France turned over their guns 5 years before the nazis invaded...didn't turn out well for them.

[2aguy]

New book....gun control in France during the nazi occupation...

The French wanted to reduce violence in their country, so they took guns away from law abiding Frenchmen......

Then the nazis invaded and they didn't have the resources to fight them off..... unlike Switzerland. Switzerlad didn't turn in their military weapons, they had 435,000 civilians armed and ready to fight against any invasion...and they weren't invaded.......

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/08/france_the_nazis_and_gun_control.html

In 1935, French prime minister Pierre Laval, who later served in the Vichy government during the Nazis' four-year occupation of France, commanded French citizens to surrender their firearms. Laval and France's ruling parties feared social revolution and banned "war" weapons, instituting strict gun registration policies. They believed that repressive limits on civilian gun ownership were necessary at a time of Depression-sparked unrest and ongoing conflicts among various political factions. Strict time limits for firearms registration and harsh penalties for noncompliance, including forfeiture, fines, and imprisonment, were put in place. Laval's government did not foresee the impact these restrictive measures would have on a Nazi-conquered France just five years later, when firearms surrender would be required under threat of death.

In Gun Control in Nazi-Occupied France: Tyranny and Resistance, attorney Stephen P. Halbrook explores the impact and efficacy of gun control measures on Wehrmacht-controlled France and how these measures hindered the French Resistance's fight against Nazi tyranny. The author asserts that Laval's 1935 gun control efforts left the French people vulnerable to the Nazi invaders and ill equipped to deal with the Nazi invasion of 1940, plus simplified the Nazi efforts to confiscate firearms and impede a French resistance.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The French civilians would not have raised up against the Germans. You have no evidence that would have happened, 2aguy.

The freedom fighters had plenty of guns from the defeated military and the allies.

 

[2aguy]

The French civilians would not have raised up against the Germans. You have no evidence that would have happened, 2aguy.

The freedom fighters had plenty of guns from the defeated military and the allies.

They did raise up.....the ones who were brave enough despite being disarmed by their own government.

Funny how you guys tell us the unarmed people who didn't have guns wouldn't have stood up to the invaders if they had had guns.... and the only information you have is that the people of France didn't have guns to stand up to the invaders.....

Read the article...... They didn't have enough guns, not like Switzerland where they had 435,000 civilians armed with miltary rifles, actual military rifles, ready to fight any invasion..

They weren't invaded...France was.

 

[2aguy]

The French civilians would not have raised up against the Germans. You have no evidence that would have happened, 2aguy.

The freedom fighters had plenty of guns from the defeated military and the allies.

I enjoy when you guys tell us that unarmed people would not have risen against a brutal oppressor....considering they didn't have enough guns on a general scale to arm enough people to be a real deterrent....but you guys know better because.... you make things up.

An armed population across all the countries of Europe would have made nazi occupation impossible....but Europe disarmed their people using the same arguments twits like you are making today.... and they sent 12 million innocent Europeans to death camps...

 

[williepete]

They believed that repressive limits on civilian gun ownership were necessary at a time of Depression-sparked unrest and ongoing conflicts among various political factions.

Prewar France was a mess. There are many reasons an advanced Western country with a huge, well equipped army fell in only six weeks.

The Collapse of the Third Republic by William Shirer gives an excellent account of the fall by an eye witness.

 

[Cellblock2429]

New book....gun control in France during the nazi occupation...

The French wanted to reduce violence in their country, so they took guns away from law abiding Frenchmen......

Then the nazis invaded and they didn't have the resources to fight them off..... unlike Switzerland. Switzerlad didn't turn in their military weapons, they had 435,000 civilians armed and ready to fight against any invasion...and they weren't invaded.......

