The awful connection of Hitler and Non-presence of pers. wea

[Aetixintro]

There's a strong warning on the non-presence of personal weapons leading to the possibilities for personalities like Hitler to emerge in the political landscape. This falls as heavily on USA for preventing the world and supplying "Serial-Henry" to it, as it comes to countries being able to see this and take action against it.

For you to consider.

Conclusion: Warning on preventing people from acquiring the personal weapons for them to present themselves as friends and with a sufficient personality to go, without the fear from getting tortured and with the non-corrupt mind to behave in a friendly way.



(More later, possibly...)

[Aetixintro]

Hitler more... The consequence of denying people their Art. 3 (UDHR) rights by personal weapons, straight. Here:

Adolf Hitler research - Causes to his rise: After much investigation into human nature, especially lying, and psychiatric issues, mSomatism too, I find that Adolf Hitler may have come to power mainly out of 2 causes:

1. The lack of personal weapons in the German population. I bet with Wild Wild West, that most U. S. Americans would have one or more personal weapons at this point, also rifles (lever action incl.).

2. There would be the special rule in navel-gazing Germany (we're BIG, 40-50 millions, whatever) that would allow anybody who could gather a larger mass of people and claim power by this gathering, that he (man dominant, sorry women) would win Germany and become the leader of the nation.

Extra: at the same time, big Germany has its many affiliations elsewhere, also suppressed by the settlement with France that costed heavily. That they aired thoughts with the U. S. Americans, still with their weaponry and good at it too. Excited with some approval, the Germans begin to pick up on crazy ideas, still due to the lack of personal weapons in their population, allowing much insanity to happen, under under-paid police. So the Germans report back to homeland from New York, with only the crazy ideas, "because only these ideas work with us, or that, "you corrupt Germans... well, well, you can talk to them", while massive people showed up with an ever-idiot A. Hitler "because he was friend with everybody".

So with the failure to reason behind the personal weapons of many, and consequently without the power to assassinate the crazy people too, Adolf Hitler takes power and coarse political rhetoric takes hold, "the Jews are to blame", plus others, "we're the best in the World", "we are HUGE, we take over the World", or whatever.

Conclusion: not only corrupt forces like that. No, the lack of personal weapons has made the German people inclined toward the corrupt mind, and that other factors made this inclination/disposition cascade/gather force so for Germany to make many idiot-mistakes, many that lead to dubious invitations, to fx. Henry Ford and others, and set crazy-Nazi-Germany ready for WAR! Insanity evidently most clear!

So to characterise the most immediate situation, most severe to Europe in terms of honour, that this is either about "saving decency and progress of humanity" or to find oneself, with others, willing or not, as "servile under the "bodies" of Hitler, Eichmann (Dachau, Nazi-Germany) and beyond!"

This goes for China, Afghanistan, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, France, Germany, USA and all other countries, i.e., it applies to all populations Worldwide NOW!

We may end up with "necessary monster leaders necessitating more widespread grievances that I believe nobody is willing to accept in trying to support a family being one parent with two kids, fx.

Any opinion?

[100%atheist]

After much investigation into human nature, especially lying, and psychiatric issues, mSomatism too, I find that Adolf Hitler may have come to power mainly out of 2 causes:

1. The lack of personal weapons in the German population.

Any opinion?

If you are a student, I would give you an 'F' for making up conclusions that are based not on facts, but on your personal preferences.
In 1928, before Hitler came to power, the German Bundestag enacted the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, which allowed personal ownership and personal carry of the firearms.

Also, it might be an interesting read for your education:
"And there are other curious aspects to the Nazi gun control argument.
In the first place, the argument is of an odd form for the NRA. After all, the
NRA stands for the proposition that “it’s not guns that kill people, it’s people
who kill people.� The central idea here is that instrumentalities—in this case
handguns—are just that: instrumentalities. They are not to be blamed for what
people do wrongly with them. If you follow the logic of that argument, then
you would expect a member of the NRA to respond, when confronted with the
Nazi gun laws argument, in the same manner: “it’s not gun registration that
causes genocide, it’s people who cause genocide.�
//from http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files ... ordham.pdf

[Aetixintro]

"Yes, the Jews must have been up to the teeth in personal weapons" or NO, NO, NO!

You come here, just blurting out unfounded claims:
First F for you:

If you are a student, I would give you an 'F' for making up conclusions that are based not on facts, but on your personal preferences.

I can't say why this should be fact merely because you manage to make it come out of your mouth!

Second F for you:

In 1928, before Hitler came to power, the German Bundestag enacted the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, which allowed personal ownership and personal carry of the firearms.

Same again. Mere claim. No reference. Serious topic. Impoliteness. The abrupt behaviour...! You're being rude!

----
(Edit:)
* The possibilities for Germans to choose personal weaponry: "Western" style (from USA too) revolvers! Cock-equipped rifles plus the new lever-action rifles probably invented in USA.
* The army as we know, probably better than in 1st World War, Germany vs. France.

[100%atheist]

Considering your response, I now see why nobody replied to your strange posts. Apparently, others were better educated about you than I was.

"Yes, the Jews must have been up to the teeth in personal weapons" or NO, NO, NO!

I have never mentioned Jews. You should be talking to somebody else...

You come here, just blurting out unfounded claims:
First F for you:

If you are a student, I would give you an 'F' for making up conclusions that are based not on facts, but on your personal preferences.

I can't say why this should be fact merely because you manage to make it come out of your mouth!

This is an opinion, not a claim or fact. So, another 'F' for you.

Second F for you:

In 1928, before Hitler came to power, the German Bundestag enacted the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, which allowed personal ownership and personal carry of the firearms.

Same again. Mere claim. No reference. Serious topic. Impoliteness. The abrupt behaviour...! You're being rude!

A piece of highlighted text in my previous post is called a link. If you place a mouse over that line and click the left button your computer [hopefully] will open a pdf file. In that file you will find plenty of references.

Good luck.