Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Gun Control Works
- Thread starter Chief_Quabachi
- Start date
WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?
Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.
Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Boy,it's a real shame they couldn't provide the number of ALL of the PRIVATELY OWNED guns that the Czars, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, The Emperor, Tojo, Pol Pot and the REST CONFISCATED if they were going to produce this video.
I mean SURELY if they are able to count the number of dead, they can EASILY count the number of guns, right?!
BankShot
The Kleuh Level
Bring 'em to Florida and we'll get an accurate count.
:lol:
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/mar/13/fla-politician-resigns-57-charged-scandal/
:lol:
http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/mar/13/fla-politician-resigns-57-charged-scandal/
Daveinth
The Wade Level
Booooooring .
D
dr. bucket
Guest
hitler only took guns away from the jews; he never confiscated them from the general population. there was a registration law but that was passed during the weimar republic before hitler came to power. you can look it up.
it's one of the great myths of history
it's one of the great myths of history
Actually, I think Hitler EXPANDED the ability to own weapons; unless you were Jewish.
Prior to 1938, Gun restriction laws applied to all guns and ammunition. The 1938 revisions introduced restrictions specifically reiterating the prohibition for Jews to hold firearms, but made it easier for one party nazi regime to gain acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as was the possession of ammunition."
The legal age at which guns could be purchased was lowered from 20 to 18.
Permits were valid for three years, rather than one year.
The groups of people who were exempt from the acquisition permit requirement expanded. Holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted.
Last edited:
Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
...and IF the Jews would have had guns maybe millions of them wouldn't have been slaughtered. There damn sure would have been some Krauts taken out trying to round the Jews up like cattle.
Well, when you see how Adolph and his party PLANNED it; guns wouldn't have been as much of a factor as some think.
The nazis removed the intellectuals, the leadership, the intelligentsia very early into their reign.
The jewish refugees/displaced persons in Warsaw fought one HELLUVA fight and were essentially destroyed.
The Bielski Brothers are a great example of resisting...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bielski_brothers
America today is not Germany ~1928
The video, just like every other political propaganda video out there tells half truths and only gives what they want you to hear to get those that are already on their side fired up.
It is pretty simple and obvious. If a government (no matter if it is an empire, dictatorship, monarchy, democratically elected, whatever) wants to control the people or a specific group of the people throughout history they take away their weapons. Simple as that, they did it in the Roman Empire, they did it in the Ottoman Empire, they did it in China, Japan and every other country in the world. They take from the people they wish to oppress. Hitler took away Jewish Leadership and took away weapons. He took away the Jewish people's abilities to organize themselves and to protect themselves. In Japan for centuries, the Emperor made it impossible and punishable by death for any person not a member of the warrior class to own a sword. In Russia the Czar and then Stalin made it even worse, they took away all abilities of the people to protect themselves (or fight back). Oppression of a people starts with control and you can't control a people that can organize and can protect themselves. Whether swords, bows, guns, horses, whatever was the weapon at the time.
Now, it is most certainly sensationalism to think that anyone is suggesting that "guns et al" should be banned in the US. But, any government, again no matter which type, in over 5,000 years of civilization has proven that when an inch is given, the government (those in power) want a mile. Do I need an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine? No, should I have the right as a law abiding citizen to have it, yes! Do I have the need to own a automatic shotgun that is modified to hold 15 shells, NOPE! But do I have the right as a law abiding citizen to have it, yes! Should the government infringe on my right to do so...NO! Simple as that! The constitution protects my rights and liberties. Should there mandatory background checks...absolutely! Should there be waiting periods..yes! Should there even potentially be limits on the number of guns or rifles I can buy a month...I am open to that idea. I certainly don't need to purchase 15 guns in a month. Should gun shows be regulated better, without question!
This is not all that complicated of an issue. Should firearms be banned? NO! Should some firearms be banned, absolutely! There is no reason in the world that an average joe needs to be able to buy a fully automatic 50 caliber machine gun. But a simple bushmaster which is just a rifle with some "military" looking add ons to it...no that should not be banned and that is why Harry Reid and the other jackasses took bans off the table.
Dumb video...but then everything about this issue is pretty dumb! Its dumb because the constitution gives us this right. It says nothing about hunting, it says nothing about "home invasion". It says the right to keep and bear arms...now if you want to argue about a well regulated militia, that is a different argument all together which should be addressed...and never is
It is pretty simple and obvious. If a government (no matter if it is an empire, dictatorship, monarchy, democratically elected, whatever) wants to control the people or a specific group of the people throughout history they take away their weapons. Simple as that, they did it in the Roman Empire, they did it in the Ottoman Empire, they did it in China, Japan and every other country in the world. They take from the people they wish to oppress. Hitler took away Jewish Leadership and took away weapons. He took away the Jewish people's abilities to organize themselves and to protect themselves. In Japan for centuries, the Emperor made it impossible and punishable by death for any person not a member of the warrior class to own a sword. In Russia the Czar and then Stalin made it even worse, they took away all abilities of the people to protect themselves (or fight back). Oppression of a people starts with control and you can't control a people that can organize and can protect themselves. Whether swords, bows, guns, horses, whatever was the weapon at the time.
