| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
| Gun Control; Who is for it? Who is against it? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 26 2008, 03:06 PM (3,611 Views) | |
| Roxdog | Feb 26 2008, 03:06 PM Post #1 |
|
Just curious. I am largely against gun control in all its forms. I think people should be able to own any kind they want and as many as they want. I own many. If I could own ONE gun it would be this one: You? 
|
 |
 
|
| JFK | Feb 26 2008, 03:24 PM Post #2 |
|
But, but, but.... 
|
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 26 2008, 09:40 PM Post #3 |
|
The Myth of Nazi Gun Control, by N.A. Browne A commonly heard argument against gun control is that the National Socialists of Germany (the Nazis) used it in their ascent to and maintenance of power. A corollary argument is sometimes made that had the Jews (and presumably the other targeted groups) been armed, they could have fought off Nazi tyranny. This tract seeks to counter these misassumptions about Nazi gun control. Gun control, the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, was introduced to Germany in 1928 under the Weimar regime (there was no Right to Arms in the Constitution of 1919) in large part to disarm the nascent private armies, e.g. the Nazi SA (aka "the brownshirts"). The Weimar government was attempting to bring some stability to German society and politics (a classic "law and order" position). Violent extremist movements (of both the Left and Right) were actively attacking the young, and very fragile, democratic state. A government that cannot maintain some degree of public order cannot sustain its legitimacy. Nor was the German citizenry well grounded in Constitutional, republican government (as was evidenced in their choices at the ballot box). Gun control was not initiated at the behest or on behalf of the Nazis - it was in fact designed to keep them, or others of the same ilk, from executing a revolution against the lawful government. In the strictest sense, the law succeeded - the Nazis did not stage an armed coup. The 1928 law was subsequently extended in 1938 under the Third Reich (this action being the principal point in support of the contention that the Nazis were advocates of gun control). However, the Nazis were firmly in control of Germany at the time the Weapons Law of 1938 was created. Further, this law was not passed by a legislative body, but was promulgated under the dictatorial power granted Hitler in 1933. Obviously, the Nazis did not need gun control to attain power as they already (in 1938) possessed supreme and unlimited power in Germany. The only feasible argument that gun control favored the Nazis would be that the 1928 law deprived private armies of a means to defeat them. The basic flaw with this argument is that the Nazis did not seize power by force of arms, but through their success at the ballot box (and the political cunning of Hitler himself). Secondary considerations that arise are that gun ownership was not that widespread to begin with, and, even imagining such ubiquity the German people, Jews in particular, were not predisposed to violent resistance to their government. The Third Reich did not need gun control (in 1938 or at any time thereafter) to maintain their power. The success of Nazi programs (restoring the economy, dispelling socio-political chaos) and the misappropriation of justice by the apparatus of terror (the Gestapo) assured the compliance of the German people. Arguing otherwise assumes a resistance to Nazi rule that did not exist. Further, supposing the existance of an armed resistance also requires the acceptance that the German people would have rallied to the rebellion. This argument requires a total suspension of disbelief given everything we know about 1930s Germany. Why then did the Nazis introduce this program? As with most of their actions (including the formation of the Third Reich itself), they desired to effect a facade of legalism around the exercise of naked power. It is unreasonable to treat this as a normal part of lawful governance, as the rule of law had been entirely demolished in the Third Reich. Any direct quotations, of which there are several, that pronounce some beneficence to the Weapons Law should be considered in the same manner as all other Nazi pronouncements - absolute lies. (See Bogus Gun Control Quotes and endnote [1].) A more farfetched question is the hypothetical proposition of armed Jewish resistance. First, they were not commonly armed even prior to the 1928 Law. Second, Jews had seen pogroms before and had survived them, though not without suffering. They would expect that this one would, as had the past ones, eventually subside and permit a return to normalcy. Many considered themselves "patriotic Germans" for their service in the first World War. These simply were not people prepared to stage violent resistance. Nor were they alone in this mode of appeasement. The defiance of "never again" is not so much a warning to potential oppressors as it is a challenge to Jews to reject the passive response to pogrom. Third, it hardly seems conceivable that armed resistance by Jews (or any other target group) would have led to any weakening of Nazi rule, let alone a full scale popular rebellion; on the contrary, it seems more likely it would have strengthened the support the Nazis already had. Their foul lies about Jewish perfidy would have been given a grain of substance. To project backward and speculate thus is to fail to learn the lesson history has so painfully provided. The simple conclusion is that there are no lessons about the efficacy of gun control to be learned from the Germany of the first half of this century. It is all too easy to forget the seductive allure that fascism presented to all the West, bogged down in economic and social morass. What must be remembered is that the Nazis were master manipulators of popular emotion and sentiment, and were disdainful of people thinking for themselves. There is the danger to which we should pay great heed. Not fanciful stories about Nazi's seizing guns. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 27 2008, 08:37 AM Post #4 |
|
Sorry Arbor, I believe my mom ( May her soul rest in peace ) much more than your story... Her town was one of the frontlines between Germany and Russia not too long after Hitler took power. Her house was searched ( and possessions plundered ) for weapons many times by both sides. If you want history to repeat itself in all it's gory details, all the more power to you. Perhaps it can be one of your limbs dangling from the power lines this time around. Or perhaps a UN soldier can blow the crap out of your shitter while committing suicide via hand grenade because he can't take the thought of seeing the people who nursed him back to health as the enemy, and getting orders to return to battle tommorrow.... A Russian soldier in my mom's case. The best offense against tyranny is a strong defense. The best defense is an armed civilian population. Our forefathers knew that. You choose to ignore that. That is your choice, but when the shit hits the fan, don't expect any help. |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 10:24 AM Post #5 |
|
The point of the article that I posted is that all the guns in the world dont matter if a whole society is brainwashed. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 27 2008, 10:31 AM Post #6 |
|
When the shit hits the fan the brainwashing becomes unraveled rather quickly. That is why they are pushing for gun control now. |
|
|
|
| blarney fife | Feb 27 2008, 10:34 AM Post #7 |
|
RCF...Roxdog Cannon Fodder. The bombs will be dropping in 5, 4, 3,........... Edited by blarney fife, Feb 27 2008, 01:15 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Roxdog | Feb 27 2008, 12:26 PM Post #8 |
|
So blame yourself and all the other brainwashed idiots, not the people that know what is actually going on, and their legally owned property....that article is rhetorical garbage. "And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand. The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst; the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!" - The Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 01:04 PM Post #9 |
|
You think there is a secret society of Illumanity Freemasons out to control the world, thee are secret concentration camps built all over the country to inprison all disenters once "martial law" comes, that the WTC was destroyed by a secret Mossad/DOD/Neo-Con cabal, that the DOD is secretly spraying chemical weapons out of the backs of commercial airliners, and you think Im the one who is brainwashed? Wow dude. Just..wow. |
|
|
|
| Roxdog | Feb 27 2008, 01:17 PM Post #10 |
|
, Um, Ive never said anything like that. You are the one saying they are communicating with you via the Sci Fi channel.
