snopes.com Post new topic  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » Archived Forums » History Archive » Hitler's Gun Registration (Page 0)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Hitler's Gun Registration
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I believe this is a misattribution. (Urban Legend.)

But also, remember that in Berlin, as recently as 1929, there had been running gun battles in the streets between various factions.

Gun control, in Berlin, in the 1930's, was no more controversial than it was in Chicago at the same time, as people grew sick of Capone-style gun battles.

Silas

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ursa Major
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by toddvh:
yes,it was that way. [Eek!]

Do you have a cite?

Here's one that debunks it.

As that linked site points out, there was no need for Hitler to impose gun registration on Germany since the Wiemar Republic had already done it years earlier.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Drag, the Magic Puffin
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 14 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Oh no!! The Nazis supported gun registration! Therefore, all gun control must be evil! Hitler liked dogs and classical music too...No more puppies and Mozart for me!!

This is why I HATE when people reference Hitler when they want to argue against something. Sure, he was evil, but that doesn't mean that everything he ever did or said was inherently bad. If people have a valid point to make, can't they support it with a more educated, reasoned citation? If the point is so valid, why do they have to go all the way down to Hitler to get a good quote?

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
pinqy
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 01 posted      Profile for pinqy   E-mail pinqy   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
See, but that's why I like the Nazis. If you want to emphasize how evil something is, you just point out that that's what the Nazis did/would do. No other group sets the benchmark as well or has such brand recognition. Sure I could say "censorship, huh. You know who else liked to censor the press...the Khmer Rouge." It just doesn't have the same ring to it. And there have been too many Communist countries and too many different types of Communism to try and say "the Communists" when what you really mean is Stalin. Nope, you got to stick with the good old Nazis.

pinqy

--------------------
Don't Forget!
Winter Solstice Hanukkah Christmas Kwanzaa & Gurnenthar's Ascendance Are Coming!

Posts: 8671 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
TokyoTakarazuka
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 303 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
One of Cecil's cronies discusses this matter and the quote at the following website...

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mhitlergun.html
quote:

"...the earlier Weimar government had already passed gun registration laws. When I asked Cramer about his reasearch, he said, "The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power." In other words, they didn't need to pass additional laws. The Nazis did pass a weapons law in 1938, but that only added restrictions to the previous law, especially for Jews and other "non-citizens.""

quote:

"Cramer says the Nazis did benefit significantly from gun control in Eastern Europe in terms of "the inability of their victims to fight back." He cites The Holocaust, a book by Leni Yahil (translated by Ina Friedman and Haya Galai, Oxford University Press, 1990), which has a chapter discussing armed resistance by Jews, including rebellions with just a few firearms and a lot of courage. In addition, he talks about Israel Guttman's book, Resistance: The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, which discusses the difficulty the Jews faced in obtaining weapons."

quote:

"To summarize, Hitler did "effect total gun control," but only for the Jews, and only after his regime had been in power for several years. For the rest of the population he relied on laws already in place. To focus exclusively on gun control is to lose sight of the larger picture. The Nazis controlled EVERYTHING. If you went through the Bill of Rights you'd find that most of them were abridged in Hitler's Germany. Did the loss of one particular right have more impact than the others? That's a question we here at the Mailbag can't answer. I doubt anybody can."


IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Fizzman1970
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 303 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Thanks for the info and links. This made for some interesting reading. I might have to read one or two of the books listed.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
TokyoTakarazuka
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 03 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Censorship, huh. You know who else liked to censor the press... Joseph Désiré Mobutu Sese Seko Kuku Ngbendo Wa Za Banga!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Publius
Happy Holly Days


Icon 01 posted      Profile for Publius     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, just for that you're not getting his money.
Posts: 1640 | From: New Haven, CT | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Hamilton Burger
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Drag, the Magic Puffin:
Oh no!! The Nazis supported gun registration! Therefore, all gun control must be evil! Hitler liked dogs and classical music too...No more puppies and Mozart for me!!

