Famed 2nd Amendment lawyer Compares Hitler to Obama
Stephen Halbrook, famed 2nd Amendment lawyer, with a 4-0 record in cases tried before the Supreme Court, has written a new book about how Hitler disarmed the Jews and other enemies, using gun registration lists, and he compares that to the Obama regime’s plan on gun control. “Gun Control in the Third Reich: Disarming the Jews and ‘Enemies of the State‘,” is the name of the book and it explores gun control before and after Hitler came into power. Halbrook points out parallels and comparisons between Hitler’s policies and those of today.
“Actually, there are parallels between the firearm bans and registration requirements enacted by the Weimar Republic and those proposed by President Obama. Only law-abiding persons obeyed those laws. Weimar authorities warned that the lists of gun owners must not fall into the hands of ‘radical elements.’ The lists fell right into the hands of the Nazis when they assumed power. Gun owner data can be misused by the government today just as it did in the IRS scandal, and it can be hacked for nefarious purposes.”
He added, “That said, comparisons to Nazi Germany are unjustified in a society where a free press and free elections remain, and no one is being herded into death camps.” (Yet)
“What historians deem ‘significant’ reflects both their value judgments and what information is available. The disarming of the Jews and other ‘enemies of the state’ was widely reported when it occurred. Historians failed to pursue the topic or the rich history I located in the German archives. By contrast, numerous histories of resistance movements in the occupied countries reflect the desperate need for arms. First-hand accounts of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising are an inspiring tribute of how armed Jewish resisters fought the Nazis.”
When the Daily Caller pressed him on whether it would have made much difference since the Nazis were so well armed, Halbrook replied that it might have made a difference in individual cases and maybe for some small groups.
“Had the Jews not been disarmed, they would have had a better chance to resist and survive, even if only in individual cases or in groups. The broader question is whether anything would have been different if Germany had constitutional traditions similar to the American Bill of Rights and the engagement of the population in exercising these rights, such as a free press and having arms. Even aside from the initial disarming of democratic elements before the general disarming of the Jews, the fanatical disarming of the Jews alone demonstrated that the Nazi regime considered them a threat. Armed Jews and political opponents may have been able to resist arrest and deportation in some cases.”
When asked why he wrote the book, Halbrook replied:
Hitler disarmed the Jews and “enemies of the state” — political opponents — in order to consolidate his dictatorship and preempt opposition to his ruthless policies. My previous books concern how oppressive governments sought to disarm populaces in order to oppress them. The British attempted to do so to the Americans who fought back with an armed Revolution, which was the impetus for the Second Amendment. After the Civil War, the Southern States sought to continue the slave code provisions prohibiting gun possession by blacks, which became a major issue in the civil rights struggle during Reconstruction. My new book focuses on this universal phenomena during one of the most brutal periods of history.
Would be dictators and tyrants always go after guns and religion first.