Started By
Message
locked post

Gun Control in Nazi Germany

Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:12 pm
Posted by RollTide4Ever
Nashville
Member since Nov 2006
18314 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:12 pm
quote:

There is no shortage of theories or writings related to the rise of the Third Reich and the subsequent Holocaust. Stephen Halbrook’s 2013 book, Gun Control in the Third Reich offers a compelling and important account of the role of gun prohibition in aiding Hitler’s goals of exterminating the Jews and other “enemies of the state.” While much of the early gun prohibition was created with supposedly good intent, Halbrook carefully and meticulously details how a change in political regime facilitated manipulating some well-intentioned gun registration laws and other gun prohibition to be used in inconceivable ways.

Students of history as well as Second Amendment enthusiasts will find this a fascinating book and will find parallels between gun prohibition in pre-Nazi and Nazi Germany, and attempts to prohibit types of gun ownership and implement other forms of gun prohibition in the United States today. The current climate in the United States surrounding gun prohibition combined with a president who uses his office to impose executive order in ways not historically common gives many citizens pause, especially when looking at the era of the Third Reich. While certain states have imposed gun registration laws recently, enforcement of the laws remains unclear.

While Halbrook is careful to point out that a combination of factors led to the events of the Holocaust, there is no denying that many of the pre-war activities contributed to Hitler’s ability to disarm targeted groups, particularly the Jews. The rapid pace with which Hitler disarmed the populace in Germany is startling. Halbrook’s account is gripping, thorough, and full of legal documentation, leading the reader through the sometimes-daily changes in gun prohibitions that furthered Hitler’s agenda. Ultimately, the prohibitions enacted by the Nazi regime led to monopoly control of firearms by the Nazis and eliminated the ability of many groups in society to defend themselves. A similar progression in contemporary society related to government control of firearms and the firearms industry is a concern of many gun owners in the United States today.


LINK
Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80272 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:15 pm to
What's the biggest similarity between gun control in the Third Reich and the gun control scheme in the present-day United States?
Posted by NoNameNeeded
Lee's Summit, MO
Member since Dec 2013
1254 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:25 pm to
Judea declared war on Deutschland!
Posted by oklahogjr
Gold Membership
Member since Jan 2010
36763 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 7:47 pm to
so has any other country ever used any form of gun control? or was this exclusively a nazi policy?
Posted by gatorrocks
Lake Mary, FL
Member since Oct 2007
13969 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:09 pm to
quote:

What's the biggest similarity between gun control in the Third Reich and the gun control scheme in the present-day United States?

That's actually a good question. I'm a big 2nd Amendment guy. But I hate when people compare what the Nazi's did to what's going on here in America.

NOW... I will say this: What's going on in CT and NY (gun registration) is eerily similar to the way Germany had a restriction on guns and registration prior to Hitler gaining power. If memory serves me correct, Hitler's only gun law was banning them from Jews. I could be wrong though.

The other issue I have with registration is the fact that the wrong people know what I have. The government is never something one should trust fully. If you trust the government without exception, you're a fricking moron. Sorry, but you are.

Some of you are here...

The problem with that type of registration is in the hands of a corrupt government (e.g. The United States Government) it could lead to some issues down the road.

Now, we aren't ANYWHERE near what Germany was pre-WWII. There are so many guns here that trying to outright ban them would cause some minor issues. Mostly the police would be sent into hostile environment and I fear many would be killed over it.

The good news is that an outright ban would never be implemented here. Much to the chagrin of Utopian liberal philosophies.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48319 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:12 pm to
quote:

so has any other country ever used any form of gun control? or was this exclusively a nazi policy?


No.

The Turks disarmed the Armenians before conducting a sweeping Genocide.

Red China disarmed the population before Mao's Cultural Revolution killed 500,000.

The Soviets disarmed the population after the Bolshevik Revolution.

Posted by boosiebadazz
Member since Feb 2008
80272 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:12 pm to
So the fact that two states decided to implement a gun registration system via their respective legislatures is the closest we are to Nazi Germany?

This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 8:15 pm
Posted by oklahogjr
Gold Membership
Member since Jan 2010
36763 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:17 pm to
quote:

No.

The Turks disarmed the Armenians before conducting a sweeping Genocide.

Red China disarmed the population before Mao's Cultural Revolution killed 500,000.

The Soviets disarmed the population after the Bolshevik Revolution.



You could also add several countries that don't fit that agenda as well.
Posted by Qwerty
Member since Dec 2010
2114 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:29 pm to
quote:

So the fact that two states decided to implement a gun registration system via their respective legislatures is the closest we are to Nazi Germany?


