and Older Gadzooks, Jim Carry's dream comes true! Chuck Heston and I... 
will be disarmed!
Posted on 04/01/2013 7:11:44 AM PDT by EXCH54FE
Individuals 55 and older would lose their right to keep and bear arms under a provision that’s expected to be included as part of a comprehensive United Nations Global Arms Trade Treaty.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon spoke about the impetus behind the controversial measure at press conference over the weekend in New York City, the site of the final negotiations between the 193 Member States.
“Regulating the international transfers of both weapons and ammunition is a key component of a robust arms trade treaty, as is limiting civilian access to small arms and munitions,” said Ban Ki-moon.
“There’s an emerging consensus that certain groups should be restricted from possessing conventional arms, certainly those who fuel conflict, arm criminals or violations of international humanitarian or human rights law are at the top of the list,” Ban Ki-moon continued.
“But also, the international community believes segments of the population that present a danger to themselves and others, chiefly individuals deemed or adjudicated mentally defective and persons with attenuating cerebral faculties, should be added to that list.”
“Simply put, the UN believes guns don’t belong in the hands of the elderly,” said H. Michael Chase, an attorney for the human rights watchdog group.
“Pools of research show that a significant majority of gun-related suicides, accidental shootings, non-fatal negligent discharges are perpetrated by persons 55 and over,” Chase said.
“Along with the mentally ill, preventing those who are advancing in age from gaining easy access to firearms is a common sense way to save lives,” concluded Chase.
Dr. Michael Betti from the John Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness embraced the UN’s call to disarm senior citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at guns.com ...
LOL...That would work too.
Who was it that put dinner plate in the street?
It seemed the tank crews became reluctant to drive over any of them when they found out a fraction of them were covering landmines.
It seems the tank crews were also reluctant to step outside to find out which ones, as every plate flipper got shot...
Stopping abortions is a better way to save lives, you moron.
People 55 and over have a far better sense of history and would be the first to defy people like Chase. That's why they are being targeted. Young people are already "educated" to the ways of The State and will be more compliant.
Don’t forget the bayonnette... :-)
and Older Gadzooks, Jim Carry's dream comes true! Chuck Heston and I... will be disarmed!
Lets just get out of the UN and then kick them out of the country instead.
Disarm the Alarm List? Then how would the Old Men of Menotomy have captured Lord Percy’s supply train? Nay, the founders would never allow this.
I am against all this. However, it seems strange to take all guns from 55 and above when most shooting occurs from 15-40. Again against all of it but again the government (I guess World Government now) doesn’t even have a clue on reality.
The older I get, the less I have to lose.”
...agreed! At 54, I’m much more aware of my freedoms and liberties and how fragile they are and a whole lot more protective of them.
Ding, ding, ding..... we have a winner!
Statement by Mrs. Tanya K. Metaksa Executive Director National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action to the Commission on Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice Seventh Session Vienna, Austria April 27, 1998
Agenda Item 5: Criminal Justice Reform and Strengthening of Legal Institutions Measures to Regulate Firearms
________________ Madame Chairperson, first let me congratulate you on the excellent job you have done in presiding over today's plenary session of the Commission.
By way of introduction let me note that the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action is the oldest, largest, most active organization in the world concerned with shooting sports and the rights of firearms owners. The NRA has over three million members worldwide and our organization actively lobbies in all fifty of the United States and in the U.S. Congress. The NRA has been an official Economical and Social Counsel non-governmental organization since 1996. In this capacity, we have assumed a leadership role in monitoring all international firearms regulations efforts. We attended all four of the regional workshops on firearms regulations as well as the sixth Session of the Commission on Crime Prevention.
Today I should like to address three topics. First, the report of the Secretary General on "Measures to Regulate Firearms." Second, the resolutions regarding firearms which are being considered by this body. And finally, Madame Chairperson, perhaps the most important, the need for democratic reform of the method by which the UN conducts its business when considering issues which, by definition, constitute key elements of the domestic affairs of member states.
Report of the Secretary General
Having reviewed the report of the Secretary General on "Measures to Regulate firearms" [E/CN. 15/1998/4], we find it an incredible document. It is more aptly described as an un- credible document. I refer to the section sub-titled, "Conclusion of the Workshop." That is found in paragraphs 11 through 23 of the report.
