Gun deaths now leading cause of death for children in America.

[2aguy]

Do you think the mass-murdering bombs of the allies had no effects?



Which socialists? The Nazis not had been socialists. Ort do you call the KKK movement in the USA in the 1920ies where millions of US-Americans had been members of the racist KKK also "socialists"?



I don't know where your number "15 million" comes from. The Nazis murdered about 2 million Russian pows and 6 million German and Yiddish speaking (= German) Jews. All other murders like murdered Gypsies and Homosexuals for example had not been a number of 7 millions as far as I know.



Bye bye. Do not try to speak with me again. Never again in your whole life. I'm tired about people like you. Don't forget to take all of your soldiers and to leave Germany.

We are not talking about war deaths....we are talking the German socialists rounding up civilians and murdering them in concentration camps or executing them in forests........

The source is at the Bottom...R.J. Rummel studies government murder......

German socialists

By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age.1


And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths

http://[URL='http://hawaii.edu/powe...]http://hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM
[/URL]

 

[2aguy]

Leading cause of death for chldren

No...actually, that is a lie.......

Again..when you go to look at anti-gun research you need to realize...the facts, truth and reality do not support anything they claim...so they are going to lie.....

Here is the lie....

Do you think that 17-18 year old gang members are children? What about 15 and 16 year old gang members?

That is how they lie about those numbers...they make uninformed Americans think ......oh, Jack and Jill living in the suburbs.....when what they mean is hard core, hardened gang members shooting at each other over drug turf, girlfriends and grudges......

Yeah...they also include suicides.........another trick they use....

First of all, the number of firearm deaths for school-age children drops quite a bit when you do not include 18-year-olds.
---
Removing 18-year-olds would drop the gun death number to 28,559 — just slightly fewer than the total for the military and police.
----

In fact, 17- and 18-year-olds make up almost 56 percent of the gun deaths of school-age children. The numbers also drop significantly — 60 percent — if suicides are removed.
---
We are also wary when a single change in the data set — from age 18 to 17 — reduces the number enough that the statistic is no longer correct.

Biden’s startling statistic on school-age gun deaths

 

[2aguy]

Do you think the mass-murdering bombs of the allies had no effects?



Which socialists? The Nazis not had been socialists. Ort do you call the KKK movement in the USA in the 1920ies where millions of US-Americans had been members of the racist KKK also "socialists"?



I don't know where your number "15 million" comes from. The Nazis murdered about 2 million Russian pows and 6 million German and Yiddish speaking (= German) Jews. All other murders like murdered Gypsies and Homosexuals for example had not been a number of 7 millions as far as I know.



Bye bye. Do not try to speak with me again. Never again in your whole life. I'm tired about people like you. Don't forget to take all of your soldiers and to leave Germany.

The nazis were socialists.......

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek, et al

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience. But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a move movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt.

A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extend directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice -their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder,[2] one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic -individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “[indecipherable] of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine – and not a mere piece of propaganda – becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that man of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists. And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers – in many cases free from definite party affiliations – was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review “Die Tat” have made the phrase “the end of capitalism” an accepted dogma to most young Germans.[3]

And more...

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants.

This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism.

Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”

Read A Pile Of Top Nazis Talking About How They Love Leftist Marxism

The Nazis were leftists. This statement is blasphemy to the academic-media complex, since everyone knows the Nazis were degenerate right-wingers fueled by toxic capitalism and racism. But evidence Adolf Hitler’s gang were men of the left, while debatable, is compelling.
The dispute on Nazi origins resurfaced through the confluence of brawling alt-right and antifa fringe movements and recent alternative histories by Dinesh D’Souza and others. The vitriol and lack of candor it produces from supposedly fact-driven academics and media is disturbing, if unsurprising. They stifle dissent on touchy subjects to maintain their narrative and enforce cultural hegemony.

However uncomfortable to opinion shapers, alternative views of the Third Reich exist and were written by the finest minds of their time. Opinions from the period perhaps carry more weight because they are unburdened by the aftermath of the uniquely heinous Nazi crimes.
------

Also, Adolf Hitler Loved Karl Marx
It wasn’t only theoretical. Hitler repeatedly praised Marx privately, stating he had “learned a great deal from Marxism.” The trouble with the Weimar Republic, he said, was that its politicians “had never even read Marx.” He also stated his differences with communists were that they were intellectual types passing out pamphlets, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.”

