Friday, January 18, 2013

Hitler Redux


I did a post a couple of days ago about Hitler and gun control, and the controversy roils on.  In the first place, the quote in this graphic is bogus.  Totally bogus. Bogusíssimo. He never said it, never would have said it, and even if he would've, the year is wrong and doesn't make any sense.  Info on that HERE.  Somebody more cyber-savvy than I should make one of those "Hitler rant" videos dealing with this and other bogus quotes from Hitler on firearms.

Of course, everybody's missing the point.  Hitler didn't ban guns, but actually eased up on most of the gun laws previously legislated by the Weimar Republic.  What he did do was restrict gun ownership to regular Germans.  Gypsies and "vagabonds" weren't permitted to possess firearms, nor were conquered peoples (non-Germans), and, from what I've been reading lately, in 1938 the law prohibited Jews from owning firearms also.

Now the point here is that Hitler wanted to deny gun rights to people he didn't trust.  Regular Germans he did trust, and so of course he didn't want to take their guns away.  Indeed, about the only reason I can think of to deny gun ownership to anybody is what you perceive as their untrustworthiness.  And, logically then, I guess we can see that Obama doesn't trust Americans in general.  Oddly, he seems to have deep and abiding trust in Mexican drug cartels, because he actively supplied them with guns.  Again:  Hitler wanted gun control for people he didn't trust.  If you trust a person, you don't want to disarm him and make him vulnerable.  Here's a little more evidence, if you need any, that when you want to disarm a person, it means you don't trust him.  It also has a little info on Martin Luther King and guns that you can use to make your liberal friends sputter and kick their little feet.

Disarming the Slaves

The left’s wailing about gun control should have been over at least two weeks ago, but Alex Jones’s erratic interview with Piers Morgan provided enough fuel to keep the anti-gun flames stoked for many weeks into the future.

I recently chronicled the sporadic blame game that arose in Sandy Hook’s wake as well as the glorious backlash after a newspaper began publishing gun owners’ home addresses. Tracking the entire media debate, I didn’t see a single exchange perceived worse than Alex Jones’s.

But I didn’t see too many that were remarkably better, either. Even More Guns, Less Crime author John Lott, who has published very detailed work on firearms policy, seemed sorely underprepared during his CNN segment in December. His facts were spot-on, but his timid and scrappy presentation hindered their strength.

On Friday, CNN aired what came to be my favorite interview of all. “Gun Appreciation Day” chairman Larry Ward used the race card against its own fanatics. Co-panelist Maria Roach, a black woman, gave a sigh of contempt when Ward dared to speak of Martin Luther King, Jr., as an ally of the Second Amendment. She seemed unaware that King personally applied for a concealed-carry permit after his house was bombed in 1956. The government denied his application, so he hired armed guards for protection instead.

Ward explained:

I think Martin Luther King, Jr. would agree with me if he were alive today that if African Americans had been given the right to keep and bear arms from day one of the country’s founding, perhaps slavery might not have been a chapter in our history.
The New York Times published an op-ed lambasting Ward’s assertion without saying why. The Daily Beast also tried to critique the interview but ended up admitting that rebellions often failed because slaves were up against “their far better-armed masters.” In other words, the slaves’ guns were controlled. The sole objective of early gun prohibition was to ensure the slaves couldn’t fight back.
(Keep reading HERE.)

1 comment:

  1. "from what I've been reading lately, in 1938 the law prohibited Jews from owning firearms also."

    And I wouldn't be too quick to believe that, either! See below:

    http://rense.com/general70/nazi.htm

    'Nazi Terror' - From A
    Jewish National Socialist
    4-17-6


    'Nazi Terror: A Short Autobiography of a Jewish National Socialist' is a myth-shattering account of what it was really like for a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Heinz Weichardt's father was Editor of the Berliner Morgenpost and his mother was a Jewess. His story, which is rich in detail, is a gripping read and a real eye-opener. 54 pages, £4.80 (approx $8), ISBN 1-901240-18-5, 2004.

    .......


    Since my early teens I had been an avid gun lover. In Austria, where we lived at the time, there were in effect no restrictions on the possession of handguns or rifles. If there were, they certainly were not enforced. At the age of fifteen, I could walk into one of the finest gunshops in Vienna and purchase any weapon in the store, as long as I had the necessary money.

    Unfortunately I didn't, but after some time I had scraped together a sufficient amount to start my modest collection by acquiring three low-priced handguns. Shortly thereafter, in 1929, we moved to Berlin.

    In Germany, under the Weimar Republic, one had to register each gun with the police. There were no restrictions on possession except if you wanted to carry them. In this case you had to have a hunting licence which required a lengthy course in gun handling, marksmanship, game laws and the handling of bagged game.

    The police had absolutely no say or power to refuse you the ownership of your guns when you came to register. It was a purely bureaucratic measure which enabled the police to trace a gun involved in a criminal action.

    My guns were registered in the name of my (Jewish) mother, who had contributed the money for their original purchase, because I was only fifteen years old and could not own firearms until I reached maturity (21 years).

    After Hitler came to power, nothing was changed in the existing gun regulations; nobody had to turn in the registered guns - period. My mother still had them on the day of her immigration to the US (May 1941) and gave them to a friend of mine because importation of firearms was prohibited under US law.

    ReplyDelete