Ben Carson Gum is a Holocaust of flavor in my mouth!


  • BINNED

    :wtf: :wtf: Republicans ...

    The likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed,

    And he wants to be president of the most powerful country! denying science while being a doctor and comparing his constituency with Nazi Germany, well that makes sense I guess in a :wtf: way

    Ben Carson Blames Holocaust On Gun Control – 01:15
    — Rahan Cipry

    He probably forgets that he wants to be the Fed, but still says you know people you should be armed or we of course go over and burn you alive. Beyond Trump insanity, at least he is just egomaniac.



  • How is this controversial? :wtf:



  • Congratulations, Ben Carson, you've Godwin'ed the election.



  • Which one of the two men in the screenshot is Ben Carson?



  • I fail to see how this is in any way a :wtf: - it's very hard to round up Jews if they are armed and willing to resist you. It's also much harder to keep quiet.

    On November 11, 1938, the Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons was promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews living in those locations of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7] Some police forces used the pre-existing "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews on the basis "the Jewish population 'cannot be regarded as trustworthy'".[5]

    Wikipedia

    Those you would make powerless you must first discredit, then disarm, then marginalize, then imprison, then kill.



  • Unless he's able to travel back in time and change history, this argument is fucking stupid. We don't know what would have happened and we never will.



  • He's the M.D. (neurosurgeon, even) who's too cowardly to call-out anti-vaxxers.

    Considering Trump is in the running, I'm really surprised Carson was the first candidate to be called-out for having absolutely no courage of conviction what-so-ever.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    If that was @ben_lubar he would have said that the Holocaust could have been stopped by Dwarf Fortress

    I leave it up to debate which of the two statements is historically correct and what you want to think about it

    Filed Under: It's easy to say "things would have been different" after they happened. The important part is to say "things won't happen" and actually making them not happening!

    Also Filed Under: The people mentioned in this post are purely fictional. Any relation with real people are purely coincidental and in no way am I trying to imply anything here blah blah



  • What? Cant fight back effectively vs can fight back effectively can't be evaluated? Just sounds like an attempt to dismiss an argument, to me. And that's clearly what this thread is for: arguments.



  • @Magus said:

    What? Cant fight back effectively vs can fight back effectively can't be evaluated? Just sounds like an attempt to dismiss an argument, to me. And that's clearly what this thread is for: arguments.

    The thing is that a Germany where a significant portion of the populace was armed would have been quite a different one. The problem with such wishful-history-revising statements always is that they don't consider the requirements for the scenarios to actually come to pass.

    I mean, guns don't simply magically appear from the sky.

    It's the same problem with the fortune telling that is Macro Economics: They always tell us what would happen if you just pulled that one lever - while neglecting to mention that there is no such one lever, there are hundreds and they're all interconnected.



  • That's actually fair enough. In principle, for German citizens to choose to buy guns en masse (when they're basically useless to everybody), they would have had to be a huge industrial power with more production than consumption.

    But the argument that guns would have stopped the Holocaust is specious. The productivity would have meant people were not desperate and looking to eliminate internal consumption of their production. Guns or iPods would have been a side effect of production.


  • BINNED

    Considering that he makes this point to circumvent the outrage against increasing gun-shootings at schools is :wtf:. What could or could not have happened is just a stupid argument that can not be proven, but to use that argument to compare US with Nazy Germany in order to appease the gun nuts is in fact :wtf:
    Besides, comparing anything to Holocaust is :wtf:

    P.S. I am all for guns, and I am a conservative (fiscally but not socially) however I would only go so far to the right as to reach the Hillary camp. Current republican party is a bunch of troll racists with anti-science anti-women agenda.



  • Indeed. In such a scenario, the phenomenon of Hitler might not even have happened in the first place. He might have simply stayed a 3rd rate politician (in jail).

    In this scenario, however, the proliferation of guns would have been an effect, though. And not the cause for "Not-Hitler".



  • WTF? Ok, Trump is a troll. Not convinced he's racist. But you're crazy.

