History Lesson

[slim jim]

History Lesson
A Little Gun History Lesson

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.


------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 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, a total of 13 million Jews 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.
-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

------------------------------

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australiataxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!

It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too!

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson.

With Guns...........We Are "Citizens".
Without Them........We Are "Subjects".

During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED !

Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country.


It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns.

If you value your freedom, Please spread this anti-gun control message to all your friends !
__________________

 

[SIG_Fiend]

While I agree with the basics, there is also a lot more involved in the statistics of citizens murdered by their governments in the last century. For example, Mao Zedong was responsible for actually a significantly greater number of deaths than 20 million. I've heard lots of speculation by educated historians as to exactly how many, however generally most seem to agree it's somewhere over 60 million. I think when you get into ridiculous numbers like that, there is no real way to be exact. Anyways, because of the pressures he implemented on Chinese citizens during his reign, not all of the supposed 60+ million people were intentionally murdered. Some were killed due to starvation. Peasants were not able to keep up the rate of crop production expected, so they would lie for fear of upsetting Mao and being killed in return. From what I understand, this along with many other factors basically caused millions of people, in effect, to starve to death as Mao had more and more crops exported when there wasn't nearly enough for his own people. He also had millions of people murdered for disobeying, not living up to his expectations or what have you which likely accounts for the roughly 20 million figure you sometimes see.

Everyone usually associates Hitler with being the worst tyrant responsible for mass murder/genocide, however most don't seem to realize just how many people died under Mao Zedong. I mean he was responsible for literally something like 300%+ more deaths than Hitler. All of it is sickening to say the least.

Oh, and one other thing. Lets look at some basic and general math on the subject. While actual numbers per annum of death/murder of citizens at the hands of their government varies greatly by year and amount, lets generalize here. On the low side we'll say only 100 million people were killed by their governments in the last 100 years. And remember it is realistically much, MUCH higher like 120-150+ million, but we'll take the low side for the sake of argument. Averaging out that's around 1 million people killed by their governments per year. I realize this is an inaccurate average considering several years accounted for a much larger percentage of these 100 million deaths, while some years accounted for very little, but for the sake of argument just follow with me. In this country, from the stats I've read we generally have something like between 30,000-40,000 deaths by gunshot in this country per annum (pulled from random google site, take it with a grain of salt but in the ballpark). As always, averages are general and don't account for all the factors, but it gives us a simple base to make a comparison. In comparison to 40,000 gunshot deaths, on the high side, there are significantly more deaths in this country as a result of car accidents, doctor malpractice, etc etc. Hmm, so lets see here? 1 million vs 40,000 deaths per year? No one is taking my car away for being unsafe? Would you rather be armed or disarmed?

Putting the situation in perspective is as simple as the next sentence. Well over 100 million people were killed in the last century by their own governments because they were disarmed and could not stand up and fight for their rights. Charlton Heston said it best.......cold dead hands! I actually consider anyone that wants to disarm us, ban guns, etc an enemy against this country. If I was in charge, whether it was ignorant citizens who don't want to acknowledge the truth or politicians, I'd put them all in jail and after a mandatory 25yr sentence (life sentence for those politicians blatantly ignoring the constitution) I'd like to see how they feel having their rights/lives taken away.

We even have more current and modern examples of the reality of disarming a people and what can happen. Rwanda, Darfur, Bosnia to name a few. In the last 20 some odd years alone that's several million people killed by genocide largely because of a lack of weapons for self defense. Hell, in some of these genocides, like Rwanda, they killed countless numbers of people mainly with machetes (so much for guns being the problem)! Jesus, the insanity of all this is making me sick to my stomach with anger.

 

[Texas1911]

Part of those 40,000 / annum deaths are suicide. Something else to think about.

The Australian facts are not clear and a bit misconstrued. The actual long term statistics indicate that the trends in crime were rising at the same rate before, and after, the gun ban / buy back. However, since the gun ban / buy back firearms related homicide has reduced every year. What's misguided about that figure is it's not going to account for people that were still murdered, but using different means.

As with most major legislation involving freedoms, the Australian gun ban came after the Port Arthur Massacre in which some nut job shot and killed 30+ people and wounded an equal number using an AR15 and a FAL. What is missing from the argument is that the shooter had an IQ of 66, which is mentally retarded. So this was far from a normal gun owning individual that enacted this massacre, but the law was directed towards them anyways.

It should be noted that he was not wearing body armor, and a single armed individual could have stopped him. The engagement range was point blank in a cafe, then he moved up a road to a toll booth entrance where he engaged people at point blank range to 50m.

I must say that Australia did make an effort to make some degree of middle of the road laws. They have specifics regarding competition, allowing people to own banned weapons for sporting reasons. There are many open loopholes. In fact, Glock makes a specific model pistol for Australia that fits their laws.

The result is that the gun ban did nothing to stem the rise of crime in Australia, but has restricted firearm ownership for law abiding citizens. It did not release a flood of crime like some pro-gun websites would lead you to believe.

 

[SO758]

I think the gist is that politicians prefer unarmed peasants.

 

[Texas1911]

I think the gist is that politicians prefer unarmed peasants.

Of course.

 

[SIG_Fiend]

Part of those 40,000 / annum deaths are suicide. Something else to think about.

That's true. Another thing for people to think about is part of those numbers are deaths from people defending themselves and killing their attacker. In some of these cases at least, more potential murders would have been committed had the attacker not been killed. One example was when Jeanne Assam took down a gunman that entered the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and started shooting. He brought over 1000rds of ammo with him, and had obviously planned on killing lots of people. 1 death vs. hundreds sounds fine to me.