{"id":132,"date":"2015-12-22T19:17:39","date_gmt":"2015-12-23T00:17:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/?p=132"},"modified":"2017-03-22T18:45:22","modified_gmt":"2017-03-22T22:45:22","slug":"part-3a-nazi-gun-control-laws","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/2015\/12\/22\/part-3a-nazi-gun-control-laws\/","title":{"rendered":"Will the Real Nazis Please Stand Up?!! (Part 3a)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part 3a: \u00a0Nazi and Liberal Common Ground on Social Policy: \u00a0Gun control laws<\/b><\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

[This is the third installment on a series on Nazism. \u00a0This is the first on social policy.]<\/p>\n

\"Book_cover_for_Gun_Control_in_the_Third_Reich_by_stephen_halbrook\"<\/a>Stephen P. Halbrook provides the most in-depth study to date of Nazi uses of gun control laws in his recent book Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>.[1]<\/a>\u00a0 Halbrook documents that the Nazis made use of gun registration laws from the Weimar Republic to oppress Jews and other enemies of the state, and they also passed legislation that allowed confiscation of guns from anyone known to be a Jew.\u00a0\u00a0 Although it is common among gun rights advocates to raise the example of Nazi use of gun registration laws to oppress the Jews, gun control advocates often counter that the Nazis did not pass gun control legislation except to liberalize gun control laws.\u00a0 Halbrook demonstrates that the gun control advocates are using half-truths to present the situation as the reverse of what really happened under the Third Reich.<\/p>\n

The Weimar Republic passed gun registration laws a few years before the Nazis took power in 1933.\u00a0 A prescient conference of state interior ministers meeting in September 1931 noted that not requiring a permit to own firearms \u201cavoids the danger that, in chaotic times, the list of firearms owners would fall into the wrong hands, allowing unauthorized persons to seize power and use them to commit unlawful acts.\u201d[2]<\/a>\u00a0 Exactly what they feared happened soon after when the Nazis took over.\u00a0 The Nazis made extensive use of the gun registration law that was already on the books, such as the 1928 Law on Firearms and Ammunition and the 1931 decree made pursuant to the 1928 law.\u00a0 Nazi courts cited the Weimar-era laws and the various local enabling regulations to uphold convictions for unregistered firearms.[3]<\/a>\u00a0 \u201cEmergency situations,\u201d like alleged Jewish attacks against Nazis, were used to confiscate the guns of Jews in various cities, and the officials knew who had the guns because they had the gun registration lists.[4]<\/a>\u00a0 The 1931 amendment to the 1928 Law on Firearms and Ammunition allowed the state to confiscate weapons and ammunition \u201cif the maintenance of public security and order so require.\u201d[5]<\/a>\u00a0 As interpreted during the Nazi era, the Weimar-era law allowed the police the discretion to determine who was \u201creliable\u201d or not, which allowed them to confiscate weapons from those who were not.\u00a0 A leading legal journal noted in November 1934:\u00a0 \u201cIf the police consider a person dangerous and if such person, because of concerns about his reliability under \u00a716(1), should not have received a firearm or ammunition acquisition license, then the police may prohibit such person from possession of arms and ammunition.\u201d[6]<\/a>\u00a0 Dr. Werner Best, a top Gestapo official, issued a directive to the Gestapo on December 16, 1935 that said, \u201cAs a rule, we have to assume that firearms in the hands of the Jews represent a considerable danger to the German people.\u201d[7]<\/a>\u00a0 Arms searches became an everyday occurrence soon after the Nazis took power.[8]<\/a>\u00a0 The Nazis even searched the home of Albert Einstein for weapons in 1933, but they only found a bread knife.[9]<\/a><\/p>\n

