When American gun owners sent guns to Britain during World War 2...

[2aguy]

The argument is always that law abiding citizens do not need to have guns...leave it to the police and military to protect us.........until the government becomes the bad guy, or simply can't or won't do it's job and protect the citizens from enemies both foriegn and domestic.....during World War2....the British were in need of guns....and turned to us for those guns....

The False Promise Of Civilian Disarmament The Daily Caller

In late 1940, the committee sent an urgent appeal—which, of course, appeared in American Rifleman—for Americans to send “Pistols – Rifles – Revolvers – Shotguns – Binoculars” because “British civilians, faced with the threat of invasion, desperately need arms for the defense of their homes.” Thousands of arms were collected and sent to England, one of which was a .30-’06 Model 1903 target rifle owned by Major John W. Hession. One of the pre-eminent highpower rifle target shooters of his day, Hession used that rifle to win Olympic gold at Bisley Camp in England in 1908.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Did Germans ever actually invade England proper that they needed the weapons for homesoil defense?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Did Germans ever actually invade England proper that they needed the weapons for homesoil defense?

Arguing from hindsight, I see.

 

[pwjohn]

Did Germans ever actually invade England proper that they needed the weapons for homesoil defense?

They could have used the guns to take potshots at German planes.

 

[blastoff]

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

 

[rightwinger]

None of those guns were ever needed
American gun owners were suckers

Not only that, but the guns and stockpiles of ammunition for the Nazi invasion of the US never happened

 

[2aguy]

Yes...thank you for showing the left wing strategy for national defense and personal protection......

1) hope that the violent criminal or genocidal government will be kind

2) hope that the violent criminal or genocidal government will be incompetent

3) hope that when faced by a violent criminal or a genocidal government, pure dumb luck will save you


I think the Dodo bird relied on that strategy......

Oh....and which of the 3 above strategies saved the 12 million Germans sent to the death camps...or the 25 million soviet citizens sent to the labor camps or starved to death....or the 70 million chinese murdered by mao........?

 

[pwjohn]

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when did invade. . The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, and stayed that way right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

 

[2aguy]

In the short term Russia was very much low hanging fruit. Bloody old England

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when they invaded. The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

No...the Germans had to deal with the U.S. and we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed to keep fighting....if we weren't in the war Russia would have fallen easily....

 

[pwjohn]

In the short term Russia was very much low hanging fruit. Bloody old England

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when they invaded. The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

No...the Germans had to deal with the U.S. and we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed to keep fighting....if we weren't in the war Russia would have fallen easily....

There's no denying that we helped but keep in mind, the German army lacked heavy long range bombers and we're still relying heavily on horses to transport men and equipment around.

That's a recipe for disaster in a war like that.

 

[rightwinger]

 

[2aguy]

In the short term Russia was very much low hanging fruit. Bloody old England

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when they invaded. The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

No...the Germans had to deal with the U.S. and we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed to keep fighting....if we weren't in the war Russia would have fallen easily....

There's no denying that we helped but keep in mind, the German army lacked heavy long range bombers and we're still relying heavily on horses to transport men and equipment around.

That's a recipe for disaster in a war like that.

I once posted about Russia and how they stayed in the war....Stalin murdered his senior generals, posted horrible orders about not surrendering, didn't equip his troops because they had planned on invading west and the Germans invaded first......sweeping up the Russian war materials......and then at vital points fighing the Germans the Germans had to shift focus because of the U.S. advancing against them....that saved Russias bacon a couple of times......on top of that we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed....

And the German policy of mass executions of Russian civilians and soldiers stiffened the resolve of the Russian people.....who at the outbreak of the war were trying to escape from Stalin......

Without the U.S. Germany would have run over Russia....

 

[2aguy]

Hmmm...except for hitler, mussolini, japan, kept South korea safe, helped vietnam...

And people murdered because they lacked the means to fight their own governments......75-100 million.......

 

[pwjohn]

In the short term Russia was very much low hanging fruit. Bloody old England

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when they invaded. The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

No...the Germans had to deal with the U.S. and we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed to keep fighting....if we weren't in the war Russia would have fallen easily....

There's no denying that we helped but keep in mind, the German army lacked heavy long range bombers and we're still relying heavily on horses to transport men and equipment around.

That's a recipe for disaster in a war like that.

I once posted about Russia and how they stayed in the war....Stalin murdered his senior generals, posted horrible orders about not surrendering, didn't equip his troops because they had planned on invading west and the Germans invaded first......sweeping up the Russian war materials......and then at vital points fighing the Germans the Germans had to shift focus because of the U.S. advancing against them....that saved Russias bacon a couple of times......on top of that we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed....

