Michael Moore is a Moron.

[Ramp1311]

1. This is a popular myth, one that most Americans believe whole heartedly. It is however little more than a myth. If this was it's true it would have been part of the Federalist Papers not the Constitution. Who in there right mind arms the populace AFTER they rebel? The Founders weren't fools. There were plenty of reasons to want an armed populace at the time but overthrowing the government was just the hype they sold. For the record Mao didn't take guns, nor did Pol-Pot. Hitler only took them from the Jews which as awful as it is it's not like they were a majority. When the Germans wanted them dead they were gonna die. Just like everybody else who stands up to a military.

2. It's possible the Holocaust would have been less severe. It is however unlikely. For the record of your list.

3. Laughable. The entire massacre took under a minute. The people with guns were still on the way. Columbine had people with guns on hand. IF he hadn't had access to the gun in the first place he wouldn't have had access to the gun in the first place and likely none of this would have happened. It certainly doesn't happen around the rest of the world. Why can't you just man up and admit you don't care, these dead Children are price we pay encase Obama tries to round us up and kill us.

4. First, that's how democracy works. Second, charge us and go after your oil, the oil you can't safely drill and don't have the technology to clean up. Have fun. The facts are the facts by any mathematical number you can come up with the Blue states produce and the Red states drain (Texas accepted).

1) The Constitution listed the powers of the government, yet if you look at the 10th, the founders intended for the states to truly have the power....thus they need to be armed

2) Talking to some survivors, and to some ex-Germany military that moved to the US, if the population had been armed, it would have been much harder for the whole thing to have happened.

3) Please, I know you want to believe that, however if you want a gun, you will find a gun no matter where you are.... (I do not fear Obama, but I sleep better at night knowing that he just can not round up the populace.) The reason why it was so short was because people with guns were coming. In both of your cases, the killing would have gone up into the hundreds if not...

(The rest of the world? You are kidding me right? Hundreds to thousands to hundreds of thousands are killed by governments of unarmed populations...... )

By the way, I am a teacher

4) LOL..you have no idea what you are talking about. The southern states tried to drill for the oil, and the rigs were pushed so far off shore that when something happens people can not get down there to fix it. If allowed, the rigs would have been closer to the shore, and the leak would have been fixed in HOURS, not the weeks it took.

The blue states do not produce. They take the resources from other states, and then prevent the red states from using their own resources by legislating laws to prevent it.

If you look, it is not the red states that are bankrupt but the blue ones (California is one of them).

The pseudosciences look very good, but when you use common sense, they fall apart.......

 

[CHNOPS]

2) Talking to some survivors, and to some ex-Germany military tha moved to the US, if the population had been armed, it would have been much harder for the whole thing to have happened.

Why didn't the Jews who had guns, use them to keep them Germans from taking their guns?

 

[Tryharder62]

That would not make him a moron.

I googled Moron and Micheal Moores picture came up.

 

[Tryharder62]

lifendumb is a bigger moron yet you like him.

You're in no position to call anyone a moron.

I find if I am in the recumbent position I can call Michael Moore a Moron without any problems.

 

[Sean Renaud]

1) The Constitution listed the powers of the government, yet if you look at the 10th, the founders intended for the states to truly have the power....thus they need to be armed

2) Talking to some survivors, and to some ex-Germany military tha moved to the US, if the population had been armed, it would have been much harder for the whole thing to have happened.

3) Please, I know you want to believe that, however if you want a gun, you will find a gun no matter where you are.... I do not fear Obama, but I sleep better at night knowing that he just can not round up the populace. The reason why it was so short was because people with guns were coming. In both of your cases, the killing would have gone up into the hundreds if not...

(The rest of the world? You are kidding me right? Hundreds to thousands to hundreds of thousands are killed by governments of unarmed populations...... )

By the way, I am a teacher

4) LOL..you have no idea what you are talking about. The southern states tried to drill for the oil, and the rigs were pushed so far off shore that when something happens people can not get down there to fix it. If allowed, the rigs would have been closer to the shore, and the leak would have been fixed in HOURS, not the weeks it took. The blue states do not produce. They take the resources from other states, and then prevent the red states from using their own resources by legislating laws to prevent it.

If you look, it is not the red states that are bankrupt but the blue ones (California is one of them).