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/08/france_the_nazis_and_gun_control.html

In 1935, French prime minister Pierre Laval, who later served in the Vichy government during the Nazis' four-year occupation of France, commanded French citizens to surrender their firearms. Laval and France's ruling parties feared social revolution and banned "war" weapons, instituting strict gun registration policies. They believed that repressive limits on civilian gun ownership were necessary at a time of Depression-sparked unrest and ongoing conflicts among various political factions. Strict time limits for firearms registration and harsh penalties for noncompliance, including forfeiture, fines, and imprisonment, were put in place. Laval's government did not foresee the impact these restrictive measures would have on a Nazi-conquered France just five years later, when firearms surrender would be required under threat of death.

In Gun Control in Nazi-Occupied France: Tyranny and Resistance, attorney Stephen P. Halbrook explores the impact and efficacy of gun control measures on Wehrmacht-controlled France and how these measures hindered the French Resistance's fight against Nazi tyranny. The author asserts that Laval's 1935 gun control efforts left the French people vulnerable to the Nazi invaders and ill equipped to deal with the Nazi invasion of 1940, plus simplified the Nazi efforts to confiscate firearms and impede a French resistance.

/----/ The same thing happened in the UK. After WWII the citizens were forced to turn on their guns. When the Nazi dropped in for a visit, not only did they beg the US for arms, but no Brit knew how to use them.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The French civilians would not have raised up against the Germans. You have no evidence that would have happened, 2aguy.

The freedom fighters had plenty of guns from the defeated military and the allies.

They did raise up.....the ones who were brave enough despite being disarmed by their own government.

Funny how you guys tell us the unarmed people who didn't have guns wouldn't have stood up to the invaders if they had had guns.... and the only information you have is that the people of France didn't have guns to stand up to the invaders.....

Read the article...... They didn't have enough guns, not like Switzerland where they had 435,000 civilians armed with miltary rifles, actual military rifles, ready to fight any invasion..

They weren't invaded...France was.

/----/ Arguing facts with a gun grabber is like telling a pig not to roll in the mud.

 

[JakeStarkey]

2aguy does not get that about 5% of the French rose up (no, bud, it was not the whole nation). LaValle's program had not effect on la Resistance.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Switzerland also didn't declare war on the Nazis, and is heavily German speaking.

 

[night_son]

The French civilians would not have raised up against the Germans. You have no evidence that would have happened, 2aguy.

The freedom fighters had plenty of guns from the defeated military and the allies.

I enjoy when you guys tell us that unarmed people would not have risen against a brutal oppressor....considering they didn't have enough guns on a general scale to arm enough people to be a real deterrent....but you guys know better because.... you make things up.

An armed population across all the countries of Europe would have made nazi occupation impossible....but Europe disarmed their people using the same arguments twits like you are making today.... and they sent 12 million innocent Europeans to death camps...

I agree with you in principle and also, that the population of our America and other Western nations should be heavily armed. However, I'd take it all one step further with a shout out to command and control structure: our need for a community, county, state and national, civilian one. I believe that without some kind of national civilian corps unit organization and command structure, the chances of effectively resisting American tyranny lessens--even fails. Small unit guerrilla warfare campaigns are one thing, but at the very we least, we need the equivalent of veteran military advisors--retired veteran irregular warfare guys--to train up civilian groups in the event of the rise of a hostile anti- U.S. government. Train ten. Ten train 100, 100 train five hundred . . . etc.

 

[2aguy]

They believed that repressive limits on civilian gun ownership were necessary at a time of Depression-sparked unrest and ongoing conflicts among various political factions.

Prewar France was a mess. There are many reasons an advanced Western country with a huge, well equipped army fell in only six weeks.

The Collapse of the Third Republic by William Shirer gives an excellent account of the fall by an eye witness.

Not discussing the incompetence and corruption of the French military...we are talking about an unarmed population left defenseless after their military fell....government incompetence after disarming their people.... the usual story.

 

[williepete]

Not discussing the incompetence and corruption of the French military...we are talking about an unarmed population left defenseless after their military fell....government incompetence after disarming their people.... the usual story.

I get it and agree. But it's all part of a larger and interesting story. The French government didn't trust it's citizens with firearms. The French people, government and big business were fractured. Being unarmed just allowed the rotten structure to collapse quicker.