Auschwitz, the holy grail of liberalism

[Pete7469]

rtards' last post pissing and moaning about love canal and whatever else that retard was ranting about, and I didn't bother to read it because brain cells commit suicide when exposed to that sort of idiocy inspired me to point out that libturds like rtard hate the fact that the people they're programmed to hate are well armed.

Why would "tolerant" liberals be so upset with the concept of a well armed society? Is it because of all the murder and lawlessness in the cities democrooks have ruled? They have laws against murder, yet for some reason they believe laws against getting guns will stop sociopaths from killing people. Why do "tolerant" libturds like rderp hate the civil right of gun ownership enshrined in the bill of rights?

They're programmed to. The nazis, soviets, chi-coms, and every other murderous leftwing state programmed people to accept servitude. They programmed their people to believe they didn't need weapons, that the nanny state would always protect them. They didn't concern themselves about the safety of those they were told were the enemies of the state. They believed their moonbat messiahs would protect them.

Weapons grade stupidity is just as dangerous now if not more so.

 

[Gracie]

I'm confused. What does Auschwitz have to do with what you are ranting about?

 

[Pete7469]

I'm confused. What does Auschwitz have to do with what you are ranting about?

Auschwitz could not have happened without a systematic disarmament of the people. You really had that hard of a time connecting those dots?

 

[Gracie]

You really had that hard of a time connecting those dots?

Yes. Maybe you ranted too much and I got lost.

 

[Gracie]

Ok.

 

[Pete7469]

You really had that hard of a time connecting those dots?

Yes. Maybe you ranted too much and I got lost.

Yeah, I have a bad habit of doing that when it comes to this issue.

I am passionate about it.

 

[Gracie]

Well..I don't think we have to worry about becoming Auschwitz.

 

[konradv]

I'm confused. What does Auschwitz have to do with what you are ranting about?

Auschwitz could not have happened without a systematic disarmament of the people.

Next question: why do you act like a living exhibit outlining the reasons for disarming the public? Follow up: Is it really a good idea to allow the insane to have access to weapons?

 

[Pete7469]

Well..I don't think we have to worry about becoming Auschwitz.

Considering the history of government, I put my faith in individuals.

 

[TheOldSchool]

rtards' last post pissing and moaning about love canal and whatever else that retard was ranting about, and I didn't bother to read it because brain cells commit suicide when exposed to that sort of idiocy inspired me to point out that libturds like rtard hate the fact that the people they're programmed to hate are well armed.

Why would "tolerant" liberals be so upset with the concept of a well armed society? Is it because of all the murder and lawlessness in the cities democrooks have ruled? They have laws against murder, yet for some reason they believe laws against getting guns will stop sociopaths from killing people. Why do "tolerant" libturds like rderp hate the civil right of gun ownership enshrined in the bill of rights?

They're programmed to. The nazis, soviets, chi-coms, and every other murderous leftwing state programmed people to accept servitude. They programmed their people to believe they didn't need weapons, that the nanny state would always protect them. They didn't concern themselves about the safety of those they were told were the enemies of the state. They believed their moonbat messiahs would protect them.

Weapons grade stupidity is just as dangerous now if not more so.

Wow that's an insane dramatization of reality. It would be majorly PC to have that opinion deleted.

Again.

 

[Pete7469]

Next question: why do you act like a living exhibit outlining the reasons for disarming the public? Follow up: Is it really a good idea to allow the insane to have access to weapons?

This is why I ignore your posts and only ridicule them when I run across them incidentally.

You say I act like:

a living exhibit outlining the reasons for disarming the public?

So let me get this straight, someone who questions criminally insane totalitarian sociopath's motives for disarming people, are exhibits for a case to disarm the public?

Then to prove just how stupid you are you follow up with:

Is it really a good idea to allow the insane to have access to weapons?

Sniveling, servile, vacuous oxygen thieves like your dumbass demand that the criminally insane totalitarian sociopaths you vote for get total control of all the weapons.

Gulags would not have happened if genetic garbage like you didn't exist.

 

[Pete7469]

Wow that's an insane dramatization of reality. It would be majorly PC to have that opinion deleted.

Again.

When you wake up after huffing all those paint fumes see if you can remember what point you were trying to make.

 

[The Great Goose]

People are just ignorant about gun laws.

 

[BULLDOG]

You really had that hard of a time connecting those dots?

Yes. Maybe you ranted too much and I got lost.

Yeah, I have a bad habit of doing that when it comes to this issue.

I am passionate about it.

Some people call it passionate. Most call it nuts.

 

[midcan5]

An armed society is an uncivilized society, it is only the cowardly who find courage in a gun. Our daily shootings place America right alongside the backward nations of the world.

