History of gun control

[kinzysdad]

Gun control is not about controlling guns, gun control is about controlling
people!

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,
some 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to
1981, some 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 Australia taxpayers 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 a 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 WW II.. 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
AttachÃ(c) 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. and
knew that almost all households had guns.

[sneekeepete]

Awesome post man! I wish everyone would understand why we have our right to keep and bear arms.

[DeadI]

+1

[ABert]

I hate to play devil's advocate here, but your "stats" are not accurate. Please post the source, other than an email that was forwarded to you. Most "data" can be construed to back up anything the author wants it to. There has not been a huge increase in crime, murder or break ins since Australia passed their gun laws. This has been disproved many times over.

Believe me, if this country ever passes a gun ban (very unlikely with the latest decision from the Supreme Court on handgun ownership in DC) my guns will be covered in blood before they get them. MOST US service members will NOT confiscate guns from the public because they own guns themselves. Same with LE personnel.

This is what I do not like about the NRA. They do ALOT to protect our rights, but at the cost of causing undue alarm. The Supreme Court of the United States of America, the highest court of the land, has RULED that the Second Amendment of the US Constitution GUARANTEES the right of citizens to bear arms...period.

The only thing the anti's can fight now is the TYPE of weapon that a citizen can own. I, for one, do not believe that every citizen NEEDS to own a fully automatice weapon. If one chooses to own one, they can apply for a licenses. I don't NEED one. I'm guessing most hunters don't NEED one, either. Would I love to have a fully automatic TommyGun in .45? You better believe it. And for only about $1500 for a license plus the cost of the gun I can have one. I don't NEED one that much.

I believe most of us on this board are very law abiding citizens and will fight to the death to keep the tools of our choosen trade (or hobby, whatever you want to call it). I may receive some flaming from this post, but the pro-gun vs the anti-gun uses the same tactics to get attention. IMHO, one is no better than the other. This is one of the reasons I quit the NRA more than a few years ago.

Believe it or not, there is a middle ground.

[sneekeepete]

ABert I agree there is a middle ground in all of this. I also agree that if it ever came down to it majority of your military would not go collect guns. Alsmost every one I work with and have worked with in the Marine Corps owns at least one gun and would not be willing to give it up.
I wasn't sure how accurate the post was but I am sure there is some truth in it. I also beleive that we will see our variety of weapons that we are currently aloud to own will be limited in the near future. Or they will try to limit it again. I agree most people have no need for fully auto weapons. Anywho just some more thoughts.

[m gardner]

Few of us have any use for a full auto weapon. Even the U.S. military realized this and went to the M-16 A2 which fires 3 shot bursts instead of full auto. But the constitution guaratees me the right to own any firearm and is not specific. When it was written lots of people owned the best in military weaponry at the time. If I was to fight I would rather you be poorly trained and excited and have a full auto weapon. Just like in Vietnam when the U.S. troops ran out of ammo from firing full auto they were slaughtered. It's not the weapon you have it's knowing how to use it.
Mark

[kinzysdad]

Soo Abert I took your advise, I looked up the info that was posted. I found it interesting that The Aussie portion cannot be proven nor can it be disproven. As you said, Statistics can be twisted to the authers agenda.

Now, I will not take credit for authoring the email, I will take credit for posting it.

Your opinions on the NRA are just that YOUR opinions. You may choose to take the middle ground. As for me. I choose to take a more active role in keeping my guns.

[NotEnufTags]

Here's another nice tidbit that you won't see the media playing on any prime time.

GunControlWitness.wmv

(3.89 MiB) Downloaded 217 times

Hold on to your guns.