|
via e-mail |
| United Nations Gun Summit Successful |
| July 24, 2006Reuters and other news outlets reported that the U.N.
conference to control illicit trade in small arms ended in failure, with
no consensus reached, no document produced, and the nations placing
blame for the failure on a myriad of causes. The truth is that the U.N. conference on small arms was a success for people everywhere who cherish freedom, and recognize that power in the hands of the people is the only place power can safely rest. The U.N. effort to place control of small arms solely in the hands of government officials, and leave entire populations defenseless against a myriad of aggressors ended without ceding control of small arms to the one-world body. But they’ll be back. The largest source of genocidal activity is and has always been governments against their own people, and disarmament is the standard warm-up for genocide. Researchers at the University of Hawaii have labeled it “democide,” responsible for 180 million people’s deaths worldwide in the last century alone -- the largest single cause of untimely death in the world. The places are familiar: Stalin’s Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, Uganda, Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenia, Sudan, Bosnia and many more. Guns don’t kill people, governments kill people. With many of the attending nations guilty themselves of outrageous human rights abuse, the failure to reach consensus on public disarmament was heralded by true human rights organizations everywhere. The U.N. itself has disarmed vulnerable groups engaged in conflict, and then left them dangling in the wind for various reasons, including budget shortfalls, internal disagreements, changed priorities and dissolved coalitions. The then defenseless populations remained to be slaughtered by their enemies. The U.N.’s record on precipitating massacres is horrific. Dave Kopel, co-author with me of “Supreme Court Gun Cases,” describes how U.N.-backed gun confiscation programs in Kenya and Uganda lead to torture, murder and arson, and turned tens of thousands into starving refugees. http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/kenya-uganda.pdf. He has also documented the human rights atrocities of United Nations gun confiscations in East Africa. Other scholars have loaded the web with conference reports. Here’s a good one: http://volokh.com/posts/1152314168.shtml Rick Patterson, managing director of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI), which represented the firearms industry at the conference, said, "Had the conference maintained a focus on fully automatic military weapons they may have been able to implement an effective global strategy. Issues related to sporting firearms and private ownership are too complex for global strategies." Ouch. CBS called the effort a failure, noting that Cuba, India, Iran, and Pakistan were among those resisting proposals from non-government groups who were numerous and adamant in their demands for influencing national sovereignty. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/08/ap/world/mainD8INH5K80.shtml. Mexico, Colombia, and Canada lead the effort to introduce U.N. regulation of civilian firearms, which repeatedly came up, but was successfully defeated. Ironically, the U.N. conference on government control of firearms took place in the United States over its Independence Day weekend, while Americans celebrated the establishment of the linchpin of freedom on earth, which was won with the use of privately held firearms, which government sought to confiscate. The delegates took the 4th of July off, hampering efforts to reach agreement. Although the U.N. made some pronouncements that its goal was not to disarm the public, every action it took contradicted that position, and it has NEVER armed victims of atrocities, preferring to send in heavily armed, centrally controlled, battle-ready temporary “peace keepers” instead. Indonesia's representative made the real agenda clear on the first day: "We believe that no armed group outside of the State should be allowed to bear weapons... the issue of ammunition should also be addressed in the context of the Programme of Action because in the absence of ammunition, small arms and light weapons pose no danger." The United States opposed most attacks on Second Amendment freedoms, including 1 - a ban on sales of weapons to “non-state actors” (meaning people, including populations resisting tyrants); 2 - inclusion of ammunition; 3 - references to civilian possession, and 4 - a mandatory follow-up in hopes that a future U.S. administration would be more supportive of civilian disarmament -- perhaps the most dangerous of the strategies tried. The Associated Press and other news organizations failed to point this out in calling the conference a failure. Danger Still Lurks According to the AP, “Despite the failure, delegates planned to raise many of the same issues in the U.N. disarmament committee -- where consensus is not needed for agreement -- to begin preparing a treaty that would make law out of many of the global principles supported by non-governmental groups (NGOs)." In other words, the effort to destroy the right to keep and bear arms is proceeding unabated, with less control, and less public scrutiny, by unelected foreigners working to change U.S. laws. Most NGOs leaned toward the utopian peace model, imagining government power and enforced disarmament would stop aggressors. The NRA, also a participating NGO, had released daily reports while the conference was underway. The hubris of the utopian global power mongers was chilling. “Safe and Efficient Small Arms Collection and Destruction Programmes: A Proposal for Practical Technical Measures,” the paper from the 2001 conference contains a detailed plan for disarming everyone but “officials.” It says, among other things, “Small arms are fundamentally dangerous and their removal from the equation either by control, neutralisation or removal is essential. The first step is to gain information on their numbers and whereabouts.” The reason for disclaiming an intent to disarm civilians is also found in the document. “Insensitive removal of weapons may have cultural and social implications, and indeed may inspire an unexpected political backlash.” The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights contains no right to arms. Thanks to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership for background used in this report. http://www.jpfo.org Check out my new blog on news media accuracy: http://www.PageNine.org Sign up for automatic RSS feeds! |