In November, 1938 Hitler took away all the Jew’s guns. The next week he began hauling them off to the gas chambers. It is much easier to commit genocide against people who are unarmed.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Recent Comments
“25 Years ago, Kennesaw, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta, was nicknamed “Guntown USA” by Art Buchwald ridiculing the town for passing an ordinance which required every head of household to own a gun.
25 years later, violent crime in Kennesaw is nonexistent.
Meanwhile, Morton Grove, IL, the town that banned all gun ownership and equal number of years ago continues to have violent crime –including murder.”
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/020516.html#comments?tw_p=twt
Isn’t Obama trying to ratify the UN Global Gun Control treaty?
All despots first take away your guns. Not only just in Germany under Hitler. Stalin, Mao, Mugabe did that in Zimbabwe, Pol Pot did it in Cambodia. You get the picture.
Law abing citizens= no guns. While criminals/terrorists and scumbags in power = Get keep their guns.
http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/georgia/kennesaw.html
Excellent violent crime rating, but not non-existent. There will always be stupid people in fits of rage…
Note how much lower the ‘violent crime’ rate is over state and national averages. That is telling, very telling.
See “Switzerland”. 😉
I don’t want to sound like a bleeding heart, but just wonder, for every violent crime stopped by a gun, how many people are killed by guns due to accidents or someone blowing their top during an argument or altercation?
In places where gun ownership is high, there is very little crime. In Chicago, no one has guns and they have lots of crime. Not a coincidence.
Criminals will think twice before breaking into a house and facing a 12 gauge.
or a hammer
This is a classic gun banners argument that is easily dispatched. Your count of violent crime stopped by a gun must include not only incidents where a gun was actually discharged to prevent a crime but must include incidents where the brandishing or showing of a gun, the mere mention of the possession of a gun or finally, even the perpetrators fear of the possible possession of a gun by a possible victim. I would expect that incidents of actual discharge of a gun in the act of crime prevention would be a miniscule fraction of the total incidents where possession of firearms by citizens prevented crime. Hence, the lack of crime in Kennesaw.
But that does sound like a lib, Andy. Car accidents cause deaths. But do they ban cars? No, or at least not yet, and not for that reason.
Another factor is freedom. This is a free society of free people. We have fought and died for freedom. When we start to remove constitutionally granted freedoms we start to undermine the very justification for our existence as a special nation. And its not just about the jaded people living in urban jungles; it’s about the rural folk in which guns are essential and have been a part of their lives for centuries. So occasionally people get hurt by guns; but the cost of taking our freedom away is huge in comparison.
And the old adage “when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” is true. The fact that a criminal doesn’t know whether a home owner may have a gun is a huge deterrent to scary home invasions.
And by the way, that 1938 news report is absolutely sickening. That’s the last thing we want to do here. In this sense, any liberal effort to outlaw guns is akin to what the Nazis did; the news report shows that.
Eric,
Your points are well taken. I just wish we could reach the point where average people
would not see the need to carry handguns and leave that up to law enforcment. Those things are dangerous and kill thousands of innocent people every year, thru accidents and stupid altercations involving people who are perhaps a bit unstable but otherwise not criminals. How many lives they save thru deterrence is a good question.
Andy
I actually cover Morton Grove for a suburban newspaper. The village has not had a murder in many years and that was not a gun crime. There is in general almost no violent crime at all. Two or three years ago, rather than fight an NRA lawsuit the village got rid of the ban which nobody seems to be aware of. That hasn’t changed things one way or the other,. There are a lot more factors than gun ownership that affect the crime rate. As someone mentioned, the village also has a fairly low poverty rate. It also has a high percentage of senior citizens. Or maybe it’s because Morton Grove has a mosque that there is so little crime, huh?
I should also mention that all of the posts I’ve seen on various web sites about how Morton Grove has all of these murders because there are no guns are complete nonsense.
This is what I call ‘gun control’…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nf1OgV449g
If the link does not show up (as above), go to youtube or just google ‘Why Switzerland Has The Lowest Crime Rate In The World ‘.
Morton Grove, better known as a suburb of Chicago…
“According to the 2011 Federal Bureau of Investigation’s crime report released last week, violent crimes — murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault — dropped 4% from 2010 as gun sales rose 14% over the same period.
In fact, gun sales in the U.S. last year hit a record high at 16.5 million, up a whopping 65% from 2006. During that same time, the violent-crime rate dropped 23% nationwide.
But the good news story unfolding nationwide is not the case in Chicago, where 5,000 people have been shot to death since 2001. For much of that time, there was a complete handgun ban in effect.
Owning a handgun in Chicago has actually been banned outright for the past 28 years, but the murder rate continued to climb, reaching a peak in the 1990s when 900 people were being killed every year.”
Where I live, everyone owns a gun and we all shoot on a regular basis. I leave my windows open at night and sleep soundly.
See ‘Why Switzerland Has The Lowest Crime Rate In The World’…