This is so disingenuous. The fact of the matter is that Hitler actively used Germany's gun control laws to suppress internal dissent. To my knowledge, neither puppies nor Mozart were a contributing factor in the Nazi Party's rise to power.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
pinqy
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 01 posted      Profile for pinqy   E-mail pinqy   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hamilton Burger:
quote:
Originally posted by Drag, the Magic Puffin:
Oh no!! The Nazis supported gun registration! Therefore, all gun control must be evil! Hitler liked dogs and classical music too...No more puppies and Mozart for me!!

This is so disingenuous. The fact of the matter is that Hitler actively used Germany's gun control laws to suppress internal dissent. To my knowledge, neither puppies nor Mozart were a contributing factor in the Nazi Party's rise to power.
No, it's not disingenuous...it's pointing out the logical fallacy of Argumentum ad hominem.

Yes, Hitler did use gun control laws to his advantage. This does not mean all (or any) gun control laws are bad in and of themselves. Hitler (and Stalin and Mao Tse Tung) used public education to indoctrinate youth and government control of education contributed greatly to the success of the Nazi/Communist Parties and their control of the populace. This does not mean that public education is a bad thing.

To claim that something is bad because somoeone evil supported it is an argumentum ad hominem. Particular gun control laws are good or bad based on their relative merits...what Hitler thought of them is as irrelevant as his opinions on public education, Mozart (actually, he was a big fan of Wagner and Holst) or puppy dogs.

pinqy

--------------------
Don't Forget!
Winter Solstice Hanukkah Christmas Kwanzaa & Gurnenthar's Ascendance Are Coming!

Posts: 8671 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Hamilton Burger
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pinqy:
To claim that something is bad because somoeone evil supported it is an argumentum ad hominem. Particular gun control laws are good or bad based on their relative merits...what Hitler thought of them is as irrelevant as his opinions on public education, Mozart (actually, he was a big fan of Wagner and Holst) or puppy dogs.

In this instance, those who oppose gun control are not simply claiming that gun control is bad because someone evil supported it. They are claiming that it was a key circumstance that allowed the Nazi Party to obtain and keep power. Puppies and Mozart are not bad just because Hitler liked them. And gun control is not necessarily bad because Hitler liked it. But gun control played a central role in the Nazi regime, and this fact can rightly be considered when debating gun control.

This argument is plainly not an instance of a argumentum ad hominem fallacy. It is instead a perfectly logical analysis of whether gun control is a necessary prerequisite for the rise of totaliarian regimes.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Ursa Major
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hamilton Burger:

It is instead a perfectly logical analysis of whether gun control is a necessary prerequisite for the rise of totaliarian regimes.

A theory thoroughly trashed by the prevelance of firearms in Bathist Iraq, BTW.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hamilton Burger:
But gun control played a central role in the Nazi regime, and this fact can rightly be considered when debating gun control.

*EVERYTHING* was controlled by the Nazis. Gun control was no more "central" to the regime than their controls on travel and speech. They were totalitarians; they exercised complete control over all activities.

There are plenty of good reasons to oppose gun control. But "Because the Nazis did it" is not one of them.

Silas

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
pinqy
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 01 posted      Profile for pinqy   E-mail pinqy   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
In this instance, those who oppose gun control are not simply claiming that gun control is bad because someone evil supported it.
Ummm, yes, they are. Go back to the OP and find an actual argument there. The entire point of the false quotation, and the reason many people innocently passed it on, was to say "Hitler supported gun registration, therefore it is bad." The fact that many countries without strict gun control have been totalitarian and many countries with it have not sinks a major hole in the "logical analysis of whether gun control is a necessary prerequisite for the rise of totaliarian regimes." Clearly it is not.

This is why my arguments against strict gun control do not even touch the subject of means to resist a dictatorship. I don't consider it even relevent. Pure Guerilla warfare has never been effective (to my knowledge) in any Civil War, and if I'm wrong and it has, there was an outside power supplying guns. It can be effective against an occupying power but only if backed up by external aid (Spain 1809-1811, Afghanistan 1979-1989).

pinqy

--------------------
Don't Forget!
Winter Solstice Hanukkah Christmas Kwanzaa & Gurnenthar's Ascendance Are Coming!

