IN PICTURES: How German women suffered largest mass rape in history by Moscow Marxist hordes

[westwall]

How simplistic. Hitler only took guns from the Jews and the enemies of the Reich.

The Army and the occupation of Germany | National Army Museum

Following their victory over Nazi Germany in 1945, the Allies were faced with administering a country in ruins. British soldiers had a leading role in this, helping to hunt war criminals, rebuild industry and help displaced persons.

www.nam.ac.uk

Wrong, as usual. The only people who could own guns in nazi Germany were members of the nazi party, and they were less than 10% of the population.

 

[surada]

Wrong, as usual. The only people who could own guns in nazi Germany were members of the nazi party, and they were less than 10% of the population.

Nope. Hitler only took guns from Socialists, Jews and his enemies. Look it up so you believe the truth over your assumptions.

 

[westwall]

Nope. Hitler only took guns from Socialists, Jews and his enemies. Look it up so you believe the truth over your assumptions.

Factually incorrect. I suggest you read a book called "The Nazi Seizure of Power" if you would like a more complete education.

 

[Failzero]

Nope. Hitler only took guns from Socialists, Jews and his enemies. Look it up so you believe the truth over your assumptions.

Even Hunters who were not party members surrendered their guns .

 

[westwall]

Even Hunters who were not party members surrendered their guns .

Yup. And jaegers were a protected class because of their work.

They were still disarmed and a nazi put in their place.

Surada is so stupid that she doesn't seem to understand that if you weren't a member of the nazi party you WERE an enemy of hitler.

 

[surada]

Yup. And jaegers were a protected class because of their work.

They were still disarmed and a nazi put in their place.

Surada is so stupid that she doesn't seem to understand that if you weren't a member of the nazi party you WERE an enemy of hitler.

Gun ownership was strict after WW2. Hitler made ownership more available for private citizens.

On Gun Registration, the NRA, Adolf Hitler, and Nazi Gun Laws: Exploding the Gun Culture Wars

Say the words "gun registration" to many pro-gun Americans and you are likely to hear that one of the first things that Hitler did when he seized power was to impose strict gun registration requirements that enabled him to identify gun owners and then to confiscate all guns, effectively...

scholarship.law.columbia.edu

 

[surada]

Factually incorrect. I suggest you read a book called "The Nazi Seizure of Power" if you would like a more complete education.

Lol

On Gun Registration, the NRA, Adolf Hitler, and Nazi Gun Laws: Exploding the Gun Culture Wars

Say the words "gun registration" to many pro-gun Americans and you are likely to hear that one of the first things that Hitler did when he seized power was to impose strict gun registration requirements that enabled him to identify gun owners and then to confiscate all guns, effectively...

scholarship.law.columbia.edu

 

[westwall]

Lol

On Gun Registration, the NRA, Adolf Hitler, and Nazi Gun Laws: Exploding the Gun Culture Wars

Say the words "gun registration" to many pro-gun Americans and you are likely to hear that one of the first things that Hitler did when he seized power was to impose strict gun registration requirements that enabled him to identify gun owners and then to confiscate all guns, effectively...

scholarship.law.columbia.edu

Oh lookey, yet another opinion piece devoid of facts.

Here are facts...

How the Nazis Used Gun Control​

"In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”

During the five years of repression that followed, society was “cleansed” by the National Socialist regime. Undesirables were placed in camps where labor made them “free,” and normal rights of citizenship were taken from Jews. The Gestapo banned independent gun clubs and arrested their leaders. Gestapo counsel Werner Best issued a directive to the police forbidding issuance of firearm permits to Jews.

In 1938, Hitler signed a new Gun Control Act. Now that many “enemies of the state” had been removed from society, some restrictions could be slightly liberalized, especially for Nazi Party members. But Jews were prohibited from working in the firearms industry, and .22 caliber hollow-point ammunition was banned."


"The U.S. media covered the above events. And when France fell to Nazi invasion in 1940, the New York Times reported that the French were deprived of rights such as free speech and firearm possession just as the Germans had been. Frenchmen who failed to surrender their firearms within 24 hours were subject to the death penalty."

How the Nazis Used Gun Control | National Review

The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration…

www.nationalreview.com

 

[Pellinore]

The National Review article is, at best, skewing the issue.