It wasn’t just privately that Hitler’s fealty for Marx surfaced. In “Mein Kampf,” he states that without his racial insights National Socialism “would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.” Nor did Hitler eschew this sentiment once reaching power. As late as 1941, with the war in bloom, he stated “basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same” in a speech published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Nazi propaganda minister and resident intellectual Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary that the Nazis would install “real socialism” after Russia’s defeat in the East. And Hitler favorite Albert Speer, the Nazi armaments minister whose memoir became an international bestseller, wrote that Hitler viewed Joseph Stalin as a kindred spirit, ensuring his prisoner of war son received good treatment, and even talked of keeping Stalin in power in a puppet government after Germany’s eventual triumph. His views on Great Britain’s Winston Churchill and the United States’s Franklin Delano Roosevelt were decidedly less kind.

Nazi and Communist Hatred of Each Other Was Brotherly
Despite this, there’s a persistent claim that Nazis and communists hated each other, and mention that the Nazis persecuted socialists and oppressed trade unions. These things are true, but prove little. The camps’ hatred stemmed from familiarity. It was internecine, the nastiest kind.

The Nazis and communists were not only in a struggle for street-war supremacy, but also recruits. These recruits were easily turned, because both sides were fighting for the same men. Hayek recalls

 

[zaangalewa]

We are not talking about war deaths....we are talking the German socialists rounding up civilians and murdering them in concentration camps or executing them in forests........

The source is at the Bottom...R.J. Rummel studies government murder......

German socialists

By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age.1


And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths

http://[URL='http://hawaii.edu/powe...]http://hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM
[/URL]

no comment

 

[zaangalewa]

The nazis were socialists.......

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek, et al

One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners. But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement. But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience. But, in spite of this, the German entrepreneur class have manifested almost incredible short-sightedness in allying themselves with a move movement of whose strong anti-capitalistic tendencies there should never have been any doubt.

A careful observer must always have been aware that the opposition of the Nazis to the established socialist parties, which gained them the sympathy of the entrepreneur, was only to a very small extend directed against their economic policy. What the Nazis mainly objected to was their internationalism and all the aspects of their cultural programme which were still influenced by liberal ideas. But the accusations against the social-democrats and the communists which were most effective in their propaganda were not so much directed against their programme as against their supposed practice -their corruption and nepotism, and even their alleged alliance with “the golden International of Jewish Capitalism.”

It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational. The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder,[2] one of Hitler’s early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists. But the dominant feature is a fierce hatred of anything capitalistic -individualistic profit seeking, large scale enterprise, banks, joint-stock companies, department stores, “international finance and loan capital,” the system of “interest slavery” in general; the abolition of these is described as the “[indecipherable] of the programme, around which everything else turns.” It was to this programme that the masses of the German people, who were already completely under the influence of collectivist ideas, responded so enthusiastically.

That this violent anti-capitalistic attack is genuine – and not a mere piece of propaganda – becomes as clear from the personal history of the intellectual leaders of the movement as from the general milieu from which it springs. It is not even denied that man of the young men who today play a prominent part in it have previously been communists or socialists. And to any observer of the literary tendencies which made the Germans intelligentsia ready to join the ranks of the new party, it must be clear that the common characteristic of all the politically influential writers – in many cases free from definite party affiliations – was their anti-liberal and anti-capitalist trend. Groups like that formed around the review “Die Tat” have made the phrase “the end of capitalism” an accepted dogma to most young Germans.[3]

And more...

The Myth of "Nazi Capitalism" | Chris Calton

German socialism, as Mises defines it, differs from what he called “socialism of the Russian pattern” in that “it, seemingly and nominally, maintains private ownership of the means of production, entrepreneurship, and market exchange.” However, this is only a superficial system of private ownership because through a complete system of economic intervention and control, the entrepreneurial function of the property owners is completely controlled by the State. By this, Mises means that shop owners do not speculate about future events for the purpose of allocating resources in the pursuit of profits. Just like in the Soviet Union, this entrepreneurial speculation and resource allocation is done by a single entity, the State, and economic calculation is thus impossible.

“In Nazi Germany,” Mises tells us, the property owners “were called shop managers or Betriebsführer. The government tells these seeming entrepreneurs what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. The government decrees at what wages labourers should work, and to whom and under what terms the capitalists should entrust their funds. Market exchange is but a sham. As all prices, wages and interest rates are fixed by the authority, they are prices, wages and interest rates in appearance only; in fact they are merely quantitative terms in the authoritarian orders determining each citizen’s income, consumption and standard of living. The authority, not the consumers, directs production. The central board of production management is supreme; all citizens are nothing else but civil servants.

This is socialism with the outward appearance of capitalism.

Some labels of the capitalistic market economy are retained, but they signify here something entirely different from what they mean in the market economy.”