Posts: 8671 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Southern Air Pirate
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 101 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
The whole association of an evil group or person with an evil idea is a psychological one. If you don't believe me think of all the movies that you have seen and always seen the bad guys wearing black hats (or a dark uniform) and the good guys are in white. That is why when some people bring up the Hitler quote about gun control. Hilter is equal to one of the most evil persons and ideas in the modern times. For some gun control is an evil idea. To assoicate the two thoughts together is part of the psychological effect of swaying people to your side.

With regards to Guerilla warfare and the people's ability to resist thier current form of government. The most succesful guerrilla campagins that I can think of were in the Carriberran and South American from 1803 through to the 1880's. Most of those were the removal of the European Imperial regimes by the people. Most of them with out support short of the US employing the Monroe Doctrine during those revoultions to keep the Europeans from keeping these colonies.

The whole idea behind the Second Amendment, as recoginzed by the founding fathers (as seen in the Anti-Federalist and Federalist Papers), and missed by both sides of this debate; was to plant the seed with in the government that although there is a peaceful way to replace the government. There is still another way if the rise of dictorships or some other form of tyrannary starts to rise in the government. This was always Thomas Jefferson's thought with this amendment. Also remember that the battles of Lexington and Concord during the Revoultion was the attempt by the British American Forces attempt to sieze the Massachuettes Militia's Arms and powder. To date it has only been employed in this nation twice once was during the Shay's Whiskey rebellion which was put down peacefully by Washington addressing the complaints of the leaders of the rebellion. The other was the American Civil War. That war came at a high cost to the USA. In terms of not only people and money, but also morals, ethics, and pyschological effect to the population. Where war was once seen as something fun to go and see with a date and a picnic (see the first Bull Run) it was instead viewed as something horrible and horrorific not fit for man or beast. Luckily for us another civil war has not come yet and the nation was brought back together rather quickly.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Southern Air Pirate:
The whole association of an evil group or person with an evil idea is a psychological one. If you don't believe me think of all the movies that you have seen and always seen the bad guys wearing black hats (or a dark uniform) and the good guys are in white.



I'm reminded of the Mad Magazine parody of Star Wars. ("But, wait, these guys are in white armor: that means they're the good guys, right?")

But, seriously, I agree: the demonization of the "bad guy" is a tool that probably goes farther back in history than written language.

quote:

The whole idea behind the Second Amendment, as recoginzed by the founding fathers (as seen in the Anti-Federalist and Federalist Papers), and missed by both sides of this debate; was to plant the seed with in the government that although there is a peaceful way to replace the government. There is still another way if the rise of dictorships or some other form of tyrannary starts to rise in the government.



I agree. And, in the context of the technology that existed c. 1750, it makes sense...

quote:

To date it has only been employed in this nation twice once was during the Shay's Whiskey rebellion which was put down peacefully by Washington addressing the complaints of the leaders of the rebellion. The other was the American Civil War.



And the Civil War, alas, demonstrated once and for all that the notion of personal, private small arms was irrelevant. That war could only be fought by massed infantry, with artillery support, and with cavalry scouting. It was one of the first "combined arms" wars.

It was also one of the first "massive conscription" wars, where the volunteer spirit of the Minutemen was subordinated to the industrialization of war.

There is a "thought experiment" that I sometimes propose: we know of the tragic uprising of the Warsaw Ghetto against the Nazis. Question: what if someone -- either the Russians or the British -- had managed to airdrop rifles and pistols and ammunition to the resistance? What if everyone in the resistance had personal small armament?

Could the resistance have won? Could they have prevailed over the Nazis?

In my opinion, the answer is obvious: no. They could have made the situation much, much nastier for the Nazis, but, in short order, Hitler would have pulled up reserve units and poured them into Warsaw.

A vengeful soul could find some satisfaction in the eventual butcher's bill. But the uprising would have been suppressed, and history would still rank it as a heroic failure.

