>>>>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/20/justice/australia-student-killed-oklahoma/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>So far, nobody has indicated whether the three ba$tards that did this were white/black/Hispanic/hare Krishna/??.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I really don't care. I have plenty of room in the pasture to recycle them. Bring them here - preferably alive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>UPDATE: Yes - My spelling stinks today
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Meanwhile, in Germany armed man holds several people hostage.
>>>>>>Turns out the man was armed with a knife and a fake gun. In the US that guy would have had a much better choice of weapons. So personally I prefer gun control since it does prove to prevent the worst in quite a few instances.
>>>>>
>>>>>There was arms control (gun control at national scale) before WWII. Didn't seem to work very well.
>>>>
>>>>There were lots of guns on the streets during WWII in Germany, Austria and the Netherlands. Problem was that there was no resistance. Everything else is just an excuse. Besides, only a selected kind of people were not allowed guns, most nationals were allowed guns and they had guns, only they had to be registered. Hitler's rise was not due to gun control but he was elected into office and followed by the people until the end.
>>>>Even today guns are not forbidden in Germany (as opposed to what most people believe). The current laws of gun control state that guns have to be registered and properly stored in a place that is not accessible besides of the gun owner himself. It's the same system like a drivers license, that you have to prove yourself capable and responsible of owning a gun or a car and violations in conduct may lead to loosing the right to own a gun or drive a car.
>>>
>>>Look at the arms control measures imposed on Germany after WWI re battleships, combat aircraft, etc.
>>
>>Those measurements indeed were aimed at the country to prevent Germany starting a new war. But of course that did not stop Germany from producing their own weapons and to become once more the aggressor. I doubt that this situation can be taken in relation to individual citizens who should be prevented from possessing firearms.
>>
>>But the usual argument is that Hitler introduced new gun control laws and by "disarming the German population" made it easy for him to take over the country. Nothing could be further from the truth, because Hitler's amendments to the gun control laws made it easier for Germans to own a gun and to buy ammunition, and he did not force himself on Germany, or Austria or Holland, but he was welcomed with open arms by the population.
>
>I might argue the 'welcomed with open arms' by The Netherlands - having known people who lost their entire home town because of Nazi reaction to the resistance.

That is true, I have read also some stories that are truly heart breaking. Still, resistance was in the minority and most people tried to adapt to the new situation. There was a lot of anti Semitism in the population and also a lot of willingness to cooperate with the Nazis. But those that tried to resist must be remembered for their heroic actions.