Welcome to Gaia! ::

Wendigo
Christien Chalfant

Actually This.
Actually, literally every single person who has ever told you that Hitler banned all firearms in Germany as part of his bid to seize power is completely full of s**t.

To begin with, the Nazis did not take power in Germany through military force, but rather through the Enabling Act of 1933, which allowed the Chancellor to declare whatever laws he wished unilaterally. One of his first acts after claiming emergency powers was to dissolve the legislature, which instantly had the force of law.

But more importantly, the Nazis did not add new restrictions to gun ownership for the average German. In point of fact, the Weimar Republic, which was the regime replaced by the Nazis, had completely banned firearms out of worries of an armed revolution. In 1919. It then relaxed those restrictions, requiring only registration. The Nazis relaxed gun laws even further, for most people. (For the Jewish minority matters were different, but they had effectively no other rights under the Nazis, either, including, for example, the right to own a newspaper publisher.) The law you've got a picture of there, from some fringe right wing propaganda rag? That law makes it easier to buy guns.


No one is saying that. They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.
Heimdalr's avatar

Mega Noob

Old Blue Collar Joe
They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.

One wonders whether you think Obama specifically barring Jews (or any other ethnic group) from the ownership of firearms is a realistic prospect.
Heimdalr
Old Blue Collar Joe
They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.

One wonders whether you think Obama barring Jews (or any other ethnic group) from the ownership of firearms is a realistic prospect.


And one wonders where you got that from. I merely pointed out the major difference in what Wen is constantly saying, which is incorrect on how the weapons seizure went.
On the issue of cumgobbler and his gun grab attempt? The second amendment. He has no 'executive powers' to circumvent due process.
Heimdalr's avatar

Mega Noob

Old Blue Collar Joe
Heimdalr
Old Blue Collar Joe
They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.

One wonders whether you think Obama barring Jews (or any other ethnic group) from the ownership of firearms is a realistic prospect.


And one wonders where you got that from. I merely pointed out the major difference in what Wen is constantly saying, which is incorrect on how the weapons seizure went.

That effectively renders a modern comparison to discriminatory firearms license policies pretty useless, no?
Heimdalr
Old Blue Collar Joe
Heimdalr
Old Blue Collar Joe
They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.

One wonders whether you think Obama barring Jews (or any other ethnic group) from the ownership of firearms is a realistic prospect.


And one wonders where you got that from. I merely pointed out the major difference in what Wen is constantly saying, which is incorrect on how the weapons seizure went.

That effectively renders a modern comparison to discriminatory firearms license policies pretty useless, no?


Partially, but any attempt to remove weapons, be it from one group or an entire population, completely puts every bit of power in one groups hands.
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,750 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Heimdalr
Christien Chalfant
The statistic is not called "read a ******** book for once in your life," but thank you for not providing the information so now I have no reason to believe your opinion on Nazi Gun Laws.

You're demanding yearly, reliable statistics, from a fascist regime, from thirty years before the US implemented the same.


And? It's not my problem. I didn't make the claim.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Old Blue Collar Joe
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant

Actually This.
Actually, literally every single person who has ever told you that Hitler banned all firearms in Germany as part of his bid to seize power is completely full of s**t.

To begin with, the Nazis did not take power in Germany through military force, but rather through the Enabling Act of 1933, which allowed the Chancellor to declare whatever laws he wished unilaterally. One of his first acts after claiming emergency powers was to dissolve the legislature, which instantly had the force of law.

But more importantly, the Nazis did not add new restrictions to gun ownership for the average German. In point of fact, the Weimar Republic, which was the regime replaced by the Nazis, had completely banned firearms out of worries of an armed revolution. In 1919. It then relaxed those restrictions, requiring only registration. The Nazis relaxed gun laws even further, for most people. (For the Jewish minority matters were different, but they had effectively no other rights under the Nazis, either, including, for example, the right to own a newspaper publisher.) The law you've got a picture of there, from some fringe right wing propaganda rag? That law makes it easier to buy guns.


No one is saying that. They say he disarmed the Jews, not the Germans. Big damn difference.
The Nuremberg Laws of 1935 were, I'd say, a little more actually significant in the disenfranchisement of Jews by the Nazis. Like, by the time of this law they hadn't been considered citizens under the law for three years. (One of the party's stated goals under the 20 points, btw, so this goes way back before the election of Hitler as Chancellor.) Couldn't take work as a lawyer, a doctor or a journalist; wouldn't be educated past 14; couldn't use public libraries or parks or receive lottery prizes. Couldn't marry a "German."

The laws forbidding Jews from buying, owning, or selling firearms come in pretty late in the game. Just about to the yellow armbands already.
Heimdalr's avatar

Mega Noob

Christien Chalfant
Heimdalr
Christien Chalfant
The statistic is not called "read a ******** book for once in your life," but thank you for not providing the information so now I have no reason to believe your opinion on Nazi Gun Laws.