Did the heroic resistance at the Alamo really change the course of history? Or was it a tragic misallocation of resources?

(Of course, this is all from the 20-20 advantage of hindsight...)

quote:

Luckily for us another civil war has not come yet and the nation was brought back together rather quickly.

It's scary how close we might have come in the Hayes/Tilden stolen election! If Tilden had been a hot-head and a firebrand, he might have prompted another bloodbath.

It is a sign of how "domesticated" we are today that, in the "stolen election" of 2000 A.D., there was never any talk of violence.

(We could at least have tarred and feathered a few election commissioners! Sheesh! Where is our sense of tradition!) [Wink]

Silas (I'd run 'em out of town on a rail...but I don't know where the heck to find a rail!) Sparkhammer

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
The Spider in the Ointment
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fizzman1970:
Was wondering if this was a true statement.

If there was gun registration, Hitler wouldn't have been able to mount the Munich Putsch, or have private armies such as the SA...
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
variable
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
If there was gun registration, Hitler wouldn't have been able to mount the Munich Putsch, or have private armies such as the SA...
As noted above, gun registration had been introduced in Germany by the Weimar government already. So there was gun registration while the SA was being put together, and very likely there was a gun registration law when the failed Beer Hall Putsch came and went.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
The Spider in the Ointment
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Obviously not enough since both the Communists and Nazis were having gun battles in the streets.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Drag, the Magic Puffin
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "gun registration" mean simply that? Couldn't those gunfights have been fought with registered guns?
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
variable
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Exactly. Just because a gun is registered doesn't mean that the owner is under some extra compulsion not to use it; the only use gun registration really has is for tracking down the owners of guns and the number of guns in circulation.

The relative merits of this aren't really relevant to this particular issue, so note I'm not trying to start a gun control discussion. But, just because people have guns and are using them doesn't mean that there is no gun registration, as happened in Wiemar Germany.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
The Spider in the Ointment
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Drag, the Magic Puffin:
Couldn't those gunfights have been fought with registered guns?

It would be a hell of a lot easier to "unregister" those guns though. People with a history of violence shouldn't be allowed a licence.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Spider in the Ointment:
quote:
Originally posted by Drag, the Magic Puffin:
Couldn't those gunfights have been fought with registered guns?

It would be a hell of a lot easier to "unregister" those guns though. People with a history of violence shouldn't be allowed a licence.
Collective judgement? I thought that was out of favor these days...

(And...how many European nations have a longer history of violence than the Scots?)

(Um...that last comment not meant seriously!)

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Fusca 1976
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 01 posted      Profile for Fusca 1976   E-mail Fusca 1976   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
Collective judgement? I thought that was out of favor these days...

(And...how many European nations have a longer history of violence than the Scots?)

(Um...that last comment not meant seriously!)

Hm... Silas, I believe Will meant "people" as in the plural of person, not as a collective. And "history" as in 'given Tyson's history, it looks probable'. In other words, I think he was referring to Germans with a "history" - a police sheet - of violence, ie, street brawls.

Luís Henrique

Posts: 4498 | From: Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by back to the box:
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
Collective judgement? I thought that was out of favor these days...

(And...how many European nations have a longer history of violence than the Scots?)

(Um...that last comment not meant seriously!)

Hm... Silas, I believe Will meant "people" as in the plural of person, not as a collective. And "history" as in 'given Tyson's history, it looks probable'. In other words, I think he was referring to Germans with a "history" - a police sheet - of violence, ie, street brawls.

Luís Henrique

I'm completely confused by this response. Isn't blaming "Germans" for violence a form of collective judgement?

Mike Tyson is an individual. Given his record of violent crimes, I would be very willing to deny him the right to own firearms.

But the "Germans" are a nation, composed a millions of people of every possible variety.

I honestly don't comprehend what you or Spider are trying to say.

Silas

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
pinqy
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 01 posted      Profile for pinqy   E-mail pinqy   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
I'm completely confused by this response. Isn't blaming "Germans" for violence a form of collective judgement?

