AliKat1988
Keltoi Samurai
Steam Punk Adept
sad_lonely_elf
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police." ~ Adolf Hitler from
Hitler’s Table Talk, 1941-1944: Secret Conversations, Part Three: 6 February – 7 September 1942:
Do you still think we need gun control laws?
Congratulations! You've just invoked
Godwin's Law. What this means is that you automatically lose whatever argument you're attempting to make by comparing apples to oranges. We do thank you for your attempt, but by invoking Godwin's Law, you show yourself to be little more than an internet troll. None-the-less, we thank you for your attempt at a thought out, though poorly conceived post. Please come back, and attempt to discuss again at another time when your brain isn't so addled by those pesky Nazis.
This post has been brought to you by the Committee for Prevention of Poor Trolling and Logic Bombs (CPPTLB)
if you feel his argument is in error, why not try and actually refute it, rather than trying to dodge the subject by Zoidberging at it?
as much as you insist "anything mentioning nazis" is inherently a faulty argument, is "your argument is bad and you should feel bad" really so much better?
really, you call OP a troll, but then you proceed to stoop willingly to his level, leaving him in prime position to beat you with his years of experience.
I can point out a major issue with the quotes about Hitler and guns. The quote could only be appropriately reference how selectively allowing certain groups to have guns is like Hitler. The reason why is that Hitler actually made gun laws far more liberal than his predecessor. He made it easier to get guns for the average citizen. The one thing was that he banned certain groups from having them like Jews or recently conquered groups.
If you look historically at the tyrants, Hitler included (remember that he also tightened laws up again.) gun seizure was always 'to protect'.
However, the US Supreme Court has already clearly stated that law enforcement does NOT have a duty to protect you.
They can literally stand on the corner and watch you get gunned down, and there's not a damn thing to be done about it.
Order a pizza and call 911. Time them. A lot of times the pizza will get there first.
You trust them. I refuse to. My families safety takes precedent.
Also the issue that the second isn't so much about personal protection. It's about the fact that, as citizens, it forces the government to be accountable to us, because the ability to revolt is always there.
In fact, the concept of certain weapons are 'only suitable for the military' flies in the very face of WHY they wrote the second.
It is, in fact, so that the citizens can go toe to toe with the military if needed to overthrow a tyrannical government.
And no, I'm not advocating a revolt. (Yet.)