The Hitler gun control lie

Salon.com ^ | 11 January 2013 | Alex Seitz-Wald

[Army Air Corps]

This week, people were shocked when the Drudge Report posted a giant picture of Hitler over a headline speculating that the White House will proceed with executive orders to limit access to firearms. The proposed orders are exceedingly tame, but Drudge’s reaction is actually a common conservative response to any invocation of gun control.

The NRA, Fox News, Fox News (again), Alex Jones, email chains, Joe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacher, Gun Owners of America, etc., all agree that gun control was critical to Hitler’s rise to power. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (“America’s most aggressive defender of firearms ownership”) is built almost exclusively around this notion, popularizing posters of Hitler giving the Nazi salute next to the text: “All in favor of ‘gun control’ raise your right hand.”

In his 1994 book, NRA head Wayne LaPierre dwelled on the Hitler meme at length, writing: “In Germany, Jewish extermination began with the Nazi Weapon Law of 1938, signed by Adolf Hitler.”

And it makes a certain amount of intuitive sense: If you’re going to impose a brutal authoritarian regime on your populace, better to disarm them first so they can’t fight back.

Unfortunately for LaPierre et al., the notion that Hitler confiscated everyone’s guns is mostly bogus. And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.

[ConorMacNessa]

"And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute."

Maybe they would not have stopped it, but they would certainly have made it much more difficult for the Nazis to exterminate them - and they would have died bravely instead of being mowed down like grass.



Keep Faith with the Fallen of Benghazi! Let the Obama Regime, for once, tell the Truth!

Fiat Justitia, Ruat Coelum!

Genuflectimus non ad principem sed ad Principem Pacis!

Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. (Isaiah 49:1 KJV)

[boomop1]

Both sites are moron controlled, Obozo has his foot in the door, sort of like all we want is to put a warning label on cigarettes.

[iacovatx]

“the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.”

Well, I thought about it, too, and the Warsaw uprising would have been strengthened with more arms. Every military engagement in history that ended because one of the combatants ran low on ammunition or had too few working arms is evidence of the nonsense of the above statement. Indeed, more or better arms strengthens superiority of one force against another—it is possibly the first and most important rule of conflict.

[concerned about politics]

Both sites are moron controlled, Obozo has his foot in the door, sort of like all we want is to put a warning label on cigarettes.

Homosexuals - "All we're asking for is tolerance. Just tolerance. Is that too much to ask? "

[iacovatx]

If the author’s argument is correct, then why did the Allied forces ask their defeated German and Japanese foes to surrender their arms? Why not just give them even more guns?
The logic is invisible here.

[Sir Napsalot]

Should we eliminate all police officers because the Nazis used police officers to oppress and kill the Jews? What about public works — Hitler loved public works projects? Of course not. These are merely implements that can be used for good or ill, much as gun advocates like to argue about guns themselves. If guns don’t kill people, then neither does gun control cause genocide (genocidal regimes cause genocide).

That guy was so busy building strawman arguments, it's a wonder the price of hay didn't skyrocket.

In his/her writing, Jews armed with guns had no chance against Hilter and his war machine. Because most people are unwilling to die, so they prefer to be herded onto the train.

So American ragtag band had no chance against the Brits either. Right, Alex?

[TigersEye]

Notice how the author completely glosses over the fact that those who were targetd for execution were the folks who were barred from having firearms.

He makes that sound totally irrelevant. He also makes it sound like being disarmed before the really evil people take power makes the fact of being disarmed irrelevant to being helplessly slaughtered.

Apparently it's possible to attain almost any scholastic degree without even a small child's understanding of cause and effect. All phenomena are entirely isolated events. You may have knocked that glass over but that has nothing to do with the water on the floor.

[iacovatx]

So, according to the author, more guns would not have protected the civilian victims of Adolf’s rage. Well, then why should the author care if US citizens have guns. Those guns are of no benefit, right?
The logic is typical liberal—very shallow and melts under the slightest examination.

[Panama714]

“Bartov added that this misreading of history is not only intellectually dishonest, but also dangerous. “I happen to have been a combat soldier and officer in the Israeli Defense Forces and I know what these assault rifles can do,” he said in an email.”

So this guy compares fully automatic weapons he saw/used as a combat soldier in Israel to semi-automatic rifles here in America? Talk about intellectually dishonest and dangerous, this guy takes the cake.

[TigersEye]

Uh.....first they had to disarm them before they could force them into the horrendous ghettoes. Get it now?

I think you're axing too much of a Chi-Town Univeristy professor. Maybe if you slipped him an envelope with the answer in it ... and a stack of cash.

[meyer]

“In Germany, Jewish extermination began with the Nazi Weapon Law of 1938, signed by Adolf Hitler.”

And in the US, if the liberals have their way, the extermination of conservatives will begin the same way! Thing is, I think that enough of us remember history to make that undertaking a much more difficult task for our national socialists than it was for Hitler's goons back in '38.

[45semi]

Surprised havent seen this yet...

[TigersEye]

If guns don’t kill people, then neither does gun control cause genocide (genocidal regimes cause genocide).

OK, Professor Straw Man.

If gun control doesn’t cause genocide, then neither do guns kill people
(murdering lunatics kill people.) So gun control is pointless.

[Tublecane]

Planning crappy cities and coralling pellet into closed-off areas with no travel privileges isn’t the same thing. That’s like calling proposed border fences Berlin walls. Still, ghettoization is kinda like urban planning; the way envirowackos do it, anyway. They want us to live like rats in a maze in giant low-cost housing, while they speed along autobahns and enmity the uncorrupted view of empty countryside.

[MtnClimber]

Hitler played Races against each other. Stalin and Mao played classes against each other. 0bama does both. A larger “target” audience that is best not armed.

[TigersEye]

It doesn’t mean anything to you that in a free country, without the use of force of arms and walls, 0bama was able to reduce a Chicago neighborhood to conditions that literally rival the appalling degradation and poverty of the Warsaw ghetto?

[jeffc]

And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.

Well, the government's "war on poverty" (welfare)hasn't really reduced poverty, so.......

Somehow, I don't think liberals would like to hear that argument; also, the author's claim is just a strawman argument anyway, but it's always fun to fight fire with fire.

[Tublecane]

Yes, my favorite part of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich was the section titled “The Warsaw Ghetto Is No More.” Jews and others were not the docile cattle we’ve made them out to be. There were also uprisings in Treblinka and Sobibor, and don’t forget the Bielski brothers.

Not to say more arms could’ve stopped the holocaust altogether. It certainly would’ve made it harder, and made Germany easier to beat.

[Tublecane]

It means something to me, of course, though I wouldn’t say Obama is responsible persay. The havoc wreaked by urban planning and the welfare, environmental, and other leftist movements is bad enough to remind me of the Warsaw ghetto, despite the author’s argument. That’s why we call the inner city ghettos.

Still, you can’t go all the way and say it’s as bad. Residents of our ghettos are legally free to leave.

[unixman9627]

One note from the law is this “The law restricted ownership of firearms to ...persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit.”

Question is who determined the “trustworthiness” of the applicant. Guess that would be some Nazi party hack who only approved the applications of other Nazi party hacks. Kinda like Democrats.

Kinda puts the law into a perspective for me.