This is un-credible for two reasons: the substance of the conclusions and the process by which those conclusions were drawn. Let me list just a few of the so-called, "conclusions" more precisely, affronts to law-abiding possessors of firearms, good people not just of the United States of America but good people of nations around the world.
* That hunters should be required to store their firearms in sporting clubs.
* That the firearms used in hunting be sharply restricted and permitted for use only to protect wildlife.
* That only smooth-bore firearms be permitted for protection of property or life.
* That firearm owners establish a need before being allowed to possess firearms.
* That firearms collectors be allowed to possess only those firearms which are non-functional.
* That there be an upper-age-limit on the possession of firearms.
* That firearms owners obtain insurance before being allowed to hunt.
* That firearms possession be discouraged and that, if they must, individuals would be permitted to own one firearm at most.
Madame Chair, we have in our hands a report issued by a group of people who have bent over backwards to avoid open processes -- processes designed to arrive at measured conclusions. Instead, we have witnessed closed processes which yield no measured conclusions at all, but radical proposals which strike at the core of freedoms we hold dear and a heritage which was passed on to us by our fathers and forefathers. These radical affronts may or may not have been actually discussed at the workshop. Indeed, this is the first time we and our government have heard of many of them.
We monitored all four workshops, and we reviewed all published materials, but no verbatim records are kept of workshops. Most sessions were completely closed, even to the very people who have the most to lose. People like us. Citizens with rights. Citizens with something to say. Citizens with no way of verifying how radical proposals found their way into an official U.N. document.
Madame, I will return to this point later, but for the record, permit me to make this observation: the U.N.'s tarnished reputation shall never brighten when its agencies cloak themselves in secrecy, when it insists on closing doors rather than opening doors when it masquerades radical proposals as blithe conclusions in officially bound documents.
Resolutions under Consideration
Let me hasten to add, Madame Chairperson, that we are extremely gratified that no resolution has been introduced for a "declaration of principles on firearm regulation." There has not been sufficient discussion of any such declaration. A resolution at this time would have premature at best.
If this body chooses to proceed ahead with further efforts to tighten firearm regulation, we would request that all future meetings be open meetings.
Now, action is being considered under the draft resolution. We would sincerely hope that the UN would listen to the pleas not just of the NRA, but of firearms owners worldwide. When we say that we want an opportunity to be heard, we are mindful that the issues we wish to discuss are considered vital by hundreds of millions of hunters, shooters, and lawful possessors of firearms.
Democratic reforms of UN procedures
Now, let's discuss our final point. Democratic reform of U.N. Procedures.
We know and appreciate that the National Rifle Association of America is probably not the U.N.'s most popular Non- governmental Organization. We are fully aware that some have criticized the assertiveness with which we defend our position. I can assure you that our defense of our position will continue to be strong, vibrant and dynamic, so I believe we can predict with some certainty that, in the future, our critics will continue to complain about our effectiveness. That is fine, Madame Chair, for we are not thin-skinned. Indeed, we relish the give and take of a healthy political dialogue.
What I want to emphasize today, however, goes far beyond the style with which we defend our freedom and our cultural heritage. It goes far beyond the words of our critics who complain about our assertive defense of our rights. Oh, no, at issue today is neither the style or the substance of this particular non- governmental organization. At issue today and for the foreseeable future is the style and substance of the United Nations itself.
In the grand scheme of things, NRA's popularity is of no consequence. At issue is the U.N.'s commitment to an open, democratic process within its own agencies and institutions. Put bluntly, and I can see that our critics are now sitting up, paying closer attention, and taking copious notes put bluntly, how the U.N. treats the NRA is a major test for the U.N.
Why? Because, in many ways, the NRA member is the quintessential average citizen. He, or she, is extraordinary, not because of their wealth or station in life, but because of the values they embody. Our members are from every major political party in our nation, men and women, young and old, all colors and creeds. What holds this diverse, dynamic group of people together, as members of a single association, is their shared values. NRA members are ordinary people who come together, because they cherish the values this association stands for: safety, individual responsibility, and freedom.
