- Home
- Solano News
- US / World
- Opinion
- Living
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Business
- Obituaries
- Comics
- Gallery
- Classifieds
- Advertisers
- Coupons
- Contact Us
2,431
1,102
History lesson on gun control
On Feb. 27, 1933, a Communist nutcase named Marinus Van Der Lubbe, 24, from Holland with the help of Hitler’s S.A. brownshirts burned down Germany’s Reichstad, fueling anti-communist hysteria in Germany.
Hitler, then chancellor of Germany, used this as an excuse to disarm the general population and complete his takeover of Germany and impose a dictatorship run by him and his Nazi followers, which ended 12 years later with the death of 6 million Jews and nearly 54 million others worldwide.
Now President Barack Obama has his “Reichstad,” in the form of Sandy Hook, and wants to use it as an excuse to begin restricting millions of honest, law-abiding, legitimate gun owners from owning semiautomatic guns and impose more of his left-wing will on America.
The Soviet Union under Stalin had gun control and then he killed 20 million of his own people. Communist China has gun control and Mao Tse Tung killed millions of his own people. Cambodia’s Pol Pot had gun control and he killed millions of his own people. North Korea has gun control, and who knows how many they have murdered. Australia banned guns 20 years ago after a school shooting and the crime rate jumped 20 percent almost overnight.
Four cities with the highest murder rates in the U.S. also have the strictest gun control laws on the books: Detroit, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Oakland. Guns are not the problem, mentally ill people are, violent criminals are, drug dealers are.
Of course the Democrats have always been more than a little hypocritical about gun control. Twenty-five years ago, Diane Feinstein was pushing for stricter gun control laws in California while at the same time it was discovered that she routinely carried a pistol in her purse!
Tony Naramore
Fairfield
Discussion | 45 comments
The Daily Republic does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy
Recent Posts
- Belmont Stakes: Oxbow vs. Orb in the cards
- Johnson wins again and shrugs off the haters
- Logan Couture emerges as leader on Sharks
- What happened, Mr. President?
- Big Oil won’t spoil summer plans
- Hot times in the summer sun
- When goats attack! A personal confession
- Solano College honors taxpayers’ commitment
- Solano College eyes safety changes
- Life transformations happen at the Kroc
- Sure market bets anything but sure
- Running the Kroc is a family affair
- Tight housing market continues into summer
- Cruz finds redemption
rlw895January 12, 2013 - 1:24 pm
These ridiculous comparisons to totalitarian regimes get trotted out every time there is a serious national discussion about gun control, as if we don’t have a constitution. It stems more from anti-government ideology than any understanding of history. If you are going to put more faith in the gun in your closet than the constitution, you are being un-American. Certainly everyone who is interested should participate in the national discussion and speak out about proposals, but the idea that private guns will protect us from our own government is a fantasy, half because we don’t need protection from our government if we defend the constitution, and half because it won’t work should the need arise.
Reply |Former FF residentJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:22 am
I wonder if Pat Morita and all the other citizens of Japanese descent, born prior to 1940 would agree with you RLW.
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:14 am
And if they had guns and put up a fight, what would the result of been? Peace and harmony and freedom for all? Not likely. The encampments are a stain on our history, but turning to guns would have made it a bloody stain.
Reply |rlw895January 13, 2013 - 8:10 pm
Derned strait, Danny. Instead, the Japanese-Americans sent their husbands, sons, and fathers off to war on our side, in Europe, forming our country's most decorated unit from WWII. Their demonstration of patriotism and pride made it impossible to gloss over the national shame of the internment, helping ensure it won't happen again. At least we can hope.
Reply |rlw895January 16, 2013 - 11:52 am
Correction: Most decorated unit in US Army history.
Reply |Mike KirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 10:58 am
More lies. Hitler loosened gun laws in Germany. Where does your little theory go now?
Reply |The MisterJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:28 pm
Yes, Mike... but not for the Jews.
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:37 pm
Pistols vs. Panzers? I cant see that playing out very well for the pistoleros. Anyway, the letter says "to disarm the general population."
Reply |Mike KirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 11:01 am
Diane Feinstein did not carry a semi-automatic assault rifle in her purse, did she? That was the ban she pushed through. Try using facts to make your arguments.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:04 pm
As far as Feinstein is concerned she keeps a handgun in her purse...the semi auto assault rifle she keeps in her trunk...and I AIN'T talking about her car!
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 7:45 pm
Considering how filthy rich she is, you would think she could have the A-Team protecting her. Rest in peace George Peppard.
