We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, April 6. 2021
How Confident Are We That Dark Matter Is Real?
A Fierce, Brief Book About the Holocaust - Wendy Lower’s ‘The Ravine’ looks at a photograph that many refuse to face
Consumers’ Monthly Streaming Service Spending has Doubled Since 2018
US Airports Busiest In More Than Year On Good Friday
Rachel Levine Wants Transgender Drugs and Surgery for Minors
Portland’s Police Exodus Continues As Murder Rates Surge
Grassroots organization forms to help parents fight critical race theory and politicization in classrooms
Teen Girls Who Murdered Uber Eats Driver in DC Get Incredible Plea Deal — Won’t Go to Prison
Georgia's new election law is more generous than that of New York
WHY DID BASEBALL CAPITULATE?
MLB requires photo ID to pick up tickets from Will Call, but boycotts Georgia for voter ID law
Tim Cook from Apple Condemns Voter ID Law in Georgia — Forgets It Takes a Valid ID to Get an Apple Card
Every adult has an ID
Palestinians: US Taxpayer Money Going to Terrorists
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
One of the most important lessons from the Jewish Holocaust is that they had to first take away their guns.
One important lesson that will never be learned here is to step out of the echo chamber.
In January 2013, Anti-Defamation League (ADL) director Abraham Foxman said in a press release: "The idea that supporters of gun control are doing something akin to what Hitler's Germany did to strip citizens of guns in the run-up to the Second World War is historically inaccurate and offensive, especially to Holocaust survivors and their families."
"ADL Says Nazi Analogies Have No Place In Gun Control Debate" (Press release). New York: Anti-Defamation League. January 24, 2013.
Jewish groups and Jersey City, New Jersey, mayor Steven Fulop criticized the NRA for comparing gun control supporters to Nazi Germany. The Jewish Federation of Greater MetroWest NJ released a statement saying: "Access to guns and the systematic murder of six million Jews have no basis for comparison in the United States or in New Jersey. The Holocaust has no place in this discussion and it is offensive to link this tragedy to such a debate."
Giambusso, David (December 17, 2013). "Jewish groups, Jersey City Mayor Fulop slam NRA for Holocaust comments". Star-Ledger.
"The idea that supporters of gun control are doing something akin to what Hitler's Germany did to strip citizens of guns in the run-up to the Second World War is historically inaccurate and offensive..."
And historically inaccurate. The Third Reich did not strip all its citizens of guns. The only people to lose the right to possess firearms were "enemies of the Reich", a group which included all political opponents of the regime and, predictably, German Jews.
But farmers, private citizens, hunters and sport shooting clubs continued to possess firearms throughout the existence of Nazi Germany.
Far from being gun control freaks, the Nazis were big on sport shooting and marksmanship, for rather obvious reasons.
>The only people to lose the right to possess firearms were "enemies of the Reich", a group which included all political opponents of the regime and, predictably, German Jews...But farmers, private citizens, hunters and sport shooting clubs continued to possess firearms....
I'm not sure I understand your point. It sounds like they seized guns from the groups they intended to persecute, but more-or-less let "their tribe" keep them??
More like guns weren't easily available to anyone in Germany from 1919 until the nazis came to power in the 1930s.
You will never learn this lesson until it's too late. Good luck
The point is simple: the Nazis didn't disarm the German people.
Frame it as you like.
IMO, the point is simple, and OldCurmudgeon stated it above:
" It sounds like they seized guns from the groups they intended to persecute, but more-or-less let "their tribe" keep them??
#18.104.22.168 OldCurmudgeon on 2021-04-06 12:05
Abe Foxman's being offended doesnt change that.
Now tell us about the 1938 Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons, which was enacted after Kristallnacht.
"..effectively deprived all Jews living under the Third Reich within the occupied Sudetenland and Austria of the right to possess any form of weapons, including truncheons, knives, firearms and ammunition...Before that, some police forces used the pre-existing "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews on the basis that "the Jewish population 'cannot be regarded as trustworthy'"
Apparently there are some anointed 'fact checkers' that argue that this wasn't really a case of depriving Jews from having weapons, because the regulation was poorly or incompletely enforced. It's not clear to me how this conclusion is reached; maybe the Nazis were too busily focused on actual extermination of Jews to worry about their own regulations. But to quote some New Jersey mayor as some kind of a definitive authority on the subject is absurd.
