Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[Seth]

To suggest that gun ownership or lack of it would have prevented the holocaust is one of the stupidest things I have read. You ignore history and context and the realities of the situation at the time.

Keep your fucking guns to yourselves.

A very small number of small arms kept the Nazis out of the Warsaw Ghetto for rather a long time. There's no telling how long the Jews of Poland could have resisted and/or defeated the Nazis had they been adequately armed before the Nazis invaded. One of the first things Hitler did was to require "registration" of all firearms, for safety reasons of course. The next thing he did was send out the Gestapo to seize all those firearms, particularly from the Jews. Why would Hitler do that if he didn't think armed Jews were a threat to his quest for the Thousand-year Reich?

Hitler was WAY smarter than you.

And we will keep our fucking guns to ourselves the NEXT time Britain is in jeopardy of being invaded and you can all start speaking German, Russian or Chinese and chafing under the boots on your neck. You fucks still haven't paid us back for the last time we loaned you our private arms for your national defense.

Pay up, deadbeats.

[Seth]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

How would you know?

[Gallstones]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

Laugh then.

[Gallstones]

I don't feel trapped Jim.
I don't even have to lock my doors, I can walk any street anytime of day or night.
We have a very low incidence of violent crime with a high gun ownership.  We have some of the least restrictive gun laws of all the states. My state is reacting to preempt and deny increased federal restrictions and these bills are passing with an easy majority of both parties.

I have guns because it pleases me to have them.

And the high gun ownership in the US in general has ensured that criminals have guns. Insofar as that is the case, any gun owner is contributing to that problem. That's where the trap lies, whether or not you, GS, personally feel it.

Again with this bullshit?
Every car owner is contributing to the problem of impaired driving.

Well, every car owner is contributing to many of the problems a huge number of cars brings to society: accidents, pollution, etc. That is certainly true, and it's one reason I choose not to own a car.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, you see, whether you like it or not. Society as a whole has ended up with lots of cars because individuals place more importance on the benefits of cars than the costs (to the environment, to human life, etc.) Many may not have consciously thought of it in this way, but that's the result. 

Now, saturating a society with guns also has benefits and costs. The benefits are few, as we've been discussing. The costs are significant. One of these costs is that criminals will have a steady supply of them. (That's not the only cost, of course; there are other horrific ones. But it's the one under discussion now.) You deem the benefits to outweigh the costs. Fine. I disagree with you, and because I see the terrible cost to American society I will continue to fight for gun control. But the cost/benefit analysis is there, whether or not you acknowledge it. 

Incidentally, to pursue your car analogy: we do have restrictions in place to mitigate the societal costs: one must pass tests to be able to drive a car; there are laws restricting what one can do with a car; one is penalized for breaking those laws (from minor fines up to permanently losing the right to drive, as well as imprisonment). We have required safety behaviors (e.g., mandatory seatbelts, speed limits). One must carry insurance. The car itself must pass repeated safety inspections. All cars and drivers must be registered. If ownership of a car changes hands, the legal title and responsibility for it does too. Etc. 

There is no trap.
It's a Right. A choice to exercise or not.

By choosing to exercise the right to own guns - multiplied by many people (thus many guns in the country), we have accepted the concomitant costs. We cannot have all those guns without paying the price. That's what we have trapped ourselves into. And it's made worse by pretending that there are no costs. 

"We live in a free society. We accept that certain actions of the individual aren't always positive for the body politic..."

Freedoms have costs.
I prefer to assume the costs of freedoms to the costs of oppression.

How about yourself?

[Gallstones]

To suggest that gun ownership or lack of it would have prevented the holocaust is one of the stupidest things I have read. You ignore history and context and the realities of the situation at the time.

Keep your fucking guns to yourselves.

A very small number of small arms kept the Nazis out of the Warsaw Ghetto for rather a long time. There's no telling how long the Jews of Poland could have resisted and/or defeated the Nazis had they been adequately armed before the Nazis invaded. One of the first things Hitler did was to require "registration" of all firearms, for safety reasons of course. The next thing he did was send out the Gestapo to seize all those firearms, particularly from the Jews. Why would Hitler do that if he didn't think armed Jews were a threat to his quest for the Thousand-year Reich?

Hitler was WAY smarter than you.

And we will keep our fucking guns to ourselves the NEXT time Britain is in jeopardy of being invaded and you can all start speaking German, Russian or Chinese and chafing under the boots on your neck. You fucks still haven't paid us back for the last time we loaned you our private arms for your national defense.

Pay up, deadbeats.

More likely Islam.
The UK is like a gun free zone.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

There were tons of guns in Germany after WWI, hunting weapons and small arms brought back by the troops. The various militant political parties had no problem getting armed.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

Laugh then.

[Gallstones]

To suggest that gun ownership or lack of it would have prevented the holocaust is one of the stupidest things I have read. You ignore history and context and the realities of the situation at the time.

Keep your fucking guns to yourselves.

Agreement at last.
We intend to, thanks.

[Gallstones]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

Laugh then.

Thanks for assisting me in multiple postings of my motivational.

[Rum]

I don't suppose it bothers many of you, but a thought anyway. I wonder if you know how aggressive, violent and prone to solving problems with force American's seem to much of the rest of the world.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

Laugh then.

Thanks for assisting me in multiple postings of my motivational.

No problem. I've been passing it around several history forums.

[Gallstones]

I don't suppose it bothers many of you, but a thought anyway. I wonder if you know how aggressive, violent and prone to solving problems with force American's seem to much of the rest of the world.

Oh oh, this looks like......shaming to me.

[Gallstones]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

Laugh then.

Thanks for assisting me in multiple postings of my motivational.

No problem. I've been passing it around several history forums.

Glad I could oblige.
I do the same with some of the antigun shit on my several proSecond Amendment forums.

[Jason]

To a historian, this is rather funny.

In which context? The claim that the colonists 'defeated' the most powerful empire on Earth at the time?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

In which context? The claim that the colonists 'defeated' the most powerful empire on Earth at the time?

The numbers are misleading, the "other side" is ignored, and the whole thing wouldn't have happened that way if the French hadn't gotten involved.