I’m talking about the first-hand accounts from people who were actually living there at the time. You can read all the history books you want, but what I’m talking about is what real people actually lived through, and it’s absolutely factual.[/quote]
I’ve heard those first hand accounts. Scores of them, since I was a child, and as recently as a month ago. Irrespective of what either of us heard, the taking of guns wasn’t the beginning of anything. And even before the relaxing of the gun laws in 1938 (except for whoever you heard those first hand stories from, and my relatives), registration had been required to own and acquire guns for almost 2 decades.
And probably more importantly, the proposals that didn’t get passed wouldn’t take any guns away from anyone. There’s a big difference between background checks and confiscation.[/quote]
SK,
Yes, I’m aware of the gun laws under the Weimar Republic and the conditions set forth in the Treaty of Versailles, but Hitler extended those laws. Hitler also disarmed anyone who publicly disagreed with him and/or who posed any kind of threat to his regime.
Many of us would argue that the Second Amendment was written to *specifically* protect the gun rights of those who disagree with those in power. That’s exactly the point.
There is only one reason for a government to want to disarm the masses: fear of revolution. The cause of revolutions throughout history has been the gross imbalance of power and wealth. Look around at what’s going on, not just here, but around the world. The wealth/income/power inequality is growing everywhere, and THIS is why we are hearing so much about gun control, IMHO.
edit:
As far as our relatives’ stories (and corroborating stories from their friends who lived through it with them), do you think they are lying to us?
And, as I mentioned above, background checks make sense, but how do we prevent this information from becoming a form of registration? And how does the registration of guns prevent crime?