1. Again, you are aware that the Constitution isn't the original Founding Document of America right?

2. Ethnic Clensing. That's just the last hundred years. Notice that there are easily several dozen such massacres. Only seven involved a disarmed populace. The fact is if your government wants you dead you fucking die. It's just that damn simple. You can talk about your cowboy fantasies but reality doesn't actually support it.

3. No, you will not find a gun just because you want one. That's why this doesn't happen anyplace else in the world. Will power doesn't get you things that are unavailable. You (and I) like it because we're scared of our own shadows. Not because history actually supports your claims.

4. Whatever. You're inability to realize who in this country drives the economy and who's along for the ride is just funny. Keep telling yourself that there's no reason why all the big cities are in blue states, why the incomes are higher in blue states, that the tax revenue from the blue states are higher and the pay outs back to them are lower. Pretend California's not a top ten WORLD economy. It doesn't change the facts one bit. If we stopped paying for fly over America we'd be fine. As for your rigs, California doesn't set laws in the Gulf, the Feds set some. That's called democracy. Newsflash, your side lost and has been losing fairly consistently since the 30's. THERE'S A FUCKING REASON FOR THAT.

 

[Ramp1311]

Why didn't the Jews who had guns, use them to keep them Germans from taking their guns?

The Germans had taken most of the guns. However you have to look at history as well. I do not have the time to completely educated you on the subject but here it is in a nutshell.

The Jews were persecuted for centuries. Basically a government simply told them to leave an area/or move to another area or die. If the Jews refused, everybody was killed (men, women, children). So when the Nazis said go here, alot of Jews did. Many could not believe that a "civilized" country like Germany could/would do anything like what hapened.

When they realized what was happening, so did fight back. Remember though, not only had the population of Germany been disarmed, but Poland, Russia, etc (basically Eastern Europe) by their own governments. The only guns (or most of them) were in the hands of the government. Some Jews did have guns and fought.... Warsaw ghetto was one.....

Also, basic human nature is to protect the children, and faced with a threat to them, many revolts folded......

 

[CHNOPS]

The Germans had taken most of the guns. However you have to look at history as well. I do not have the time to completely educated you on the subject but here it is in a nutshell.

The Jews were persecuted for centuries. Basically a government simply told them to leave an area/or move to another area or die. If the Jews refused, everybody was killed (men, women, children). So when the Nazis said go here, alot of Jews did. Many could not believe that a "civilized" country like Germany could/would do anything like what hapened.

When they realized what was happening, so did fight back. Remember though, not only had the population of Germany been disarmed, but Poland, Russia, etc (basically Eastern Europe) by their own governments. The only guns (or most of them) were in the hands of the government. Some Jews did have guns and fought.... Warsaw ghetto was one.....

Also, basic human nature is to protect the children, and faced with a threat to them, many revolts folded......

Tell me if I'm following: If the population had guns, they would have been able to resist the government. But they didn't have guns because the government took them.

So guns help you resist the government, but are powerless against the government if it wants your guns.

Is that right?

 

[Ramp1311]

1. Again, you are aware that the Constitution isn't the original Founding Document of America right?

2. Ethnic Clensing. That's just the last hundred years. Notice that there are easily several dozen such massacres. Only seven involved a disarmed populace. The fact is if your government wants you dead you fucking die. It's just that damn simple. You can talk about your cowboy fantasies but reality doesn't actually support it.

3. No, you will not find a gun just because you want one. That's why this doesn't happen anyplace else in the world. Will power doesn't get you things that are unavailable. You (and I) like it because we're scared of our own shadows. Not because history actually supports your claims.

4. Whatever. You're inability to realize who in this country drives the economy and who's along for the ride is just funny. Keep telling yourself that there's no reason why all the big cities are in blue states, why the incomes are higher in blue states, that the tax revenue from the blue states are higher and the pay outs back to them are lower. Pretend California's not a top ten WORLD economy. It doesn't change the facts one bit. If we stopped paying for fly over America we'd be fine. As for your rigs, California doesn't set laws in the Gulf, the Feds set some. That's called democracy. Newsflash, your side lost and has been losing fairly consistently since the 30's. THERE'S A FUCKING REASON FOR THAT.

There are so many problems with your post tha it would take me months to educate you. So, you go on along with your delusions....they seem to serve you well.....

