knowing that: Adolf HITLER said: "The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." -- Adolf Hitler, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944, Edited by H.R. Trevor-Roper (London: Widenfeld and Nicolson, 1953), pp. 425-426. Benito MUSSOLINI said "The measures adopted to restore public order are: On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results." -- Speech delivered by Prime Minister Benito Mussolini before the Italian Senate, June 8, 1923. Reproduced in Mussolini as Revealed in His Political Speeches (London & Toronto: J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., 1923), pp. 308-309. Stephen P.Halbrook on Nazi gun controls says: "Such questions have never been discussed in scholarly publications because the Nazi laws, policies, and practices have never been adequately documented. The record establishes that a well-meaning liberal republic would enact a gun control act that would later be highly useful to a dictatorship."" -- Stephen P.Halbrook, "Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews, Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 17, No. 3 (2000), pp. 483-535; available at http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf.
Tens of millions of guns out there now. No way to ever confiscate them all even if such a law was enacted, and IMHO it'll never happen.
How much do you bet ? It is very easy to pass a law, it need just a pretext: FEAR OF TERRORISM, TERRORIST HAVE ARMS SO WE MUST FORBID ARMS ! If necessary just excite the gangs of New York (just ask the CIA about their drop of drugs there http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/index.html) and after several deaths let people go into the street crying: "that's enough of all these crimes, if there were no arms that wouldn't happen". And then the law will be accepted. It's ABC in politics. Further more if you read history books like me, for example galbraith explained very well that for passing a law which is from left wing, the left wing will just propose it (did Clinton already propose such a law ?), the right wing will oppose it (as expected by people), then when the right wing goes to power there will be a pretext to finally pass the law and since they are from right wing and that the law is supposed to be left wing, people will say: "oh if even right wing agrees for left wing law it must then be really necessary" and there will be no more opposition from them . For example in France the majority of privatisation of firms has been done under ... the Socialists As for applying the law, easy: if you ever are discovered with an arm publicly you will have a fee of 500000$ and up to 5 years emprisonment. If you read Georges RIPERT Tyranny can be legal : "Confronted with such a tight regulation, can man pretend to be free because the tyranny he is subjected to derives from the law? Of course, the legal power is not called "tyranny" since it appears to be established by the general will in the common interest, and since, in any event, occurrences of arbitrary power are infrequent. But a master's equity does not mean that his subjects are not slaves. ... And when their servitude lasts and their thoughts follow their behavior, the state becomes totalitarian and subjection is complete. Since it is legal servitude, the regime is still said to be democratic. Such is the hypocrisy of political language."
I voted against gun abolition... we have every right to shoot Arab Terrorists on sight before they start blowing up our cafes and shopping malls... pre-emptive action is legitimate...
I assume you're being extremely sarcastic, Harry. Gun control has been a raging issue in the US for decades. I also do not think you appreciate how fervently many Americans hold the right to bear arms. I honestly believe if a law was somehow passed prohibiting them and demanding that gun owners turn in their weapons, the result would be catastrophic. "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws (criminals) will have guns" is a mantra and sacred belief among millions of Americans.
Having a gun doesn't suppose that you have to use it for pre-emptive action ... you are prompt to forget at least a step . If it is what dictators fear from people then I am for people having guns. Hey "brother" candle don't forget to tell what you think about Pike in the other post : really it's not a trap it interests me to have your as sincere as possible opinion since I believe you have good intention. Of course you will fear ridicule but I will prevent to mock you. I have nothing against any religion's belief of people but I hate endoctrinment above all based on lies and I'm sure you hate also only if you knew it. In fact I don't care for a person to be endoctrined if it's his "own" very personal choice I care about the consequences of a whole group impact on the other whole people of society.
Can you answer to this since you agressed me about just citing Pike : http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17248 Don't you laugh at this or do you recognise in this ? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17248&perpage=6&pagenumber=2 WHAT IS A FREEMASON? A man who joins a society which he knows nothing about. The two authors of the book "The Hiram Key", Chris Knight and Robert Lomas, bear this statement out in an article printed in the Yorkshire Post, 11 May 1996. Please bear in mind that what you are reading herewith is not a criticism but pure fact. Both these men are Freemasons ... I hope it is more clear that I would much like an explanation of your agression ?