Gun Contol

[X-it]

For those being convinced gun control is a good thing, man this sent shivers up my spine....a must read.


http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/survive.htm

 

[the_real_wild1]

I agree. Something big will happen. I just hope I am not around to see it.

 

[ABMax24]

I'm not pro control by any means, but I don't buy the notion that personal ownership of firearms would have prevented something like the Holocaust. Hitler had every intention and means to rid the world of the Jewish people. Had the Jews fought back with firearms they would have just been shot dead in the streets instead of in camps, and it would have been portrayed as an armed civilian uprising against the state by Hitler and the media.

 

[snopro]

If I was a government that wanted to impose its political agenda on a people and knew there was going to be a intense protest against it the first thing I would do is take away everyone's guns with legislation so the blow back would be manageable. Thats all I need to know when I hear about gun control. Anyone that doesn't think that is as naive as a 2 year old. Just sayin....

 

[Cdnfireman]

I'm not pro control by any means, but I don't buy the notion that personal ownership of firearms would have prevented something like the Holocaust. Hitler had every intention and means to rid the world of the Jewish people. Had the Jews fought back with firearms they would have just been shot dead in the streets instead of in camps, and it would have been portrayed as an armed civilian uprising against the state by Hitler and the media.

i disagree. If the Jews had been able to fight back and shoot the brownshirts when they kicked their doors in, the roundup of the Jews would have come to a quick stop. History is full of examples of tyranny, genocide and oppression of one group by another, almost always perpetrated by the government of the day. In ALL cases, the aggressors involved were complicit in or actively involved in the disarming of their victims.
As demonstrated again and again, the biggest threat to a persons life, liberty and prosperity is not from criminals, but from government.
Whether or not you agree with American gun laws and the second amendment of their constitution, it’s existence is what keeps their politicians respectful of and responsible to the populace.

 

[X-it]

Take the time to read the article what 10 handguns by half starved jews did. This was real not make believe

 

[52weekbreak]

Gun control is a sensitive subject for some and ultra sensitive for others. I am not a hunter but other members of my family are so I don't own one but have no problem with others who do. Notwithstanding this, I am an OK shot at the range and blowing stuff up by shooting tannerite canisters at the farm does hold some amusement for me. I have fired a couple different machine guns (an Uzi and a Thompson) on a business trip to Texas. I spend enough time in the southern states that hand guns do not particularly creep me out although it seems a little odd when a dinner companion has to return to the car to stash his gun as the sign on the restaurant door says "no guns allowed."

I think I have achieved as balanced a perspective on the issue as is likely possible overall. I, generally speaking, am not opposed to guns. I do believe there needs to be some control overall because some people - not all or even the majority - are unbelievably stupid about how they handle, store or use their guns. You should pass a test in proper handling, storage and use of a firearm. You should be of sound mind and not certifiable and not be a known or convicted criminal. I think most of this is in place in Canada.

Automatic weapons: Completely useless as a firearm except when being used to suppress enemy fire. It was explained to me by my nephew marine that while it is mostly by luck that you may actually hit someone, if you throw enough shells in that direction you should hit something. The most effective use is that the person/people you are shooting at will be too busy trying to keep out of the way of the bullets to shoot back. For this strategy to work, you need several automatic weapons and lots of preloaded clips and more than one person to fire them. Clips disappear in seconds and what gives you the edge is sustained fire. The majority of the time these things are left in single shot mode because they cannot be reliably aimed. Certainly was my experience when I was shooting them. No private person in the US or Canada needs to own one of these things for protection or for hunting.

Hand guns - Well, like the song Saturday Night Special, hand guns are mostly misused.Yea yea there are lots of things that can kill you but hand guns make that a little too simple and irrevocably fast from about 10 to 20 feet away. The other methods, knives or whatever at least require effort and sustained effort. I see some law enforcement videos and kind of wonder if they should have them some of the time as some seem pretty trigger happy. Guess you just don't know until you are in that situation.

Long guns and the Canadian rules as they apply to their use in hunting don't seem unreasonable to me nor is applying for an FAC. If compliance with that is too much bother, really, do you need a gun at all?

As far as I know there is no ban suggested for guns in general so, while interesting and to some degree informative, nobody is coming to take away your legally owned gun away from you. As far as I know, there has not been a dictatorship in north america since...well...the British when the US was a colony.

The argument seems somewhat hollow as if you know about the kind of weapons the military has access to, as a private citizen you won't last a millisecond longer than an aggressor lets you. A machine gun with a big clip loses to the guy with the chain gun who loses to the guy with the rocket launcher who loses to...well, you get the idea. If a well equipped military junta comes around, you are in serious trouble regardless of how well you armed.

