Guest guest Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 in 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, 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. That places total victims who lost their lives because of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last century. Since we should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone talks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated. gun owners in Australia were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, a program costing the government more than 500 million dollars. The results Australia-wide; Homicides are up 3.2%, Assaults are up 8 %, and Armed robberies are up 44% In that country's state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlunity Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 The only logical reason for taking or trying to take a person's arms is that the taker has plans for the disarmed person, that he or she knows the disarmed person would resist with armed force. So if I want to enslave or kill you or your family and I DON'T want to get killed, I had best disarm you. If I can fool you into giving up your arms..crime..terrorism..for the children..all the better. After all you want the sheep to go along peacefully to the killing fields. On the other hand if I am not ploting harm to you than I have no reason to fear you or your arms. Karl Karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritz Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 Karl, I'm not sure that some of these stupid governments are out to disarm you for fear that you may overthrow them. Some are doing it because they are just that--stupid. They are do-gooders. They want to "protect the children", etc, etc. They believe what they are doing is for the good of us all. While we agree that that is a stupid approach, they actually believe it. Because they are stupid. Now, countries like Cambodia (Pol Pot) were not stupid. They really were out to disarm for their own gain. And damned if they didn't do a job on the country. Anyone who has seen the movie "The Killing Fields" can attest to that. I doubt that Australia and some of the others have that fear. They are just stupid, and their do-gooder approach hurts more people than it helps. Where were the people that this hurts? They let this happen in THEIR country. They allowed it to happen. Not here, over my dead body, etc. fritz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlunity Posted August 20, 2005 Report Share Posted August 20, 2005 What if the only folk who keep the right to own and use arms are in Russia!!??? Karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamprat Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 It won't matter since I'll be dead. Because I will never willingly give up my guns. Swamprat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roscoedoh Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 The problem with disarming the citizenry is that we have owned firearms for so long they're a part of our culture. As such, the goverment will never find all the firearms out there, nor will they be able to stem the flow of illegal firearms entering the country via the criminal element. If they could, they could also stem the flow of illegal narcotics and illegal aliens - neither of which they've been terribly sucessful at. And again, I don't trust a government who wants me disarmed "for my own good." What if Al Qaeda launches another attack on us? What if Mexico invades? I have a right to defend myself. Frankly, all the arguments against gun ownership are in some way flawed. The genie has been out of the bottle for so long now that I think its better we just continued to live with guns as a part of our culture and hertiage rather than surrender them so the Clintons and Kennedys can sleep at night. Futhermore, I have no immediate plans to surrender mine. America is still a free country and we still have a constitution that enables me to own firearms. For as long as I walk this Earth, I shall exercise that right. That's my opine on the subject. Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.