-hunt narrative. That narrative has been a huge propaganda advantage for decades, and the won't let it go.

Huh..gotta admit..I never have once heard that JFK was a victim of Right-wing anything. I've always held the view that Oswald was acting as an agent of USSR...JFK had the Kremlin seriously worried that he was going to start..and win..a nuclear war. As we know now..the USSR was a paper tiger as regards its nuclear forces. JFK just wouldn't stop pushing.
So they had a mentally disturbed ex-marine defector with a Russian wife--who better to pull a trigger--Jack Ruby's killing Oswald clipped the loose end...and Ruby's death made it the perfect crime.

Anyone would have been better than someone with a Russian wife.
And Russia was not at all afraid of Kennedy.
Kennedy was much more leftist than the pentagon or the Dulles brothers.
Kennedy is the last person that Russia would have wanted dead.
Kennedy had given in to the Russians on the Cuban MIssile Crisis, and removed our nuclear ICBMs from Turkey.
Kennedy was the most pro-Russia president we ever had.

It doesn't change the fact that JKF was murdered by a communist.

No, Oswald was a US veteran who likely was pretending to want to work for Russia or Cuba, and saw through the ploy.
If he really was a communist, then he would have gone to a country with a large communist party, like Sweden, Italy, France, etc.

Obviously you don't want to believe that Communist murdered JFK, even though it is an historical fact.

How are you on the fact that a Palestinian murdered RFK?

There are lots of communists in the US and Europe.
Have you ever heard of one of them wanting to go to Russia or Cuba?
Of course not, because Russia and Cuba were never remotely communists.
There was nothing communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative.

Communism/Socialism doesn't work. It fails constantly, and with each failure we are assured that if only the sophomore class as Santa Cruz state could implement it, that it would be utopia. History, on the other hand, more strongly supports the finding that Utopians are Murderers.

Here are the facts:

In order to make sure everything is "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative" there is a small group that controls a large group, who claim they will wondrously use their authority only for the good of everyone. That's a lie. They use their power to secure wonderful things for themselves and those that are connected to the group that has assumed control.

Our Framers identified this and dispensed with it by explaining that for angels, seperation of power, checks and balances are not necessary, but men are not angels and cannot be trusted with unchecked power.

Now, back to your fraud. Once people realize that effort gets them nothing more, and nothing less than the slothful, everyone quits working, which puts the lifestyle of the small group at the top at risk. When they are at risk, they reach for the whip.

When a small group uses force to control a large group, at some point there will be violent revolution and the large group will slaughter the small group.

Interestingly, William Bradford brought both Communism/Socialism and Free Labor/Free Markets to the New World, and he got both out of the bible. The Plymouth Rock Colony first tried socialism, based on a passage in Acts, and it failed miserably, with empty stomachs, they starved and died. Interestingly, this community in Acts also fell on terrible times of want and had to be bailed out with charitable giving by the other Churches in Asia Minor.

Bradford, at a complete loss, but honest enough to admit error, went back to the scriptures, and found Jesus' parable of "The Talents" and Bradford changed approach, now each person had their own plot, they could produce as they wished, trade freely, and keep the gains of their industry. Productive labor dramatically increased and the colony thrived.

Our Constitutional system is the oldest surviving democracy in the world, and one of the oldest surviving governments in the world. By guaranteeing that Sovereign Power is held by The People, rather than the government, the large group has no need for violent revolution in order to regain power, because we already have the power.

Now, our rights are quite an annoyance to the wanna be totalitarians, but, that's tough shit. In our Constitutional system you will never be able to force others to participate in your failed social experiments. If you want to form a voluntary system that is "communal, collective, collaborative, and cooperative" you are free to do so. So, what's stopping you? Go do it and show us all how "wonderful" it is.

Wrong.
First of all, communism does not need or want EVERYTHING to be "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative".
Second is that in order to make ANYTHING "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative", you have to ensure no small elite group ever gets any power.
In order to have ANYTHING "communal, collective, collaborative, or cooperative", you need to decentralize as much as possible, so individuals have maximum influence and ability to access.
Communism and socialism are about equal access, not equal outcome.

If you knew any history, you would know that communism and socialism came up due to the industrial revolution.
It made products much more easily and cheaply, but required much more working capital in order to invest in all the machines. So the whole motivation for communism and socialism is to support cottage industries by helping individuals get access to mass production hardware.

And our country is not really much of a democracy, and there are thousands of better and older ones.
All primitives used to be democracies.
No one started to be dictators or kings until after currency, so one could buy a monopoly on the use of force.