I think the only discussions are around what are reasonable rules that will minimize improper use and outright stupidity by their owners. I certainly would prefer that gun ownership not be popularized simply for the sake of the possibility that some day we might really really want them.

 

[HotShotHarry]

i disagree. If the Jews had been able to fight back and shoot the brownshirts when they kicked their doors in, the roundup of the Jews would have come to a quick stop. History is full of examples of tyranny, genocide and oppression of one group by another, almost always perpetrated by the government of the day. In ALL cases, the aggressors involved were complicit in or actively involved in the disarming of their victims.
As demonstrated again and again, the biggest threat to a persons life, liberty and prosperity is not from criminals, but from government.
Whether or not you agree with American gun laws and the second amendment of their constitution, it’s existence is what keeps their politicians respectful of and responsible to the populace.

That's right. The Americans second amendment was created so the people have some protection from the government.

 

[DRD]

Does passing a test make you smart? Go take a drive in Calgary after some snow and let me know how all those drivers could have passed their test?

Automatic weapons: Highly regulated and expensive in the US. Only three crimes since 1934 with LEGALLY owned and obtained automatic weapons. Seems legal gun owners may not be the problem? Automatic weapons are prohibited in Canada already.

Again, legal gun owners in Canada are statistically have a much lower incidence of braking the law than the general public. Maybe it's because gun owners can be subject to warrantless searches of the fact they have a routine check by CPIC everyday?

Banning certain classes of firearms is the thing edge of the wedge. Guy with the lever action may not care that the 3 Gun competitor has his semi-auto's taken away, until they come for the lever guns.

 

[X-it]

Death to all Infidels, they are just joking ...honestly. And to keep things peaceful... they need your guns.

 

[the_real_wild1]

Full Auto is not needed for me but I sure wish my AR had the option to flip that extra bit. It is fun to shoot once in awhile. Let me make the decision. I don't need someone to do it for me.

 

[ABMax24]

i disagree. If the Jews had been able to fight back and shoot the brownshirts when they kicked their doors in, the roundup of the Jews would have come to a quick stop. History is full of examples of tyranny, genocide and oppression of one group by another, almost always perpetrated by the government of the day. In ALL cases, the aggressors involved were complicit in or actively involved in the disarming of their victims.
As demonstrated again and again, the biggest threat to a persons life, liberty and prosperity is not from criminals, but from government.
Whether or not you agree with American gun laws and the second amendment of their constitution, it’s existence is what keeps their politicians respectful of and responsible to the populace.

Hitler took the world to a global war and fought invasion on all borders during the war. You really think the Jewish civilians with firearms would have stopped him? Not even taking into account the many that would be unwilling to even use them against the SA or SS.

I lol'd at the part in bold. Not sure you can call very many US politicians "responsible to the populace."

 

[Cdnfireman]

Hitler took the world to a global war and fought invasion on all borders during the war. You really think the Jewish civilians with firearms would have stopped him? Not even taking into account the many that would be unwilling to even use them against the SA or SS.

I lol'd at the part in bold. Not sure you can call very many US politicians "responsible to the populace."

You need to read some history. Hitler didn’t go from zero to blitzkreiging across Europe. He subjugated his populace first. History has shown time and again that first you disarm your civilians then you oppress and destroy one segment of your populace. Once you’ve crushed one group of people it intimidates the rest into submission. History is replete with this happening. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin are but a few examples. How far do you think the ATF would get in the states if they tried to do what the brownshirts did in Germany?
If you think that US politicians aren’t responsible to their populace just look what happens whenever gun control is brought up. A few liberal democrats run their mouths and the rest stand there and say nothing. They know that if they incur the wrath of the NRA their next election may be their last. The division of power between the two houses in the states makes sure that no small group of states or politicians can sway an undue amount of power. They respect the will of their voters way more than Canadian politicians do.

 

[ABMax24]

You need to read some history. Hitler didn’t go from zero to blitzkreiging across Europe. He subjugated his populace first. History has shown time and again that first you disarm your civilians then you oppress and destroy one segment of your populace. Once you’ve crushed one group of people it intimidates the rest into submission. History is replete with this happening. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Idi Amin are but a few examples. How far do you think the ATF would get in the states if they tried to do what the brownshirts did in Germany?
If you think that US politicians aren’t responsible to their populace just look what happens whenever gun control is brought up. A few liberal democrats run their mouths and the rest stand there and say nothing. They know that if they incur the wrath of the NRA their next election may be their last. The division of power between the two houses in the states makes sure that no small group of states or politicians can sway an undue amount of power. They respect the will of their voters way more than Canadian politicians do.

