Congressman suggests Jews wouldn't have died in the Holocaust if they were armed

I guess you didn't here of the systematic disarming of ethnic populations that started in Germany 1933. They used the gun control legislation and registration enacted in 1928 by the Weimar republic. By 1938 no German (I say again, NO GERMAN) could own a weapon, including knives designed as weapons, unless they were NSDAP (Nazi Party) members in good standing. The registration lists were used to disarm the targeted populations.

The Jewish populations in surrounding eastern block countries took notice and spirited away weapons. That is why there were uprisings in surrounding nations starting in 1941. The Jews in Germany proper were defenseless. Their fates were sealed. What were the significant uprisings that took place in Germany proper?

So please explain again why the Congressman was wrong.

Nobody can really say what an armed Jewish population could have done to the German mission to eradicate them, I would like to think that the Germans would have suffered many loses, think Insurgency. I know if I had a choice between being thrown on a train for a gas chamber and going down killing as many Nazis as possible I would prefer to be armed. I honestly think many would have been saved just from the diversion either way. I will let those who didn't want to have guns go first on the train, I would prefer to kill those murderous phuckers. The jew's seem to have done a very good job killing many more of those who try to kill them daily in the Middle east so their abilities seem to be very good for doing so much with so little.