You're demanding yearly, reliable statistics, from a fascist regime, from thirty years before the US implemented the same.


And? It's not my problem. I didn't make the claim.

I can just as well say that pyramids were never built because where's the tax return documents of the Pharaohs.
Omnileech's avatar

Omnipresent Warlord

Paranoid gun nuts seem to be missing the part where Hitler did far worse things than disarming Jews before he disarmed Jews. Maybe it has to do with slippery slope thinking that any form of gun regulations for anyone will invariably lead to genocide and mass murder.

You have the NRA saying that background checks are awful things for all sort of ridiculous reasons.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Christien Chalfant
Well if you're addressing the entire collective of people that don't want gun regulation then you should state who you're addressing. Poor communication skills aren't really working as well as decent or even mediocre communication skills.
I'm addressing the shithead who wrote your "This" link. If you don't know who he is and what beliefs he advocates, you're doing a bang-up job vetting his skills as a historian. Here's a hint: He's not a historian. He's one of these ignorant douchebags.

Quote:
The statistic is not called "read a ******** book for once in your life," but thank you for not providing the information so now I have no reason to believe your opinion on Nazi Gun Laws.
All the information I provided is publicly available in the text of the law Benson set out to describe, in a misleading and dishonest manner, to imply kinship between Nazi Germany and modern America to the latter's detriment. I have given you the facts. The Nazi gun law, which is only a revision of a law from ten years earlier, did not introduce new restrictions on gun ownership for most people. (For whom it is easier to buy a gun than it had been in 1928, by any legitimate reading.) It did specifically ban Jews from owning or carrying guns, bullets, or stabbing weapons, but by this point in Germany, the Jews were not even treated as second-class citizens, because they were no longer citizens. The argument that this was in some way the first step toward Auschwitz is apocryphal; the journey toward Auschwitz began the day Hitler was elected, and it was practically inevitable the day he was granted absolute control over the law in Germany by legislative fiat. (That is to say, by 1933, there was no longer an authority in Germany capable of stopping it by conventional means.)

It had, for example, been nine months since the Anschluss when this law was passed. So Germany's territorial expansion was already starting, that is to say. This was the year of "breathing room" and "peace in our time."

Anyway, to make this plainer.

The This website, on Tripod
I am writing a book on Nazi policies and practices which sought to repress civilian gun ownership and to eradicate gun owners in Germany and in occupied Europe. The following sampling of my findings should give pause to the suggestion that draconian punishment of citizens for keeping firearms necessarily is a social good.
The bolded words are lies. They are not true. Those words are insupportable from the historical record. A person who says those words to you is a liar.

What follows is a straw man, as "draconian punishments for keeping firearms is a social good" is an uncommon policy position even among those who favor greater gun control measures than we currently have.

Quote:
The Night of the Broken Glass (Kristallnacht)--the infamous Nazi rampage against Germany's Jews--took place in November 1938. It was preceded by the confiscation of firearms from the Jewish victims. On Nov. 8, the New York Times reported from Berlin, "Berlin Police Head Announces 'Disarming' of Jews," explaining:

The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been "disarmed" with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.1

1. New York Times, Nov. 9, 1938, 24.


These things? These dates predate the law he cites at the top of the page, which was passed November 11, 1938. Kristallnacht was, of course, actually cited by Goebbels the date the law was passed - as normal and healthy:

Quote:
In an article which will appear in the Press tomorrow, Dr Goebbels ascribes yesterday’s outrages to the “healthy instinct” of the German people. He accuses the foreign Press of telling lies about the demonstrations and of twisting the facts.

“The anti-German Jewish foreign Press must know,” he writes, “that by exaggerating the events and by lies and misrepresentations it will benefit neither itself nor the Jews living in Germany. The opposite is more likely to be the case.

“The German people is anti-Semitic. It has no desire to have its right restricted or to be provoked in future by parasites of Jewish race.

“Anti-German foreign countries would do well to leave the solution of this problem to the Germans. If they feel the necessity to stand up for the case of the German Jews, they can have as many of our Jews as they like.”

http://cojs.org/cojswiki/Herr_Hitler_plans_new_steps_against_Jews,_The_Telegraph,_Nov._12,_1938.



Why, they actually blamed the riots on Jewish provocation, and proposed disarmament as a necessary remedy, much as one might expect from the Nazis. Being what they are.

Quote:
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.

Other European countries also had laws requiring police records to be kept on persons who possessed firearms. When the Nazis took over Czechoslovakia and Poland in 1939, it was a simple matter to identify gun owners. Many of them disappeared in the middle of the night along with political opponents.

See that? He's implying, yet again, that gun registration was an unusually severe gun control scheme in 1928, although it replaced one yet more severe.

Now, why would he do that?
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,750 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Heimdalr
Christien Chalfant
Heimdalr
Christien Chalfant
The statistic is not called "read a ******** book for once in your life," but thank you for not providing the information so now I have no reason to believe your opinion on Nazi Gun Laws.

