Skip to comments.The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: The Impact on Private Gun-Ownership in America
Posted on 06/14/2009 4:50:10 AM PDT by marktwain
"The spread of small arms creates a serious global problem and requires an equally urgent response because the lives and futures of children are at stake. These weapons have extinguished more young lives than they have protected." Carol Bellamy, Executive Director, UNICEF The vast majority of Americans, regardless of their opinions on the increasing scope of international law, agree with the proposition that children should not be used as soldiers. Accordingly, much of the UN literature that addresses children and guns deals with this military-related issue.
However, a second theme is quickly found in virtually all UN pronouncements about child soldiers and weapons. UN child's rights advocates believe, teach, and promote the idea that all private gun-ownership is dangerous for children, and that children have the right to grow up in a community that is free from all guns.
As the campaign to seek ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child intensifies, it is important for all Americans to understand the application of this children's rights treaty to the issue of private gun ownership by American citizens.
Limiting the rights of gun-ownership is not some secret agenda of the UN, but is open for all to see. UNICEF, the official UN agency charged with the worldwide advancement of children's rights, has published a four-color brochure entitled: "No Guns Please, We Are Children." The quotation given at the opening of this paper is taken from the front cover of this UNICEF brochure.
Inside this brochure we find the following assertions about guns and children:
(Link at source)
The UN official pamphlet makes it plain that nations need to [i]mplement laws to protect children . . .from having access to small arms. Moreover, the UN says that states should [c]ollect and destroy small arms
through community programmes in which civil society plays a key role.
...while Muslims are free to strap explosives onto their children.....
I don't agree at all, especially since the UN seems to define "child soldiers" as anyone 25 or younger.
That building wants to come down.
Read about the woman who wants to strip you of your rights. She is from NYC (big surprise) rather than some other third world dictatorship, but she is typical of the arrogant elitist attitude you see in NYC government. Another one for Koko's list.
I hope they are smart enough to know it.
Said the smarmy socialist, Carol Bellamy, Executive Director, UNICEF:
“The spread of small arms creates a serious global problem and requires an equally urgent response because the lives and futures of children are at stake.”
Her logical fallacies are as follow:
1. Small arms kill or maim no one - only the evil (often Muslim males) using the small arms to kill or maim children or adults.
2. Banning guns to prevent crimes committed with a gun is impossible because:
A. Criminals will always exist.
B. Criminals will get guns or make them.
3. Disarmed people are defenseless against a criminal with a gun.
MS Smarmy Socialist (MS SS) further lied when she said the following:
“These weapons have extinguished more young lives than they have protected.”
History proves MS SS lies:
1. Guns allowed the free to stop evil tyrants in Germany, Italy, Russia, Korea.
2. The history of gun control in America began when night riders of the KKK found their dirty sheets were cotton, not KEVLAR. To prevent the newly freed blacks from protecting their families, laws were passed to disarm the blacks.
3. Once disarmed, they were helpless before the KKK.
Gun grabbers always want you disarmed because they are planning to do something to you which you would fight to the death against if you were armed.
Gun grabbers are either evil or the unwitting tools of the evil who wish to tyrannize you.
These weapons have extinguished more young lives than they have protected.” Carol Bellamy, Executive Director, UNICEF
The decision to shoot a child is made by the human holding the weapon, not by the weapon.
Sorry for the extra extraneous paragraph, carelessly posted.
Better keep an eye on the new incarnation of Zer0’s old Global Poverty Act! I believe it is HR 2639.
Blue helmets look best when viewed with an overlay of cross hairs. Adding a touch of red makes for a festive look.
How many children have died over the last 100 years due to a lack of firearms sufficient to protect them?
I need my guns to protect my children from an oppressive central government
When and where I grew up, guns in the house were the norm, not the exception. A gun, usually a .22 rifle, by the back door, gun racks in bedrooms, in a den or study and a very common sight in pickup back windows. No big deal. If guns were such a danger, it is a miracle we were able to survive childhood.
“If Obama and Congress signed anything like this into law by the treaty provision, they would be igniting CW2.”
That’s a fact.
“Blue helmets look best when viewed with an overlay of cross hairs. Adding a touch of red makes for a festive look.”
The Treaty must then be ratified by Congess. That is where the trouble begins. Our Constitution is set aside by the ratification. No other nation has that condition as part of ratifying a UN Treaty so they merely ignore them after the fact.
The Second Amendment has never been so threatened or so necessary.
From your lips to God's ears. But that's where they're going, I think. It's that 'upending of the table' that I've mentioned.
They're arrogant enough to think they'll win.
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.