Reply |ChrisJanuary 13, 2013 - 1:58 pm
It doesn't even matter. The fascist left cannot ban any guns. That fascade of togetherness is fiction. That's why Obama is surrounding himself with yes-men and not the coherent, liberty-minded individuals which 70% of America is.
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 2:15 pm
You would need a left leaning president for this to be come close to being true. Obama is not a liberal President.
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 2:27 pm
I would think a Fascist president would be better at rounding up all the guns. Maybe some extreme right winger like a tea partier or neocon. Some Dick Cheney wanna be, perhaps.
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 2:33 pm
@Mike: People use that word without clearly understanding what it means. Same for Communism.
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 2:42 pm
I very much agree. Thats why i like to use their end of the stick back at them. Maybe they will feel the urge to look up a word or two. Its worth a try.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 13, 2013 - 4:27 pm
Not a president at all...but if this circus clown isn't a liberal I'd hate to see what a liberal president really is...
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 4:33 pm
Prove to me that he is a liberal G-Man.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:11 pm
Well...I would say spending more money than the last 43 presidents combined isn't exactly the model of conservatism...
Reply |Danny BuntinJanuary 13, 2013 - 7:40 pm
The continue transfer of wealth to wall st. is not my idea of a liberal leftist prez.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:35 pm
If that was the case you'd think WALL ST. Would have supported obama more in the last election...obama Sr was a socialist thru and thru..and little Barack idolized daddy..
Reply |rlw895January 14, 2013 - 1:55 am
If driving up the national debt defined being a liberal, the the Reagan and Bush II were big-time liberals. Must be more to it than that.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 14, 2013 - 2:26 am
Of course there's more to it than that..I said BO spent MORE than all 43 presidents combined..incl. Of course Bush II and Reagan..throw in a "free" healthcare system for 30million uninsured (they'll never know what hit them)..and..a dare I say.. liberal stance on Immigration...Let's throw in Food Stamps for everyone...expand the Executive branch of the gov't to a 1.6Billion dollar waste of the taxpayers money...hey!!..let's use Air Force One like it's a regularly scheduled public airplane...please..if you must fly to Hawaii..STAY THERE..The Democrat polluted Senate hasn't passed a budget in 3 yrs..surely there must be another way for King Hussein to sign his name than flying back and forth on OUR dime...Mid terms are coming..I hope the GOP gets full control of Congress...7 Demoncrat Senate seats in States where Romney won handily are up for grabs...
Reply |rlw895January 14, 2013 - 3:08 pm
Now you're talking! You know the president is not allowed to fly commercial, don't you? And he pays for his seat if it's a private trip, at coach rates, I believe. All on the up and up. But use of AF1 defines a liberal? All presidents do that. Must be more.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 14, 2013 - 9:33 pm
Actually I thought the Treasury is reimbursed @ First Class rates for private use of Air Force One...That not withstanding I would just like our leaders to be a bit more frugal...Do we have to hear that obama is throwing parties for the Chinese w/ 400.00/btl wine?...Is it necessary for the obamas to travel like oil Sheiks with a bloated staff..hairdressers,chefs,dog handlers..geez..but we overlook it cause..HEY!!..We'll be getting free stuff too..
Reply |U NO What....January 14, 2013 - 9:37 pm
I do not like about the ocean and beach?.....Too many Seagulls. The Terns are annoying also.
Reply |StRJanuary 15, 2013 - 8:37 pm
We should buzz the Florida Seagulls w/Psychotronic Bird Brain weapons and make them fly upside down till they get over Cuba and drop their loads over those Commie Pinko Cubans. (Just kidding, don't get mad at me, Commie Pinko Cubans)
Reply |StRJanuary 15, 2013 - 8:39 pm
What are the Jack in the Beanstalk Giant's favorite salads?.............Answer....A "Chef" salad with Thousand Islander dressing.... or a Poet-ta-toes salad..... or a Grab Louie.....or a Greek salad ....or a Fellow salad....or a Mack and Ronni salad....or a Waldo-if salad [Julienned apple and celery, chopped Waldo (IF a Waldo can be located), grapes, and mayornaise]....or A Paco salad.
Reply |rlw895January 17, 2013 - 9:41 pm
G-Man: No one really cares about the president's expense account except people who don't like him already. He represents our country, and we don't mind him lavishing attention on foreign visitors or putting on a show as long as it's tasteful. There has been a wide range of presidential frugality over the centuries independent of political party, and I don't think those who were penney-pinchers necessarily served the nation well by doing it.