    I don't understand the outrage about any of his gun related comments. Probably just a convenient excuse to put down the black man who escaped the plantation.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Captain said:

    Guns or iPods would have been a side effect of production.

    I love how you equalize iPods and guns so much that a like wasn't enough!

    Filed Under: You are welcome



  • @dse said:

    but to use that argument to compare US with Nazy Germany

    I doubt he thought he was doing that, tbh. But it's understandable that someone would think that after the fact. I have no opinion on this whole subject, except that I find it very unlikely that someone would make that comparison. I'd rate this wishful thinking at worst.



  • @Kuro said:

    @Captain said:
    Guns or iPods would have been a side effect of production.

    I love how you equalize iPods and guns so much that a like wasn't enough!

    Filed Under: You are welcome

    Two words: Ghetto blasters.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @mott555 said:

    How is this controversial? :wtf:

    You Must Be New To Life.


  • BINNED

    @boomzilla said:

    WTF? Ok, Trump is a troll. Not convinced he's racist.

    Agreed, I think he just tries to appeal to closet racists

    @boomzilla said:

    I don't understand the outrage about any of his gun related comments. Probably just a convenient excuse to put down the black man who escaped the plantation.

    Also agreed, I think he is finished, but then I thought the same about Trump many times



  • @Kuro said:

    If that was @ben_lubar he would have said that the Holocaust could have been stopped by Dwarf Fortress

    Unlikely. The Dwarf Fortress community invented an interesting approach to child care. If anything, Dwarf Fortress would remove the "the" but keep the "Holocaust".



  • @Gurth said:

    Which one of the two men in the screenshot is Ben Carson?

    The one who isn't a Wolf.



  • @Kuro said:

    If that was @ben_lubar he would have said that the Holocaust could have been stopped by Dwarf Fortress

    If @ben_lubar is running for President, then I think we have bigger problems...



  • @Rhywden said:

    the fortune telling that is Macro Economics

    It is also by far the most boring college class I ever took, although at least part of that could be the fault of the instructor; I'm pretty sure he would have somehow managed to make a sex ed class with live in-class demonstrations intolerably boring.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    Macro Economics

    Ye gods! There's a whole economy built up around hacking things in Lithp?



  • @Rhywden said:

    I mean, guns don't simply magically appear from the sky.

    What a different movie that would have made if it had been a gun instead of a cola bottle:

    http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTI2ODYxNzM3N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDMwODUyMQ@@.V1_SY317_CR1,0,214,317_AL.jpg


  • Dupa

    @svieira said:

    I fail to see how this is in any way a :wtf: - it's very hard to round up Jews if they are armed and willing to resist you.

    I see what you did there. You went from "they're armed" to "willing to resist you" and packaged it as one as the same thing, whereas it isn't.

    1. Owning a gun wouldn't suffice. You need organization, you need something resembling an army, really. One guy shooting Gestapo officers coming for him wouldn't change a thing. Especially, since they had families to protect and care for and it'd be much more likely that they'd been harmed, if they're relative did something stupid.
    2. Owning a gun + being repressed /= willing to fight (even if it did matter). Plus, it wasn't as easy as: OK, as of tomorrow we're rounding up Jews and shoot them right there on the streets, behind their houses or wherever. Nazis weren't that stupid.

    Plus, what you quoted: Jews were deemed not trustworthy, they were being repressed, they didn't decide to fight then, when being made powerless.

    People stating things like that aren't just stupid, they're dangerous. Making stupid and oversimplified claims about complex and long time passed events aimed to please a bunch of stupid rednecks (if you're buying the argument about Nazis, you are a fucking stupid redneck and you should be shot with your own gun, or something have your voting rights revoked).

    EDIT

    Oh, and no, owning guns in the Warsaw Ghetto didn't change anything. They all died, in the end. Owning guns made it possible for them to go down all guns blazing/in flames/standing/put here whatever you want. But it didn't save them.


  • Fake News

    @kt_ said:

    if you're buying the argument about Nazis, you are a fucking stupid redneck and you should be shot with your own gun, or something

    :wtf:


  • Dupa

    Fixed.


