Gun Control in Nazi Occupied-France Read online

  Independent Institute

  100 Swan Way, Oakland, CA 94621-1428

  Telephone: 510-632-1366

  Fax: 510-568-6040

  Email: [email protected]

  Website: www.independent.org

  Cover design: Jeremy Anicete

  Cover image: © Media Drum Limited

  Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data

  Names: Halbrook, Stephen P., author.

  Title: Gun control in Nazi occupied-France : Tyranny and Resistance / Stephen P. Halbrook.

  Description: Oakland, California : Independent Institute, 2018. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

  Identifiers: LCCN 2017055816 (print) | LCCN 2018013816 (ebook) | ISBN 9781598133097 (ePub) | ISBN 9781598133103 (ePDF) | ISBN 9781598133110 (Mobi) | ISBN 9781598133073 (hardback) | ISBN 9781598133080 (paperback)

  Subjects: LCSH: Firearms--Law and legislation--France--History--20th century. | Gun control--France--History--20th century. | World War, 1939-1945--Law and legislation--France. | France--History--German occupation, 1940-1945. | World War, 1939-1945--Underground movements--France. | BISAC: HISTORY / Military / World War II. | HISTORY / Europe / France.

  Classification: LCC KJV5257 (ebook) | LCC KJV5257 .H35 2018 (print) | DDC 940.53/44--dc23

  LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017055816

  Contents

  Preface

  Introduction

  1 Crisis in the Third Republic

  2 Pierre Laval Decrees Firearm Registration

  3 Blitzkrieg, Defeat, and Twenty-Four Hours to Turn in Your Gun or Be Shot

  4 Occupation and Collaboration

  5 Weapons Possession: The Core of Criminal Activities of the French

  6 Amnesty or Execution

  7 Arms for the Resistance

  8 Liberation

  Concluding Thoughts

  Bibliography

  Credits for Illustrations

  About the Author

  Illustrations

  Preface

  A GERMAN POSTER requiring all people to surrender their firearms within twenty-four hours or face the death penalty is on prominent display at the Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération (Museum of the Order of the Liberation) in Paris. The museum has comprehensive information on people and groups inside and outside of France who contributed to the liberation.1

  In one of my visits there in the 1990s, I asked the curator about contact information for the associations of the veterans of the liberation. He provided me with the list.

  I then sent questionnaires to each association inquiring about the extent to which the French people had arms before the occupation, the extent to which the population complied with the German decrees to surrender arms or face the death penalty, and the use of arms by the Resistance. The responses, received in the late 1990s and early 2000s, were from younger members of the Resistance who were then still alive and who could be considered as among France’s “greatest generation.” While not extensive, the responses are worth their weight in gold, and are interspersed in pertinent parts of this book.

  But the bulk of this study is based on the records of the German occupation forces from the military archives in Freiburg, Germany (Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv Freiburg). This work would not have been possible without the research assistance of Sebastian Remus, a leading archival expert on the German records of the occupation in France.2

  Sources also include selected French archival records, which were located with the able assistance of Jean-Paul LeMoigne, who has written on the history of French firearms legislation.3 Thanks go to Odile Bosch for reviewing countless French newspapers of the time; heavily censored by the Germans, this day-to-day timeline published the names of many French citizens executed for gun possession and the pleas of the Vichy authorities for obedience to the occupation authorities. Selected diaries, which were anything but censored by the Germans, bring to life the actual impositions upon and experiences of real people.

  Countless works have been published on the German occupation of France in World War II. Not one focuses on the repression of gun owners. To be sure, many make incidental references to the execution of French citizens for various offenses, including the possession of firearms, and no history of the Resistance is complete without perennial discussion about the shortage of arms. But the alarming threat to the occupation by the mere existence of French civilians who had not surrendered their firearms was expressed in the following German military report: “Illegal weapons possession still represents the core of criminal activities of the French. It appears almost impossible to get rid of it.”4 The Germans demonstrated their frustration on this point by regularly reporting the execution of gun owners and periodically offering amnesty to surrender firearms.

  Helping the Nazis get rid of such French transgressions as gun ownership fell to the Vichy government, promoted most vigorously by Pierre Laval. The most notorious collaborator with the Germans, Laval was an opportunist who is perceived as holding perhaps the most sinister place in French history. Forgotten is the fact that as prime minister in 1935, Laval had decreed the registration of firearms. After the French defeat in 1940, and the terms of the armistice specifying that the French police would administer occupied France under the direction of the Germans, how easy it must have been to ferret out registered gun owners who had not surrendered their firearms.

  I am grateful to those who, while not responsible for any deficiencies in this book, helped to make it a better contribution to the literature. Professor Thomas J. Laub, author of the path-breaking study After the Fall: German Policy in Occupied France, 1940–1944 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), critically reviewed the manuscript and made valuable suggestions that greatly improved the factual account and overall thesis of the work. Roy M. Carlisle of the Independent Institute read the manuscript and offered useful pointers for its organization. The encouragement of David J. Theroux, president of the Independent Institute, in moving this book forward is also greatly appreciated. However, I alone am responsible for the interpretations and any errors in this book.

