So you're suggesting that Canada and the UK are doomed to dictatorship when a crisis hits?

Maybe... it all depends who is in power at the time.

I find that a little hard to believe....

I find that a little hard to believe....

Hate to talk about the Nazis, but I believe they're a pretty good example of what can happen.

lol

I think we may have broken Bloodstain's mind. One word post and it isn't even capitalized... [cabbage], is the return policy still good on this one?

 

Trolling aside, it's a bit extreme to say (however indirectly) that a lack of guns would lead to a Nazi-style dictatorship. Not without pretty much everything else that could possibly go wrong ding so as well, at any rate. I mean, maybe if Canada/UK loses and is humiliated in a war and the global economy collapses first... In which case banned guns will be the least of their problems.

 

See, it's not just one crisis that leads to the Nazis. It's several in a row. By which time gun laws simply won't matter :razz:

 

As for America... Part of it may be that we're all trying out best to be desensitized to violence. You can turn on the TV and see a murder play out with the aid of special effects and good acting, you could turn on your game console and blast your way through a million and a half terrorists, or you could see the film and watch that all happen in a dark, air-conditioned room with some popcorn and a soft drink. Our primary sources of entertainment are watching muscular badasses gun down hundreds of people, and Football. Not the weak European one, the manly one where steroid-fueled giants crash into each other. But even with all that, Australia is still more badass-per-capita than we are... :cry:

 

Now if anyone needs me, I'm gonna read a book.

I think we may have broken Bloodstain's mind. One word post and it isn't even capitalized... [cabbage], is the return policy still good on this one?

 

Figured it would be better to hold my tongue after being awarded a temp ban at zybez (god damn their mods are ridiculous), still had to say something though.

 

Just don't compare to Nazi Germany, it's a bad idea

I think we may have broken Bloodstain's mind. One word post and it isn't even capitalized... [cabbage], is the return policy still good on this one?

 

Figured it would be better to hold my tongue after being awarded a temp ban at zybez (god damn their mods are ridiculous), still had to say something though.

 

Just don't compare to Nazi Germany, it's a bad idea

Next time you should just say "post count" instead, we'll understand.

EVERYWON WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH MY POINT OF VEW IS A HOMOSEXUAL ATHEIST MUSLIM TERRORIST GERMAN CAVEMAN WHO DESERVES TO BE EUTHANIZED AND A BLIGHT ON GALACTIC PURITY. YOU, SIR! YOU ARE A BLIGHT!

 

You can't be serious... Do I really need to debunk this argument?

I think we may have broken Bloodstain's mind. One word post and it isn't even capitalized... [cabbage], is the return policy still good on this one?

 

Figured it would be better to hold my tongue after being awarded a temp ban at zybez (god damn their mods are ridiculous), still had to say something though.

 

Just don't compare to Nazi Germany, it's a bad idea

Next time you should just say "post count" instead, we'll understand.

Hitler came to power because he was a master of manipulation and insanely clever. He only took away the rights of society once he had everyone on board with it - by the time he got going, ifi the jews had guns it wouldn't mean crap, because the 85% of the population that liked what Hitler was doing had guns too.

Hey, if someone can find away to completely eliminate guns and gun trade from the U.S then I'm all for it. That's not going to happen though...

Hey, if someone can find away to completely eliminate guns and gun trade from the U.S then I'm all for it. That's not going to happen though...

 

Basically my belief too. I'm all for a world without guns. But realistically speaking, the underground market is pretty much invincible. People [criminals] will always have the ability to hide, hoard, smuggle, and create guns. Not to mention every other type of weapon. As far as I can tell, strict gun laws would do the following: It would alleviate accidents caused by guns, but it would hinder self-defense by giving an upper hand to the people who don't obey the law.

 

Also, I don't believe there's conclusive enough evidence to say that America's gun crime is a pure result of our gun laws, as opposed to a combination of several other cultural influences. Just look how Americans handled the the banning of alcohol.

In Canada, it's difficult to get a gun. Yes, you can hunt animals and such (my grandfather owns several hunting rifles), but handguns are so strictly regulated you'll be lucky to get one if you ever have the desire to. I don't really see much of a problem with it myself.

