A tool (boot, glove, knife, hammer, etc) is easily both the means of production and personal property. The distinction is in effect meaningless.

A hammer isn’t a factory. There is a distinction, unless you don’t think industrialization had any effect on society.

The rhetoric around the means of production was initially in reference to slaves. Communism was an offshoot of the abolition movement not in reference to at the time minimal number of factories. And in that context people did abandon slavery.

Even today factories aren’t the means of production, they don’t make houses that’s mostly people with hand tools. Nor do they make food or mine resources etc.

What point are you trying to make here? Marx’s writings were based on his observations of factories and industry in England at the time, among other things.

Marx was not the origin of communism. Which is why he was credited with the Marxism not communism.

The context for his writing wasn’t simply factory conditions being so so bad he created an ideology from whole cloth.

This entire thread was in response to police stealing in the US, and someone responded referencing communists. Given they context, they were clearly talking about Marxism. The guy you responded to explicitly mentioned that. And then you go off on some other interpretation of the same words, clearly misinterpreting what they posted to argue some other point.

Assuming someone misspoke to support your point is a bit much.

That is an imaginary distinction which only exists to anti-capitalists to have their cake and it eat too, along with a continuation of their ongoing torrid love-affair of creating their own sophistic definitions. Everyone else says more or less "that is private property you fool!".