jonesthecurl wrote:I don't wanna go all Spocky on ya, but re-read.
that first part there. That was the law the nazis reversed.
The second part shows where more people were allowed,
Interesting stuff- I didn't know about this.
That's a good point, because:
"[i]Gun restriction laws applied only to handguns, not to long guns or ammunition. Writes Prof. Bernard Harcourt of the University of Chicago, The 1938 revisions completely deregulated the acquisition and transfer of rifles and shotguns, as well as ammunition[/i]."[4]"
But it doesn't say how the 1938 revisions were completely deregulated. (what were the enforcement policies which oversaw this law?)
For example, the Soviet Union had a lovely sounding constitution, but it didn't mean much. To apply this to Sym's post, it's like looking at the Soviet Constitution and concluding that the Soviet Union "recognized collective social and economic rights including the rights to work, rest and leisure, health protection, care in old age and sickness, housing, education, and cultural benefits" (wiki). Clearly, the SU didn't because some words on a piece of paper don't matter when enforcement and actual public policy is brought into the analysis.
All that the quote shows is that: "
"Holders of annual hunting permits, government workers, and NSDAP party members were no longer subject to gun ownership restrictions. Prior to the 1938 law, only officials of the central government, the states, and employees of the German Reichsbahn Railways were exempted."
So, you are correct in saying that "
The second part shows where more people were allowed," but that doesn't mean that the gun ownership was deregulated. It just means that if you were an avowed Nazi, you could forego many of the gun laws. Gee, why is that? Because they already screen such people. To call this "deregulation" is really stretching it.
What were missing, which would confirm if the Nazis in fact deregulated or further regulated guns, would be an analysis of their enforcement policies. I'm no Nazi expert, but the Gestapo and perhaps other police agencies had much discretion, which would mean that they could enforce whatever laws they wanted--whether the law was codified or completely fabricated by those same agencies. So, the letter of the law is irrelevant.
And even if the Nazis "deregulated" gun control laws, deregulation would still be relative. For example, let's say the 1928 law declared that only 100 people could have guns. Then, the 1936 law allows for 10,000 people to have guns (plus a caveat). Is this deregulation? Some might say yes, but what's that caveat? Oh, you have to essentially be an avowed Nazi, which (I presume) requires passing the screening process in order to a own gun. Is that deregulation? No, they lifted some restrictions but replaced them with other restrictions, e.g. "must be a Nazi, which basically means 'must be trustworthy.' "
In other words, what's the definition of "deregulation"? To me, that includes a reduction in government-mandated and enforced laws/legislation, which in turn means that the production and distribution of whatever is shifted to the discretion of the producers and consumers in the markets. "Deregulation" cannot be "more people are allowed X" because it depends on the enforcement/public policies beyond that one law.
To conclude that the Nazis deregulated guns is the result of twisting/misinterpreting the meaning of "(de)regulation" while only looking at the written law but ignoring enforcement and other public policies.