 

I think the problem is that in other countries in the world, we're culturally different than the United States (or any other country for that matter). So many of us won't understand the need for a gun in your house or for self-protection. I acknowledge that so I just give my advice and move on. It's just that people tend to become enraged against the United States as a whole over these issues which is just silly.

I find that a little hard to believe....

Hate to talk about the Nazis, but I believe they're a pretty good example of what can happen.

I'm sorry... what?

 

• This is what happened when he tried to use guns.
• This is what happened when he didn't.

Again, clear evidence of how evil super-individuals use gun control to steal people's political freedoms.

Hey, if someone can find away to completely eliminate guns and gun trade from the U.S then I'm all for it. That's not going to happen though...

 

When society gets too used to gun ownership, trying to take them away will only lead to a black market for guns. Black markets are never good

EVERYWON WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH MY POINT OF VEW IS A HOMOSEXUAL ATHEIST MUSLIM TERRORIST GERMAN CAVEMAN WHO DESERVES TO BE EUTHANIZED AND A BLIGHT ON GALACTIC PURITY. YOU, SIR! YOU ARE A BLIGHT!

 

You can't be serious... Do I really need to debunk this argument?

ALWAYS AND YOUR FEET SMELL

 

I find that a little hard to believe....

Hate to talk about the Nazis, but I believe they're a pretty good example of what can happen.

I'm sorry... what?

 

• This is what happened when he tried to use guns.
• This is what happened when he didn't.

Again, clear evidence of how evil super-individuals use gun control to steal people's political freedoms.

Sees_all best be trollin'. I'm assuming the links are the Beer Hall Putsch (I think that's what it was called - his first revolution where he got arrested and wrote Mein Kempf) then his political rise to power.

 

People need to understand that what happened with Germany before WWII was a societal issue, and it was present in America and the rest of Europe at the time as well. It wasn't until Germany invaded France that anyone really cared, and it wasn't until Pearl Harbor that we got involved. And it wasn't until after the war (when the Allies were trying to put the "EVIL" in "Axis of Evil" - a term still taught in high schools) that we had such a big problem with the way Jewish people were treated under Hitler.

I think we may have broken Bloodstain's mind. One word post and it isn't even capitalized... [cabbage], is the return policy still good on this one?

 

Figured it would be better to hold my tongue after being awarded a temp ban at zybez (god damn their mods are ridiculous), still had to say something though.

 

Just don't compare to Nazi Germany, it's a bad idea

Next time you should just say "post count" instead, we'll understand.

Hitler came to power because he was a master of manipulation and insanely clever. He only took away the rights of society once he had everyone on board with it - by the time he got going, ifi the jews had guns it wouldn't mean crap, because the 85% of the population that liked what Hitler was doing had guns too.

Gun rights in Germany were largely taken away in 1928, 5 years before the Nazis were elected to power.

 

Hitler was elected January 30th, but had limited powers. He planned on having a parliamentary election March 5th, when the Reichstag building was set fire a week before - February 27th. Hitler used the opportunity to have the President of Germany suspend most civil rights throughout Germany, forcing opposing newspapers to shut down and allowed him to declare that Communists set fire to the Reichstag building as a plot to overthrow the government.

On March 23rd Hitler had a law passed that made him essentially dictator of Germany.

 

If the Communists in Germany had guns, they wouldn't have as easily been suppressed. In the week before the March 5th election, Hitler used the police to intimidate and silence his opposition. The seats he gained in the election were at the expense of the Communist party, but they weren't enough to pass the Enabling Act (required 2/3rd versus the 44% the Nazis had) - they had to convince a couple other minority parties to go along with them.

If the election ended up any differently, I don't think Hitler could have become the dictator he was.

 

Later in 1938 Hitler banned all gun ownership from the Jews, but at this point it probably was too late.

 

 

Last thing - he made sure to take away the guns of people he conquered.

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." -Adolf Hitler

I can't believe someone brought Nazi Germany into this

 

Gun rights in Germany were largely taken away in 1928, 5 years before the Nazis were elected to power.

 

Hitler was elected January 30th, but had limited powers. He planned on having a parliamentary election March 5th, when the Reichstag building was set fire a week before - February 27th. Hitler used the opportunity to have the President of Germany suspend most civil rights throughout Germany, forcing opposing newspapers to shut down and allowed him to declare that Communists set fire to the Reichstag building as a plot to overthrow the government.