Reply |G-ManJanuary 17, 2013 - 10:27 pm
A Lawyer...no wonder you're liberal..3yr Dr's degree...no tort reform in the health law..lawyers like accountants love complication...get a flat tax..bye bye accountants..be sensible w/tort reform..hits Attys right in the wallet...I have a paralegal degree..obtained just to understand better than legal system...This president from 400.00/btl of wines..to lavish vacations..and failed green energy projects...just spends to much...I thought spending more than 43 presidents combined and being responsible for 35% of the National Debt in only 4 yrs would at least be a passing concern to you...
Reply |Mike KirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 2:55 pm
"Now President Barack Obama has his “Reichstad,” in the form of Sandy Hook, and wants to use it as an excuse to begin restricting millions of honest, law-abiding, legitimate gun owners from owning semiautomatic guns and impose more of his left-wing will on America." Here's a question for all you gun lovers out there: Do you really think that Obama staged the Sandy Hook shooting in order to pass elieve gun control laws? Do you believe everything you hear on Fox - without question?
Reply |StRJanuary 13, 2013 - 3:20 pm
President Obama did not "stage" the Sandy Hook shootings. But certainly the Psyops Operatives could have. Mr. Obama is a puppet of the international bankers just as much as Bush was. BTW Osama Bin Laden died of natural causes (kidney failure ect) at the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002. Killing Obama was staged, again by the Psyops people. Now they could have had a good motive for staging this as a way to justify getting US out of Afghanistan. But it just goes to show how the media/military/populace can be manipulated. Also why aren't the Democrats telling us that 911 WAS an inside job (hint, they are in on it also being controlled by the international New World Order Banking establishment).
Reply |StRJanuary 13, 2013 - 3:23 pm
OK big mistake here I meant killing OSAMA not Obama. BIG BIG MISTAKE HERE mother of all typos.
Reply |sgkJanuary 13, 2013 - 4:44 pm
Last liberal president was JFK.
Reply |Tom ChalkJanuary 13, 2013 - 5:05 pm
Mike: Your comment leaves me no choice but to interpret it as your accusing Fox of saying that Obama staged Sandyhook for the purpose of stricter gun control laws. When did that Fox "news" air? C'mon, man! Get a grip. Now, here's a quetion for you: Is there any difference between a "gun owner" and a "gun lover?" In your humble opinion, of course.
Reply |Mike KirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:52 pm
Tom, i;ve tried to post a couple of times, but just Google: sandy hook staged obama and you'll find them.
Reply |Tom ChalkJanuary 13, 2013 - 8:48 pm
Mike: Scanned the first five pages of links per your suggested Google search--saw no reference to Fox as a source of reporting that the government/Obama staged the massacre at Sandyhook.
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:28 pm
Tom, nobody would give a hoot about some goofy professor And his goofy theory unless Fox gave him an audience of tens of millions of like minded people.
Reply |StrJanuary 13, 2013 - 9:58 pm
Michael you DO FUSS....... alot about us Conservatives, we are not all bad.
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 10:15 pm
STR, just answering Toms question. He seems to be a doubting Thomas. As for conservatives, i am trying to help you guys. Stop arguing with me. Resistance is futile.
Reply |rlw895January 16, 2013 - 11:55 am
Mike: Did Fox really put that nut case professor on the air? What it a serious news or some sort of a sick joke? Is it on YouTube?
Reply |Mike kirchubelJanuary 16, 2013 - 1:35 pm
I found it on Fox Nation. You could google it And see where it popped up .
Reply |rlw895January 17, 2013 - 9:52 pm
Mike, et al.: Here's the link nation.foxnews.com/sandy-hook/2013/01/08/professor-says-obama-staged-sandy-hook-massacre It refers to a story that ran out of Florida, where the professor resides. It's short and factual. Apparently the prof went on radio and newspapers picked it up. I don't see any opinion expressed from Fox News or Fox Nation, and it doesn't appear Fox aired the piece. I give Fox a pass on this one. The comments section is interesting, and that alone justifies putting the piece on Fox Nation the low profile way it is. Now, if Fox gave the nutty prof more exposure, I would have a real problem with that.
Reply |Mike KirchubelJanuary 13, 2013 - 6:57 pm
gun owner vs gun lover is obvious.
Reply |Praise the Lord..Gun is good!January 13, 2013 - 6:55 pm
Baseball, Hot dogs, Apple Pie and my Bushmaster .223
Reply |