Well we've murdered many more people than the nazis ever did, and we continue to do so, while celebrating it.
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16590 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:34 pm to
Anybody with a basic understanding of this debate knows that gun control proponents desire to limit civilian ownership as much as they possibly can. It's in the history of every major gun control group in the US as well as the major international ones. The company trying to push its smart gun technology, Armatix, reads more like a gun control company that happens to sell firearms in the attempt to legitimize its position.
Posted by Porky
Member since Aug 2008
19103 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 8:45 pm to
quote:

Anybody with a basic understanding of this debate knows that gun control proponents desire to limit civilian ownership as much as they possibly can.

True. Any gun control laws or political maneuvering passed under the pretense of public safety with the sacrifice of civil liberties will be exploited and used against law abiding citizens. The Patriot Act is a good example. Hitler's version was called the Enabling Act (1933). History teaches some good lessons.
This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 8:59 pm
Posted by Big12fan
Dallas
Member since Nov 2011
5340 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 9:57 pm to
Wow, you guys are consumed by the far-fetched potential that someone is coming for your guns. It isn't happening now nor in the future. Relax.
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
16590 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 10:10 pm to
It's not happening because of a motivated and organized voter base. Maybe you should do a little research into Armatix yourself. A firearms maker that lobbies for stringent laws requiring biometric/PIN/network-active firearms security devices in other countries. Devices it just happens to provide. A firearms maker who has a sitting board member that also conducted civilian disarmament studies for IANSA. It's not far fetched when the writing is in plain English (or German in this case). Just have to do a little mental effort.
Posted by OleWar
Troy H. Middleton Library
Member since Mar 2008
5828 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 10:23 pm to
Unlike the well armed Volksstrum who were able to keep the Red Army out of Berlin.
This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 10:30 pm
Posted by boxcarbarney
Above all things, be a man
Member since Jul 2007
22742 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 10:26 pm to
Has there ever been an instance where gun registration hasn't led to some form of confiscation? This is a serious question m
Posted by deltaland
Member since Mar 2011
90679 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 10:27 pm to
quote:

You could also add several countries that don't fit that agenda as well.


The point is that every mass murder committed by a Government came after disarming the population.

Sure, it's possible it would never happen here but are you willing to give up your own security in the hope that our Government remains honest and doesn't oppress it's people?

With an armed populace, you have a formidable resistance to keep a Government from ever going to the extreme. IT CAN HAPPEN ANYWHERE. Don't think for one second that it couldn't.
Posted by TIGERSandFROGS
Member since Jul 2007
3809 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 10:36 pm to
quote:

Unlike the well armed Volksstrum who were able to keep the Red Army out of Berlin.


They were? You sure about that, chief?
Posted by OleWar
Troy H. Middleton Library
Member since Mar 2008
5828 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 11:38 pm to
Shhhhhh! sagen Sie nicht, mein Führer.
This post was edited on 5/12/14 at 11:40 pm
Posted by 2close2Gainesville
Huge
Member since Sep 2008
4795 posts
Posted on 5/12/14 at 11:44 pm to
quote:


What's the biggest similarity between gun control in the Third Reich and the gun control scheme in the present-day United States?


Absolute control by a ruling party.

It's harder to rule a nation of people that can fight back. Take their guns, and "Hey!" It's much easier.

Posted by ChewyDante
Member since Jan 2007
16923 posts
Posted on 5/13/14 at 1:52 am to
The irony here is that gun control was actually relaxed under National Socialism. It was the Weimar governments who introduced the strict gun control legislation.

Granted after Kristallnacht Jews were finally completely stripped of their rights to own firearms and other forms of weaponry, the rise to power of Hitler and the NSDAP had essentially nothing to do with them implementing stringent gun laws. They also greatly increased gun liberties for those deemed German citizens, which of course necessarily corresponded with their blood/race laws. In fact, Jews had been thoroughly stripped of any real power and influence in Germany by the Nuremberg Laws in 1935. Not to mention the Jews left in Germany proper when the war began were a very small fragment of the German population and certainly a small fragment of the Jews that would be rounded up and interned throughout the course of the war. Gun laws in Germany were effectively irrelevant to the ultimate outcome for the Jews and certainly were not used to oppress and control the native population.

So how does the author's premise apply to the bulk of the Jews who were subjugated and killed in the Holocaust who were not subject to the German gun laws whatsoever (i.e. foreign Jews)? The book sounds interesting in that it may provide some documented specifics regarding German laws during the period but its thesis appears to be rather dubious and hollow as far as I can observe.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram