2 statements that bother me


PDA

Bonker
May 16, 2003, 06:20 PM
Our side has the facts and history on our side. There's no need to make up lies or exaggerations. It gives our enemies ammunition when we do so.

In that vain, I am so tired of 2 sayings that I see ALL the time in gun shops, gun shows, bumper stickers, and websites.

First, the quote by Hitler from 1933 where he talks about banning guns and making a crime free state just never happened. Hitler never said it or anything like it.

Second, the "liberty teeth" speech by George Washington. He never said it. It's 100% fabrication.


Just stick to the facts. There's no point in making people on the fence think we are just making stuff up. The left makes up enough BS for both sides :)

If you enjoyed reading about "2 statements that bother me" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Mark Tyson
May 16, 2003, 07:00 PM
Right you are. Let those other people do all the lying. We'll play by the rules. We have the facts on our side.

faustulus
May 16, 2003, 07:55 PM
I agree that I hate seeing lies come from our side.
We will not, however, win because we have the facts. Facts almost never prevail in emotional arguements.

Standing Wolf
May 16, 2003, 09:38 PM
Facts almost never prevail in emotional arguements.

Fortunately, America has outgrown both leftism and leftists, and is taking a much more rational approach to political issues.

J Miller
May 16, 2003, 09:57 PM
Fortunately, America has outgrown both leftism and leftists, and is taking a much more rational approach to political issues.
At least for now. I'm hoping this continues long enough to destroy the hold the liberals have on every facit of America.

Mike Irwin
May 17, 2003, 12:05 AM
"Facts almost never prevail in emotional arguements."


But an emotional argument based on facts?

Such as a single mother, beaten and threatened by her ex, and continually failed by the system, who kills her tormenter with a firearm?

Priceless.

I've always thought that a VERY powerful and compelling campaign for the right of people to be armed would be the ACTUAL police or hospital of a battered, bloody woman, a copy of the violated protection from abuse order, and a picture of the firearm the woman used to save her life, with a recounting of how the system failed and how the gun saved her life.

An ad like that would never be done, though.

SkunkApe
May 17, 2003, 01:18 AM
You want to hear something really sad? That phony Hitler quote is the very first line of the Silveira v. Lockyer case. I kid you not.

http://keepandbeararms.com/silveira/scotus.asp

http://keepandbeararms.com/Lawsuits/SilveiraComplaint2.pdf

How dumb can we be?

general
May 17, 2003, 09:31 AM
About a year ago I bought one of those Hitler quote shirts at a gun show.....
It has the quote attributed to "AdolPH Hitler"
not Adolf. - Now I hear it's untrue...
Geezz... can't trust anyone these days.
I guess that's your point. We need to be seen as above reproach. 100% clean and neat. Taking THE High Road. That's the kind of approach I can feel good about.
We should be the first to de-bunk myths and falsehoods re-RKBA, if not us - then who?
Good post Bonker!
Post 'em when ya see 'em-(hear 'em/ect.)

Pat S
May 17, 2003, 11:51 AM
I actually heard Charleton Heston use the quote a couple of years ago. If they can get it wrong you really have to be careful! There's a lot of trash floating around, especially on the internet. You really need to scrutinize what you read.

Someone else said that facts don't always prevail, and that is very true. Anyone remember 10 yrs. ago when the debate heated up in the months preceding the AWB? The TV continually showed fully automatic weapons being fired and protrayed them to be the ones affected by the pending legislation. You can't tell me that the media didn't know it was a lie and that someone didn't bring it to their attention! Bottom line: The media in this country are anti-gun and will use whatever deceiptful means necessary to get their point across!:fire:

HBK
May 17, 2003, 12:13 PM
I may be showing my naivity, but I really thought the Hitler quote was a fact. How are y'all so sure it's false?

SkunkApe
May 17, 2003, 02:20 PM
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcbogus.html

"This year* will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
---Falsely attributed to Adolf Hitler, "Abschied vom Hessenland!" ["Farewell to Hessia!"], ['Berlin Daily' (Loose English Translation)], April 15th, 1935, Page 3 Article 2, Einleitung Von Eberhard Beckmann [Introduction by Eberhard Beckmann].
This quotation, often seen without any date or citation at all, suffers from several credibility problems, the most significant of which is that the date given (*in alternate versions, the words "This year..." are replaced by "1935..." has no correlation with any legislative effort by the Nazis for gun registration, nor would there have been a need for the Nazis to pass such a law, since gun registration laws passed by the Weimar government were already in effect. The Nazi Weapons Law (or Waffengesetz) which further restricted the possession of militarily useful weapons and forbade trade in weapons without a government-issued license was passed on March 18, 1938.
The citation usually given for this quote is a jumbled mess, and has only three major clues from which to work. The first is the date, which does not correspond (even approximately) to a date on which Hitler made a public speech, and a check of the texts of Hitler's speeches does not reveal a quotation resembling this (which is easily understandable when you realize that "Hitler" is commenting on a non-existent law). The second clue is the newspaper reference, which if translated into German resembles the title of a newspaper called Berliner Tageblatt, and a check of the issue for that date reveals that the page and column references given are to the arts and culture page! No Hitler speech appears in the pages of Berliner Tageblatt on that date, or dates close to it, because there was no such speech to report.