Now, it is most certainly sensationalism to think that anyone is suggesting that "guns et al" should be banned in the US. But, any government, again no matter which type, in over 5,000 years of civilization has proven that when an inch is given, the government (those in power) want a mile. Do I need an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine? No, should I have the right as a law abiding citizen to have it, yes! Do I have the need to own a automatic shotgun that is modified to hold 15 shells, NOPE! But do I have the right as a law abiding citizen to have it, yes! Should the government infringe on my right to do so...NO! Simple as that! The constitution protects my rights and liberties. Should there mandatory background checks...absolutely! Should there be waiting periods..yes! Should there even potentially be limits on the number of guns or rifles I can buy a month...I am open to that idea. I certainly don't need to purchase 15 guns in a month. Should gun shows be regulated better, without question!
This is not all that complicated of an issue. Should firearms be banned? NO! Should some firearms be banned, absolutely! There is no reason in the world that an average joe needs to be able to buy a fully automatic 50 caliber machine gun. But a simple bushmaster which is just a rifle with some "military" looking add ons to it...no that should not be banned and that is why Harry Reid and the other jackasses took bans off the table.
Dumb video...but then everything about this issue is pretty dumb! Its dumb because the constitution gives us this right. It says nothing about hunting, it says nothing about "home invasion". It says the right to keep and bear arms...now if you want to argue about a well regulated militia, that is a different argument all together which should be addressed...and never is
In all fairness, the Constitution says THIS:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Why is it the "gun enthusists" want to IGNORE the Well regulated Militia? Why, because that's COUNTER to their whack idea of the "gub'ment gonna take my guns..."
Another part of the Constitution the "gun enthusists" never mention: Article III, Section 3: Treason and its punishment.
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
So... if the Government INTENDED to let the citizens be armed to overthrow the Government, why even include a definition OF treason? And remember the oaths that Politicos and Military Personnel take...
"I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Note the part about ALL enemies, Foreign AND Domestic. Seems counter to the idea of inciting another Revolution...
bent20
The Odum Level
Good point.
"We think that peace is only got by peaceful methods and that to fight the establishment with their own weapons is no good, because they always win and they’d been winning for thousands of years," Lennon says in the clip. "They know how to play the game 'violence' and it's easier for them when they can recognize you and shoot you. They don't know how to handle humor, and peaceful humor. And that's our message really."
http://music.yahoo.com/news/yoko-on...s-bloody-glasses-190054119-rolling-stone.html
Revolutions in most third-world countries lead to poverty and oppression. Revolutions in more powerful countries result in Hitler, they don't prevent him, or those like him. I wish more gun advocates would just be honest. It's not about protecting your rights or our country, it's about liking guns and there is nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean people should be able to own any weapon they want no matter how deadly.
"We think that peace is only got by peaceful methods and that to fight the establishment with their own weapons is no good, because they always win and they’d been winning for thousands of years," Lennon says in the clip. "They know how to play the game 'violence' and it's easier for them when they can recognize you and shoot you. They don't know how to handle humor, and peaceful humor. And that's our message really."
http://music.yahoo.com/news/yoko-on...s-bloody-glasses-190054119-rolling-stone.html
Revolutions in most third-world countries lead to poverty and oppression. Revolutions in more powerful countries result in Hitler, they don't prevent him, or those like him. I wish more gun advocates would just be honest. It's not about protecting your rights or our country, it's about liking guns and there is nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean people should be able to own any weapon they want no matter how deadly.
Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Gotta Hav
The Wade Level
Helloooo......THE PEOPLE already can't own anything they want.
THE PEOPLE, already can't own Cannons, Rockets, Bazookas, Missiles, Cluster Bombs, Chemical Weapons, Howitzers, Mortars, Tanks, Self-Propelled Howitzers, Anti-Tank Missiles, Pipe Bombs, Shoulder Fired Ground-To-Air Missiles, Land Mines, Hand Grenades, and maybe not last, but least Biological Weapons.
The government, which is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people....has all the good stuff for themselves, THE CITIZENS have pea-shooters.
And just one final note, having what I can have, IS MY RIGHT....not Diane Feinstein, Piers Morgans or Michael Moores. THEY'RE MY RIGHTS. PERIOD.
I don't go around yapping to all the Pro-Abortionists who've helped murder what now, 60,000,000 babies in this country, that they shouldn't be able to own any kind of rusty coat hanger, or vacuum sweeper, or forceps, or stabbing weapons to penetrate the brains of 6 month olds when they extract them.....nope, it's perfectly fine for me for them to continue the genocide, no matter how deadly the tool. That's their rights.