Dangerous gun control precedents

Jan. 3, 2013

By Katy Grimes

As the gun control debate is rekindled in the United States following the recent Newtown, Connecticut school killings, I am reminded of the atrocities which took place in Germany and occupied Europe during World War ll.

Gun control can be a dangerous precedent.

WWll

“Over a period of several weeks in October and November 1938, the Nazi government disarmed the German Jewish population,” historian Stephen Halbrook wrote. In his book,  “‘Arms in the Hands of Jews Are a Danger to Public Safety’: Nazism, Firearm Registration, and the Night of the Broken Glass,” Halbrook explained that the Nazis imposed the death penalty on a Pole or Jew, “If he is in unlawful possession of firearms . . . or if he has credible information that a Pole or a Jew is in unlawful possession of such objects, and fails to notify the authorities forthwith.”

Free America rejects gun control

“In 1941, U.S. Attorney General Robert Jackson called on Congress to enact national registration of all firearms. Given events in Europe, Congress recoiled, and legislation was introduced to protect the Second Amendment, Halbrook continued. “Rep. Edwin Arthur Hall explained: ‘Before the advent of Hitler or Stalin, who took power from the German and Russian people, measures were thrust upon the free legislatures of those countries to deprive the people of the possession and use of firearms, so that they could not resist the encroachments of such diabolical and vitriolic state police organizations as the Gestapo, the Ogpu, and the Cheka.'”

Rep. John W. Patman added: “The people have a right to keep arms; therefore, if we should have some Executive who attempted to set himself up as dictator or king, the people can organize themselves together and, with the arms and ammunition they have, they can properly protect themselves. . .”

Perhaps one of the most amazing events during WWll was the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1943. The heroism by the citizens in the Warsaw Ghetto is unsurpassed. Using only a few remaining handguns, Warsaw Jews “put a temporary stop to the deportations to extermination camps, frightened the Nazis out of the ghetto, stood off assaults for days on end, and escaped to the forests to continue the struggle. What if there had been two, three, many Warsaw Ghetto Uprisings?” Halbrook asked.

Other countries have tried and failed at gun control

Despite the recent school, movie theater and shopping mall rampages, America actually is not high on the gun-related murder list maintained by the United Nations (Homicides by firearms).

But countries with stronger gun control laws have higher murder rates, according to U.N. statistics. Russia, Brazil, South Africa and Mexico, for example, have very strict gun control laws, and much higher murder rates.

Yet gun ownership has always been very strong in Switzerland, ranked number three for gun ownership in the world. The Swiss have had historically lower murder rates than countries with strict gun control laws.

Gun ownership in Switzerland is part of the national identity, and particularly harkens back to WWll. The Swiss believe they were spared a German invasion because it was commonly known that all households were armed, and all of the men had been taught to shoot.

Israel, New Zealand, and Finland also have high rates of gun ownership and lower murder rates.

Swiss government figures show only 0.5 gun homicides per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. By comparison, the U.S rate in the same year was about 5 firearm killings per 100,000 people, according to the 2011 U.N. report.

Gun control failure

Americans do not need to look halfway around the world to see where gun control has failed. Chicago, which just announced a record high of 500 murders in 2012, is one of America’s most violent cities. Gang violence terrorizes many neighborhoods, where brutality thrives as boys and young men slaughter each other, regardless of strict gun laws.

Most people understand the need to find answers after horrific tragedy. It may be easier for some to blame guns rather than the people who use them to kill. But it is a weak reason to criminalize gun ownership by law-abiding citizens, and a potentially dangerous precedent, deeply rooted in history.

29 comments

Write a comment
  1. Ted Steele, Navigator
    Ted Steele, Navigator 3 January, 2013, 11:27

    Katy— What a tired saw— we need guns in case of revolution— when the military is reigning down sidewinders and snake and nape on your street you won’t be thinking of waiving your saturday night special or Bushmaster—- Gun control will not stop tthe constant parade of mass murder by gun in this Country. We know that. But the overdetermination of this issue requires all clear thinking people to look to ALL solutions— gun control is part of the solution.