Read A Pile Of Top Nazis Talking About How They Love Leftist Marxism

The Nazis were leftists. This statement is blasphemy to the academic-media complex, since everyone knows the Nazis were degenerate right-wingers fueled by toxic capitalism and racism. But evidence Adolf Hitler’s gang were men of the left, while debatable, is compelling.
The dispute on Nazi origins resurfaced through the confluence of brawling alt-right and antifa fringe movements and recent alternative histories by Dinesh D’Souza and others. The vitriol and lack of candor it produces from supposedly fact-driven academics and media is disturbing, if unsurprising. They stifle dissent on touchy subjects to maintain their narrative and enforce cultural hegemony.

However uncomfortable to opinion shapers, alternative views of the Third Reich exist and were written by the finest minds of their time. Opinions from the period perhaps carry more weight because they are unburdened by the aftermath of the uniquely heinous Nazi crimes.
------

Also, Adolf Hitler Loved Karl Marx
It wasn’t only theoretical. Hitler repeatedly praised Marx privately, stating he had “learned a great deal from Marxism.” The trouble with the Weimar Republic, he said, was that its politicians “had never even read Marx.” He also stated his differences with communists were that they were intellectual types passing out pamphlets, whereas “I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun.”

It wasn’t just privately that Hitler’s fealty for Marx surfaced. In “Mein Kampf,” he states that without his racial insights National Socialism “would really do nothing more than compete with Marxism on its own ground.” Nor did Hitler eschew this sentiment once reaching power. As late as 1941, with the war in bloom, he stated “basically National Socialism and Marxism are the same” in a speech published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

Nazi propaganda minister and resident intellectual Joseph Goebbels wrote in his diary that the Nazis would install “real socialism” after Russia’s defeat in the East. And Hitler favorite Albert Speer, the Nazi armaments minister whose memoir became an international bestseller, wrote that Hitler viewed Joseph Stalin as a kindred spirit, ensuring his prisoner of war son received good treatment, and even talked of keeping Stalin in power in a puppet government after Germany’s eventual triumph. His views on Great Britain’s Winston Churchill and the United States’s Franklin Delano Roosevelt were decidedly less kind.

Nazi and Communist Hatred of Each Other Was Brotherly
Despite this, there’s a persistent claim that Nazis and communists hated each other, and mention that the Nazis persecuted socialists and oppressed trade unions. These things are true, but prove little. The camps’ hatred stemmed from familiarity. It was internecine, the nastiest kind.

The Nazis and communists were not only in a struggle for street-war supremacy, but also recruits. These recruits were easily turned, because both sides were fighting for the same men. Hayek recalls

no comment

 

[zaangalewa]

2aguy

You are much more weird than only damned weird. If you have psychological problems go to a doctor.

 

[zaangalewa]

How many?

And suicide is a choice and every single person has the absolute right to make that choice.

I don't know what you call "right" in such a case. Life likes to live and not to die. Someone who likes to die on the own free will has a super-gigantic problem. To die is not any solution - to die is the problem. If someone or something else causes the own death then this is inevitable. In the end we all will lose the own life here in this world. But who for heavens sake likes to lose on the own free will?

 

[scruffy]

This is the decision of your neighbors who have to live with you - and not your decision or my decision.

Fucktard Nazi prick. ^^^

Fuck you, asshole.

 

[CowboyTed]

Stop giving people a reason to believe they will lose the right.

Sorry but main stream Democrats have consistently stated that they want limited measures which have the support of the majority of Americans...

Here is the list generally...

And before you say the constitution... the Constitution can and should be amended to reflect the will of the people if it needs be... The framers wanted that way...
Where it has gone wrong is that changing the constitution has become close to impossible and the proof is in showing how many changes have been done in the last 50 years : zero...

A Country like US should be amending at the rate of 18 - 24 months to reflect changing atitudes over time... The framers actually believed that...

 

[zaangalewa]

Fucktard Nazi prick. ^^^

Fuck you, asshole.

G'd likes to speak with you.

 

[Blues Man]

Children are free to make the bad choice to go to school and to become murdered there from an extremist idiot of the own "holy" nation with war weapons - what easily could had been avoided by the moral duty of all politicians of the USA to make good, strong and strict weapon laws?

Here we go again.

War weapons is an utterly meaningless phrase.

And those kids would have not been killed if the idiots in charge of the scholar locked the fucking doors but you want to blame every single person who just happens to own a gun

 

[Blues Man]

Aha



No. I called you an anti-Christian (not anti-Christ!) because you used the word "fool" in the original sense of "godless fool" what's a break with the Christian tradition. But if you are a proud not-Christian then this is obsolete.