Rex84. Google it.
I've never said anything like that. I knew you were stupid but I never figured you for a liar...
Ha...chemtrails? Please do point out where I have ever talked about chemtrails. YOu are so pathetic...lol
Liar, dude. You are a liar. |
|
|
|
| Roxdog | Feb 27 2008, 01:18 PM Post #11 |
|
You're doing a great job of ignoring me...lol |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 05:02 PM Post #12 |
|
Allllllrighty then. And yes, I chose to not ignore the bully, but expose him. Please point to where I mention a "secret society of Illuminati Freemasons trying to take over the world." "Yesterday afternoon, all they showed was disaster movies dealing with meteors and nuclear war on Sci-Fi Channel. Are they trying to tell us something? Has NASA discovered a huge asteroid thats gonna hit the Earth, and dont wanna tell the people? Is nuclear war from Russia upon us? Im really really worried. " You, my friend, are a liar. Edited by arbor, Feb 27 2008, 05:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 27 2008, 06:41 PM Post #13 |
|
ROTFLMAO... You may want to read that thread again Arbor. - http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/111810/1/ Wanna share some of what you arer smokin' ?
|
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 07:03 PM Post #14 |
|
Dude, what the hell are YOU smoking? I made one post on that topic, and it was the introduction, which is "Yesterday afternoon, all they showed was disaster movies dealing with meteors and nuclear war on Sci-Fi Channel. Are they trying to tell us something? Has NASA discovered a huge asteroid thats gonna hit the Earth, and dont wanna tell the people? Is nuclear war from Russia upon us? Im really really worried. " Now, JFK, where do you see the words "Illuminati", "Freemason", "secret society", "or taking over the world"?????? Crack cocaine. Its kills your brain cells man..it kills the brain cells!! p.s. You just got schooled!!!! Edited by arbor, Feb 27 2008, 07:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 27 2008, 08:12 PM Post #15 |
|
OK, I misread your post... I took it as your accusation of Roxdog talking about the illumanati, freemason, and secret societies taking over the world in your thread. Perhaps next time you can be clearer. As far as your accusation of me doing coke and crack, never tried crack and have no intention of trying it. Cocaine only makes me grind my teeth... at least that was the effect 25+ years ago when I last tried it.... A total waste of good money it was. P.S. I seriously doubt you could school me in anything. You are to intellectually challanged. |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 09:13 PM Post #16 |
|
If I was intellectually challenged, I doubt they would let me do what I do at work. But I was joking about the crack thing. I would never say that unless it was a joke or if I hated your guts, which I do not. =) Edited by arbor, Feb 27 2008, 09:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 27 2008, 09:43 PM Post #17 |
|
OK, I'm curious, what do you do for work ? |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 27 2008, 10:28 PM Post #18 |
|
i wont be specific, but i deal with construction projects. |
|
|
|
| Roxdog | Feb 28 2008, 01:43 PM Post #19 |
|
Um, what did I lie about again? Can YOU point out where I said anything about what you asserted since YOU are the one that mentioned it? Thanks... |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 28 2008, 05:31 PM Post #20 |
|
What do you suppose "they" refers to? Edited by arbor, Feb 28 2008, 07:16 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Roxdog | Feb 29 2008, 11:44 AM Post #21 |
|
Redacted....lol
Edited by Roxdog, Feb 29 2008, 11:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 29 2008, 06:18 PM Post #22 |
|
A nation without some gun control would be a nation out of control. You cannot possibly have a safe, civil society if everyone and their uncle can buy an AK-47, a Glock, and an M-16, without any restrictions, checks, permits, or training. Now, you could have anarchy, the law of the jungle, only the strongest survive, if thats what you want. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 29 2008, 06:38 PM Post #23 |
|
Yep... that is their intent. |
|
|
|
| arbor | Feb 29 2008, 06:51 PM Post #24 |
|
please show me one nation, in history, that has allowed all people to possess any weapon they chose..no strings attached. this nation does not exist. know why? because it would be impossible for such a society to survive. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Feb 29 2008, 06:53 PM Post #25 |
|
The greatest nation on earth... before it was subverted. I am talking about America pre 1913. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Current Politics · Next Topic » |
10:21 AM Nov 23