    Reply this comment
  2. PT
    PT 3 January, 2013, 11:45

    Ted. Stop electing yourself as one of those ‘clear thinking people’.

    Reply this comment
  3. Umbriel
    Umbriel 3 January, 2013, 14:17

    I personally count myself a supporter of gun rights, but I don’t find that UN data especially helpful. It shows that the US rate of homicide-by-gun per 100K people is about 6x higher than Canada, and 10-30x higher than Western European nations. The countries with significantly higher rates seem to be nations in Central and South America with active insurgencies and/or rampant organized crime. That many of these countries also have strong anti-gun laws might be argued to show the impotence of such laws, but might also arguably reflect the general ineffectiveness of law enforcement in the nations in question, and/or the relative ease of gunrunning in the western hemisphere.

    It’s clear to me that the anti-gun arguments centered on lower European gun violence are shaky, given that none of these nations achieved those rates by disarming an already heavily-armed nation while maintaining the pretense of democratic rule. A better comparison, to my mind, is prohibition — An also well-intentioned suppression of a public right in hopes of preventing the harm caused by an irresponsible minority’s use of that right. Major, confiscatory gun control in the US would achieve nothing more than disarming a lot of otherwise responsible gun owners, criminalizing a lot more otherwise harmless gun owners, and empowering criminals. One need only look at the 1920s and our current drug laws to see the effects.

    Reply this comment
  4. StevefromSacto
    StevefromSacto 3 January, 2013, 14:31

    Katy has to chant “take away our guns” and “repeal the Second Amendment” and bow in the direction of NRA headquarters six times a day.

    Putting reasonable limits on assault weapons and large ammo magazines DOES NOT MEAN repeal of the Second Amendment, period. You do not need an assault weapon or a 100-round magazine to hunt or defend yourself and your family.

    Just because you have the right to drive on city streets doesn’t mean you should be allowed to do it in an Indy car or dragster.

    There is a reasonable middle ground on this issue, but–as always–the Dog refuses to acknowledge it.

    Reply this comment
  5. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 3 January, 2013, 18:39

    Ted. Stop electing yourself as one of those ‘clear thinking people’.
    ==
    🙂

    Reply this comment
  6. The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm)
    The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm) 3 January, 2013, 19:58

    Thanks– I like to think so…..

    Reply this comment
  7. David Yates
    David Yates 3 January, 2013, 20:44

    Well Ok before I even start, I am not a level Headed thinker! and I do agree with Steve from Sacto on one point “one only” we do not need 100 round Magazines to Hunt with; unfortunately, however we do need those and More to stand up to a corrupt Government bent on taking even more of rights away! In case you haven’t noticed Katy is not the one posting these warnings, History tells us one thing will never change the lust of “Power”;

    Reply this comment
  8. Dave B
    Dave B 3 January, 2013, 22:13

    Steve pontificating on the hunting or defense needs of 100 round magazines (golly, that one actually jammed didn’t it? Probably saved lives, but that is not convenient to this story) shifts the debate from the actually damage caused by “assault weapons” to one of determining what I need for hunting or defense. Where does anybody come off tell me what I need or don’t need? If you think the second amendment doesn’t provide for standard military weapons, perhaps you should research some primary documents about the affair. What is the difference between a hundred round magazine and ten 10 round magazines? A few seconds…can’t see Steve gaining the edge in that scenario.

    Reply this comment
  9. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 3 January, 2013, 23:19

    I do agree with Steve from Sacto on one point “one only” we do not need 100 round Magazines to Hunt with; unfortunately, however we do need those and More to stand up to a corrupt Government bent on taking even more of rights away! In case you haven’t noticed Katy is not the one posting these warnings, History tells us one thing will never change the lust of “Power”;
    ==

    “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

    — Thomas Jefferson

    Reply this comment
  10. The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm)
    The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm) 4 January, 2013, 06:52

    Davi Yates—-

    So you need 100 round clips to “stand up” to the corrupt gov bent on taking your rights?

