Quote
You probably forgot, but we're discussing here how gun restriction would affect the gun crime rate, especially shooting sprees and stupid random shootings.
Only gun controllers worry about gun crime. Everyone else worries about crime.
I suppose the 3000 dead from 9/11 were not important, since they were killed by box cutters, plane crashes, building collapses (or if you wear tin foil, termite explosions).
I'm puzzled by your misdirection to gun laws during WW2. Rather silly to think it doesn't count if passed before the start, no? I pointed out that modern Europe has had quite a few genocides, one only a bit over a decade ago. Depending on your geographic definitions, you can include Turkey-Armenia a century ago, and lord knows how much suffering in the Eastern Block from 1945 - 1990. Those poor Poles - the Jews were decimated, but the rest of the country got worked over by the Nazis, and the Soviets both at the beginning and end of the war.
tsisson 0
Extreme Tourism!!!! Oh boy...I'm still recovering from that one. Olive Garden....HAHAAHAHAHAH.
Help me, my stomach hurts from laughing!
Help me, my stomach hurts from laughing!
Ron 7
Still waiting on you to explain "people like me".....
And the reason you stated it was to defend George's position. (Also totally ignoring that the reason he was pulled over was a missing tag).
Otherwise you would just be posting irrelevant crap for no reason.
For example:
"The sky is blue."
While true, it has no relevance to this discussion... so where you just posting random crap, or trying to support a position?
QuoteI claimed no such thing. I simply stated that the reason for his arrest was that he had an illegal gun. (Post #57, this thread)
And the reason you stated it was to defend George's position. (Also totally ignoring that the reason he was pulled over was a missing tag).
Otherwise you would just be posting irrelevant crap for no reason.
For example:
"The sky is blue."
While true, it has no relevance to this discussion... so where you just posting random crap, or trying to support a position?
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Ron 7
Some more German gun laws for you.... since you clearly don't know them.
Now in truth, the Treaty did not really apply to individuals.... But the German Govt was free to apply it to them and did.
more for you
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf
Jews were not allowed.. just like the US Gun Control Act of 1968 made it difficult for black people to buy a weapon legally.
Quote1919 Regulations on Weapons Ownership, which declared that "all firearms, as well as all kinds of firearms ammunition, are to be surrendered immediately."
Verordnung des Rates der Volksbeauftragen über Waffenbesitz, Reichsgesetzblatt 1919, Volume I, § 1, page 31–32
QuoteAugust 7, 1920 Law on the Disarmament of the People. It put into effect the provisions of the Versailles Treaty in regard to the limit on military-type weapons.
The treaty stated: "Within two months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, German arms, munitions, and war material, including anti-aircraft material, existing in Germany in excess of the quantities allowed, must be surrendered to the Governments of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers to be destroyed or rendered useless." -- Article 169.
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/text/versaillestreaty/ver159.html
Now in truth, the Treaty did not really apply to individuals.... But the German Govt was free to apply it to them and did.
QuoteThe 1938 German Weapons Act
The important point that supports my position and negates yours is:
Jews were forbidden from the manufacturing or ownership of firearms and ammunition Harcourt page 22.
Second, the Nazi gun laws of 1938 specifically banned Jewish persons from obtaining a license to manufacture firearms or ammunition. In this respect, the Nazi gun laws were more restrictive than those under the Weimar Republic. Third, with regard
to possession and carrying of firearms, the Nazi regime relaxed the gun laws that were in place in Germany at the time the Nazis seized power. The Nazi gun laws of 1938 reflect a liberalization of the gun control measures that had been enacted by the Weimar Republic with respect to the acquisition, transfer, and carrying of firearms. In this regard,
Hitler appears to have been more pro-gun than the predecessor Weimar Republic. Four, approximately eight months after enacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws, Hitler imposed regulations prohibiting Jewish persons from possessing any dangerous weapons including firearms. The Nazi regime implemented this prohibition by confiscating weapons, including guns, from Jewish persons, and subsequently engaged in genocide of the Jewish population.,
Harcourt, Bernard E (2004) "On the NRA, Adolph Hitler, Gun Registration, and the Nazi Gun Laws: Exploding the Culture Wars (A Call to Historians)"
http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/67-harcourt.pdf
more for you
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf
QuoteLicenses were available only to “persons of
unquestioned trustworthiness.”43
Jews were not allowed.. just like the US Gun Control Act of 1968 made it difficult for black people to buy a weapon legally.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
It did not happen overnight, myself going from being an anti-gun person, to being gun neutral to being open to gun ownership. What can I say I was brainwashed growing up thinking that guns killed. But I say never again. What happened to the Jews in German occupied territories in the 1930s and 1940s is only one example of many in the history of humanity where the strong preyed on the weak. People are fooling themselves if they think it won't happen again. It has happened and it will continue to happen if people let their guard down.
Besides threads like this are all talk. Let's say someone in the USA did ban firearms. All that would happen is that a bunch of law abiding citizens who have never committed a crime in their life would become instant criminals. Some might surrender some of their firearms, but most would not. Guns are not going anywhere. Getting rid of them will cause more deaths than the deaths being caused by the criminals who use them in their crimes.
Criminals do not register their weapons. There is a reason why criminals are called criminals.
Try not to worry about the things you have no control over
Besides threads like this are all talk. Let's say someone in the USA did ban firearms. All that would happen is that a bunch of law abiding citizens who have never committed a crime in their life would become instant criminals. Some might surrender some of their firearms, but most would not. Guns are not going anywhere. Getting rid of them will cause more deaths than the deaths being caused by the criminals who use them in their crimes.
Criminals do not register their weapons. There is a reason why criminals are called criminals.
Try not to worry about the things you have no control over
Ron 7
This:
I am amazed that people think making people register guns will do anything.... Its not like criminals will fill out the paperwork.
And I am amazed that people think bans will work... How did the whole drug ban work out for us? And prohibition CREATED powerful criminals more than it did to stop crime.
QuoteCriminals do not register their weapons.
I am amazed that people think making people register guns will do anything.... Its not like criminals will fill out the paperwork.
And I am amazed that people think bans will work... How did the whole drug ban work out for us? And prohibition CREATED powerful criminals more than it did to stop crime.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
tsisson 0
I'm still shaking my head over all the hand wringing by some because people like me own and carry firearms.
But, I'm still smiling because my right to own a firearm is protected by the 2nd ammendment. I also smile because my state has granted me a license to legally carry that firearm concealed.
So nanananananananaaaaaaaa...........
So pretty much a lie by omission, again.