The Jews constituted less than 1% of the German population at the time of their persecution, even if every single one was armed and willing to fight their resistance would have been miniscule in comparison to the force of the Nazis. The Jews were the scapegoat for the huge reparations imposed by the west on Germany after the first world war. But to believe that their ownership of firearms would have prevented this is ridiculous.

I think you need to read some real history, and not the basterized version of the NRA in support of their own cause.

 

[Cdnfireman]

The Jews constituted less than 1% of the German population at the time of their persecution, even if every single one was armed and willing to fight their resistance would have been miniscule in comparison to the force of the Nazis. The Jews were the scapegoat for the huge reparations imposed by the west on Germany after the first world war. But to believe that their ownership of firearms would have prevented this is ridiculous.

I think you need to read some real history, and not the basterized version of the NRA in support of their own cause.

It’s not the number of Jews that is the point here, it’s the disarming of the populace that is. There is nothing to say that only the Jews were disarmed, just that they were the ones persecuted in the largest and most evident fashion. Gypsies, handicapped, homosexuals and other Germans deemed “ undesirable “ were victims too. If the German populace had not been disarmed, they would have been able to fight back against the goon squads that went door to door. They didn’t show up in tiger tanks, they came in small groups and dragged families away into the night. If the first brownshirt in every door got a bullet in the head, the rest would soon disappear.
And by the way, no one knows how many Jews there actually were in Germany back then, but the common estimate is around 550,000, with about 150,000 of them butchered by the Nazis. (These are numbers used by the UN in genocide studies, not the NRA.)
Assuming these numbers are accurate, If only 1in5 of these numbers had a gun and defended his family (110,000), I’m pretty sure the history of Nazi germany would be different.

 

[ABMax24]

It’s not the number of Jews that is the point here, it’s the disarming of the populace that is. There is nothing to say that only the Jews were disarmed, just that they were the ones persecuted in the largest and most evident fashion. Gypsies, handicapped, homosexuals and other Germans deemed “ undesirable “ were victims too. If the German populace had not been disarmed, they would have been able to fight back against the goon squads that went door to door. They didn’t show up in tiger tanks, they came in small groups and dragged families away into the night. If the first brownshirt in every door got a bullet in the head, the rest would soon disappear.
And by the way, no one knows how many Jews there actually were in Germany back then, but the common estimate is around 550,000, with about 150,000 of them butchered by the Nazis. (These are numbers used by the UN in genocide studies, not the NRA.)
Assuming these numbers are accurate, If only 1in5 of these numbers had a gun and defended his family (110,000), I’m pretty sure the history of Nazi germany would be different.

There are many factors that would have influenced history in this case. The problem we have is we can look back on the situation and know what happened, but did the general public or the persecuted in Germany know what their actual fate would be while being rounded up? Its believed the allies found out of the death camps only 2.5 years before the end of the war. Many were sent to Ghettos prior to being sent to the death camps, so was it really worth fighting to the death for if your are just being moved to another area? As well I'm sure if the first in the door was shot the second and third would be shooting first and asking questions later.

In Canada we also have a similar story of rounding up certain groups of civilians, the government detained and seized the property of 21,000 Japanese Canadians after the bombing of Pearl Harbour. These citizens clearly had access to firearms in Canada, why aren't their reports of them using them to fight back against the government?

I think events like this are a huge tool in pro-gun activists handbag to promote their cause, but in practice I think there are very few places with citizens willing to turn them against the government should the need arise.

 

[rodney1960]

I'll keep my guns thanks for the history lesons though lol

 

[Clode]

Even if gun control comes back I won't participate, I didn't register chit the first time and I feel the same still.

 

[HotShotHarry]

There are many factors that would have influenced history in this case. The problem we have is we can look back on the situation and know what happened, but did the general public or the persecuted in Germany know what their actual fate would be while being rounded up? Its believed the allies found out of the death camps only 2.5 years before the end of the war. Many were sent to Ghettos prior to being sent to the death camps, so was it really worth fighting to the death for if your are just being moved to another area? As well I'm sure if the first in the door was shot the second and third would be shooting first and asking questions later.

In Canada we also have a similar story of rounding up certain groups of civilians, the government detained and seized the property of 21,000 Japanese Canadians after the bombing of Pearl Harbour. These citizens clearly had access to firearms in Canada, why aren't their reports of them using them to fight back against the government?

I think events like this are a huge tool in pro-gun activists handbag to promote their cause, but in practice I think there are very few places with citizens willing to turn them against the government should the need arise.

With a gun, a least you have the option to use it or not.

 

[ABMax24]

With a gun, a least you have the option to use it or not.

True, I own long guns myself, and I'm still not advocating for more gun control in Canada. I just don't agree with the original premise of this thread.