    Who are you going to kill with these clips?

    Are you going to kill police officers?

    Military?

    Civillians?

    YOU sir are a prime example of the right tea bag extreme. YOUR type has dragged the conservative position and the GOP into the gutter—–I would truly like to know who exactly you anticipate killing with your high cap clips?

    Journalists you disagree with? Exactly how do you anticipate killing Americans to defend yourself from the government as you’ve stated?

    Oh— after you answer that— exactly and specifically which rights have you lost so far????

    Reply this comment
  11. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 4 January, 2013, 09:07

    Davi Yates—-

    So you need 100 round clips to “stand up” to the corrupt gov bent on taking your rights?

    Who are you going to kill with these clips?

    Are you going to kill police officers?
    ===
    Start by taking out the first 100 Teddy Steals who try to violate the 2nd Amendment and try confiscate protected rights! You left wing tree hugging bait racer teddy steals 😉

    Reply this comment
  12. Ted Steele, Navigator
    Ted Steele, Navigator 4 January, 2013, 09:55

    Poor Poodle–

    Schhool’s in session:
    I am a private citizen. I can’t “violate” your second A. rights little buddy. The 2nd A. proscribes government conduct only. I can see by YOUR answer to the question posed to Mr. Yates that YOU advocate that gun violence should be visited upon private citizens. You and your ilk never fail to sink lower and lower.

    Reply this comment
  13. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 4 January, 2013, 12:36

    Poor Poodle–

    Schhool’s in session:
    I am a private citizen. I can’t “violate” your second A. rights little buddy. The 2nd A. proscribes government conduct only.
    ==
    🙂

    You are ADVOCATING the taking of arms, therefore YOU are trying to STEAL my protected (2nd Am) rights.

    Reply this comment
  14. Ted Steele, Navigator
    Ted Steele, Navigator 4 January, 2013, 12:43

    LOL—- You still don’t get it. The second A has ZERO to do with private cits like myself taking away your weapons.

    It’s ok– I know you’re doing the best you can and you don’t have all that much to work with— but thanks for playing!

    Reply this comment
  15. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 4 January, 2013, 13:16

    Teddy YOU still don’t get it- YOU want to control OTHER PEOPLES RIGHTS, like violating the right to arm bears, I mean bear arms.

    You are a direct threat to this country.

    Reply this comment
  16. Ted Steele, Navigator
    Ted Steele, Navigator 4 January, 2013, 13:40

    have a super duper day Zero!

    Reply this comment
  17. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 4 January, 2013, 16:12

    Teddy, please take some stress tabs, you are going off the cliff….. 😉

    Reply this comment
  18. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 4 January, 2013, 20:16

    The citizens are not going to stand for anarchy, and when you take up arms against the government, you will be arrested, and you certainly will lose your freedom then.

    Reply this comment
  19. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 4 January, 2013, 21:56

    The citizens are not going to stand for totalitarian government, and when you the government takes up arms against the people, you will be ventilated, and you certainly will lose your freedom then.

    Reply this comment
  20. Ron Kilmartin
    Ron Kilmartin 4 January, 2013, 22:20

    Admiral Yamamoto, commander of the Pearl Harbor attack, attended school in the US prior to WWII (Harvard?). He stated that since the American people were so heavily armed, a Japanese invasion of the USA would never work (or words to that effect).

    Reply this comment
  21. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 January, 2013, 01:37

    I am a law abiding citizen, Rex. I am not taking up arms against anyone and of course not against my government. Stop your stupid talk! Your jealousy of public employees is making you crazy!

    Reply this comment
  22. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 5 January, 2013, 10:59

    seesaw, you are the one with the stoopid talk. Your ignorance is astounding, even for a trougher 🙂

    Reply this comment
  23. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 January, 2013, 12:10

    We’ll see who is the ignorant one when this issue is settled, Rex.