  • Fake News

    You're still bloody-minded, so...


  • Dupa

    Oh come on, can't you handle a little bloody joke in a small bloody post? :sunglasses:


  • Fake News

    Given how many gun confiscation advocates say such things and actually mean them, you never can tell.


  • Dupa

    I'm not really a gun confiscation advocate, as I've mentioned in the earlier gun-related topic, I think it's a very complex business. I do think it could help with the problem America has with mass-shootings, though. However, I grew up in a country with anti-gun laws and so I can't really appreciate the mindset of gun-lovers, so I guess I'm closer to this whole gun-control crowd.

    But I do hate stupid claims and arguments politician make to appeal to stupid people. And that's what I meant: if you really DO believe that such claims are substantial and true, and that they are pro-gun arguments, you are stupid. (Wait for it...) Bloody stupid. :sunglasses:


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    To be fair, guns did stop the Holocaust. Those guns were being wielded by the armies of the Allied powers, so they were the guns of Big Government Intervention, but the guns were a very important part of that process.


  • Dupa

    Can't argue with that. It's funny, but it just so happens, that armed conflicts are usually resolved thanks to guns. I think someone should research this topic.



  • "May" ≠ "definitely would have beyond any and all doubts and I would bet my life that this outcome would happen all the time."



  • @kt_ said:

    Oh, and no, owning guns in the Warsaw Ghetto didn't change anything. They all died, in the end. Owning guns made it possible for them to go down all guns blazing/in flames/standing/put here whatever you want. But it didn't save them.

    This isn't quite the same scenario as

    1. Jews nationwide revolt with guns and weapons
    2. Allies step in and help out before they're all killed
    3. War is over sooner, fewer Jews die, ???

    Not guaranteed but a plausible outcome to me; armed uprisings in many countries have worked even to the point of overtrhowing the government. Not sure that this would happen here since they don't have popular support and the government was militarizing in preparation for a large war but it definitely would have made things different.


  • Dupa

    @rc4 said:

    This isn't quite the same scenario as

    1. Jews nationwide revolt with guns and weapons2) Allies step in and help out before they're all killed 3) War is over sooner, fewer Jews die, ???

    Still, not possible. The whole point of the Nazi m.o. was that they didn't do anything to spark a nationwide revolt. As I said: it wasn't as simple as:
    • we're gonna kill you know!!!!
    • Oh no, if we had guns, we'd rise! Shame we don't have them.

    Plus: they did have guns, but they were confiscated (as quited by @svieira). Why didn't they rise then?

    Plus Plus: no country was prepared then to fight Germany. Proof: no one came to help Poland after they were invaded. So, before anything would have been done by other countries, Jews would be long gone.

    C Plus Plus: Sure, if the above happened, maybe there would be no WW2 at all? Or if Hitler'd been aborted? Or if the Earth'd been bombed by aliens?

    Hope you get my point: making up oversimplified shit about past events to appeal to some demo is a wrong thing to do and it shouldn't be validated by any real discussion.



  • @rc4 said:

    "May" ≠ "definitely would have beyond any and all doubts and I would bet my life that this outcome would happen all the time."

    Oh, yes, weasel words. So, if it's possible that it may not have happened that way, then why bring it up in the first place? Because of the "but there's an increased chance"?

    Right. For that "increased chance" we only have his word wishful thinking and secondly, as I've already laid out, for them to have guns a whole bunch of other things would have to have been different in the first place.

    I mean, I can also state that "If Ghandi had conquered the world we now would have world peace!"

    That's about as meaningful, useful and true a statement as the starting point of this discussion.



  • @Rhywden said:

    That's about as meaningful, useful and true a statement as the starting point of this discussion.

    "I don't agree with the presentation therefore it's a stupid concept entirely"

    Also, do you live in a world of absolutes? Is everything black and white?



  • A wishful revision of history never makes sense in such a simplistic way.

    Again, guns don't simply appear from nothingness. To change one variable you also have to change all the other variables. Which makes the whole "but what if?" train of thought something that's useful in writing entertaining books, but not so useful for setting policies.

