[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally posted by jaguar
That said I don't think the Khmer Rouge are a good example of the dangers of gun control. Obviously I’m no scholar of pre-revolutionary Cambodian/Indochina law and since you've declined to actually quote anything out of the holy bible of gun control you espouse so highly ill have to guess exactly what your point is. . .

So your conclusion appears to be that since massacres have and do occur under despotic regimes that have gun control, gun control is the key factor, not the existence of the despotic regime in genocides occurring. I assume the counterargument is that the despotic regime in question could not have come to power without weapons.

...I’m an irrational raving loony for opposing you.

I have not declined to quote anything. I merely have not done it yet. Now, how is it that you cannot think how the Khmer Rouge exemplify the perils of gun control? Gun control creates an imbalance of access to killing tools, and there is no surer way to guarantee the oppression of the unarmed by the armed than that. The Khmer Rouge had the guns, the general Cambodian populace had none, and there are two million bleaching human skulls piled in pyramids all over Cambodia, with gun control a contributing factor in these needless deaths. When someone is seized with such a Big Idea that his morals go into suspension, general misery is invariably the result. Adolf Hitler had a Big Idea. Pol Pot had a Big Idea. Mao Tse-Tung, the same Big Idea. Lethal Laws gives a deliberately conservative accounting of their butcher's bill.

Herewith, in translation, is the text of the relevant sections of Cambodia's Code Pénal et Lois Pénales:

From Royal Ordinance no. 71, of 11 April 1935:

Art. 322 -- The manufacture of, importation of, dealing iin, and distribution of firearms, of weapons using liquefied gases, of weapons using compressed air, of ammunition, and of explosive materials or devices, is forbidden. Violations of this prohibition are punished as first degree criminal offenses. In all cases, the making of a weapon or of ammunition for the personal use of the maker is punished as set forth in Article 324.

Art. 323 -- The manufacture, importations, and the distribution of steel weapons of the same type used in the military; of concealable offensive weapons such as a stiletto, dagger, switchblade, truncheon, barss knuckles, etc., is forbidden. Violations of this prohibition are punished as third degree criminal offenses. The additional punishments of a loss of civil rights and a prohibition against entering certain localities may also be imposed. In all cases, the making of a weapon for the personal use of the maker is punished as set forth in Article 325.

Art. 324 -- The acquisition of firearms, of weapons using liquefied gas or compressed air -- and of ammunition -- their possession, storage, or carrying are prohibited to all persons not provided with the prescribed permit, according to the conditions set forth by the regulations established by the French authority. Violations of this prohibition are punished as third degree offenses.
All persons convicted of having sold, given, loaned, rented, or entrusted weapons or ammunition which they had a right to possess, to a person not provided with the prescribed permit, are punished as accomplices to the crime specified above.

From Royal Ordinance No. 55 of 28 March 1938

Art. 325. (Amendment resulting from Law no. 791-NS of 29 May 1953) -- The carrying of offensive or concealed steel weapons, i.e., of truncheons, brass knuckles -- and all weapons of the same type -- is prohibited, as is the transportation of such arms without a legitimate reason.

All persons found on a public road, carrying -- or transporting -- a concealed offensive weapon, are punished with the correctional penalty of the first degree.

Carrying of arms at an election campaign gathering: see Criminal Code: Article 283.

Art. 326 -- A holder of a permit to carry weapons -- whether issued for a fee or gratis -- who, without proper authorization, buys or obtains ammunition, is punished with first degree correctional penalties. The revocation of the permit to carry weapons may, besides, be ordered. The same punishments apply in the case of the sale or the exchange of weapons without prior notification.

Art. 327 -- Every violation of the regulations on permits to carry weapons -- whether the permit is issued gratis or after payment of a fee -- is punished with the correctional penalties of the first degree; moreover, revocations of the permits may be ordered. This also applies to the following: the renewal of a permit, the presentation of permits -- issued gratis or paid -- for periodic authorization; the declaration of the loss of a weapon, of ammunition, or a permit; the handing over of a weapon, ammunition, or a permit, when the permit has expired, been revoked, or when the bearer has died or disappeared.

Art. 328 -- Every person convicted of having kept a weapon -- for a period exceeding eight days -- after the revocation or suspension of the permit, is punished with the penalties applicable to one who owns a weapon without a permit. The possession of several weapons by one who has a single-weapon permit -- and equally the possession of an amount of ammunition exceeding that authorized -- is punished by correctional penalties of the first degree; the revocation of the permit may be ordered. (punctuation as in the original)

These laws set up a very tight control over arms and ammunition of all types. Even air rifles come under this control, though somewhat more loosely regulated. Permits were issued solely at the government's discretion. This setup means that only the favored of the government get arms; everyone else is shut out.

Note that these regulations were in effect for decades before the Killing Fields fell upon the Cambodians' unsuspecting heads -- and their heads fell upon those fields. To say that one cannot see warning signs of genocide on the horizon is to say nothing or worse than nothing; genocide is always a surprise to its targets. Always.

Since despotic regimes always have the gun control without which they cannot long exist, I think you draw a distinction without a difference.

For the moment, I don't think I'll call you irrational -- merely "ignorant and prejudiced by your environment." It is not that you oppose me, but that I oppose you.