And we say laws in the plural because there were indeed more than one. We’ve been discussing primarily the German Weapons Act of 1938, passed in March of that year, which as we’ve noted before, significantly deregulated firearms. It also prohibited Jews from manufacturing and selling them; one gets the impression that the intent was to prevent Jews, whom the Nazis regarded as subhuman, from handling the sacred implements of power that they later would touch with their own hands. Even so, note that this law itself did not expressly ban Jews from owning guns.You know, if we removed from the pro-gun argument all the things that are made-up and false, there wouldn't be much left.
It wasn’t until November of that year that a different law, The Regulations Against Jews’ Possession Of Weapons, did what its name suggested. That’s right: even though they’d subjected the Jews to just about every form of degradation and brutal oppression possible, it took the Nazis five years before they actually got around to barring Jews from owning guns. Gives you some indication just what an all-consuming priority it was, doesn’t it? Furthermore, this law was passed only after Kristallnacht, which might have given Jews an incentive to retaliate violently.
What do you think?
If you're expecting gunsucks to tell the truth, that is not reasonable. For a gunsuck, a word or idea has 2 states: It advance gunsuckitude, or it is damned to hell. There are no lies in gunsuck views of the world. If a lie advances gunsuckitude, it is truth.
ReplyDeleteMikeb, I think that you don't pay much attention to what we say. You listen a lot to what you think we said or wish we said, but not to our actual arguments.
ReplyDeleteThat is because you tend not to frame rational arguments, and tend to be factually deficient.
DeleteBeyond that, there hasn't been a lot worth giving attention.
Please continue to be dismissive, Dog Gone. Between the two of us, a person who argues for individual liberty and an elitist prig, which one do you imagine will get more acceptance in America?
DeleteI have yet to see you answer any of the facts or arguments that I've presented. When you're willing to particpate in genuine debate, rather than sneering dismissals, I'll be glad to give you a chance.
Shorter Greg Camp argument:
DeleteGuns.
That's the whole argument. All the rest is window-dressing results driven bullshit.
Nick, if you're capable of making an argument, rather than degenerating into slurs and nonsense, I'd be pleased to address your points. I'd also like to see you extend to me the same courtesy.
DeleteI doubt this will happen.
I think, Mikeb, that you ignore much of what has been said or pull it violently out of context to make it say what you want it to say. I've pointed out before that there are two requirements for resistance. Those are 1)the MEANS to resist and 2)the WILL to resist (please forgive the all caps words). Both are essential to any sort of resistance.
ReplyDeleteResist what? Oh, I get it: You are another paranoid insane wack. WHACKA-WHACKA-WHACKA. Black helicopters, NAFTA highway, poisoning our precious bodily fluids. \
DeleteYou guys are so fucking stupid and predictable. It's amazing.
Nick, are you suggesting to us that your choice during the period in question would have been submission? Or perhaps you'd have gone along with the program, it being ordered by the government, after all.
DeleteActually, a couple of minutes reading my blog, or simply asking what I think, as I indicated to Laci, would have let you know that's not my perspective. I was speaking generally and those principles apply whether we're discussing resisting the Nazis or anyone else. So, your assumptions are baseless.
DeleteActually, you are missing a vital third component to resistance: support.
ReplyDeleteSupport isn't just popular support, but it is also logistics and the ability to resupply your resistance. There needs to be some form of organsiation besides some idiot who wants to fight the government.
The US beat the British during the War for Independence because of support from France, Spain, Holland, and other European powers in addition to Logistical considerations for Britain.
Likewise, the gun loon Turner Diaries fantasy fails if no popular support exists for their resistance movement. A rough rule of thumb (from Liddell Hart "Lessons from Resistance Movements -- Guerrilla and Nonviolent" is that a successful insurrection needs at least 3% of the adult population actively fighting the government, and another 10% supporting the rebels.
The hard right wanted to believe that Waco or Ruby Ridge should have been a spark for rebellion, but it's not like any militiamen rushed to relieve the siege. Likewise, there won't be any serious resistance to Federal authorities once people realise that they are violating the Constitution and doesn't support their actions (Articles I, Section 8, Clause 15; Article III, Section iii, and Article IV, Section 4).