After World War I, Germany needed to restrict its gun ownership, so it did, in 1928. After the Nazis took over, they passed a second law in 1938, that loosened gun control for everyone with younger minimum ages, longer permit times, and plenty of exemptions. Unlike modern American gun control efforts, it notably and specifically prohibited one class of people (Jews) from manufacturing guns. The 1938 law didn't apply to long guns or hunters (at all), it didn't prohibit Jews from having guns, just from making them.

On the Night of Broken Glass, Jews had full access to firearms if they wanted them. It didn't help a bit. The next day, Hitler put into effect their equivalent of an Executive Order banning any Jews from owning any kind of weapon, up to and including clubs and knives.

Hitler didn't need to disarm or restrict ownership from the public. He didn't take power by going house-to-house, cudgeling poor, defenseless, disarmed Germans into submission. Neither did Mussolini, and neither now are Erdogan or Orban, and neither will the next guy. They seize power by twisting the laws to pass new laws to put themselves in position, and all the guns in all the hands of all the patriotic farmers isn't going to help that.

 

[westwall]

The National Review article is, at best, skewing the issue.

After World War I, Germany needed to restrict its gun ownership, so it did, in 1928. After the Nazis took over, they passed a second law in 1938, that loosened gun control for everyone with younger minimum ages, longer permit times, and plenty of exemptions. Unlike modern American gun control efforts, it notably and specifically prohibited one class of people (Jews) from manufacturing guns. The 1938 law didn't apply to long guns or hunters (at all), it didn't prohibit Jews from having guns, just from making them.

On the Night of Broken Glass, Jews had full access to firearms if they wanted them. It didn't help a bit. The next day, Hitler put into effect their equivalent of an Executive Order banning any Jews from owning any kind of weapon, up to and including clubs and knives.

Hitler didn't need to disarm or restrict ownership from the public. He didn't take power by going house-to-house, cudgeling poor, defenseless, disarmed Germans into submission. Neither did Mussolini, and neither now are Erdogan or Orban, and neither will the next guy. They seize power by twisting the laws to pass new laws to put themselves in position, and all the guns in all the hands of all the patriotic farmers isn't going to help that.

It also exempted "enemies of Hitler". A nice vague term that was used to deny 99.99999% of the German population that wasn't a member of the nazi Party.

The nazi party numbered less than 10% of the population of the country so your claim that gun control was loosened by the Nazis is laughable.

Fully more than 90% of the population could not get a permit to own a gun.

 

[Pellinore]

It also exempted "enemies of Hitler". A nice vague term that was used to deny 99.99999% of the German population that wasn't a member of the nazi Party.

The nazi party numbered less than 10% of the population of the country so your claim that gun control was loosened by the Nazis is laughable.

Fully more than 90% of the population could not get a permit to own a gun.

First of all, 10% less is 90%, not 99.99999%.

Second of all, no it didn't. You're cribbing the term "enemies of Hitler" from the National Review's non-footnoted term "enemies of the state," which the 1938 law didn't curtail from gun ownership, not a bit. It doesn't even mention them, and it doesn't even limit the ability for Jews to own weapons, not a bit. That wouldn't come until the order Hitler gave eight months later.

Also, remember this: None of these were actually legislature-passed laws. Every "law" that Nazi Germany passed after 1933 was a decree from Hitler, using the powers given to him when he strong-armed Hindenburg into giving him "emergency" dictatorial powers. If he had wanted to "pass" laws making every gun in the country illegal, he could have, but he didn't, because he had already done what your argument says he was trying to do: he had already taken over, without needing to take everyone's guns.

And it wasn't until just now that I noticed that the National Review article was written by Stephen Halbrook, who is an anti-gun-control lawyer with a well-broadcasted agenda, and his education is in psychology, not history or political science. Here, I found this paper written by Bernard Harcourt, a Columbia Professor with a background in political science, writing for the Fordham Law Review with the kind of extensive notes and detail that Halbrook lacks. It addresses the Nazi gun laws and Halbrook's position specifically, starting on page 669. (Don't be put off by the page number; the numbering starts in the 650s.)

If you read far enough, you may notice use of the term "enemies of the state" by one of Hitler's lead goons, which is likely where Halbrook picked up on the term.

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4029&context=flr

Enjoy.

 

[westwall]

First of all, 10% less is 90%, not 99.99999%.

Second of all, no it didn't. You're cribbing the term "enemies of Hitler" from the National Review's non-footnoted term "enemies of the state," which the 1938 law didn't curtail from gun ownership, not a bit. It doesn't even mention them, and it doesn't even limit the ability for Jews to own weapons, not a bit. That wouldn't come until the order Hitler gave eight months later.

