It would have been different indeed but the holocaust would have still happened.
You’d be surprised what people are capable of when it comes to protecting their families. Combined with the fact Hitler’s armies were expanding into unfamiliar territory and I’m confident in saying they would have made a different.
Just look over at Iraq. The insurgents aren’t getting the months of training our soldiers are getting, but they’re still making for a very difficult time for our professionally trained and vastly superior in technology military.
Americans should have the right to bear arms but that article sounds so fucking redneck scare tactic to me. Isn’t australia gun free? No one is rounding them up… The problem is the society as a whole. There are a good amount of americans that can’t be trusted with guns but have them.
The Bill of Rights (1–10)
The Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Those amendments were adopted between 1789 and 1791
You don’t feel that in 218 years, when this was written times have changed enough to pretty much make this worthless.
1789 people took months to get from one side of the US to the other (oh yea, many didn’t know how far that actually was) So by having guns they were able to hunt for food.
Also, what kind of organized policing did they have? The local militia, which was good citizens protecting.
And your remark about the people being able to uprise against the government. Power of words over violence
We have a military, we have police, we have organized neighbor hood watches. Unless you are from texas, what point do you having a gun on you is going to serve?
Most people that have a gun don’t understand the laws anyway, probably many “defending” themselves will be convicted of murder.
I Agree that crimes happen that involve weapons, but do you think arming people is going to be the step in the right direction?
It is a case of the individual. Again though, if you know someone is armed will you take a chance or will you prey on someone that isn’t armed. The right to bear arms is a cornerstone of our society and because of that we have the ability to prevent oppression if collected and concerted effort is put forth.
We are looked at as a warrior culture in America by our neighbors. In Canada there are less weapons but the criminals still have guns and there are still murders that happen in the cities. It’s a fact of life, we are a self destructive race. Population control at the elementary level.
Yeah, things would have been different, it would not have been so easy for Hitler to conquer the Jews but the end would have resulted in the same. Again, protecting your family is one thing but stopping an entire army who are
a) better equiped
b) better trained
c) greater in numbers
is not going to yield victory. Again, I don’t discount that it would have changed the death tolls a bit but you can’t tell me that the Jews would have fought off the Nazis completely.
A sad fact is that if the Jews had guns and did fight back it would never have been viewed as a tragedy as a tragedy is something you can prevent.
The actions of the Nazis although harse would have garnered some support in the world as police actions. Look at serbia and the ethnic albanians and muslims in both the Bosnian and Kosovo wars. Bosnia was not soo lucky, hence mass graves from massacres in Srebrenica and all over of Bosnia, Croatia
They had gunsin Kosovo, The UCK fought off a great number of trained serbian soldiers and para militaries. Eventually NATO stepped in but in the end they brought attention to the attrocities and prevented complete and udder annihilation of a people as this was the WRITTEN policy that Slobodan Milosovich put into place.
Here is a written excerpt of what a government bent on destruction will do.
LOL
Or The Jews were dead in their house holds instead of being put in concentration camps. I choose the later, Suffer and wait for freedom.
SPECULATION.
You can’t compare two different time periods and two different cultures, etc and think they would end the same.
Correct, a Huge difference, the germans had enough power and support to take over the world. If the US wasn’t involved… I think Europe would look much different.
Well you can when one conflict is a continuation of another. The Balkan conflicts were continuation of conflicts that started in WWII, mostly.
The Serbs lashed back on the rest of Yugoslavia for massacres that occoured in WWII as hitler marched across the balkans, you realize that Jews were not the only ones massacred in the camps. More Slavs and russians were murdered than Jews.
WWII was fought on the entire european continent not just germany, france poland etc.
It reached just about every spance of the globe minus some of south america and deep arab areas
The facts remain, Iraq, Chechnya, Kosovo, Ireland. An armed people do not go down soo easy.
Nazi Germany, Armenia, Laos, Vietnam. Unarmed people crumble.
Kill or be killed. Someone is always going to have the power in form of oppressive weapons. Until we live in a utopian society where we all get along it’s always going to be that way. Survival of the fittest.
Going back and forth about this isn’t going to solve the real issue which is the end user.
There was just as much violence before guns, look at the crusades, ancient greece, rome etc.
If you take away the guns, people will rob, murder with knieves of blunt instruments. We are a self destructive race.
It’s not that hard to understand. Some are smarter than others. It happens what are you gonna do. Punish the good law abiding citizens based on the sporadic moron.
OK then, STFU, because your right to freedom of speach has just been revoked, and i’m kicking your door in and taking your computer, cause unreasonable search and seizure has just been revoked as well. Now how valid are those bill of rights? Clueless fucks
since this post uses somebody else’s argument, so will I:
Well, right off the bat I can see that whoever compiled this tally has a different definition of defenseless than I do. I myself wouldn’t declare the largest military machine on the planet “unable to defend itself”, but by adding 20 million from the Soviet Union, this list does. After all, Stalin’s most infamous terror fell heavily on the Soviet Army, culling tens of thousand of officers, and executing three out of five marshals, 15 out of 16 army commanders, 60 out of 67 corps commanders and 136 out of 199 division commanders. In one bloody year, the majority of the officer corps was led away quietly and shot. It may be one of life’s great mysteries as to why the Red Army allowed itself to be gutted that way, but obviously, lack of firepower can’t be the reason.