Thus, the manner in which NRA is treated by the U.N. will be seen as emblematic of how the U.N. treats everyday citizens of every member-nation, all around the world, citizens whose lives and culture could be radically transformed by what you decide and how you go about deciding it. With the end of the Cold War, the UN is now engaged in myriad activities, peace-keeping, democracy- building, functions profoundly different from its earlier days.
Now, Madame Chairperson, you are probably asking, how does this relate to the need for democratic reform in UN procedures?
When the UN was mainly concerned with fulfilling its classic diplomatic role of preventing interstate wars of aggression, there was little necessity for citizens of members countries to have a voice in your deliberation.
If and when the UN chooses to involve itself in issues which are domestic by nature, and this most definitely includes the firearms issue, the U.N.'s approach must change. Many criticize the U.N. for even delving into domestic issues; we will leave their valid criticisms for another time. Today, this much can and should be said: the U.N. cannot act in the classic diplomatic manner of governments talking to governments in a closed, restrictive process. The process must be democratic.
If there are meetings, they must be opened.
If there is information, it must be shared.
If decisions are built on evidence and discussions, then all three -- evidence, discussions and resulting decisions -- all three must be made a matter of record.
And, if there is a record, that record must be available to the public.
Madame Chairperson, we have had a thorny relationship with the UN. The test for the UN is not how it relates to a group with which it feels compatible, but how it relates to groups who often take strong positions, positions some of you may find contrary. This is what democracy is all about.
Our experience to date has not been good. One is tempted to say that, if you have found us assertive, I can assure you we have found your locked doors aggressive. Meetings have been closed when they should have been opened. Information was not furnished when it should have been furnished. Deliberations have been private when they should have been public.
Madame Chairperson, let me conclude by saying that it is our intention to pursue through the appropriate channels two major reforms of UN procedures. In the USA, such approaches are often called "sunshine laws." Such laws open closed doors, so that all interested parties can observe and participate in the light of day. In U.N. parlance, they are known as "increased transparency."
First, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action will seek an "open meeting" provision for the UN. Under such a provision, all official meetings of the UN will, with certain limited exceptions, be open to the public.
Second, the NRA Institute for Legislative Action will seek a "public records" provision for the UN. Under this provision, all documents held by the UN will, with certain limited exceptions, be open to public examination.
Our extraordinary, ordinary citizens who make up the NRA might put it this way: we want open, honest debate. We want freedom of information. We like town meetings, and we love democracy. And we think, in expressing those values, we have a lot of company.
When this Commission meeting started, Pino Alaachi made a prophetic statement. He said, and I quote, Madame Chairperson, "Ultimately, we answer to citizens of the governments of the world."
Indeed, Madame Chairperson, so do you.
And, from one ordinary citizen who has the honor of speaking for millions of freedom-loving citizens of the United States of America, citizens who are as average as they are extraordinary, thank you for listening.
=+=+=+=+
This information is provided as a service of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Fairfax, VA. This and other information on the Second Amendment and the NRA is available at: http://WWW.NRA.Org
Bring it on you red neck peckerwoods! I'll wait for ye wit my old aut six!
“I’ll grab his boots!”
See my 52
Caption: PFC Agnes Agnieszka, 23, mans a machine gun next to a truck.
"Me, over 55? NAW!"
They are afraid of those people 55 and older for several reasons. First off you have experienced life and have seen what their policies have yielded and understand their true intentions. Next, you most likely lost much of your wealth or never had the opportunity to generate it because of their policies. Finally, you are more likely to act out against them. Your family is grown, spouse may be dead and there is little for you to lose…
They are afraid of those people 55 and older for several reasons. First off you have experienced life and have seen what their policies have yielded and understand their true intentions. Next, you most likely lost much of your wealth or never had the opportunity to generate it because of their policies. Finally, you are more likely to act out against them. Your family is grown, spouse may be dead and there is little for you to lose…
First thing that came to mind was this is a good way of keeping guns out of the hands of the next generation through inheritance.
Don’t worry, you won’t need a firearm down in that bunker you’ll be in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.