Also, remember this: None of these were actually legislature-passed laws. Every "law" that Nazi Germany passed after 1933 was a decree from Hitler, using the powers given to him when he strong-armed Hindenburg into giving him "emergency" dictatorial powers. If he had wanted to "pass" laws making every gun in the country illegal, he could have, but he didn't, because he had already done what your argument says he was trying to do: he had already taken over, without needing to take everyone's guns.

And it wasn't until just now that I noticed that the National Review article was written by Stephen Halbrook, who is an anti-gun-control lawyer with a well-broadcasted agenda, and his education is in psychology, not history or political science. Here, I found this paper written by Bernard Harcourt, a Columbia Professor with a background in political science, writing for the Fordham Law Review with the kind of extensive notes and detail that Halbrook lacks. It addresses the Nazi gun laws and Halbrook's position specifically, starting on page 669. (Don't be put off by the page number; the numbering starts in the 650s.)

If you read far enough, you may notice use of the term "enemies of the state" by one of Hitler's lead goons, which is likely where Halbrook picked up on the term.

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4029&context=flr

Enjoy.

I have read the GERMAN side of it. Try reading The Nazi Seizure of Power if you actually wish to learn something.

The nazis didn't just take guns away, they also confiscated bayonets.

This is all well documented, but you actually have to want to learn the truth, not some socialist claptrap.

 

[Pellinore]

I have read the GERMAN side of it. Try reading The Nazi Seizure of Power if you actually wish to learn something.

The nazis didn't just take guns away, they also confiscated bayonets.

This is all well documented, but you actually have to want to learn the truth, not some socialist claptrap.

It's been a while, but doesn't Allen argue that the Nazis rose to power through democratic means, rather than through arms? Doesn't he therefore support my argument, not yours?

 

[westwall]

It's been a while, but doesn't Allen argue that the Nazis rose to power through democratic means, rather than through arms? Doesn't he therefore support my argument, not yours?

The Nazis used terror to drive people to vote for them. And, they used vote fraud to reinforce where they needed.

Once again, this is well known. The SA were the Para military of the nazi party. They numbered in the hundreds of thousands.

You need to read a book if you think the Nazis didn't use violence to come to power.

They were literally at war with the various factions for years.

 

[Pellinore]

That's not what I'm saying. Of course they used violence; I mentioned Kristallnacht earlier.

The question is whether they relied on gun control. You argued that they did, based on what you read in a misleading article. I said they didn't, pointing to a detailed, footnoted article by a political scientist that explains it in detail. You responded by pointing me to a book that isn't about the topic.

Nazis did not rely on gun control to seize power. They relied primarily on political means, and when they used violence, they did not wait to disarm the populace first.

Also, the anti-gun-control crowd consistently and falsely tries to pretend that Nazis used gun control, in an attempt to make modern American gun control look bad. The facts don't support their case.

And with that, I'm done here. Have a good Tuesday.

 

[westwall]

That's not what I'm saying. Of course they used violence; I mentioned Kristallnacht earlier.

The question is whether they relied on gun control. You argued that they did, based on what you read in a misleading article. I said they didn't, pointing to a detailed, footnoted article by a political scientist that explains it in detail. You responded by pointing me to a book that isn't about the topic.

Nazis did not rely on gun control to seize power. They relied primarily on political means, and when they used violence, they did not wait to disarm the populace first.

Also, the anti-gun-control crowd consistently and falsely tries to pretend that Nazis used gun control, in an attempt to make modern American gun control look bad. The facts don't support their case.

And with that, I'm done here. Have a good Tuesday.

No, based on MULTIPLE SOURCES, many of them period documents.

And the Nazis disarmed everyone so that they could begin their reign of terror.

I have been to the cathedral in Lich, and there are many Germans buried there who were murdered by the GESTAPO.

Not one of them a Jew.

 

[braalian]

A great way not to get raped by Russians is not to invade and rape their country first.

Germany invaded Russia first.

 

[miketx]

Hi. I'm the Easter Bunny

I heard you been messing with a chicken.

 

[AZrailwhale]

A great way not to get raped by Russians is not to invade and rape their country first.

Germany invaded Russia first.

The Russian raped and pillage their way across eastern Europe, not just Germany. What did the Poles do to the Russians?

 

[Litwin]