Democrats use Nazi policy to get registration, then confiscation, of your guns
By Gerald Lostutter
GellerReport.com
March 18, 2019
Happiness is a warm gun, sang the Beatles; but Democrats are singing registration, then confiscation, of your guns. A “Firearm Registration” bill was introduced in the Pennsylvania Legislature on March 8, 2019.
Safety is the mantra of anti-gun activists, but their claim of control is a means to their goal of a gun-free society. This progressive policy can be implemented only by compliant citizens. But political opponents, the “deniers,” must be eliminated by social shaming or civil and criminal penalties. There are historical lessons of totalitarian governments, which rule because citizens have been deprived of weapons.
The Nazi policy
In Nazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews, page 537, Stephen P. Halbrook observed:
“The record establishes that a well-meaning liberal republic would enact a gun control act that would later be highly useful to a dictatorship. That dictatorship could then consolidate its power by massive search and seizure operations against political opponents, under the hysterical ruse that such persons were ‘Communist’ firearm owners.”
“It could enact its own new firearms law, disarming anyone the police deemed ‘dangerous’ and exempting members of the party that controlled the state. It could exploit a tragic shooting of a government official to launch a [sic] pogrom, under the guise that Jewish firearm owners were dangerous and must be disarmed.”
“This dictatorship could, generally, disarm the people of the nation it governed and then disarm those of every nation it conquered.”
The USA’s fundamental rights
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“In the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the ‘Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.’” Reported by the Legal Information Institute of the Cornell Law School.
“The above experiences influenced perceptions of fundamental rights in both the United States and Germany,” Halbrook explained: “Before entering the war, America reacted to the events in Europe in a characteristic manner. Seeing the Nazi threat and its policies, Congress passed the Property Requisition Act of 1941 authorizing the President to requisition certain property for defense, but prohibiting any construction of the act to ‘require the registration of any firearms possessed by any individual for his personal protection or sport’ or ‘to impair or infringe in any manner the right of any individual to keep and bear arms.’” Nazi Firearms Law, pp. 536-37.
“Remember that registration of firearms is only the first step,” stated the Requisition Act’s sponsor, Rep. Paul Kilday (D-TX). “It will be followed by other infringements of the right to keep and bear arms until finally the right is gone.” Nazi Firearms Law, p. 537, fn. 289.
The Rest…HERE