On March 23rd Hitler had a law passed that made him essentially dictator of Germany.

 

If the Communists in Germany had guns, they wouldn't have as easily been suppressed. In the week before the March 5th election, Hitler used the police to intimidate and silence his opposition. The seats he gained in the election were at the expense of the Communist party, but they weren't enough to pass the Enabling Act (required 2/3rd versus the 44% the Nazis had) - they had to convince a couple other minority parties to go along with them.

If the election ended up any differently, I don't think Hitler could have become the dictator he was.

 

Of course if the communist party had guns they wouldn't have been suppressed as easily - it simply would have easily justified hitler's use of violence against them.

 

Later in 1938 Hitler banned all gun ownership from the Jews, but at this point it probably was too late.

 

 

Last thing - he made sure to take away the guns of people he conquered.

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." -Adolf Hitler

 

Goes without saying. It's still a far cry from that and suddenly deciding to sity idly by as your government turns into a dictatorship.

The point I'm trying to make is that in 1928, when Germany restricted gun ownership, everyone probably thought they were better off for it (at the very least it'd make a coup d'etat more difficult). No one would have been able to see 5 or 10 or 15 years into the future.

Yes, I understand that Germany was unstable at the time, but really what would it take to put Canada or the U.K. into a similar situation? A famine, some financial markets and/or other industries complete collapse? If the government didn't reorganize itself into a Dictatorship, it could very well be anarchy, for the time being. If that happened, chaos would ensue, and the last people to be looted would be the ones that are able to protect themselves.

 

[hide=After Hurricane Katrina, looting was rampant. If you were a looter, you'd at least think twice before touching this property:]

[/hide]

I wonder how many of the looters had guns of their own? Probably a fair number.

Again, you're really missing the point. In 33 of the 35 areas up for election during the March 1993 Federal election, the Nazis were most popular. They took the popular vote by 25% more (43% vs 18%) over the second party, which incidently wasn't the Communists by the way. The Communists owning guns wouldn't have prevented a damn thing when there's three Nazis for every one Commie. Comparing the Treaty of Versailles and the widespread anti-Semitism at the time to a 'famine' in the UK or Canada really is a silly comparison, also.

 

Please, just accept that guns had nothing to do with the Nazis' rise to power.

I wonder how many of the looters had guns of their own? Probably a fair number.

The anarchy of the aftermath of Katrina shouldn't be added onto the discussion. We're talking about the legality of guns; with anarchy there's no legality of anything. So lets not go to archaic situations.

Again, you're really missing the point. In 33 of the 35 areas up for election during the March 1993 Federal election, the Nazis were most popular. They took the popular vote by 25% more (43% vs 18%) over the second party, which incidently wasn't the Communists by the way. The Communists owning guns wouldn't have prevented a damn thing when there's three Nazis for every one Commie. Comparing the Treaty of Versailles and the widespread anti-Semitism at the time to a 'famine' in the UK or Canada really is a silly comparison, also.

 

Please, just accept that guns had nothing to do with the Nazis' rise to power.

I think you missed the point, actually. The 1933 March election would be the same as America holding congressional elections a week after 9/11/2001. What's more is in that week after 9/11, it would be the same thing as all the Republicans blaming the Democrats for the terrorist attacks, having all prominent leaders of the DNC arrested, then by leveraging fear against the other party and silencing any dissent. They'd need to gain about 10% to get enough seats to pass anything they want, which without anyone opposing them would be trivial. Then, when they gained a super majority, they'd pass an Amendment to the US constitution giving all power to the President.

 

The entire process of silencing opposition is much easier when your citizens don't have a means to defend themselves, which was the case in post 1928 Germany.

And what exactly do you think giving guns to the citizens would do?

And what exactly do you think giving guns to the citizens would do?

Armed citizens gives them the ability to defend themselves from factions within the government, or even overthrow the government (like in the case of the U.S.'s Revolutionary War).

It's very difficult to intimidate someone who is on an equal footing as you. In the Germany example, if the communist party was armed it could have defended itself from the Nazi party, especially when their rights were trampled on.