You're demanding yearly, reliable statistics, from a fascist regime, from thirty years before the US implemented the same.


And? It's not my problem. I didn't make the claim.

I can just as well say that pyramids were never built because where's the tax return documents of the Pharaohs.


Except that's a flaw. Obviously the pyramids have been built, because they're still standing in Egypt. The issue is how long ago were they built. But then there's scientific methods to know that.
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,750 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Wendigo

Now, why would he do that?


Well, you seem to have all the answers without giving any evidence. So you must know.
In response to your "the bolded are lies" comment; you say it's false when looking at historical record, and yet you didn't supply the historical evidence.
Omnileech's avatar

Omnipresent Warlord

Christien Chalfant
Wendigo

Now, why would he do that?


Well, you seem to have all the answers without giving any evidence. So you must know.
In response to your "the bolded are lies" comment; you say it's false when looking at historical record, and yet you didn't supply the historical evidence.


You mean like quoting Goebbells to solidify that the order of events happened much differently from what your source said happened. Or quoting/summarizing the Nazi law to demonstrate that it loosened a lot of gun restrictions?

Wendigo has provided the sources... you just rejected them.

How about this? Since you don't believe anyone when they factcheck your beliefs on history then why don't you do the factchecking yourself. Tell us, what, if any, anti-jewish persecution happened in Nazi Germany before they passed the law banned weapons for Jews. Be sure to provide sources to back up that claim. Specifically I'm thinking of dates of legislation and decrees.

Did the night of broken glass happen before, or after, jews were disarmed? Since if you trust none of us to be truthful then you might as well research everything yourself. You also have no reason to believe what the pro-gun people are saying unless you can verify everything yourself.

Their "sources" don't appear to have honesty at heart.
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,750 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Omnileech


You mean like quoting Goebbells to solidify that the order of events happened much differently from what your source said happened. Or quoting/summarizing the Nazi law to demonstrate that it loosened a lot of gun restrictions?

Wendigo has provided the sources... you just rejected them.

How about this? Since you don't believe anyone when they factcheck your beliefs on history then why don't you do the factchecking yourself. Tell us, what, if any, anti-jewish persecution happened in Nazi Germany before they passed the law banned weapons for Jews. Be sure to provide sources to back up that claim. Specifically I'm thinking of dates of legislation and decrees.

Did the night of broken glass happen before, or after, jews were disarmed? Since if you trust none of us to be truthful then you might as well research everything yourself. You also have no reason to believe what the pro-gun people are saying unless you can verify everything yourself.

Their "sources" don't appear to have honesty at heart.


I'm sorry to say that I never stated any beliefs on history. But thank you for assuming things, as you can see, it did nothing.
Your post in response to me means nothing, because I have not proposed an argument or counter-argument to Wendingo's posts. I merely posted another link.
I have only asked for the statistics of what he's saying to be true. Anyone can say anything, that's what's called Hearsay in the court of law.
Wendigo's avatar

Manly Explorer

8,750 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Christien Chalfant
Wendigo

Now, why would he do that?


Well, you seem to have all the answers without giving any evidence. So you must know.
In response to your "the bolded are lies" comment; you say it's false when looking at historical record, and yet you didn't supply the historical evidence.
You got any particular point on which you can contradict me with a greater authority than myself, feel free.

Found a study on this very subject you could read, if you'd like:

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf

This Stephen Halbrook, while he is fairly clearly on Benson's side of the argument (regarding gun control, that is), he is also something called a "lawyer." And he owns his own website, he's not all low-rent on it.

So for example, we have, regarding the 1928 law:

Quote:
The new law was passed on April 12, but did not take effect until October 1,
1928. On the effective date, the 1919 law requiring immediate surrender of all firearms
and ammunition would be repealed. That would allow over six months for
compliance with the new law while leaving the more draconian but widely ignored law
on the books for the same period.


Regarding "sporting arms," a critical element of the argument:

Quote:
To “facilitate the shooting sport,” the law did not require a license to acquire
or use a firearm at a range with a police permit. Further, “special provisions were
adopted for hunters”:

When hunting, conducting game protection or practicing shooting,
or on their way to or from those activities, owners of a hunting
permit of a German State may carry hunting weapons and a
handgun without needing a special weapons permit. Whoever is in
possession of a hunting permit for a whole year of a German State
may acquire hunting weapons and hand firearms anywhere in the
Reich to the extent provided by the hunting permit and may acquire
ammunition without an acquisition permit.

Noting the effective date of October 1, 1928, Kuenzer added: “In the
meantime the Reich government with the consent of the Reichsrat will issue the
provisions necessary for the implementation of the law and in particular will decide
which firearms should not be subject to the law at all.


How does that strike you as information? Note the lack of conspicuous agitprop.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games