In response to:

Tit-for-Tat Politics: Missouri GOP Rep. Introduces Bill That Makes Proposing Gun Control Laws a Felony

NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 9:45 PM
Searcherseeker: "Just ask Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Khrustrev, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, and all the more of the killers which mark the milestones of history." Instead of regurgitating talking points that have been around for over 20 years, why don't you search for some answers? Hitler did not have a program of widespread disarmament of the German people. He disarmed conquered nations, but not the Germans. Germany had been disarmed by the Treaty of Versailles (which, because your grasp of history is clearly limited, was before Hitler had power). Hitler actually eased gun conrol. Do you really think the Holocaust occurred because Jews weren't armed? Give me a break.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:03 PM
Also, as to why Hitler didn't restrict "German" Germans from having weapons - because he was amazingly popular among that sort of people and might need them to defend him.

By comparison, I recall that Mussolini was saved from an assassination attempt when his Blackshirts stabbed the assassin to death with their dresse daggers, so I expect the concept was something like that.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:29 PM
Ah, sh!t, I guess the joke's on me. I do enough reading to provide a literate answer, and "Novus" is nowhere to be found.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 11:27 AM
I think what you're saying, in a roundabout, long-winded manner, is that Hitler and Mussolini allowed their supporters to keep firearms?

The Hitler/Mussolini/Stalin/&c comparisons are historically inaccurate and logically false. They have been Conservative talking points since long before there were blogs like this for like-minded fools to disseminate them amongst themselves on.

Your "answer," literate as it is, says essentially nothing.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 11:55 AM
You said "Lenin didn't confiscate guns from peasants." I said, "He was too busy fighting an actual military to worry about some silly peasants!"

You said "Supposedly Stalin did disarm the peasants. But why did he have to disarm the peasants if Lenin already did?" I said "The peasants got new guns because it was easy to pick them up off the dead Communists laying all over the place."

You said, "Hitler didn't confiscate guns from 'Aryans.'" I said "'Aryans' were by and large crazy about him, and he thought he might need them to protect him in a pinch."
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 11:56 AM
You said: "Hitler did not have a program of widespread disarmament of the German people. He disarmed conquered nations, but not the Germans."
I said: "What do you think he disarmed 'untermenschen' for? To keep them from hurting themselves? No, to STREAMLINE EXTERMINATING THEM!"
Seriously, point and match.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 12:47 PM
On the off chance that you return to this thread, I'd like to point out - you start with the premise that gun control isn't a factor in the slaughter perpetrated by Hitler & Stalin ... then concede that Hitler confiscated guns from people & slaughtered them, and that historically Stalin was known to have enacted gun control. Your "proof" actually DISPROVES your premise. See how that works? When it comes down to it, I think all we got from you was the assertion that "I don't like it when people use Hitler & Stalin as examples against gun control." That's hardly a logical or compelling argument.
searcherseeker Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 9:59 PM
The Jews were warred against since the beginning of the Third Reich. They had no chance. I appreciate your acceptance of my ignorance. After Hitler took power, he eliminated Jews, Catholics, intellectuals and other inferior humans. Of course, they weren't 'humans', they were refuse.

I admire your defense of Hitler and those like him. They had an orderly solution to the problem of humanity. Always can a scapegoat be found. Hitler had the Jews, which are a primo target, since they just won't go away.

You may notice, Americans are now cast into the same cauldron as the Jews. They are the Little Satan and we are the Great Satan.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:01 PM
Deflect, deflect, deflect. Go have an original thought.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:05 PM
"Deflect, deflect, deflect."
Weren't you the one who a moment ago said "Go read this link. I don't have time to argue. Just research what I ought to say and have an argument with yourself!" or something to that effect
MudontheTires Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 11:19 PM
"Go have an original thought."

Take your own advice, you statist shill.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 11:22 AM
I told him to read the First Amendment.
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 9:47 PM
Stalin has the quote about disarming his adversaries; what evidence do you have to show how his program of disarmament worked? Why did he have to disarm them if Lenin already did? (Answer: Lenin didn't). Why did Khrushchev have to disarm them a third time? Surely at least some Russian peasant farmers owned rifles, gun regulations or not. What role did this disarmament play in Stalin's rise to power? It appears minimal and attenuated to me.

I'll go on if you provide a shred of support for your talking points.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:00 PM
Lenin wasn't worried about disarming the populace because he was too busy fighting White Russian military units. Stalin didn't have a White military to deal with, so he could focus on other things.

Actually, lots of weapons were dispersed to the Russian population during WWII, at least in part to arm anti-German partisans ... but also because the Reds were getting killed in such enormous numbers that it was pretty easy to scrounge up Russian made weapons. Actually, the standard issue Finnish long rifle for WWII was made from captured Mosin parts.
searcherseeker Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:07 PM
It is late for me but my shred is this: a disarmed populace is an enslaved populace. The only support of my hypothesis is the history of mankind.

Now, good night, my statist adversary.
_,l,, Vaporise this, Thought Police ,,l,_ Wrote: Feb 19, 2013 10:15 PM
"Hitler did not have a program of widespread disarmament of the German people. He disarmed conquered nations, but not the Germans." What do you think he disarmed "untermenschen" for? To keep them from hurting themselves? No, to STREAMLINE EXTERMINATING THEM!
NovusOrdoSeclorum Wrote: Feb 20, 2013 11:23 AM
Right, which is not anything like what is happening here, now.

Last week, Missouri Democrats introduced an extreme gun-control bill that would force gun owners to either surrender or destroy their “assault weapons” within 90 days. If Missourians do not comply within this period of time, they would be charged with a Class C felony.

Because the proposal was such an affront to the Second Amendment, Rep. Mike Leara (R-St. Louis) retaliated by introducing a similarly extreme bill that would make “any member of the general assembly who proposes legislation that further restricts an individual’s right to bear arms…guilty of a class D felony.”

Of course, Leara doesn’t expect the...

Related Tags: Missouri