While most adults know that the Weimar Republic in the 1920s had more restrictive gun laws than the nazi regime including gun registration and permit requirements that were difficult to obtain by anyone, including Jews, I'm more interested in why you think you know more than "self-anointed 'fact checkers'" like the Anti-Defamation League about the Holocaust.
After you evade that question, here's another to evade:
Explain how a potentially armed Jewish population, which amounted to less than 0.75 percent of the German population in 1933 according to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum could have mounted any kind of defense against the German armed forces and paramilitary.
That's a pretty ignorant answer.
Can you explain why you believe you know more about the Holocaust than the ADL?
You poor thing, imagining you can play spurious bait & switch games and then demand answers from people expressing their point of view in a blog's comment section. It's terribly immature of you. We're accustomed to a much better quality of troll here at MF.
You're not used to being challenged here, are you. Get used to it.
Do you intend to support your opinion or not? Why do you think you know more about Jewish ownership of guns as a way of stopping the Holocaust than the Anti-Defamation League?
YOU think you are challenging, the rest of us think you are a rude MF troll. You are as transparent as you can be, dickhead!
"Explain how...could have mounted any kind of defense against the German armed forces and paramilitary."
So many responses to this:
Even if they died anyway can you imagine the satisfaction of killing one or more of your tormentors?
It started small in Germany as most genocides do. It accelerated simply because there was insufficient resistance.
If all Germans owned guns many Germans would have resisted. It was the inability to resist that allowed evil to rise up undeterred.
I don't understand why you think a hypothetical question about what would have made Jewish resistance more successful is relevant to the point that the Nazis made sure they had legal structures that allowed them to disarm the people they wanted to exterminate. Seems to me that anything that made the Einsatzgruppen's job easier was probably considered helpful to them.
I've listened to fifty years of ever intensifying claims that conservative policies are the equivalent of Nazism. Do you have another other than appeals to authority to explain why this one of out of bounds?
"I don't understand" ... of course you don't.
So pay attention, here's a short history lesson. Article 177 of the Versailles treaty banned all civilian gun use in Germany. The Weimar Republic enacted a law banning and requiring surrender of all guns in 1919, and again in 1920. This was replaced by a licensing scheme and tightly controlled use in 1928 that required a showing of need. So strict gun control including confiscation and registration was already in effect before the nazis came to power.
The nazi anti-Jew gun law came into effect in 1938, FIVE YEARS after persecution of the Jews began in 1933 -- the same year Dachau opened for business.
"Einsatzgruppen." Learning a new word doesn't mean you know what it was. They operated in occupied territories, especially Poland and Russia. You probably mean another criminal organization, but you can figure out which one.
Argument citing authorities is how the real world works. We could compare authorities, if you cited any, but even if you could, mine are better.
I think it's presumptuous for anyone, especially you, to put yourself in the position of a member of a Jewish family in the 1930s who likely hadn't owned a firearm since 1920. Maybe you think first person shooters where captain marvelous guns down platoons of nazis with a hunting shotgun are historical depictions of the time, but you'd be wrong if you thought so.
WTF does this thread have to do with conservative policies and nazis? The OP made a false statement about gun control, he's been corrected.
Once again, you couldn't be more arrogant and condescending if you tried.
I bet you're a real treat at parties.
Isn’t it true that the ADL favors very strict gun control laws? I don’t think they are a very neutral source for the topic of gun control. Which makes me question their facts.
The ADL took after Ben Carson for statements that echo this Dachau survivor:
Q.) Did the camp inmates ever bring up the topic, "If only we were armed before, we would not be here now"?
A.) Many, many times. Before Adolph Hitler came to power, there was a black market in firearms, but the German people had been so conditioned to be law abiding, that they would never consider buying an unregistered gun. The German people really believed that only hoodlums own such guns. What fools we were. It truly frightens me to see how the government, media, and some police groups in America are pushing for the same mindset. In my opinion, the people of America had better start asking and demanding answers to some hard questions about firearms ownership, especially if the government does not trust me to own firearms, why or how can the people be expected to trust the government?