About California though, without the water from the other states, California would be a desert..... simliar to the Baja.... no crops.....so keep telling yourself how strong California is.....

 

[IndieSnob]

2) Talking to some survivors, and to some ex-Germany military that moved to the US, if the population had been armed, it would have been much harder for the whole thing to have happened.

If the population of whom had been armed? The Germans? The conquered countries?


Hitler didn't disarm those like Dinko Sakic, Viktor Arajs, and other foreign nationals in conquered territories. They weren't disarmed so that they could do the dirty work of killing Jews.

When are people going to stop talking about this myth that somehow the holocaust would have never happened or been to a much lesser extent had the Jews effected were armed.

If you truly cared for your family that was killed, you wouldn't be propping them up for your disgusting argument.

 

[jeninflorida]

Tell me if I'm following: If the population had guns, they would have been able to resist the government. But they didn't have guns because the government took them.

So guns help you resist the government, but are powerless against the government if it wants your guns.

Is that right?

Just like the Obama is using these these school schools (and movie theater) to 'legally' take away ... to make people like you buy into this, being for the better good.

look at it, Obama is chipping away rights one by one, turning America not only into a militarized police state, but a communist one to boot.

 

[jeninflorida]

If the population of whom had been armed? The Germans? The conquered countries?


Hitler didn't disarm those like Dinko Sakic, Viktor Arajs, and other foreign nationals in conquered territories. They weren't disarmed so that they could do the dirty work of killing Jews.

When are people going to stop talking about this myth that somehow the holocaust would have never happened or been to a much lesser extent had the Jews effected were armed.

If you truly cared for your family that was killed, you wouldn't be propping them up for your disgusting argument.

did you just come back from a crystal meth binge?

 

[CHNOPS]

Just like the Obama is using these these school schools (and movie theater) to 'legally' take away ... to make people like you buy into this, being for the better good.

look at it, Obama is chipping away rights one by one, turning America not only into a militarized police state, but a communist one to boot.

Save it, gimmick.

 

[jeninflorida]

There are so many problems with your post tha it would take me months to educate you. So, you go on along with your delusions....they seem to serve you well.....

About California though, without the water from the other states, California would be a desert..... simliar to the Baja.... no crops.....so keep telling yourself how strong California is.....

There really is no way to educate Sean. He like the many other Socialist Wingnuts here on GB...are lost causes. They are happy to turn in rights, as long as the entitlement credit card gets that monthly debit

 

[Ramp1311]

Tell me if I'm following: If the population had guns, they would have been able to resist the government. But they didn't have guns because the government took them.

So guns help you resist the government, but are powerless against the government if it wants your guns.

Is that right?

Well most of the governments in Europe did not ever allow their population to arm themselves. You do not have to take what most of them did not have in the first place. They did this to make controlling their population easier. The ones that had guns had been issued them when they joined the military. They kept them after their sevice was over.

Similair reasoning in the Far East. They wanted to control their population, so did not allow metal weapons to be in the hands of the population. It is the reason why martial arts, wooden chop sticks, et al. are so prevalent. If you do look at the metal weapons the population did have, most were farm instruments (hence why many martial arts weapons look like farm equipment)

 

[IndieSnob]

Tell me if I'm following: If the population had guns, they would have been able to resist the government. But they didn't have guns because the government took them.

So guns help you resist the government, but are powerless against the government if it wants your guns.

Is that right?

He's yet another person who believes in the propaganda and lies spread by the gun nutters.

Yet it's funny that GunCite, a website dedicated to second amendment rights, OUTRIGHT says that the argument is full of shit.

The Myth of Nazi Gun Control

Kind of sad that the people on your side even call you a liar.

 

[IndieSnob]

did you just come back from a crystal meth binge?

You can't refute my facts so you make a wild allegation.

Read my previous post in this thread and you'll see you're absolutely full of shit.

But then I wouldn't expect you to believe it. You'll spin it somehow. That's what trolling fanatics such as yourself do.

 

[Ramp1311]

If the population of whom had been armed? The Germans? The conquered countries?


Hitler didn't disarm those like Dinko Sakic, Viktor Arajs, and other foreign nationals in conquered territories. They weren't disarmed so that they could do the dirty work of killing Jews.