And the German policy of mass executions of Russian civilians and soldiers stiffened the resolve of the Russian people.....who at the outbreak of the war were trying to escape from Stalin......

Without the U.S. Germany would have run over Russia....

I don't doubt your knowledge in that part of the war. You're obviously well versed and more then capable of making your point in any debate.

 

[rightwinger]

Hmmm...except for hitler, mussolini, japan, kept South korea safe, helped vietnam...

And people murdered because they lacked the means to fight their own governments......75-100 million.......

Really?

Which were Constitutional Republics?
If you have a strong First Amendment, you don't need a Second Amendment

Our guns kill 32,000 Americans a year and have yet to do a thing to constrain government or stop an invasion

 

[rightwinger]

What the Brits REALLY needed instead of American handguns

 

[2aguy]

Hmmm...except for hitler, mussolini, japan, kept South korea safe, helped vietnam...

And people murdered because they lacked the means to fight their own governments......75-100 million.......

Really?

Which were Constitutional Republics?
If you have a strong First Amendment, you don't need a Second Amendment

Our guns kill 32,000 Americans a year and have yet to do a thing to constrain government or stop an invasion

Really....how stupid are you...what gaurantees the right to free speech......?

Gun murder killed 8454, people in 2013 according to the FBI table 8....

Accidental gun deaths in 2013....505....

Suicides account for the rest and since Japan and South Korea have absolute gun control their people still kill themselves at 2 times our rate without guns...so guns are not the issue...


Then of course you don't mention the number of time violent criminal attack is stopped or prevented with guns and lives saved...on average 2 million times a year (non military, non police civilian defensive uses of guns)

So you are wrong....

 

[2aguy]

What the Brits REALLY needed instead of American handguns

Yeah.......what they needed and got was the United States military, stocked with gun owning Americans who knew how to shoot.........

 

[2aguy]

In the short term Russia was very much low hanging fruit. Bloody old England

War strategery wasn't Adolph's strong suit. Had he invaded England with half the resources he threw at Russia the Brits would have needed every gun they could get their hands on.

Ignoring the hitler part of your comment I disagree with the rest of it.

Russia was ripe for invasion and was essentialy low hanging fruit for the Germans when they invaded. The Germans simply lacked the military hardware necessary to make the invasion payoff.

Bloody old England on the other hand would have been a full on disaster for the Germans starting from day one, right up until they were driven back into the sea from which they came.

No...the Germans had to deal with the U.S. and we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed to keep fighting....if we weren't in the war Russia would have fallen easily....

There's no denying that we helped but keep in mind, the German army lacked heavy long range bombers and we're still relying heavily on horses to transport men and equipment around.

That's a recipe for disaster in a war like that.

I once posted about Russia and how they stayed in the war....Stalin murdered his senior generals, posted horrible orders about not surrendering, didn't equip his troops because they had planned on invading west and the Germans invaded first......sweeping up the Russian war materials......and then at vital points fighing the Germans the Germans had to shift focus because of the U.S. advancing against them....that saved Russias bacon a couple of times......on top of that we supplied Russia with the equipment they needed....

And the German policy of mass executions of Russian civilians and soldiers stiffened the resolve of the Russian people.....who at the outbreak of the war were trying to escape from Stalin......

Without the U.S. Germany would have run over Russia....

I don't doubt your knowledge in that part of the war. You're obviously well versed and more then capable of making your point in any debate.

No...you don't have to take my word...I was debating a lefty who claimed the Russian won the war for us.....and just by doing a little research it is obvious that the only reason Russia survived was the allies fighting the Germans and supplying the Russians.

 

[rightwinger]

Hmmm...except for hitler, mussolini, japan, kept South korea safe, helped vietnam...

And people murdered because they lacked the means to fight their own governments......75-100 million.......

Really?

Which were Constitutional Republics?
If you have a strong First Amendment, you don't need a Second Amendment

Our guns kill 32,000 Americans a year and have yet to do a thing to constrain government or stop an invasion

Really....how stupid are you...what gaurantees the right to free speech......?

Gun murder killed 8454, people in 2013 according to the FBI table 8....

Accidental gun deaths in 2013....505....

Suicides account for the rest and since Japan and South Korea have absolute gun control their people still kill themselves at 2 times our rate without guns...so guns are not the issue...


Then of course you don't mention the number of time violent criminal attack is stopped or prevented with guns and lives saved...on average 2 million times a year (non military, non police civilian defensive uses of guns)

So you are wrong....

Guns guartantee the right to free speech?

When has that ever happened in OUR country?