  I am greatly indebted to Therese Klee Hathaway for translations from the German occupation records. Odile Bosch is entitled to great appreciation for translations from French. I am further indebted to Lisa Halbrook Hollowell for organizing documents and general research. Jean Blomquist, aided by Cecilia Santini, provided tremendous copyediting in all relevant languages of the manuscript.

  A short version of certain topics in this book was published as “Why Can’t We Be Like France? How the Right to Bear Arms Got Left Out of the Declaration of Rights and How Gun Registration Was Decreed Just in Time for the Nazi Occupation,” vol. 39, Fordham Urban Law Journal, no. 5, p. 1637 (October 2012). I am grateful for the comments and suggestions made by the editors.

  1. See Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération, Cinquantenaire de l’Ordre de la Libération (Paris: Musée de l’Ordre de la Libération, 1990).

  2. See Stefan Martens, ed., Frankreich und Belgien unter deutscher Besatzung 1940–1944. Die Bestände des Bundesarchiv-Militärarchivs Freiburg, compiled by Sebastian Remus (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 2002).

  3. See Jean-Paul Le Moigne, Le contrôle administratif de la détention des armes à feu par les particuliers (Université Reims Champagne-Ardenne, Faculté de Droit et de Science Politique: Mémoire de DEA, 1999–2000).

  4. BA/MA, RW 35/1264, Lagebericht des Militärverwaltungsbezirks B, Südwestfrankreich, für die Zeit vom 16. November 1941 bis 15. Januar 1942, 19. Januar 1942.

  Introduction

  NAZI GERMANY LAUNCHED its blitzkrieg (“lightning war”) against France, Belgium, and the Netherlands on May 10, 1940. In every town occupied, Wehrmacht soldiers immediately put up posters warning that civilians who failed to surrender their firearms within twenty-four hours would be shot. French law before the occupation banned “war” weapons and required that firearms be registered. The registration requirement had been decreed in 1935 by Prime M
inister Pierre Laval. After its defeat in 1940, France signed the armistice agreeing to administer occupied France on behalf of the Wehrmacht, the German armed forces. The French police could then easily identify citizens who had registered their firearms. Laval returned to power as the chief collaborationist with the Nazis.

  Requiring registration of firearms and banning certain firearms was a familiar panacea for crime and violence in Europe and the United States in the 1930s. Street violence between Communist and Nazi thugs prompted a registration decree in 1931 by Germany’s Weimar Republic. But the interior minister warned that the registration records must not fall into the hands of extremist elements. That happened in 1933, when Hitler seized power and these very records were used to disarm and repress the Social Democrats and all other “enemies of the state,” which later included the entire Jewish population.1

  In the United States, efforts to repress gun ownership were brewing from long-term efforts to disarm African Americans combined with reaction to organized crime created by Prohibition and Depression-era gangsterism. The National Firearms Act of 1934 as originally proposed would have required registration and prohibitive taxation of pistols and revolvers, but—due in part to opposition by the National Rifle Association—was amended only to include machine guns and short-barreled shotguns.2

  Firearm prohibitions in the United States have always been moderated by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides that “[a] well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” James Madison, draftsman of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, acclaimed “the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation,” adding that “[n]otwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe … the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”3 That certainly applied to the France of Louis XVI and his predecessors, and it applies to the European Union today.

  In the months preceding the French Revolution, countless statements of grievances (cahiers de doléances) were brought by the Third Estate urging that ordinary French citizens be allowed to keep guns for protection from criminals and from animal predators that destroyed crops.4 When the Revolution began, one of the first acts of the National Assembly in abolishing feudalism was to declare the right of commoners to hunt.5

  A draft provision of the Declaration of Rights of 1789—written by le comte de Mirabeau of the Committee of Five (Comité des cinq)—would have provided that “every citizen has the right to keep arms at home and to use them, either for the common defense or for his own defense, against any unlawful attack which may endanger the life, limb, or freedom of one or more citizens.”6 Mirabeau explained:

  My colleagues all agree that the right declared in this article is self-evident in its nature, and one of principal guarantees of political and civil freedom; that no other institution can replace it; that it is impossible to imagine an aristocracy more terrible than one which would be established in a state where only a part of the citizens would be armed, and the others would not be; that all contrary arguments are futile sophisms contradicted by the facts, since no country is more peaceful and offers a better policy, than those where the nation is armed.7

  This provision was not included in the Declaration as adopted, which did however recognize the right of “resistance to oppression.”8 That left France without an explicit constitutional guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms, and created an ambiguity in whether the right to resist oppression included the means to do so by an armed citizenry.

  The French Revolution failed to shatter the centralized, authoritarian character of the French state. Perhaps reflecting the distrust of the masses by the new ruling elites, various firearm restrictions of the ancien régime remained in place. Supporters of an American-style republic did not prevail. While Louis XIV was long gone, Napoleon could as well have said, “L‘État, c’est moi,” as could Pierre Laval almost a century and a half later, albeit in a wholly different context.