"Unfortunately for LaPierre et al., the notion that Hitler confiscated everyone’s guns is mostly bogus. And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.

University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt explored this myth in depth in a 2004 article published in the Fordham Law Review. As it turns out, the Weimar Republic, the German government that immediately preceded Hitler’s, actually had tougher gun laws than the Nazi regime. After its defeat in World War I, and agreeing to the harsh surrender terms laid out in the Treaty of Versailles, the German legislature in 1919 passed a law that effectively banned all private firearm possession, leading the government to confiscate guns already in circulation. In 1928, the Reichstag relaxed the regulation a bit, but put in place a strict registration regime that required citizens to acquire separate permits to own guns, sell them or carry them."

The Hitler gun control lie - Salon.com

The Hitler gun control lie

Besides, Omer Bartov, a historian at Brown University who studies the Third Reich, notes that the Jews probably wouldn’t have had much success fighting back. “Just imagine the Jews of Germany exercising the right to bear arms and fighting the SA, SS and the Wehrmacht. The [Russian] Red Army lost 7 million men fighting the Wehrmacht, despite its tanks and planes and artillery. The Jews with pistols and shotguns would have done better?” he told Salon."


Americans, never give up your guns: Plea from Communist Victims | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[konradv]

Next question: why do you act like a living exhibit outlining the reasons for disarming the public? Follow up: Is it really a good idea to allow the insane to have access to weapons?

This is why I ignore your posts and only ridicule them when I run across them incidentally.

You call this an 'IGNORE'? Apparently my analysis was correct. FYI, hyper-paranoia is NOT a sign of mental health,

 

[sealybobo]

I'm confused. What does Auschwitz have to do with what you are ranting about?

Auschwitz could not have happened without a systematic disarmament of the people. You really had that hard of a time connecting those dots?

That wasn't in Schindler's list or Ann franks diary

 

[sealybobo]

An armed society is an uncivilized society, it is only the cowardly who find courage in a gun. Our daily shootings place America right alongside the backward nations of the world.

"Unfortunately for LaPierre et al., the notion that Hitler confiscated everyone’s guns is mostly bogus. And the ancillary claim that Jews could have stopped the Holocaust with more guns doesn’t make any sense at all if you think about it for more than a minute.

University of Chicago law professor Bernard Harcourt explored this myth in depth in a 2004 article published in the Fordham Law Review. As it turns out, the Weimar Republic, the German government that immediately preceded Hitler’s, actually had tougher gun laws than the Nazi regime. After its defeat in World War I, and agreeing to the harsh surrender terms laid out in the Treaty of Versailles, the German legislature in 1919 passed a law that effectively banned all private firearm possession, leading the government to confiscate guns already in circulation. In 1928, the Reichstag relaxed the regulation a bit, but put in place a strict registration regime that required citizens to acquire separate permits to own guns, sell them or carry them."

The Hitler gun control lie - Salon.com

The Hitler gun control lie

Besides, Omer Bartov, a historian at Brown University who studies the Third Reich, notes that the Jews probably wouldn’t have had much success fighting back. “Just imagine the Jews of Germany exercising the right to bear arms and fighting the SA, SS and the Wehrmacht. The [Russian] Red Army lost 7 million men fighting the Wehrmacht, despite its tanks and planes and artillery. The Jews with pistols and shotguns would have done better?” he told Salon."


Americans, never give up your guns: Plea from Communist Victims | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Similar to the question, "why didn't the Jews rush the guards instead of walking into the gas chambers.

 

[sealybobo]

rtards' last post pissing and moaning about love canal and whatever else that retard was ranting about, and I didn't bother to read it because brain cells commit suicide when exposed to that sort of idiocy inspired me to point out that libturds like rtard hate the fact that the people they're programmed to hate are well armed.

Why would "tolerant" liberals be so upset with the concept of a well armed society? Is it because of all the murder and lawlessness in the cities democrooks have ruled? They have laws against murder, yet for some reason they believe laws against getting guns will stop sociopaths from killing people. Why do "tolerant" libturds like rderp hate the civil right of gun ownership enshrined in the bill of rights?

They're programmed to. The nazis, soviets, chi-coms, and every other murderous leftwing state programmed people to accept servitude. They programmed their people to believe they didn't need weapons, that the nanny state would always protect them. They didn't concern themselves about the safety of those they were told were the enemies of the state. They believed their moonbat messiahs would protect them.

Weapons grade stupidity is just as dangerous now if not more so.

You know who should have been better armed back then? Japanese Americans. What do you say to that?

 

[Pete7469]

That wasn't in Schindler's list or Ann franks diary

I'm saddened that your knowledge of history is limited to a couple of stories surrounding the experience of just 2 people alive in the 1940's.

I'm not surprised though.