Just a few steps down, we can trim another 20 million from our total. Take a look at China, 1935. Picture, if you will, a long, peaceful line of naive little natives queueing up to dump their guns into an industrial smelter, while off to the side, a bureaucrat with a clipboard checks their names off the list. That’s the image this list would like to create. The problem is, in 1935 China was in the midst of the Age of Warlords. Even if you know nothing about Chinese history, just the name “Age of Warlords” should tip you off. It was a pistolpacker’s paradise, a lawless Wild West where all power flowed from the barrel of a gun.
But it’s not just the ready availability of guns in China that contradicts the Big Tally. No, it’s just as important what everyone was doing with all those guns – fighting for supremacy, fighting against the Communists, fighting the Japanese. In other words, gun control or not, everyone who had a side to take had already taken sides. Everyone who wanted a gun already had a gun. The enemies of the state who were killed after 1949 weren’t defenseless; they were just plain beaten.
This is what I call the Cold-Dead-Hands Test. If the only way to get someone’s gun is to pry it from their cold, dead hands (literally or figuratively), that’s not gun control. When Grant disarmed the Confederates at Appomattox, that wasn’t gun control; that was taking prisoners. When the Soviets disarmed the remnants of the German 6th Army at Stalingrad, that wasn’t gun control either. Mao didn’t come to power in China by tricking the populace into surrendering their arms. He pummeled his well-armed opponents in a stand-up fight. There’s a big difference between unable to fight back, and fighting back but losing.
It’s just as hard to label the Cambodians defenseless when you remember that they had just spent five years and a half million lives trying to stop the Khmer Rouge. It’s also hard to call the Guatemalans defenseless when it took a 30-year civil war to rack up their body count. Even most of the victims of Hitler went down kicking and screaming. The majority of the Jews and Gypsies were hunted down in countries like Poland and Russia that had been overrun in open battle, and if they were lacking guns, it certainly wasn’t German laws that created the situation.
Frankly, this list is a pitifully weak argument against gun control, simply because most of the victims listed here did fight back. In fact, if there’s a real lesson to be learned from this roster of oppressions, it’s that sometimes a heavily armed and determined opposition is just swept up and crushed – guns or no guns.
Valid point, incredible arguement, let my change my view point…
YAY!! GUNS
you should be a lobbyist
:tup:
good info.
small story.
Back a few years ago playing airsoft in a park we had the right to use by its owner and township.
there were about 20 of us guys, playing airsoft in the park, with what looked like Ak-47s, m4’s M60’s, G3’s and many other assault rifles.
A state trooper pulled up and was called to the scene. We put down our FAKE guns and we talked to him.
Turns out becuase of the lack of orange tips someone thought we were doing training for some militia.
The quote I remember from the trooper is.
" If those guns were real, and you guys were planning something, It would take Erie county swat, NYS swat and the entire combined police forces of both to probably end this situation"
If you think about the north hollywood shootout as an example of that, you will know what he meant.
Guns will never be out of the hands of criminals, if we cannot defend ourselves, we might as well just play in traffic.
"The current situation in Kosova and Metohija can result in unpredictable consequences, especially if outside factors aim at implementing such a scenario. Therefore, particular attention must be paid to preventive actions, first of all by seizing all kinds of weaponry, in with licenses or without them, so to neutralize all paramilitary, para-police and para- territorial defense formations. If we have to fight a war to defend Kosova and Metohija, it should be fought with all possible means and have it finished as soon as possible. No talks or agreements should start with representatives of Albanians until the law on citizenship is adopted and until it is verified the exact number of those who recognize and accept this state as a state of theirs. "
This is the ending paragraph taken from the piece of Serb Govt policy that I posted.
People suck. Merry Christmas
there need to be more stringent laws regarding gun control. i am not liberal, i know there will always be guns, but this is just a polarized issue to begin with it is not simply that people are uneducated on the subject. however the simple fact that many of the illegal guns especially in the past precipitated when criminals would burglarize homes and steal them is a serious problem. owning a gun is a responsibility and those who choose to own and carry them should be scrutinized when consequences ensue from them. Gun ownership and storage needs to be more strict; proper locked storage is a must. Therefore the constitution should be amended that if you own a gun and someone steals it, and a crime is committed with the weapon, the licensed owner should be subjected to the same crime in court. If I own a gun and choose to store it outside of a locked gun safe, and someone breaks in and steals it, i should be 1- fined, 2- be required to report it immediately to the proper authorities, 3- lose my right to bear arms for life. also, if a murder is committed with the weapon before i report it, i should be charged with murder also. The simple fact is that many gun owners aren’t aware of the consequences. A strict penalty is not the only answer, but it is One definate way to shape up gun control. I am all for background checks, and CC permits i just believe there should be laws prosecuting registerd gun owners should malfeasance occur.
I personally think the problem is education more then control. why do american have cities exponentially more murders then other cities around the world?
it’s because we’re trained to go grab a gun whenever we’re scared or have an argument to settle.
the cause is not guns, it’s emails like the one that started this thread. created by idiots and believed by those too lazy to think.