In addition to allowing the later confiscation of weapons under Nazi rule, the Weimar Republic\u2019s gun registration law promoted the rise of the Nazis to power by making life difficult for average-citizen gun owners and thereby discouraged their ownership of weapons. Halbrook writes, \u201cThe effect of its laws was to limit and discourage arms possession by average citizens \u2013 the very people most likely to support democratic government against communism or National Socialism \u2013 while at the same time failing to control the destabilizing in-country conflict.\u201d[10]<\/a>\u00a0 The people most likely to have their guns confiscated under the gun registration laws were those who were law-abiding enough to register the guns in the first place.[11]<\/a>\u00a0 The bumper sticker slogan proved true, that when guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns.\u00a0 The danger of Germany\u2019s history of gun regulation was not lost on Supreme Court Justice Frankfurter, writing shortly after the end of World War II:<\/p>\n

We are in the danger of forgetting that the Bill of Rights reflects experience with police excesses. It is not only under Nazi rule that police excesses are inimical to freedom. It is easy to make light of insistence on scrupulous regard for the safeguards of civil liberties when invoked on behalf of the unworthy. It is too easy. History bears testimony that by such disregard are the rights of liberty extinguished, heedlessly at first, then stealthily, and brazenly in the end.
\n– \u00a0Davis v United States<\/em>, 328 U.S. 582, 597 (1946) (Frankfurter, J., Dissenting)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Despite the example of Nazi Germany, liberals still clamor to pass gun control legislation under the delusion that it will stop the criminals from using guns against innocent people.<\/p>\n

The Enabling Law passed on March 24, 1933 allowed the cabinet to decree laws and Hitler, as Chancellor, to draft laws that could violate the Constitution. [12]<\/a>\u00a0 On March 28, 1933 there was a Decree for the Surrender of Military Weapons, which included bolt action military rifles and revolvers.[13]<\/a>\u00a0 A few days later Nazis raided homes in Jewish homes in Berlin.\u00a0 Halbrook writes that, \u201cApparently hoping to depict Jews as subversive by proving them to be in possession of firearms, search-and-seizure operations were executed on April 4, 1933.\u201d[14]<\/a>\u00a0 The New York Times reported,<\/p>\n

A large force of police assisted by Nazi auxiliaries raided a Jewish quarter in Eastern Berlin, searching everywhere for weapons and papers.\u00a0 Streets were closed and pedestrians were halted.\u00a0\u00a0 Worshipers leaving synagogues were searched and those not carrying double identification cards were arrested.\u00a0 Even flower boxes were overturned in the search through houses and some printed matter and a few weapons were seized.[15]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Hitler-Fricke Weapons Law, published on March 13, 1938, amended the 1928 Weimar firearms law.\u00a0 Under the 1938 law Jews were specifically prohibited from working in the firearms industry, but it did not specifically forbid Jews from owning firearms.\u00a0 Nevertheless, it continued the criterion of the \u201creliability\u201d of a person in the issuance of a firearms license.[16]<\/a>\u00a0 The 1938 law is cited by modern gun-control advocates as a liberalization of gun laws because the law no longer required a license for rifles and shotguns, only handguns.[17]<\/a>\u00a0 However, Halbrook notes that \u201cAlthough this description makes the new law sound as if it is deregulatory, the Nazis were masters of propaganda.\u201d[18]<\/a>\u00a0 The gun-control advocates are falling for this propaganda.\u00a0 Halbrook cites the following commentary on the law from a German newspaper on March 22, 1938 that reveals the truth of the law\u2019s \u201cliberalization\u201d:\u00a0 \u201cThe prerequisite for the easing of the applicable weapons law had to be that the police authorities would remain able ruthlessly to prevent any unreliable persons from acquiring or possessing any weapons.\u201d [19]<\/a> Pursuant to the 1938 Weapons Law, on November 11, 1938, Interior Minister Frick promulgated the Regulation Against Jews\u2019 Possession of Weapons.\u00a0 It provided that \u201cJews . . . are prohibited from acquiring, possession, and carrying firearms and ammunition, as well as cutting and stabbing weapons.\u00a0 Those now having in their possession weapons and ammunition must at once surrender them to the local police authority.\u201d[20]<\/a>\u00a0 Furthermore, the official laws of Germany did not prevent the Nazi regime from doing whatever they wanted to do.\u00a0 Hitler declared on October 22, 1938 that \u201c[E]very means adopted for carrying out the will of the Leader is considered legal, even though it may conflict with existing statutes and precedents.\u201d[21]<\/a> \u00a0The Nazi regime made use of this power to confiscate weapons from political enemies in addition to the legislation that was passed.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"Detroit<\/a>