    I find it particularly amusing that you're accusing me of "black and white" thinking when I'm pointing out that the whole thing is so complex that it's not making sense. But if you think that saying: "Hey, that's way more complicated and difficult than you're making it out to be!" is a sign of black-and-white-thinking then I can't really help you.



  • @Magus said:

    What? Cant fight back effectively vs can fight back effectively can't be evaluated? Just sounds like an attempt to dismiss an argument, to me. And that's clearly what this thread is for: arguments.

    Did you ever read what transpired in Germany in the 30s? The level of violence? I guess not.



  • And while you (USAmericans) are bikeshedding on this, another campus shooting has happened in Arizona. You've got 50 states, try to ban guns on one of them like you did with pot in Colorado.


  • Fake News

    @Eldelshell said:

    another campus shooting in a "gun-free" zone has happened in Arizona

    FTFY.



  • @Rhywden said:

    The thing is that a Germany where a significant portion of the populace was armed would have been quite a different one. The problem with such wishful-history-revising statements always is that they don't consider the requirements for the scenarios to actually come to pass.

    I mean, guns don't simply magically appear from the sky.

    It's the same problem with the fortune telling that is Macro Economics: They always tell us what would happen if you just pulled that one lever - while neglecting to mention that there is no such one lever, there are hundreds and they're all interconnected.

    What would have happened had we not pumped so much CO2 into the atmosphere?

    Would we not have global warming today.

    IDK, there's no one magic lever.

    Then how can you ever tell what's causing it?

    @Captain said:

    they would have had to be a huge industrial power with more production than consumption.

    I can get a gun cheaper than a big mac in Africa. I wasn't aware they had a large industry building guns.

    But since there's no such thing as one lever, I can't tell what Africa would look like without guns.

    @boomzilla said:

    Probably just a convenient excuse to put down the black man who escaped the plantation.

    A successful black man who doesn't credit welfare..... that's just unacceptable.
    He owe's his entire success to the left.

    @lolwhat said:

    FTFY.

    I wouldn't be surprised if it was another case of a person getting a gun they shouldn't have in an environment that can't be filtered by a background check.

    Most school shootings, the kid with the gun stole it from someone. Something extra background checks would do nothing to stop.

    What was that one store shooting, where the guy asked to look at a gun, grabbed it, loaded it with ammo he stole from the next aisle?

    @kt_ said:

    made it possible for them to go down all guns blazing

    Better to die firing a gun in my arms, than to be led into a shower.



  • This has got to be one of the most ridiculous debates I've seen. The anti-gunners are now arguing that the Jews should not have even thought about fighting Hitler because it probably wouldn't have made a difference. What ever happened to "If it could save even one life..."

    Despite our differences, I salute you, Ben Carson. You made the other side go full-retard.



  • Well, this is from a group of people who let in hundreds of thousands of people from which we get the bright idea to use pressure cookers to kill.

    I suppose Europe will have to do background checks to buy kitchen equipment.

    They've already caught ISIS members running around pretending to be Syrian, but only because a few of the countries started checking people at their borders.



  • @xaade said:

    What would have happened had we not pumped so much CO2 into the atmosphere?

    Right. Because Jews behave just like carbondioxide.

    I mean, I'm obviously talking about something you can't model very well in a lab. But that distinction probably flew right over a certain someone's head.

    Next up: I can predict that water temperature goes up when I heat it. Thus I can also predict the wheel of fortune numbers next week.



  • @Rhywden said:

    Because Jews behave just like carbondioxide.

    Let's just blame global warming on Hitler and be done with it.


  • BINNED

    Having guns if any thing would have accelerated the atrocity, it is harder to justify killing of unarmed citizens. You do not understand what an army is, and you do not consider the fact that in Nazi Germany Jews could not trust their neighbors either. Mix all this shit together, it is too complex to make any wishful predictions about.



  • @Rhywden said:

    Jews behave just like carbondioxide

    Jews breathe out carbon dioxide. Global warming is all their fault. The solution is obvious.

    (I really shouldn't need to say /sarcasm, but you know some idiot will take this at face value if I don't.)


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.