Finally, the citation includes a proper name "Eberhard Beckmann," which is sometimes cited as "by Einleitung Von Eberhard Beckmann," which is an important clue itself, because it reveals that the citation was fabricated by someone who had so little knowledge of the German language that they were unaware that "Einleitung" isn't the fellow's first name! The only "Eberhard Beckmann" which has been uncovered thus far did indeed write introductions, but he was a journalist for a German broadcasting company after WWII, and he wrote several introductions to photography books, one of which was photos of the German state of Hesse (or Hessia), which may be the source of the curious phrase "Abschied vom Hessenland!" which appears in the citation. This quotation, however effective it may be as propaganda, is a fraud.

[GunCite note: Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, a gun rights group, acknowledges the quote as bogus in the second item of their FAQ.]

http://www.jpfo.org/faq.htm#faq02

Question: Is the following an authentic Hitler quotation?

"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future."
--Adolph Hitler, 1935

Answer: No, it's a hoax. At least nobody has been able to verify it.




Also see this:

http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/general/BogusAntiGunQuotes.htm

Feanaro
May 17, 2003, 02:47 PM
We can't say for sure it's false. But there is no evidence to support it.

Anyways, I can't stand it when people lie. Even if they are on our side. The truth never persuades anyone. But we are supposed to be above manipulating facts and making things up.

general
May 17, 2003, 02:56 PM
Thanks for the research SkunkApe!

Leatherneck
May 17, 2003, 06:50 PM
Facts win. Always. As long as there exist tellers of facts.:scrutiny:

TC
TFL Survivor

TechBrute
May 17, 2003, 06:52 PM
It doesn't really bother me. We should be above reproach, but come one, when have the facts ever entered into an anti-gun arguement?

Bruce H
May 17, 2003, 08:49 PM
You can argue with the anti side of the equation all you want. Be it for fun, personal intertainment or just silliness, in the end the anti will wind up pulling a gun on you. Emoptional issues allways have a habit of turning nasty when the loosers are backed against the wall.

Double Naught Spy
May 18, 2003, 02:52 AM
Here are sites claiming the Washington quote is false.

http://www.codyexpress.com/Hist%20Docs/falsequotes.htm

http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/general/BogusFounderQuotes.htm

Do note that there are lots of sites on the net that recapitulate the statement many times over.

Nazi weapon banning is another busy topic. Here, a lot of sites show it to be true and several show it to be false.

In both cases, what I find amazing is pro-gun folks claim these statements to be true while others claim them false. In short, we don't have our own house in order or take the time to verify information before passing it on.

As for the lack of truth on both sides of the gun issue, I too find that to be disturbing. I really started to lose faith in my side (pro-gun) as being honest when I compared NRA claims against some anti claims. In the particular incident, but parties cited the CDC for the information that supposedly prooved their points. When I went to see the CDC data for myself, I found that both sides had conviently biased the data in their own favor and as such, neither side presented credibile information.

My guess is that both sides probably believe that no outside party is ever really going to check their sources and no doubt, most don't.

The really sad thing here concerns how gullible folks are. Often, people will believe statements that support their causes without trying to verify the validity of those statements.

Drjones
May 18, 2003, 03:21 AM
Are these fake too?


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.

- Adolph Hitler


"The associations of the national revival, SA, SS, and Stahlhelm, offer every decent citizen the opportunity to join their ranks in the struggle. Anyone who does not belong to one of the above named organizations and nonetheless keeps his weapon without permission, or indeed conceals it, must be regarded as an enemy of the national government, and will be brought to account without compunction and with the utmost severity."

- Nazi Germany, 1934


"Juden haben waffen!" (The Jews have weapons!)

- unknown German askari. The Germans marched into the Jewish Ghetto at Warsaw to remove the last Jews. The Jews didn't behave according to German rules and opened fire on them.

Feanaro
May 18, 2003, 04:08 AM
The first one is right, I know that. The second one is too if memory serves. Dunno about the third.

twoblink
May 18, 2003, 05:45 AM
Two statements that bother ME:

#1) Diane Feinstein
#2) Barbara Boxer

Hal
May 18, 2003, 06:31 AM
But an emotional argument based on facts?
Such as a single mother, beaten and threatened by her ex, and continually failed by the system, who kills her tormenter with a firearm?

Priceless. Priceless?!?! More like pathetic.
(The respose and interest from our side that is):banghead:
I see it happen a lot. Same as back at TFL. These real "priceless" gems come along, and POOF! They go all but unread. Let somebody giggle and fart over being "made" in public, or how to carry a 1911 in a speedo, and everybody wants to read about it. No my friend, these stories are far from priceless. The roar of silence to a good factual story here is deafening.

For specifics, here's the thread I'm, talking about:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22563

As of this AM only 279 views.

pathetic.