But Spider did not blame Germans, as a people, for violence. In fact, no one but you brought up collective blame. Spider in the Ointment wrote: "People (Persons) with a history of violence shouldn't be allowed a licence." It seems you somehow inferred that he meant "A People" and that Luís meant "The Germans" instead of "(individual) Germans."

pinqy

--------------------
Don't Forget!
Winter Solstice Hanukkah Christmas Kwanzaa & Gurnenthar's Ascendance Are Coming!

Posts: 8671 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Feb 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Jaime Vargas Sanchez
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 01 posted      Profile for Jaime Vargas Sanchez   E-mail Jaime Vargas Sanchez   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Silas, you're not sleeping very well lately, do you?

Jaime (that was an earnets question) Vargas

--------------------
"Everyone has problems. They only vary in design" - Mama Duck

Posts: 4988 | From: Spain | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
The Spider in the Ointment
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by back to the box:
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
Collective judgement? I thought that was out of favor these days...

(And...how many European nations have a longer history of violence than the Scots?)

(Um...that last comment not meant seriously!)

Hm... Silas, I believe Will meant "people" as in the plural of person, not as a collective. And "history" as in 'given Tyson's history, it looks probable'. In other words, I think he was referring to Germans with a "history" - a police sheet - of violence, ie, street brawls.

Luís Henrique

Yes THANK YOU LUIS!!!!!!

I'm talking about the Communists and Nazis who were shooting up each other, not the whole damn German nation...

If I was talking of the German Nation, as a whole, I would have said "A People with a history of violence shouldn't be allowed licences."

Please think!

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Neither Spider nor Luís were completely clear in what they said; the specific language led me to believe they were referring to groups of people.

After all, that's what laws do... Laws are rules that apply to the collective as well as the individual. No Californian is allowed to own a fully-automatic weapon. (Well, actually, there are exceptions, but they're quite rare!) It's a law that affects "Californians," as individuals and as a political entity.

Many states also have rules that prohibit gun ownership to individuals who have a criminal record. But that isn't what was being discussed....

Jaime: It isn't so much that I'm sleeping poorly, but perhaps that I'm drinking too well...

Silas

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
ULTRAGLORIA
Markdown, the Herald Angels Sing


Icon 01 posted      Profile for ULTRAGLORIA     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Whenever I've seen the original quote, or one of it's offspring, its been in the context of:

The Nazis had gun registration, and that meant it was easy for them to take all the guns away from the populace (or Jews), and that meant the Germans (or Jews) couldn't resist when Hitler took over.

And there are a lot of logical falicies in there. Starting with any significant percentage of the populace actually wanting to overthrow Hitler at any point until the war started to completely fail.

Think about it. What if Bush or Clinton had taken over our government like Hitler did? What significant percentage of our population would have rushed out with their guns and tried to overthrow him? And would they have succeeded?

ULTRAGOTHA

--------------------
A Lie can run around the world before the Truth can get its boots on. - Terry Pratchett

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions; but everyone is not entitled to their own facts. - Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Posts: 2495 | From: Connecticut | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
variable
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
What if Bush or Clinton had taken over our government like Hitler did?
In a somewhat twisted manner of speaking, one of them did. Hitler was appointed chancellor by the president, Hindenberg (who was to remain president well into the thirties) in 1932. The nazis did not have a majority in the vote, but had a large enough percentage to convince Hindenberg to form a new governmental coalition with these new reactionaries.

Bush was also, in essence, appointed by a current governing body and it remains, to this day, not entirely clear what the actual election results were either through our bizarre electoral college system or through popular vote.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, ran out of the house with a gun waving.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
First of Two
The Bills of St. Mary's


Icon 01 posted      Profile for First of Two   Author's Homepage   E-mail First of Two   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
That's because Conservatives would only shoot liberal presidential usurpers, while liberals simply don't have guns.