Detroit News article on Kristalnacht and Polish Jew<\/p><\/div>\n

On November 7, 1938 a seventeen-year old Polish Jew shot and killed a German official at the German embassy in France.\u00a0 He was despondent because his parents were stranded at the border of Poland along with thousands of other German Jews who had been deported from Germany but were not allowed to reenter Poland.\u00a0 This event served as the Nazi\u2019s excuse to regard all Jews as untrustworthy with firearms.\u00a0 Given that designation, the Nazis were able to invoke the 1931 Weimar firearm law to deprive Jews of their firearms.\u00a0 They could confiscate registered weapons and ammunition \u201cif the maintenance of public security and order so requires.\u201d[22]<\/a>\u00a0 The Nazis used gun registration records, informants, interrogation, and house searches to search for firearms.\u00a0 On November 9 the Berlin police announced (possibly exaggerating) that they had confiscated from Jews in their jurisdiction 1,702 firearms, 20,000 rounds of ammunition, and 2,569 stabbing and cutting weapons.[23]<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>

The Night of Broken Glass: Nazis terrorizing Jews to find their guns.<\/p><\/div>\n

The Night of Broken Glass (Kristallnacht) followed on the night of November 9-10, 1938.\u00a0 Jews throughout Germany and Austria were terrorized in their homes and synagogues by Nazi sympathizers while authorities looked on without intervening.\u00a0 Of course, it was all orchestrated by the Nazi officials, from Hitler on down.\u00a0 What was the purpose of night of terror?\u00a0 Looking for firearms was a main one. \u00a0The gun registrations records begun under the Weimar Republic were available to identify Jewish firearm owners before the Night of Broken Glass.[24]<\/a> \u00a0And the fact that Jews had already been almost completely disarmed allowed the terrorists to invade homes and synagogues without fear of the owners using deadly force in self-defense.<\/p>\n

An order issued by SS leader Heinrich Himmler on November 10, 1938 read: \u201cPersons who, according to the Nurnberg law, are regarded as Jews, are forbidden to possess any weapon. Violators will be condemned to a concentration camp and imprisoned for a period of up to 20 years.\u201d[25]<\/a>\u00a0 Off to the concentration camps they went \u2013 because of weapons violations \u2013 although the \u201cfinal solution\u201d was still four years away.\u00a0 No judicial review of Gestapo decisions were permitted, whether for firearms or anything else.[26]<\/a>\u00a0 On top of Himmler\u2019s decree, the very next day Interior Minister Frick promulgated the aforementioned Regulation Against Jews\u2019 Possession of Weapons pursuant to the 1938 Weapons Law.\u00a0 At least under this law, an accused had a right to trial.<\/p>\n

As Justice Frankfurter noted, the contrasts between gun rights in the United States and such rights in Germany are instructive.\u00a0 A war for independence by the American colonies was started on April 19, 1775 when British military troops attempted to confiscate the Americans\u2019 firearms at Lexington and Concord.\u00a0 They passed the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to secure the right of individuals to be armed as the ultimate basis for the security of the nation.[27]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0Citizens continued to rely on firearms to settle its frontier, for both protection and hunting.<\/p>\n

In Germany, their tradition was Hegelian statism, where the State is God walking on earth.\u00a0 Hegel said that history is ruled by great men, not the will of the people living freely to pursue their own happiness.\u00a0 Individuals serve the state, not the state serving to secure the rights of individuals.\u00a0 Nietzsche took a similar view when he extolled the superman, a man like Napoleon (also admired by Hegel) who creates new order and values for society. \u00a0Hitler greatly admired Nietzsche.\u00a0 \u00a0William Shirer writes, \u201cThat in the end Hitler considered himself the superman of Nietzsche\u2019s prophecy can not be doubted.\u201d[28]<\/a> \u00a0On top of that, Hitler and the German scientific establishment enthusiastically applied Darwin\u2019s idea of survival of the fittest to society.[29]<\/a>\u00a0 On this view, the weak have no rights.\u00a0 Societal progress requires exterminating the weak.[30]<\/a><\/p>\n