There is no such thing as an anti Christ.

And I'm not anti Christian that's you displaying a persecution complex

Leading cause of death for chldren

FYI that stat includes 18 and 19 year old ADULTS

 

[Blues Man]

I don't know what you call "right" in such a case. Life likes to live and not to die. Someone who likes to die on the own free will has a super-gigantic problem. To die is not any solution - to die is the problem. If someone or something else causes the own death then this is inevitable. In the end we all will lose the own life here in this world. But who for heavens sake likes to lose on the own free will

None of that negates what I said. You assume people who would commit suicide are mentally ill but that is not necessarily true

 

[zaangalewa]

Here we go again.

War weapons is an utterly meaningless phrase.

It is not. I explained very clear what's the problem with this weapons.

Your constitution speaks about such things:


To remember:
Up to the 18th/19th century the Red Indians had been able to defend themselves with archery before you wiped many of their tribes out of this Americans before they became US-Americans.

And those kids would have not been killed if the idiots in charge of the scholar locked the fucking doors

But such things always will happen - and whatelse had been his target in this case?

but you want to blame every single person who just happens to own a gun

I respect archery because this is a very old tradition - I do not respect pseudo-modern gun owners on reason of fun who don't see any need to protect the life of the people in the own country with good, strong and strict weapon laws.

 

[zaangalewa]

There is no such thing as an anti Christ.

That's what I think too. No one is able to undo what Jesus had done.

And I'm not anti Christian

When I said so to you I thought you refer to the Christian religion and I criticized this wrong way. That's obsolete because you are no Christian and you don't know why you called me a godless fool.

that's you displaying a persecution complex

FYI that stat includes 18 and 19 year old ADULTS

?

 

[zaangalewa]

None of that negates what I said. You assume people who would commit suicide are mentally ill but that is not necessarily true

In only 99.999% of all cases true where a doctor is hopefully able to help. It exist some very very very rare exceptions where it is better to end the own life because it is necessary to do so for the life of others. But this extremely rare exceptions confirm only the rule "life is holy and has to be respected".

 

[2aguy]

Sorry but main stream Democrats have consistently stated that they want limited measures which have the support of the majority of Americans...

View attachment 658622

View attachment 658624

Here is the list generally...

And before you say the constitution... the Constitution can and should be amended to reflect the will of the people if it needs be... The framers wanted that way...
Where it has gone wrong is that changing the constitution has become close to impossible and the proof is in showing how many changes have been done in the last 50 years : zero...

A Country like US should be amending at the rate of 18 - 24 months to reflect changing atitudes over time... The framers actually believed that...

Sorry….

1) People who answer those poll questions are uninformed about those issues, in particular background checks…….they don’t understand that we already have federally mandated background checks…..they don’t understand that the only reason people like you push universal background checks is because you want gun registration……….and universal background checks are the way you get there.

2) Mainstream democrats aren’t the ones controlling the democrat party…..the entire leadership of the democrat party wants to ban and confiscate guns…..and they don’t care what the serfs in their party want, in particular black and Hispanic voters.

 

[2aguy]

It is not. I explained very clear what's the problem with this weapons.

Your constitution speaks about such things:


To remember:
Up to the 18th/19th century the Red Indians had been able to defend themselves with archery before you wiped many of their tribes out of this Americans before they became US-Americans.



But such things always will happen - and whatelse had been his target in this case?



I respect archery because this is a very old tradition - I do not respect pseudo-modern gun owners on reason of fun who don't see any need to protect the life of the people in the own country with good, strong and strict weapon laws.

American criminals do not generally use rifles for crime……..they do not use “weapons of war,” for crime.

European criminals, on the other hand, actually prefer and use “weapons of war,”…..fully automatic military rifles and hand grenades…..

 

[wamose]

I'd say our education system is causing most of those deaths. Between laissez faire parenting and our radical, self-esteem destroying education system, we're mass-producing maladjusted, mis-informed teen and 20s maniacs.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Guns have become the top injury-related cause of death for U.S. kids.

Sloppy handling of guns and suicides along with school shooting.


America fuck yeah.

/----/ It's time we lock up the loonies again, and arm school staff. Mass shooters are cowards and only hit soft targets.
"I believe the compromises that are now a part of this bill have resulted in a balanced piece of legislation that protects the rights of private gun owners while not infringing on law enforcement's ability to deal with those who misuse guns or violate laws. During my 12 1/2 years as a Member of this body, I have never believed that additional gun control or Federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, nontraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control. In my opinion a national register or ban of handguns would be impossible to carry out and may not result in reductions in crime." -- Senator Joe Biden 1985