    Reply this comment
  24. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 6 January, 2013, 11:08

    ok 🙂

    Reply this comment
  25. The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm)
    The Modified Ted Steele Methodologies (tm) 7 January, 2013, 06:09

    Remember SEESaw–Zero the Poodle is 0 for 14 ™! in his famous predictions!

    lol

    oh my!

    Reply this comment
  26. Vizkid
    Vizkid 11 January, 2013, 19:03

    One only needs look as far as “the battle of Athens” to see what sort of “government” might need to be reined in. It was right here in the good ole USA. Besides, I’m sure all (the dead) people in russia, korea, germany, on and on, never thought their government would do the things then did to them. It’s a right, and it’s our right, end of story.

    Reply this comment
  27. Green.J
    Green.J 24 January, 2013, 02:09

    You set your credibility up for question when you reference Halbrook.

    The “learned” gentleman (and I use that term very loosely in this instance) has time and time again, with intent, misrepresents the gun laws of Germany while the Nazis held power.

    Gun laws were pretty stringent during the Weimar Republic as mandated by the Treaty of Versailles. It wasn’t until Hitler cemented his authority that gun laws were significantly relaxed, though they forbade the production of arms and ammunition by Jews, but Jews were not forbade weapons per say. It wasn’t until a few years later that the Jews and other “minority” groups within Germany were completely forbade the ownership of any gun.

    Halbrook has been corrected time and time again on this fact, he knows what he is presenting is pretty much a lie, yet he keeps presenting it because it weights in the favor of his arguments.

    Most of Halbrooks historical citation of gun control is wildly and intentionally innumerate. Anyone with a library card or internet connection can easily research this information and come to the same concussion.

    Reply this comment
  28. Ron Gilbert
    Ron Gilbert 27 January, 2013, 12:37

    As I read the article, I was given at least a little bit of hope in that people are starting to wake up and see that the excuses that our government is using to target certain weapons is a complete sham. Then I started reading the comments below and found Ted’s to be typical of those that wish to remain asleep in all of this. Ted makes an assertion that their is a constant parade of mass murders using these weapons. Ted, please educate yourself on this matter. It has been reported by NBC, PBS, and the TODAY Show that there was NO ASSAULT RIFLE USED AT NEWTOWN. “What?” That’s right Ted. They lied to push an agenda through. Now ask yourself why. Why would they prey upon people’s fear and cause them to give up our only defense against a government that would impose tyranny? Ever heard of Agenda 21? Read about it. Ever heard about the FEMA camps being built across this nation? They are not for the possibility of a nuclear attack or chemical attack from outside this country. They are for placing political activists into that have spoken out against our government. They are for many reasons other than what is being told to us. This is not a theory, this is a fact. Our government has been buying up massive amounts of ammunition, arms and riot gear over the last 2 years preparing for the implementation of marshal law. When this happens, and it will soon, they will round up everyone that has ever been in disagreement with them, myself included. The whole reason that they target the AR15 is due to their knowing of all of the former service and current service members that are quite familiar with this weapon and how easily it could be used against our government should they impose tyranny upon us. Gun control is not about our safety, never has been never will be. Gun control is about their safety from us, always has been always will be. It is about control over us.

    Reply this comment
  29. Ron Gilbert
    Ron Gilbert 27 January, 2013, 12:38

    There, not their, sorry.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

ALRB’s Shiroma Backs AB 32

As part of CalWatchdog’s ongoing series reporting about the California’s Agricultural Labor Relations Board, it is interesting to note some

Thanks, Dan: Cal Watchdog themes now Walters’ favorite talking points

For a year, Cal Watchdog contributors and staffers (and a Cal Watchdog alum) have been pretty much alone in pointing

Government octopus strangling state

August 20, 2012 By Katy Grimes If forces are at work quelling America, the best place to start would be