Germany had a \u201cright to bear arms\u201d in sense, but Halbrook points out that it was in the sense of \u201cthe Hegelian statist tradition, meaning compulsory military service rather than individual liberty.\u201d\u00a0 He continues that \u201cGerman military leaders rejected the Swiss militia system of \u201ca people in arms\u201d in which the citizen soldier kept his arms in his home.\u201d[31]<\/a>\u00a0 He also notes that \u201cThe working class had few firearms and no tradition of keeping and using them.\u201d[32]<\/a>\u00a0 This meant that even when they did have weapons, they did not have much knowledge on how to use them.\u00a0 The Prussian Administrative Appeals Court ruled on July 9, 1931 that an individual does not have a need for a weapons license just because he has political adversaries given that \u201cthe police are responsible for the protection of the public.\u201d[33]<\/a>\u00a0 (As the saying goes, when seconds count, the police are minutes away.)\u00a0 And Hitler often emphasized, as reported by the U.S. Ambassador to Germany from 1933 to 1937, William Dodd, that the state armed services were \u201cthe sole bearer of arms in the Nation.\u201d[34]<\/a>\u00a0 Hitler, of course, was hardly a Thomas Jefferson-type democracy-promoter.\u00a0 He wanted to control the masses (inferior races), which required keeping them disarmed.\u00a0 Not surprisingly, that especially applied in recently conquered territory.\u00a0 Hitler said:<\/p>\n

The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non<\/em> for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.[35]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Anyone found with a firearms in occupied territories received the death penalty.[36]<\/a><\/p>\n

Even hunting licenses and shooting clubs were targeted by the Nazis.\u00a0 In March 1937, the Gestapo revoked all hunting permits held by Jews.[37]<\/a>\u00a0 Target matches were placed under the German Defense Association by Gestapo decree, and hence any actions against a shooting club for violations of the decree were ineligible for judicial review.\u00a0 On December 21, 1938 Hitler mandated that all sports associations were under the Nazi Party.\u00a0 All leaders of the sport associations had to be approved by the Nazi Party.[38]<\/a>\u00a0 Hitler himself was a vegetarian and was sensitive to the feelings of animals (but not humans!).\u00a0 He said, \u201cPersonally, I cannot see what possible pleasure can be derived from shooting,\u201d\u00a0 and\u00a0 \u201cThe Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals would do well to turn its attention to the sportsmen themselves.\u201d[39]<\/a><\/p>\n

Is Resistance Always Futile?<\/em><\/p>\n

Gun-control advocates claim that the gun rights would have done nothing to help the Jews against the Nazis.\u00a0 Jews in the Warsaw ghetto were able to obtain some guns and temporarily drove off the Nazis.\u00a0 But Nazi troops soon returned and crushed the rebellion.\u00a0 Liberals say that this proves that it was futile for Jews to try to resist.\u00a0 This is wrong for a number of reasons.\u00a0 If a person is going to be killed, is it compassionate or reasonable to forbid him from at least trying to save his life?\u00a0 Nobody with any human sensibility in them should deny innocent people being led away to their death a chance to try to save their lives.\u00a0 Second, the rebellion at Warsaw and other places were so unsuccessful because the Nazis had already confiscated so many guns from Jews.\u00a0 If the registration laws under the Weimar Republic and the Nazi regime had never been enacted, then the Jews would have had a much better chance at fighting back in the home country of Germany, which would have made conquest of other nations for difficult.\u00a0 That is a good reason to fight such legislation from ever being enacted.\u00a0 Third, there were benefits that resulted from the Jewish uprising against the Nazis.\u00a0 The Warsaw rebellion inspired other rebellions, and some of those permanently escaped, and one concentration camp was torn down by the Nazis after the rebellion.[40]<\/a>\u00a0 Lives were saved by fighting back with firearms!<\/em>\u00a0 Another benefit was that rebellions like the one at Warsaw required the Nazis to divert resources away from fighting the professional armies of the Allies, giving them a better advantage over the Nazi military.\u00a0 Fourth, while gun-control advocates paint a futile picture of a small number of armed Jews mounting an assault on trained Nazi troops, more guns in the hands of Jews could have been very effective in asymmetrical warfare.\u00a0 There were several assassination attempts on Hitler\u2019s life, and they were very close to being successful.\u00a0 If one had been successful, it would have been a drastic blow to Nazi Germany, probably leading to a fight for power and rebellion against the regime from groups within the Nazi ranks. \u00a0One assassination attempt was by Swiss theology student Maurice Bavaud, who stalked Hitler for months before he was caught.\u00a0 He decided not to take a shot on one occasion because he might injure others, and he barely missed other opportunities. \u00a0\u00a0Hitler later remarked about him that<\/p>\n