There is no doubt in my mind that millions of lives could have been saved if the people were not "brainwashed" about gun ownership and had been well armed. Hitler’s thugs and goons were not very brave when confronted by a gun. Gun haters always want to forget the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, which is a perfect example of how a ragtag, half starved group of Jews took up 10 handguns and made asses out of the Nazis.
"If only we were armed before, we would not be here now"
Because they'd have been shot resisting arrest and whatever slim chance their family might have had to survive would been over.
Warsaw. That took place in Poland in '43 when everyone understood what deportations to death camps meant, not in prewar Germany when it was still possible to leave the country.
You're misreading history to try to make a current political point if you think there's any credible analogy between Warsaw '43, Germany '38 and/or the US in 2021. Your kind of argument really is an insult to the 13,000 victims in '43 (against 150 Germans, according to the official report, which stated that the main weapons were grenades and other explosives).
Do you realize, that what I had quoted was from an actual survivor of Dachau? Those words are his. They are his arguments. So am I really insulting him? Maybe you should tell him how insulting his arguments are to the dead at Warsaw?
Here is a rather detailed reading on the Ghetto Uprising. I'm not sure where you are getting your facts. While there, check out the article on the Polish uprising in '44.
Just because you don't want to fight back, doesn't mean that the rest of us don't. We actually read history; deeper than a quick scan through a Wikipedia article. Check out what the Comanche on the plains of Texas did, armed (at first) with nothing more than bows and arrows.
Do you understand that the survivor would have been shot if he attacked a nazi at any time from 1933 onward and his family murdered as well? What part of that escapes you? Do you think he doesn't know that? Do you know what "reprisals" are? You obviously don't so find a history book and look up Lidice, look up Lezaky and the reprisals after Reinhard Heydrich was assassinated, there were over 2,000 murders and tens of thousands of deportations because Heydrich was killed. That is one example among thousands of others.
You are insulting the dead of both uprisings by this asshatted fantasy of the Jews and other Poles successfully uprising and conflating Poland in '43 with Germany in '33 for the sake of making a stupid comparison to gun control in the USA.
In the '43 uprising they knew they had no chance of success but made a choice about how they were going to die according to the second in command who managed to escape. Look up Masada if you still don't get it. In '44 they thought they might succeed but were betrayed by the Soviets.
A false lesson and a bit of a canard.
German Jews numbered perhaps 0.7 percent of the German population before WWII. There was never any question of such a small and disparate demographic successfully resisting the Nazis or preventing the German government from confiscating their firearms.
During WWII, the question was rather moot anyway: any Jewish resistance in Europe faced the same problem as other resistance groups: the overwhelming military power of the SS and Wehrmacht. Think for a moment what it took for the British Empire, the US and the Soviets to defeat that.
And European Jews had a problem that (for example) French partisans didn't: the ongoing deportation of their entire population base to the camps and their deaths.
Your response begs the question.
For example: "the ongoing deportation of their entire population base to the camps and their deaths."
Well if all the Jews were armed would there have been ongoing deportations???
I will misquote Samuel Johnson "“Depend upon it, sir, when a Nazi knows he is to be shot if he tries to assault a jew, it concentrates his mind wonderfully.”
And do not forget the most important point that hasn't even been mentioned; If someone with a gun had shot Hitler in 1933 it is extremely likely none of these terrible things would have ever happened. THAT is the power of a gun in the hands of the people!!!
But they weren't armed. Gun control laws from the 20s -- before the nazis took power -- ensured that.
So your hypothetical collapses.
Which it would anyway, since when the persecutions stated, much less than 1% of the German population was Jewish, and the nazis controlled the military, paramilitary, the police and their informers.
You should read up on the Holocaust and disabuse yourself of these historical fantasies.
So, then we agree that it was gun control that allowed the Nazi's to take over the country. We merely disagree about when and who began the gun control. You are making progress. Maybe there is hope for you yet. Sit down and rest now I wouldn't want you to become confused.