--------------------
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide." - Jerry Pournelle

Posts: 14567 | From: Pennsylvania | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Fusca 1976
Angels Wii Have Heard on High


Icon 01 posted      Profile for Fusca 1976   E-mail Fusca 1976   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
Many states also have rules that prohibit gun ownership to individuals who have a criminal record. But that isn't what was being discussed....

If I properly understand what Will stated, he was trying to say exactly this:

quote:
gathered from Spider in the Ointment through telepathy:
Though it would possible for Nazis and Communists to struggle in German streets with registered weapons, it would be possible for the German government to take back the registrations from the people involved in these struggles, because the German government wouldn't allow people with criminal records ("history of violence") to keep and bear arms.

To me, this seems to be what was being discussed: the effectiveness of gun bans as crime (or civil strife) deterrents.

I tried to read it your way, but I couldn't understand how you read "a people" instead of "people" (or "the Germans" instead of "Germans" in my post). Certainly those articles weren't present in our posts.

Luís Henrique

Posts: 4498 | From: Brasília, Distrito Federal, Brazil | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by back to the box:
If I properly understand what Will stated, he was trying to say exactly this:

quote:
gathered from Spider in the Ointment through telepathy:
Though it would possible for Nazis and Communists to struggle in German streets with registered weapons, it would be possible for the German government to take back the registrations from the people involved in these struggles, because the German government wouldn't allow people with criminal records ("history of violence") to keep and bear arms.

To me, this seems to be what was being discussed: the effectiveness of gun bans as crime (or civil strife) deterrents.

1) I could have a great deal of fun with telepathic interpretation... For instance, telepathically interpreting what you said, you favor mandatory intravenous injections of chocolate milk for all writers of Star Trek "slash" fiction... [Wink]

2) By the time you have open factional warfare in the streets -- parts of Los Angeles come to mind -- mere registration programs won't work. You need tougher measures.

3) Since violence tends to be an "area" effect, targeting an area for gun control might make sense. Targeting individuals *ahead of time* makes sense; i.e., disallowing gun ownership to convicted felons. Targeting individuals *after the fact* is something that all law-enforcement bodies, everywhere, already do.

(i.e., if you shoot someone, the police will try to find you and arrest you, and they will take away the weapon involved in the crime.)

So, if this last is what you're trying to describe, it's already what we *all* do, and I don't know of anyone who has any complaint about it.

Silas (sober as a judge)

--------------------
When on music's mighty pinion, souls of men to heaven rise,
Then both vanish earth's dominion, man is native to the skies.

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
The Spider in the Ointment
The Red and the Green Stamps


Icon 01 posted            Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by back to the box:

quote:
gathered from Spider in the Ointment through telepathy:
Though it would possible for Nazis and Communists to struggle in German streets with registered weapons, it would be possible for the German government to take back the registrations from the people involved in these struggles, because the German government wouldn't allow people with criminal records ("history of violence") to keep and bear arms.

To me, this seems to be what was being discussed: the effectiveness of gun bans as crime (or civil strife) deterrents.

I tried to read it your way, but I couldn't understand how you read "a people" instead of "people" (or "the Germans" instead of "Germans" in my post). Certainly those articles weren't present in our posts.

Luís Henrique

-----------------

Yes, that's pretty much it.

I'd add one thing.
"Not only could registrations be withdrawn from the offenders, but could be withheld from potential offenders much more easily on the basis of past misdemeanours".

"By the time you have open factional warfare in the streets -- parts of Los Angeles come to mind -- mere registration programs won't work. You need tougher measures."

Chicken and egg problem.

LA is partly so bad because there was no gun registration, which in turn makes it harder to enforce. Not to mention years to stamp out.

In the case of LA, registration would allow caches to be raided and destroyed. I suspect those operating on the wrong side of the law would be less likely to want to register, and so more likely to be prosecuted.

"Targeting individuals *ahead of time* makes sense; i.e., disallowing gun ownership to convicted felons. Targeting individuals *after the fact* is something that all law-enforcement bodies, everywhere, already do."

There would have to be an amnesty, or a time period to sign up. People should have due warning.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2