The confessions of this Swiss interested me insofar as they confirmed by conviction that no a soul could cope with an assassin who, for idealistic reasons, was prepared quite ruthlessly to hazard his own life in the execution of his subject.\u00a0[41]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Fifth, the Nazis themselves did not believe that guns in the hands of Jews and other political opponents would be ineffective.\u00a0 Halbrook comments:<\/p>\n

A skeptic might surmise that a better-armed populace might have made no difference, but the Nazi regime certainly did not act on that premise.\u00a0 While many historically unique factors ultimately led to the Holocaust, Nazi policies prohibiting possession of firearms helped consolidate Hitler\u2019s power at home, exacerbated persecution of the Jews, aiding their arrest and deportation, and foreshadowed some of the more severe policies undertaken during the war.[42]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Last, I should point out that the use deadly force in self-defense is a right given by God\u2019s law.\u00a0 A homeowner is held guiltless for killing a thief who breaks in at night (Exodus 22:2).\u00a0 And Jesus tells His disciples that, while He protected them while He was on earth, He was about to leave them, and they needed to each buy a sword:\u00a0 \u201clet the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one\u201d (Luke 22:36).\u00a0 Peter misused his sword to cut off a soldier\u2019s ear (John 18:10), but that demonstrates that Jesus had allowed Peter to carry a sword for self-defense prior to the misuse incident.[43]<\/a><\/p>\n

The Bible demands a limited government that follows the rule of law, rather than a totalitarian regime like Hitler promoted.\u00a0 The king of Israel was forbidden from multiplying horses, which prevented him from launching offensive wars to other lands, and forbidden from multiplying wives, which prevented him from making foreign alliances that could draw the nation into war, and he was required to follow God\u2019s law rather than his own will \u201cthat his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment\u201d (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).\u00a0 A tyrannical regime is described as one that forces citizens into government service and that taxes as high as a ten percent of income (1 Samuel 8:10-18).\u00a0 Successful wars require troops and money, and the possession of both resources in large amounts by the government is condemned by the God of the Bible.<\/p>\n

______________________________<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a>\u00a0 Stephen P. Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich:\u00a0 Disarming the Jews and \u201cEnemies of the State\u201d<\/em> (Oakland, CA:\u00a0 The Independent Institute, 2013).\u00a0 Also see his essay, \u201cNazi Firearms Law and the Disarming of the German Jews,\u201d 17 Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law<\/em>, No. 3, 483-535 (2000), http:\/\/www.stephenhalbrook.com\/article-nazilaw.pdf<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a>\u00a0 Quoted in Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, p. 29.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 39.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a>\u00a0\u00a0 Ibid., pp. 66, 69.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 33.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a>\u00a0 Quoted in ibid., p. 103.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a>\u00a0 Quoted in ibid., p. 111.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 113.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., pp. 58-59.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 23.<\/p>\n

[11]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 33.<\/p>\n

[12]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 60.<\/p>\n

[13]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 62.<\/p>\n

[14]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 64.<\/p>\n

[15]<\/a>\u00a0 \u201cRaid on Jewish Quarter,\u201d New York Times, April 5, 1933,p. 10; quoted by Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, p. 64.<\/p>\n

[16]<\/a>\u00a0 Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, p. 132.<\/p>\n

