Ben Carson’s weird

In it he says Nazi authorities disarmed German citizens during the 1930s before the Holocaust.
“Through a combination of removing guns and disseminating deceitful propaganda, the Nazis were able to carry out their evil intentions with relatively little resistance,” he wrote.

Nazi gun control legislation was actually more liberal (ie, looser, more people could have more types of gun) than that of the Weimar Republic.

25 thoughts on “Ben Carson’s weird”

  1. It’s almost like the idea of individual armed resistance against the state became obsolete during the 19th century. 1914 at the latest.

  2. I like the new narrative that the RKBA was never intended by the founders to be an individual right.

    Which is just flat contradicted by the Federalist papers that deal with the topic.

    And the English 1688 Bill of Rights from which they drew much inspiration.

    Ho hum…

  3. “Republican candidate provokes ridicule …”
    One presumes he’s attracted widespread support, then.

    One would also presume the important aspect of the German experience was how successful the Weimar Republic was at suppressing gun ownership. One suspects, not very.
    Which bears on the US situation. “Gun control” in the US is a fantasy. There’s simply too many guns out there & the authorities would never have the power to significantly reduce the numbers. As the NRA say, it’d disarm the honest citizen but leave the guns in the hands of the crooks.
    UK’s a fine example. Some of the tightest gun control legislation in the world. I could get off a plane on Saturday & be tooled up by Monday. You simply have to know who to go to. It’d even be fair to say, the amount of handguns in circulation has risen since the ban. Not that there’s a direct connection. Just that the ban’s totally irrelevant.

  4. Some of the tightest gun control legislation in the world. I could get off a plane on Saturday & be tooled up by Monday. You simply have to know who to go to.

    *cough* yeah, right.

    Even if you do, most people don’t, which is why the UK has very little gun crime (and the vast majority of “gun crime” that gets breathlessly reported by hacks involves crims being arrested for having guns, generally before they’ve had the chance to do bad things with them).

  5. “*cough* yeah, right.”
    No, really, John. Comes of spending many years living just down the road from Tottenham. Where a handgun’s a fashion accessory.
    And “most people don’t” is rather the point.
    “and the vast majority of “gun crime” that gets breathlessly reported by hacks ”
    Firearms incidents make a couple lines on the local paper, these days. They only get excited when there’s casualties.

  6. There used to be lots of small four paragraph reports of shootings on the BBC news site. Brief, anodyne and always ending with the same final paragraph about how the murder/shooting was “being investigated by Operation Trident”.

    Even these half-hearted reports have mostly stopped now. As I imagine the shootings haven’t I am assuming the BBC has decided blacks shooting blacks isn’t important anymore, certainly nowhere near as important as who won a baking competition.

  7. “Nazi gun control legislation was actually more liberal (ie, looser, more people could have more types of gun) than that of the Weimar Republic.”

    So? Irrelevant comparison. The question is, did Nazi gun control enable the Nazis “to carry out their evil intentions with relatively little resistance”?

  8. Brief, anodyne and always ending with the same final paragraph about how the murder/shooting was “being investigated by Operation Trident”.

    Back when there was all the hetze around converting Brococks or converting replicas and the passage of the extremely misnamed “Violent Crime Reduction Act”, every article speculated that the crime involved a converted replica or a converted Brocock.

    Then after the VCRA passed, they stopped.

    Funny, that.

  9. If I was American, I wouldn’t bother with all this nonsense about nazis and tyrants to justify owning guns.

    That’s weaksauce. You should never fall into the trap of justifying your rights.

  10. JJ:”So? Irrelevant comparison. The question is, did Nazi gun control enable the Nazis “to carry out their evil intentions with relatively little resistance”?”

    One of the major factors in Nazi “success” was that their evil was unexpected. People didn’t really believe (or wouldn’t let themselves believe) that they were being taken to mass slavery or death,

    Today we have no excuse. No one will ever put me in some cattle car. Even without guns you can still hope to kill several before they kill you.

