I would disagree with the proposition that an armed German Jewry could not have put up much resistance anyway. Oh, they couldn't have *won* without outside help which of course wasn't, and wouldn't have been, forthcoming until too late. But they would've taken quite a few SS down with 'em. / I suspect that the supposed mass passivity of the Reich's Jews is, if not an urban legend, at least exaggerated in the popular belief. / In any case, to the extent that they *were* docile, their descendants, thank G*d, have learned the lesson, haven't they? - "Never Again". Even if so inclined, & all anti-Zionist polemics aside, one would *not* be wise to attempt the Final Solution now. Nonono. You've heard of Israel's "Samson Option" nuclear doctrine? And, can you blame them?? I can't.

The civilian-disarmament-by-Nazis issue is an interesting one historically; but I question its relevance to the present day. Even assuming arguendo (and however unlikely it is, given the record) that their facts are correct, I think the NRA has set up a straw-man chop-logic argument --- and liberals then fall into the trap by pinning too much on refutation of the facts, ignoring the false logic. The Nazis disarmed the populace; ergo, all gun control equals tyranny. False -- even if Hitler DID do it, or attempt to. The argument is largely emotional; i.e., a non-argument.

Also of course the NRA position apparently implies that today, a civilian militia equipped armed with sidearms & rifles could prevent the establishment of a government dictatorship backed by the U.S. military. Right. Git the .45, Maw, there's more helicopter gunships comin' in. (No offense, Banjoest. I own one .357, myself. When I got it, there was a very specific reason. But, it wasn't to uphold the Rights of Man against the fed-ruhl gummint's tanks & bombers.)