[17]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 134.<\/p>\n

[18]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 136.<\/p>\n

[19]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 136.<\/p>\n

[20]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., pp. 173-74.<\/p>\n

[21]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 141.<\/p>\n

[22]<\/a> \u00a0Ibid., p. 157.<\/p>\n

[23]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 158.<\/p>\n

[24]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 35.<\/p>\n

[25]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 169.<\/p>\n

[26]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 170.<\/p>\n

[27]<\/a> \u00a0District of Columbia v. Heller<\/em>, 554 US 570 (2008).<\/p>\n

[28]<\/a>\u00a0 William L. Shirer,\u00a0The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich<\/em> (London:\u00a0 Mandarin Paperback, 1991), p. 101.<\/p>\n

[29]<\/a> \u00a0See Richard Weikart, From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany<\/em> (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006); and Hitler’s Ethic: The Nazi Pursuit of Evolutionary Progress<\/em> (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). Jerry Bergman, Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview: How the Nazi Eugenic Crusade for a Superior Race Caused the Greatest Holocaust in World History<\/em> (Joshua Press, 2012).<\/p>\n

[30]<\/a>\u00a0 Darwin apologist Richard Dawkins admits as much:\u00a0 \u201c[N]atural selection is a good object lesson in how NOT to organize a society. As I have often said before, as a scientist I am a passionate Darwinian. But as a citizen and a human being, I want to construct a society which is about as un-Darwinian as we can make it. I approve of looking after the poor (very un-Darwinian). I approve of universal medical care (very un-Darwinian). It is one of the classic philosophical fallacies to derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’.\u201d\u00a0 Richard Dawkins, “Lying for Jesus?,\u201d March 23, 2008 at\u00a0http:\/\/old.richarddawkins.net\/articles\/2394-lying-for-jesus<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[31]<\/a>\u00a0 Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, p. 44.<\/p>\n

[32]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 9.<\/p>\n

[33]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 26.<\/p>\n

[34]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 101.<\/p>\n

[35]<\/a>\u00a0 Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations<\/em>, Second Edition, Trans. by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1973), pp. 425-426.<\/p>\n

[36]<\/a>\u00a0 Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, pp. 112-13, 206-07.<\/p>\n

[37]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., p. 125-26.<\/p>\n

[38]<\/a> \u00a0Ibid., p. 204.<\/p>\n

[39]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., pp. 204-05 (quoting Hitler\u2019s Secret Conversations:\u00a0 1941-45<\/em>, trans. Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens (New York:\u00a0 Signet Books, 1961), pp. 114, 633.)<\/p>\n

[40]<\/a>\u00a0 \u201cTreblinka Death Camp Revolt,\u201d http:\/\/www.ushmm.org\/research\/the-center-for-advanced-holocaust-studies\/miles-lerman-center-for-the-study-of-jewish-resistance\/medals-of-resistance-award\/treblinka-death-camp-revolt<\/a>; \u201cSobib\u00f3r Uprising,\u201d http:\/\/www.ushmm.org\/research\/the-center-for-advanced-holocaust-studies\/miles-lerman-center-for-the-study-of-jewish-resistance\/medals-of-resistance-award\/sobibor-uprising<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[41]<\/a>\u00a0 Halbrook, Gun Control in the Third Reich<\/em>, p. 206.<\/p>\n

[42]<\/a>\u00a0 Ibid., pp. xv-xvi.<\/p>\n

[43]<\/a>\u00a0 See P. Andrew Sandlin, \u201cPistol Packin\u2019 Jesus?,\u201d http:\/\/docsandlin.com\/2015\/12\/14\/pistol-packin-jesus\/#comment-8043<\/a>; Larry Pratt, \u201cWhat Does the Bible Say About Gun Control?,\u201d https:\/\/www.gunowners.org\/fs9902.htm<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Part 3a: \u00a0Nazi and Liberal Common Ground on Social Policy: \u00a0Gun control laws [This is the third installment on a series on Nazism. \u00a0This is the first on social policy.] Stephen P. Halbrook provides the most in-depth study to date … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3,5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":239,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132\/revisions\/239"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/christianciv.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}