"If someone with a gun had shot Hitler in 1933 it is extremely likely none of these terrible things would have ever happened."
A meaningless assertion because it never happened.
There were actually a number of attempts to bump off Hitler between 1932 and 1945, some of which would have required shooting him at close quarters. But these were either exposed or failed to come to fruition. Heck, Hitler could have been killed on the Western Front at any moment between 1914 and 1918. Obviously, that never happened either.
A word of advice: you cannot successfully advance an argument about history by basing your position on events that never happened.
I was raised in a Jewish family, and I had relatives die in World War Two. The Jews in Germany were very politically active; they were not the "passive innocents" that they are portrayed as in the Movies. There were many Jews who belonged to the communist party, and attended demonstrations in Berlin. I'm not saying that killing them was justified, but only one side of the story is being told. I'd like to see a movie which shows Jewish political activity in Germany before the war. People would be very surprised. And nowadays, if you look at the ridiculous oversimplification of history, they make movies like "Jo Jo Rabbit" which (as usual) paints the communists as heroes, and the Germans as villains. Soon, we'll see a lot more movies about communist heroes. Jewish Hollywood will glorify Marx, and Lenin, and maybe Mao Tse Tung. So really, not much has changed.
They say that it's everywhere in the Universe. It's all powerful and can't be seen.
When I first heard about Dark Matter I thought: "Aren't they describing God"?
Yes, removing the guns from the hands of the bourgeois is the primary focus once the political ducks have been lined up. They want to take them because they're planning to do something you would shoot them for.
Now we have the corporations clamoring to show their virtue in the Progressive Pagent. What do normal people think, when a corporate head makes a choice that is critical of something that ensures the health of your society - A person that heads a business that is dependent on crowds - like baseball, or an airline? What do you think, when the head of a energy utility announces they will 'go green' with 'sustainable' energy sources that are plainly not sustainable, and will cost the customer more money, for a poorer quality of service? What do you think, when an oil & gas company announces they will work to eliminate emissions? Or an auto/truck manufacturer announces they will phase out internal combustion engines, with no viable alternative even on the horizon? Or an elected district attorney declaring they will no longer arrest, prosecute, or bring justice for certain arbitrarily-declared criminal behavior?
Modern conservatives get hung up on pointing out the constant hypocrisy of Progressive thinking, as if that is a viable riposte. It is not. Progressives don't see it as hypocrisy; They see it as the natural order of things. They're superior and entitled. Get used to it - or start getting right up in their face. There are no other alternatives; Fight, or give up and accept the lot they have prepared for you.
How Confident Are We That Dark Matter Is Real? Well, what about DAWN matter? It's lighter!! (OK, I've got that out of my system...)
Portland’s Police Exodus Continues As Murder Rates Surge: Portland prefers to have the ANTIFA fascists.
Grassroots organization forms to help parents fight critical race theory and politicization in classrooms: I hope sanity prevails.
WHY DID BASEBALL CAPITULATE? The STUPID was STRONG in those ones...
The opposition to voter ID is simply amazing. Everyone has an ID. Check out the voting laws of Mexico sometime. I wish America had Mexico voting laws.
If I boycott all the corporations that act like stasi thugs, I wouldn’t be able to buy much. I keep having this nagging feeling that I better move away from this deep city. I look at the news everyday and wonder what crazy thing the left will force on us today? When will the American people say enough is enough?
My God, the things they are doing to children with the transgender stuff is sickening! The left is sexualizing children as early in their lives as possible. Molding their fragile young minds. It is child abuse. As a Christian, I feel I will be held accountable for it. What did you do to try and stop it?
re MLB requires photo ID to pick up tickets from Will Call, but boycotts Georgia for voter ID law
As MLB is boycotting GA, why not make the Atlanta Braves play all their games on the road?
Why is it OK to play regular season games there but not the All-Star game?
Only for show. But you knew that. I'm just making it clear for the others.
Teenagers and Murder
Part of the explanation is that the 13 year old can't legally be tried as an adult in D.C. -- D.C. Code of 1981, Pt. II, Sec. 16-2307(e-2). The 15 year old could have been charged as an adult, but the government decided not to for reasons unexplained.