  While French regimes historically imposed various restrictions on gun ownership, in 1935 Prime Minister Laval issued an unprecedented decree imposing firearm registration. The timing could not have been worse. The German occupation that began in 1940 decreed the death penalty for gun ownership, and the French police—the repository of the registration records—enforced German policy. Laval became the collaborator-in-chief.

  Reacting to such occupation policies throughout Europe, shortly before the sneak Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. Congress enacted a law to prohibit “the registration of any firearms possessed by any individual for his personal protection or sport” or “to impair or infringe in any manner the right of any individual to keep and bear arms.”9 A sponsor of the bill explained: “Before the advent of Hitler or Stalin, who took power from the German and Russian people, measures were thrust upon the free legislatures of those countries to deprive the people of the possession and use of firearms, so that they could not resist the encroachments of such diabolical and vitriolic state police organizations as the Gestapo, the Ogpu, and the Cheka.”10 While Hitler came to power legally, he quickly established his dictatorship by various repressive measures, including the disarming of perceived enemies of the state and the arming of his goon squads.

  Supporters of firearm registration in the United States were drowned out by the realities of war, not the least of which was the imperative to train the population in marksmanship. The National Rifle Association (NRA) instructed numerous civilians who would go on to use their shooting skills in the Armed Forces to fight the Axis. Not surprisingly, the NRA continued to oppose proposals to restrict firearms, and it needed only to state the obvious to explain why. As the NRA’s magazine stated in early 1942:

  From Berlin on January 6th the German official radio broadcast—“The German military commander for Belgium and Northern France announced yesterday that the population would be given a last opportunity to surrender firearms without penalty up to January 20th and after that date anyone found in possession of arms would be executed.”

  So the Nazi invaders set a deadline similar to that announced months ago in Czecho-Slovakia, in Poland, in Norway, in Romania, in Yugo-Slavia, in Greece.

  How often have we read the familiar dispatches: “Gestapo agents accompanied by Nazi troopers swooped down on shops and homes and confiscated all privately-owned firearms!”

  What an aid and comfort to the invaders and to their Fifth Column cohorts have been the convenient registration lists of privately owned firearms—lists readily available for the copying or stealing at the Town Hall in most European cities.

  What a constant worry and danger to the Hun and his Quislings have been the privately owned firearms in the homes of those few citizens who have “neglected” to register their guns!11

  Were the above allegations just exaggerations of the “gun lobby”? As will be seen, the same facts were being reported in newspapers such as the New York Times. Douglas MacArthur II, nephew of the general, who served in the U.S. embassy in Paris and Vichy in those days, recalled that “[t]he Germans confiscated everything, including shotguns. The Germans let it be known that it was … [a] death sentence if you were caught with a weapon in your home, in your place, or anything.”12

  The issue of German occupation policy in World War II arose in the U.S. Congress in 1968 in the context of bills to require the registration of firearms. Opponents raised the specter of the then-more-recent Nazi experience, while proponents denied that the Nazis made any use of records to disarm enemies.13 A Library of Congress study summarized prewar laws in France and elsewhere, and concluded that it was “unable to locate references to any German use of registration lists to collect firearms.”14 The researchers apparently did not look very far, but at any rate the bills were defeated.

  Fast-forwarding to today, in the United States background checks are required on people who buy firearms from licen
sed dealers, but once the transaction is approved, the government may not keep records on the identities of the buyers, and gun registration by the federal government is prohibited.15 A study by the National Institute of Justice stated that with “[u]niversal background checks … [e]ffectiveness depends on … requiring gun registration….”16

  By contrast, member states of the European Union (EU) are required to maintain central, electronic registration records of all lawful gun owners. Ironically, Germany was the first state to comply, which was in 2013—the eightieth anniversary of Hitler coming to power.17

  The advent of terrorist attacks by radical Islamic extremists have kept the issues involving gun ownership and prohibitions in a burning debate. The Paris murders of the satirists of Charlie Hebdo magazine and shoppers at a kosher supermarket in early 2015 prompted Rabbi Menachem Margolin, head of the Rabbinical Centre of Europe (RCE) and the European Jewish Association, to plead with the EU states to allow Jews to have guns to protect their institutions.18 His call went unheeded.

  Then Paris again, then San Bernardino, then Brussels, then Orlando, then … who knows where else terrorists will attack in Europe and the United States, as they do every day in the Middle East? Prevent terrorist attacks by disarming the citizenry at large or by allowing citizens to arm themselves while fighting back and eradicating the terrorists abroad? The debate will never end.

  Other than to acknowledge the perennial nature of the issue of arms and the citizen, historic and current, this book says no more about that broader context. Instead, this work sticks to historical facts concerning French gun control laws in the 1930s, the Wehrmacht conquest in 1940, the armistice provisions requiring the French police and state to enforce German military dictates, the enforcement of German policies to execute French citizens for possession of firearms, the stubbornness of many French in refusing to surrender their firearms, the threat perceived by the occupiers if even a segment of the population possessed arms, and the tragic impediment of the shortage of arms to the ability of the French Resistance to fight back.