SkunkApe
May 18, 2003, 10:18 AM
The really sad thing here concerns how gullible folks are. Often, people will believe statements that support their causes without trying to verify the validity of those statements.

- Double Naught Spy

That statement is so powerfully truthfull, it needed to be repeated.

Most people develop an opinion first, THEN find evidence to support it.

Try this as an interesting excercise. Select an idea that you firmly believe to be false. Then research the subject to find information that makes it out to be true. Use that information to try to convince a friend that the idea is true. You'll be amazed at how easily you can construct a seemingly rational argument for a peposterous idea. After that, you'll be more skeptical of things you hear.

Double Naught Spy
May 18, 2003, 01:38 PM
SkunkApe, sure enough, and it isn't just with gun and anti-gun folks, but with people everywhere on a myriad of topics. Where it gets still sadder in when folks on one side of the argument will immediately assume any information presented by the opposition must be false. When folks on neither side are presenting valid arguments and/or data and when they assume the opposition must always be wrong on the issue, then you move out of the realm of scientific reasoning or logical debate and into the realm of religious fanaticism as the information is taken on faith.

After all, would any of our political leaders ever tell us an untruthitude? (Sat. Night Live term in satire of Judge Judy case where a person isn't telling the truth). Could it be possible that groups like the NRA would be biased in how they gather, manipulate, and report that information to its members? The NRA is a good organization, but they are definitely biased (as expected they should be since they are a pro gun group) and they are only as good as the members/employees who make information known to the public and membership. No doubt some NRA dude has found those quotes on the internet, put the information into flyers or a Heston speech, and low and behold the NRA becomes the broadcaster of statements that have no actual or factual reality and in essense becomes something of a folkloric storyteller, only the readers assume the NRA is credible, does valid research, and thinks the information is actual fact. The really neat touches come from the details added in such as the dates the statements were supposedly made, who made them, and the circumstances.

And SkunkApe, people do need to be more critical in trying to understand information they receive and definitely before passing it on. And there may be some truth in the stories, but once they start on their journey, they can become repeated so many times that they are seen as common knowledge facts when they are actually nothing more than folklore. The quotes you initially noted would fall into that category of 'common knowledge facts' that aren't facts.

general
May 19, 2003, 03:57 AM
In short, we don't have our own house in order or take the time to verify information before passing it on.
How do we accomplish this?
Spreading stories by word of mouth isn't working... Ideas?
Try this as an interesting excercise. Select an idea that you firmly believe to be false. Then research the subject to find information that makes it out to be true.
Monkeys on Mars? HUH? Anyone want to take a shot at that? HUH?! Anyone?
How about the fact that Monkeys on Mars has never been DISPROVEN! HUH?! HUH?! - Thats what I thought.
Sounds like something the VPC would put out.
More Monkeys on Mars were killed by hanguns than by any other means. 78.3 percent more.
:what: :neener: :what:
Sorry just a factual (as the facts are known to me) comparison.

SkunkApe
May 19, 2003, 05:38 AM
I don't know about the monkeys on Mars, General, but I can make a pretty good argument that the Grand Canyon was largely dug by the Civilian Conservation Corps as part of Roosevelts emergency work program.

Bog
May 19, 2003, 06:54 AM
In both cases, what I find amazing is pro-gun folks claim these statements to be true while others claim them false. In short, we don't have our own house in order or take the time to verify information before passing it on.
Double-nought,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the pro-gun-choice types more likely to at least try to establish the veracity of a statement before repeating it?

My reasoning is as follows.

A central precept of responsible gun ownership is to accurately and dispassionately consider the information presented to oneself by the environment at all times, to the best of one's ability.

Therefore, thinking seriously about what one sees, and verifying it, before acting on it, during the action, and as an assessment after an action is a way of life.

Working with unverified data is very dangerous when dealing with a handgun - is my fire lane clear? Is my weapon unloaded and made safe? Checking things becomes second nature.

With the anti-gun-choice side of the equation, there's no real compulsion to do this... the worst one could do is fall on one's own car keys, in their ideal universe. The constant cycle of observe-verify-think-act isn't as urgent in their world.

Or am I talking out of my hat?

That said, I guess I'd better check the contents of my signature file for authenticity sometime soon...

Bonker
May 19, 2003, 03:01 PM
Good thoughts SkunkApe.


"Facts win. Always. "

I don't agree with that. In the case of many things, including gun control, the left is driven by a sort of religious doctrine. The facts are 100% irrelevant to them because they don't support their beliefs. The are diving purely by emotion.
I can put myself in their shoes by thinking about my religion. All the science and facts in the world will never convince me that there is no God. In fact, I usually find ways to make science and facts actually support my beliefs.
For some people, liberalism is their god and gun control is their savior and leftist politicians are their prophets. Facts are useless against these people.

SkunkApe
May 19, 2003, 10:38 PM
Interesting analogy to your religion, Bonker. Thanks for sharing that.

If you enjoyed reading about "2 statements that bother me" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!