Gun-Free France--from IFSF Paris Bureau Chief Charlie Crummer
From an NRA member: "Remember when France was a "gun free zone before WWII?" The implication being that because there were regulations on who could own a gun and what kind, the Germans were able to walk in and take the place over.
OK, let's call France before WWII a "gun free zone" if you want to use that loaded phrase. France is "gun-free" now with less than 3 gun deaths per 100,000 inhabitants per year and 31 guns per 100 inhabitants. For the US, there are about 10 gun deaths per 100,000 inhabitants per year and yet the US has over 101 guns per 100 inhabitants. England is "gun-free." Australia is "gun-free." Norway is "gun-free." Spain is "gun-free." Sweden is "gun-free."...Switzerland has about 24 guns per 100 inhabitants but only about 3 gun deaths per 100,000 inhabitants per year.1 Of course it is pretty well known that Switzerland's citizens form a well-regulated (by the state) militia. Per capita gun deaths in these countries are far below gun deaths in the US. "Gun-free" means safe from being shot by guns. When guns are outlawed, fewer outlaws will have guns.
There are people who think that France was occupied by the Germans because France was "gun-free" and therefore defenceless. The reason France was occupied by the Germans during WWII is that Marshal Petain capitulated to Hitler. He was the leader of France and collaborated with and aided the Nazis in their zeal to eradicate the Jews. (There's a lot of French history behind his decision, which was certainly a bad one. And a shameful one. One has only to read a few of the many plaques around Paris admitting to this horror to sense the shame.) The Vichy French and their army at the time were working for the German occupiers. They were responsible for heinous crimes against their own people, many of whom were Jews. The French of the Resistance did what they could and they were very brave. Here's a quote from the Wikipedia page "French Resistance:"
"The men and women of the Resistance came from all
economic levels and political leanings of French society,
including emigres; academics, students, aristocrats,
conservative Roman Catholics (including priests) and
also citizens from the ranks of liberals, anarchists and
commmunists."
The tide turned against Hitler, primarily due to the huge sacrifices by the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front and the US entry to the war, establishing a Western Front. Thus as a nation, Germany was defeated by the allied armies, not the brave Resistance even with US guns. The arms the US sent to the resistance, however, were a fine gesture and did play a part in the defeat of the Nazis.
There are some, in the US at least, who maintain that the presence of guns by citizens will serve as an effective deterrent to anyone who might want to attack with a gun. There is really no evidence for this idea though.
It is interesting to listen to the thoughts of people who have had experience in fire fights. I have never had to be in one. I, for one, instead of going off on wild fantasy, defer to our soldiers and police who have. Students, teachers, one young man who was carrying a weapon with a permit at a shooting in Oregon, hardened soldiers who have seen action, all are appalled that there should be talk about arming teachers. In a satirical piece 2 I "predicted" that the "Guns are the Solution, not the Problem" people would next recommend the arming of teachers, among other things. At what point had I gone past the point of decency? Arming students, smaller guns for the younger children, euthanising the little kids so they wouldn't have to suffer? Where?
In all this, I have learned something: In the face of such nonsense anyone's attempt at a reductio ad absurdum argument is doomed to fail except if he's preaching to the choir.
1 These statistics are taken from the page "List of countries by firearms-related death rate" on Wikipedia.
2 See "A Modest Policy Proposal at https://sites.google.com/site/charliecrummer/