A LITTLE GUN HISTORY
>
> In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953,
> about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded
> up and exterminated.
>
>
> In 1911, Turkey established gun control.. From 1915 to 1917,
> 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
> exterminated.
>
> Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
> of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
> rounded up and exterminated.
>
> China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
> political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
> exterminated
>
> Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
> Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
> exterminated.
>
> Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
> Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
> exterminated.
>
> Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million
> educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
> exterminated.
>
> Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
> because of gun control: 56 million.
>
> It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
> new law to surrender
> 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a
> program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The
> first year results are now in: List of 7 items:
>
> Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
>
> Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
>
> Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
>
> In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300
> percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the
> criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
>
> While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in
> armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the
> past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is
> unarmed.
>
> There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the
> ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
> safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was
> expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The
> Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
>
> You won't see this datum on the US evening news, or hear politicians
> disseminating this information.
>
> Addendums:
>
> With guns, we are 'citizens' Without them, we are 'subjects'.
>
> During WWII the ***anese decided not to invade America because they knew
> most Americans were ARMED!
>
> 1. Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll
> just kill you.
>
> 2. If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.
>
> 3. I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.
>
> 4. When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.
>
> 5. A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The
> reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and
> asked him 'Why do you carry a 45?' The Ranger responded, 'Because they
> don't make a 46.'
>
> 6. An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.
>
> 7. The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented
> on his wearing his sidearm. 'Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are
> you expecting trouble?' 'No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would
> have brought my rifle.'
>
> 8. Finally, beware the man who only has one gun - he probably knows how
> to use it!
Seems clear to me. When the government fears the people they take away their ability to defend themselves. Does the government fear the people? If the answer is yes, and I believe they do, removing their defenses, rite to speak, rite to assemble, rite to defend will be taken away.
When these things happened, (gun control listed above)were the people routinly being taken advantage of by those in control of the things they needed? In every case I think you'll find they were. It's why they feared them.
T. Roosevelt blamed the spread of socialism on "the dumb, purblind folly of the very rich".If guns are taken away there is your reason. Fix it or kiss this country good bye. When countries suffer from such things, world wars happen. Fortunetly we've been on the winning side in the last two.
ORIGINAL: DoctorDeath
> Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
> because of gun control: 56 million.
I know this was a cut and paste so these aren't your words, but this is a non-sequitur (inference that does not follow from the premise). They were killedbecause of other reasons (political gain, competition for resources, etc.). Gun control was part of the exterminationprocess, not the reason for extermination.
Cambodia really isn't a good example. The Khmer Rouge came into power in 1975, 19 years after gun control was institutionalized by the communists, and began killing immediately. The general population was unarmed for yearsbefore the Khmer Rouge existed. One of their mottos was "To keep you is no benefit. To destroy you is no loss."
BTW:US administrations supported the murdering Khmer Rouge for many years. Thegovernment of a unified Viet Namwas opposed to that group.Pol Pot was supported by China and the USA. Paranoid Pol Pot invaded Viet Nam and got his butt kicked royally for his trouble:The Vietnamese army went into Cambodia and cleaned house. The Chinese army entered the fray on the side of the Khmer Rouge and got their butts kicked very badly by the Vietnamese army.
TheKhmer Rouge held a small enclave near the Thai border for years, protected by the Thai army and supported by the USA.
My point was that for 19 years after strict gun control in Cambodia, there was no mass extermination and that the ones who later did the killing were not the ones who took away guns. Therefore Cambodia is not a good example. The writer of the article just wanted Cambodia's 1.5 million dead added to his figures.
Another example of flexibility in the timeline here is German gun regulation, which was in effect after Versailles. While the laws were tightened in 1938, under the Weimar Republic they were always much more strict than anything we'd tolerate.
More to the point, the Third Reich strictly prohibited Jews from owning guns. No exception. I wonder why that was.
My point was that for 19 years after strict gun control in Cambodia, there was no mass extermination and that the ones who later did the killing were not the ones who took away guns. Therefore Cambodia is not a good example. The writer of the article just wanted Cambodia's 1.5 million dead added to his figures.
I hear ya but a point that needs making is freedom lost is often done for the greater good and for noble reasons. It is after the freedom is taken away that wickedness takes control and uses the lose of freedom against the people.
The lesson, freedom is more importent than all else. It has it's short comings but the alternative is always worse, much worse.
The curernt Patriot Act is a classic example and it opened a door that can led to a misery greater than any 9/11. Were seeing the new administartion using it now.
Ignorant fools! Every law made should protect freedom and no law should ever weaken it. It is our only true defense.
Sobriety check points give the law the rite to stop people who aren't breaking the law because it's been deemed for the greater good. This law seals the end of freedom and all because some women thought it a good idea.
A Little Gun History