When are people going to stop talking about this myth that somehow the holocaust would have never happened or been to a much lesser extent had the Jews effected were armed.

If you truly cared for your family that was killed, you wouldn't be propping them up for your disgusting argument.

Man, I know what I am talking about. You on the other hand have no clue.

Once it was KNOWN what the germans were doing, if the population had guns they would have used them..... I told you alot of the governments disarmed their population to control them long before the 1930's and 40's.

Try and keep up.... by the way, alot of my family DIED fighting to keep from being sent to the camps.......

 

[CHNOPS]

Well most of the governments in Europe did not ever allow their population to arm themselves. You do not have to take what most of them did not have in the first place. They did this to make controlling their population easier. The ones that had guns had been issued them when they joined the military. They kept them after their sevice was over.

Similair reasoning in the Far East. They wanted to control their population, so did not allow metal weapons to be in the hands of the population. It is the reason why martial arts, wooden chop sticks, et al. are so prevalent. If you do look at the metal weapons the population did have, most were farm instruments (hence why many martial arts weapons look like farm equipment)

Let's hold off on the Far East until you've settled on a position for Europe. Here is what you said:

The Germans had taken most of the guns.

...Not only had the population of Germany been disarmed, but Poland, Russia, etc (basically Eastern Europe) by their own governments. The only guns (or most of them) were in the hands of the government. Some Jews did have guns and fought.... Warsaw ghetto was one.....

Did the population have guns at one point, as you claim, or are your statements here incorrect?

 

[IndieSnob]

Man, I know what I am talking about. You on the other hand have no clue.

Once it was KNOWN what the germans were doing, if the population had guns they would have used them..... I told you alot of the governments disarmed their population to control them long before the 1930's and 40's.

Try and keep up.... by the way, alot of my family DIED fighting to keep from being sent to the camps.......

Again, read the link I posted and them come back and tell me who doesn't have the clue.

It's much easier to be correct when you base your arguments on actual historical facts and don't use biased sources to back up your arguments.

I won't wait with baited breath for you to tell me I'm right.

 

[Ramp1311]

Save it, gimmick.

He is right, I am a teacher. If you look and see what the population is being taught, you would understand.

It was hard to listen to the drivel my professors talked about, as most of it had no basis in reality. It was straight brainwashing, and social engineering on a grand scale. Now they have lowered it to the high/middle/elementary schools.....

 

[Ramp1311]

Again, read the link I posted and them come back and tell me who doesn't have the clue.

It's much easier to be correct when you base your arguments on actual historical facts and don't use biased sources to back up your arguments.

I won't wait with baited breath for you to tell me I'm right.

You proved my point by your link...thanks..

"Gun control, the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, was introduced to Germany in 1928 under the Weimar regime"

(If I implied that that it was the Nazi's that took the guns I am sorry, but looking back I NEVER said it was the NAZI's that took them)

However, I have been telling you that GOVERNMENTS take the arms to control their populations.....East Europe was top of the list...... mostly only military could even have one to start with....

 

[CHNOPS]

However, I have been telling you that GOVERNMENTS take the arms to control their populations.....

You've been saying that armed populations can resist governments.

Every single person the government takes a gun from, is armed. So did the gun help resist the government, or not?

 

[IndieSnob]

Sigh, I didn't prove shit for you.

Do you even understand the context of what was happening in Germany at the time?

Do you know anything about the Treaty of Versailles? The political and economic conditions in Germany after the Treaty?

As it also states, the gun laws were in effect because both the left and right had they had access to guns, it was feared they would try to overthrow the democratic government.

 

[Ramp1311]

You've been saying that armed populations can resist governments.

Every single person the government takes a gun from, is armed. So did the gun help resist the government, or not?

LOL.. nice spin. Yes, as history has shown us, when a government does not take guns from the popuation, the population can resist the government. If the government outlaws guns, or prevents the populace from every getting a lot of guns the population did not resist.

Or do you not understand revolutions?

 

[IndieSnob]

LOL.. nice spin. Yes, as history has shown us, when a government does not take guns from the popuation, the population can resist the government. If the government outlaws guns, or prevents the populace from every getting a lot of guns the population did not resist.

Or do you not understand revolutions?

Sonny, do you think he is tired of chasing his tail yet?