Do anti-2A'ers really? Pic related.
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (21)
sorted by:
I do not necessarily trust "fact checking" sites like this but:
Strict German gun regulation was in place before Hitler rose to power and he later oversaw gun laws that loosened many firearm restrictions.
According to a 2004 analysis by Bernard Harcourt, a professor at Columbia University, after the Germany’s defeat in World War I, the Weimar Republic, the government that preceded Hitler’s, passed very stringent gun laws that essentially banned all gun ownership in an attempt to both stabilize the country and to comply with the Treaty of Versailles of 1919.
By the time the Nazi Party came around in the early 1930s, a 1928 gun registration law had replaced the total ban and, instead, created a permit system to own and sell firearms and ammunition.
Dresden Technical University in Germany, told PolitiFact in 2015 that the order was followed "quite rarely, so that largely, only newly bought weapons became registered. At that time, most men, and many women, still owned the weapons they acquired before or during the first World War."
In 1938, the Nazis adopted the German Weapons Act, which "deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns as well as ammunition,"
I highly, highly doubt that the number of Jews who died in the holocaust would be even a 3% as great if they had the right to keep and use any weapon they acquired by making it or buying from somebody who acquired it by these standards.
I do wish that the people in Ukraine had personal firearms for the Holodomor. It would have prevented a great amount of suffering and injustice.
Indeed. As with the horribly misnamed "Great Leap Forward" in Mao's China.
The number of Jews that died in the Holocaust wasn't even a quarter of what they tell you in schools. Realistically under one million Jews died, mostly as a result of overwork, poor nutrition, and/or disease.
Holocaust propaganda is stupid and constantly contradicts itself.
I wonder why many of the smartest people of this generation and the previous have doubted the six gorillion :thonk:
Hell, even based Jew Murray Rothbard doubted the six gorillion, and he sure got a stain on his reputation.
I understand that holocaust numbers are hugely exaggerated, but the number killed, even if minuscule compared to what we're "taught", would be significantly lower with less strict gun laws, and probably close to a handful if people actually had the right to private property.
Duncan Lemp died to "laws". Never forget.
Yet what they don't like to talk about, was the fact that Hitler hated tobacco smoke (he was a major hypochondriac from living like a poor street rat all those years), and was the first to bring in anti-smoking laws.
Turns out dictators tend to like preventing people from exercising exclusive control over their own bodies. Almost like the concept, being an a priori truth, threatens their very existence.
Nah tobacco should be treated as a class 1 drug and fully banned. It's worse and more insidious than most other drugs.
Hitler was right.
The entire tobacco industry revolves around denying people exclusive control over their own bodies, so that they will keep buying their highly addictive drug no matter how much damage it's doing to their health, property and finances. Even if that was not true, converting the drug into an aerosol and spreading it around the room is still a violation of everyone else's right to not partake in their drug habit.
This claim cannot be made. To take tobacco or a cigarette or whatever is one's own choice, as an action. It is up to them whether they wish to make this action or not. It is not that you have a right to exclusively control your own body as such, but rather that nobody else can claim to have this right. Indeed, a drug addict is not in full control of himself while he is on 800 different drugs, all in lethal quantities, but nobody else is exercising such a right over him. There is nobody to punish.
Everybody else retains the ability to leave the room. The absence of doing so amounts to agreement with the consequences of the smoker's actions. To understand why, consider the case of a man asleep in bed with his wife; he starts to make sexual advances, and his wife does not resist or express discontentment in any way. Can she now later say she was in fact raped? Of course not. The husband had no way of knowing if she liked this, especially if this was the first time he had made such advances with her.
I'd argue whoever implemented the gun control laws is irrelevant. Another deflect from the underlying point to score points.
Whether Hitler took away their guns or whether they grew legs and walked away on their own, the point of this graphic is that if the people don't have the means to defend themselves, it doesn't take much for atrocities to come about.
I would like to see if there is any legal statues from this era showing this but you could argue that permitting schemes and registration is Nazi ideology...
I'm more interested in illegal statues. Bet they're sexier.