  11. I increasingly find myself agreeing with Ecks. The Nazis relied on subterfuge and intimidation to gain power. Once they had it they exercised it absolutely. No number of farmers with shotguns could have changed that. The takeover was complete when they banged up or shot the last opposition leader who wouldn’t shut up – and they did that in just a few months.

  12. I’m currently reading a book about Switzerland during the war, which starts in 1933. What really struck me was:

    1. How quick the Gleichschaltung was enacted. Really, we’re talking months here for it to be come crazy and totalitarian.
    2. How much they provoked their neighbours, again indeed very quickly, often with silly things like publishing maps of Grossdeutschland that had Holland and German-speaking Switzerland on them as part of the Reich.

  13. “I could get off a plane on Saturday & be tooled up by Monday.” I’m told there’s a local pub where one can hire a pistol for, say, the weekend. I suppose one buys ammo too. Personally, once I had the pistol and the ammo I’d be tempted to relieve the renter of my money and anything else valuable he had on him. Presumably he has tooled-up chums to defend him from that.

  14. “You should never fall into the trap of justifying your rights.”

    Why on earth not? The Constitution (or in our case Parliament) giveth and the Constitution taketh away.

  15. ‘Even if you do, most people don’t, which is why the UK has very little gun crime’

    We have no gun crime in the U.S. Plenty of people crime, but no gun crime.

  16. dearieme: Surely the burden is upon governments to justify removal of our rights, not on us the justify their retention.
    See e.g. the removal of double jeopardy protection and the introduction of secret courts.

  17. Has anyone actually done any research on this?

    Wikipedia:
    On November 11, 1938, the Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons was promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews living in those locations of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7] Some police forces used the pre-existing “trustworthiness” clause to disarm Jews on the basis “the Jewish population ‘cannot be regarded as trustworthy'”.[5]

    Full paper in Arizona law review: http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazilaw.pdf

  18. Robert has already said what I was going to – Ben Carson is right on this point. I’d strongly recommend the article he cited – I knew some of the facts contained therein, but not all of them.

    Carson is the Republican who does best against Clinton in the polls. He’s not a professional politician and has made a few gaffes, but I’d recommend looking into him – he’s not actually “weird” (unless you call being an exceptionally gifted surgeon and a leader in the black community “weird”).

  19. Yup, I was just coming along to say what Robert and AJ have said. You’re wrong on this one, Tim. You might well be right about general gun laws for most Germans (I have no idea), but the Nazis didn’t make general laws that were the same for everyone, did they?

  20. So Much For Subtlety

    Matthew L – “It’s almost like the idea of individual armed resistance against the state became obsolete during the 19th century. 1914 at the latest.”

    So that is what? Two years before the Easter Uprising?

    Tell me old bean, which inbred git do we get to send to the Castle to rule Ireland these days?

  21. So Much For Subtlety

    I kind of bet that Nazi gun control was not looser than that of the Weimar. But never mind.

    I like this review of a book I may one day actually read:

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/nazi-gun-control/?singlepage=true

    The author ends up by asking how could Gun Rights have made things worse for the Jews of Warsaw. That is a very good question. Gun control does not reduce gun crime and may well increase it – Australia has seen more gun crime since their gun control laws were passed. Britain has too. Perhaps guns will deter future Hitlers. Maybe not. But what harm can they do?

    Law abiding people who own guns pose no threat to anyone but themselves and criminals. They are a positive force for good in the community by and large. Apart from a dislike of ordinary people and a desire for them to be dependent on the state at all times, what is the big deal? Why not let them have guns?

    Suppose we push this to its logical extreme – the British government decides to give every home owner on the electoral roll without a criminal record one of these:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saiga-12

    That is, an AK-47 chambered for a 12-gauge shotgun round. What is the downside? How does this do anything but make Britain a better place?

    (Bearing in mind that the last two terrorist attacks in Europe involved Islamists acquiring AK-47s and in the case of the Charlie Hebdo attack, a rocket-propelled grenade as well. Good thing those French gun laws work so well.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *