Guns vs. Tyranny

[hikarugenji.livejournal.com]

There's a lot of talk lately about guns being necessary as a defense against tyranny, complete with comparisons to Stalin and Hitler and such. The "Right to revolution" is also mentioned sometimes. But in a democracy, how is this actually supposed to work?

We see situations (such as the Middle East) where fledgling democracies aren't working because the response to your candidate losing an election is violence. Clearly some people on the right-wing fringe in the US are convinced that Obama is destroying the nation, etc. etc. So what does the "right to revolution" mean for them?

There's also mention of resisting authority. Someone on my FB wall just posted something that showed the WW2 internment of Japanese-Americans as an example of why the populace needs guns, but didn't really elaborate on that. Does any citizen who disagrees with a law have the right to use guns against authority figures trying to enforce the law?

Even the founders, who had lived through and participated (and led) a revolution, were still fairly decisive in putting down rebellions and civil unrest early in the US' existence. When the Whiskey Rebellion happened, the founders didn't think "Well hey, they've got a right to revolution."

(Not to mention that we clearly don't recognize a right for the Taliban to revolt in Afghanistan.)

So what does it all mean? An actual codified, lawful right to revolution makes no sense in a democracy, but I'm unclear about what else it can mean.

Comments

[cheezyfish.livejournal.com]

As well as both a superficial grasp of context and of obvious problems that Germany might have encountered if it had sent Jews in ghettoes and completely disarmed them when it was at first pretending to everyone, including itself, that it wasn't intending ultimately to kill them all somehow

So you did disagree with Jeff assertion that Hitler attempted to disarmed the Jewish population. And no, you are very much incorrect. The Jewish population was disarmed before being sent to ghettos.

As I said if your understanding of WWII is at a third grade level, maybe.
Rule number one, don't immediately follow an incorrect statement about WW2 with an accusation of someone else not knowing WW2 beyond a 3rd grade level.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I provided citations for my views and neither you nor he have bothered to provide the least hint of citations for yours, especially since the Nazis moved Jews into the Ghettoes without intent at the time to proceed to the death camps. I provided multiple examples, in fact, that showed my views are backed by evidence. So far all you rely upon is accusing me of speaking gibberish and being incorrect. So again, if you're going to counter multiple sources with simply accusing me of speaking gibberish, I think saying your view is superficial is quite warranted, as otherwise you could, for instance, show where either the Nazi Party in the General-Government and the Lodz, Warsaw, and other ghettoes in Poland practiced this policy and/or gave orders to carry it out. If those orders exist they would be easily findable via say, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum archives, same as the links to Jewish resistance were.

Again, don't talk the talk unless you can walk the walk. And so far you ain't done either. And until either you or Jeff (and *that* will be a cold day in Hell) provide evidence to back the usual negationist historical assertions in question, I have no interest in continuing this thread. You're welcome to the last word and feeling vindicated about a complete failure to back up what you're saying.

[cheezyfish.livejournal.com]

I provided multiple examples, in fact, that showed my views are backed by evidence.

Those links you provided do not say what you think they say. Did you not read those links you copy and pasted? First off, all the camp uprising were obviously due to weapons stolen from guards, or where carried out with tools. They also specifically state that the the Warsaw uprising was made possible mostly because of weapons provided by the Polish Home Army. There is no mention of the source of weapons from the other ghetto uprisings, however, I'm fairly certain they were not still in possession of their own weapons that they were allowed to keep as an act of good faith.

Additionally there were laws specifically targeting Jews for disarmament.

Nazi Weapons Law of November 11, 1938 (http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/NaziLawEnglish.htm)

One of the first legal measures issued was an order by Heinrich Himmler, commander of all German police, forbidding Jews to possess any weapons whatever and imposing a penalty of twenty years confinement in a concentration camp upon every Jew found in possession of a weapon hereafter (http://books.google.com/books?id=4LnoQgC4GKQC&pg=PA50&lpg=PA50&dq=Nazis+Smash,+Loot+and+Burn+Jewish+Shops+and+Temples+Until+Goebbels+Calls+Halt&source=bl&ots=EqMnOkdOt6&sig=LcqR4lMkV2EYC6VjvTqeLdNgZ_g&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GMH9UOWRNoj8qwHW_oDoBQ&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Nazis%20Smash%2C%20Loot%20and%20Burn%20Jewish%20Shops%20and%20Temples%20Until%20Goebbels%20Calls%20Halt&f=false)

Not to mention that, at least in Berlin, there were several raids by Berlin police in the weeks before Nov. 9th 1938 to disarm Jewish residents. (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2128749/posts) Which was a move widely believed to be in preparation for the Kristallnacht.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Thank you for providing actual sources. I concede the argument, since you finally provided a basis for an actual argument instead of simply accusing someone else of speaking gibberish. You were right and I was wrong. Not the first time I was wrong on the Internet and it would be a bold man who'd predict it'd be my last.