The true oathkeepers are the ones putting down the insurrection.
Sorry, but the most likely outcome of a war between the Feds and the extreme right is that the extreme right is crushed like bugs, even before the network news anchors can move their mobile newsdesks, satellite link-ups and tactical hairdryers out to the battlefield.
In reality, your fantasies play out like Timothy McVeigh with a lethal injection and the realisation that you are a traitor, not a patriot.
But, that is only if you are ignorant enough not to understand the actual meaning and consequences of your silly beliefs.
I forgot to add, the Jews in the Ghetto had the means to resist and the will, but they were surrounded by an well-equipped army. Those who weren't killed in ghetto uprisings (there was more than one), were rounded up and sent to extermination camps.
DeleteYou seem to forget, the Germans were killing people in occupied territories which had been overrun in war time. People could get access to weapons--the WAS war time.
The problem is that Germans would ruthlessly crush resistance on the Eastern Front (and to some extent on the Western Front).
If you were willing to resist, you had to resign yourself that you could be killed, tortured, or sent to a concentration camp.
Do you know who Sophie Scholl was Retired Mustang? How about Lucie Aubrac? Hélène Viannay? Suzanne Buisson? Marie-Madeleine Fourcade? Marie-Hélène Lefaucheux? Berty Albrecht?
And what was the size of the German force that had to put down the ghetto uprising? Those soldiers could have been fighting the Russians, but instead, they were fighting behind the lines.
DeleteLaci, if you would refrain from even attempting to put words in my mouth, it would make discussion far easier. I made no mention, nor did I contemplate in my reply, any sort of armed uprising within the United States or against our duly elected government. Your assumption is both incorrect and unwarranted. You could have taken a moment to look at my blog. Here, for instance: http://retiredmustang.blogspot.com/2013/02/did-you-think-about-this-even-little.html Or, here:http://retiredmustang.blogspot.com/2013/01/why-be-stupid.html The point is, my blog hasn't been around long so it wouldn't have taken much effort to avoid making an assumption about me that is patently untrue. Or, you could have simply asked.
Delete"If you were willing to resist, you had to resign yourself that you could be killed, tortured, or sent to a concentration camp" is true. What is most emphatically not true, and what I understand you to be promoting, is the idea that it's better to submit and suffer the same fate. Even the suggestion of such a thing is repugnant.
Since you brought up the Ghetto Uprising, remember that the deportation and extermination of Jews from the Ghetto was a major factor in the formation of the ZOB. So, submitting would have resulted in what benefit? It's also worth noting that the Jewish resistance initially enjoyed a tepid support, at best, from the greater Polish resistance because of the widely held belief that the Jews were cowards. It is arguable that this view was reinforced by the actions and suggestions of many in positions of leadership within the greater Jewish community. In spite of all this, a force of perhaps 750 guerilla fighters held off the Nazis for almost a month. I'd suggest it's frightfully easy, from our modern, safe and comfortable perspective to denigrate the decision these people made to resist and die rather than submit to the tyranny of a regime that would eventually lead to the deaths of 11 million civilians.
And, yes, I know who those people were.
Laci is of the opinion that it's better for us to submit to a power that he doesn't want to resist.
DeleteThe reality is that we aren't at civil war in this country. The hope is that by thinking through the implications of bad proposals, we'll never go to that terrible event.
Not everyone will be led meekly and obediently to the cattle cars.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
"I forgot to add, the Jews in the Ghetto had the means to resist and the will, but they were surrounded by an well-equipped army. Those who weren't killed in ghetto uprisings (there was more than one), were rounded up and sent to extermination camps."
ReplyDeleteI get it, you see Obama mobilizing the US Army inside the borders of the US, declaring war on the citizens of the US, rounding us up, and sending us to concentration camps.....
Those pesky ole Jews were only sent to concentration camps for rising up, if they hadn't been so damn uppity and known their place, the Nazis were just gonna let them be peace.
And what this all boils down to is the well fed Brits rolling over and showing their bellies to their Hun betters....