It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by EyesWideShut
Actually Hitler did not bring in gun control in Germany - please see this document: ir.lawnet.fordham.edu...
When the Nazis enacted their own law in 1938, they added restrictions aimed at Jews, such as not allowing Jews to work in any business involving guns. They also prohibited those under eighteen from buying guns, added yet another permit for handguns, and banned silencers and small hollow-point ammunition. Of course, Nazi officials were exempted from all gun permits. Later that year, after "Kristallnacht," Hitler forbade Jews to possess pretty much any weapons.
That said, and a bit tangential to this question (but I'd hate to leave something out AGAIN), Cramer says the Nazis did benefit significantly from gun control in Eastern Europe in terms of "the inability of their victims to fight back." He cites The Holocaust, a book by Leni Yahil (translated by Ina Friedman and Haya Galai, Oxford University Press, 1990), which has a chapter discussing armed resistance by Jews, including rebellions with just a few firearms and a lot of courage. In addition, he talks about Israel Guttman's book, Resistance: The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, which discusses the difficulty the Jews faced in obtaining weapons.
Cramer believes that "if the population of Eastern Europe were as well armed as the average American, the Nazis would have lost much of their military capacity attempting to implement the Holocaust." I'm not sure I'd go that far, but it's certainly difficult to have an uprising without weapons.
To summarize, Hitler did "effect total gun control," but only for the Jews, and only after his regime had been in power for several years. For the rest of the population he relied on laws already in place.