Posted on 07/28/2003 11:18:43 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan
Experts Say Curbing Gun Violence Takes Int'l Action
Monday, July 14, 2003
By Jim Wurst, U.N. Wire
UNITED NATIONS — What progress has been made in controlling the illicit trade in small arms —and whatever future progress can be made — is due to increasing national awareness and regional cooperation in stopping the trade, said the chairman of the U.N. small arms conference that ended Friday.
Reports presented at the conference "revealed a much higher state of preparedness to prevent future illicit [arms] transfers and misuse" and the recognition of "a growing need … for the development of a regional perspective to combat the illicit trade in small arms," Ambassador Kuniko Inoguchi of Japan, the conference chairman, wrote in a report presented at the end of the meeting.
At a news conference Friday, Inoguchi said, "I would not claim we have achieved some heroic and ambitious outcome," but have only started to implement actions against small arms and explore what the United Nations can do. "One of the most important outcomes of this conference is that a lot of countries have shown their initiatives," she added.
A common theme running through Inoguchi's paper is that the issues cannot be thoroughly addressed only on the national level. Rather, it is best when there is strong regional and international cooperation.
For example, in the case of the collection of illicit arms already in the field, she wrote, "There is a growing awareness among both affected countries and donor governments that future programs of weapons collection would attain more lasting results by covering a sub-region rather than a single country."
Inoguchi estimated that 4 million weapons have been collected and destroyed over the last decade, with half of that happening in the last two years. "Could we make a marked difference in such a short period of time? I'm not so sure but we have to start working at some time. [This meeting] has assured a strong momentum on the side of the affected countries and those who want to help affected countries," she said.
In July 2001, the U.N. Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects devised a program of action meant to encourage greater international cooperation in addressing the issue. Last week's meeting was the first biennial session to report on the progress in implementing the program. The week consisted largely of governments, regional organizations such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the African Union and U.N. agencies reporting on new initiatives designed to implement the program.
Small arms and light weapons are generally those weapons that can be maintained, fired and carried by one or two people, such as assault rifles, pistols, rocket-propelled grenade launchers and shoulder-fired anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.
Rebecca Peters, the director of the nongovernmental International Action Network on Small Arms, called the conference "a success" because it has placed small arms "firmly on the agenda. ... Although there is obviously still a lot of work to do."
Speaking at a news conference on Friday, she said, "It is clear that reporting in itself spurs governments to take action to reduce the proliferation of small arms." IANSA was "calling on governments to step up their activities to make sure that this is a program of action … and not just a permanent conversation about stopping small arms violence," Peters added.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States, Inoguchi said there has been more focus on the links between terrorism and other illegal activities and small arms violence. Pointing out that the original conference took place less than two months before the attacks, she said she expected the agenda will broaden because of "the changing circumstances of the threat of terrorism and the general phenomenon of weapons [getting] into the wrong hands, either small arms or weapons of mass destruction."
In her report, she wrote, "The lack of borders in international crime and migration trends have seen an alarming rise in terrorist activities over recent years, [therefore] states are encouraged to develop a common approach, including the establishment of norms and standards, in order to fight terrorism and organized crime." She also wrote that the same pipelines are often used for terrorism, the arms trade and smuggling drugs and precious metals.
Peters said another reason for encouragement is a greater recognition of how disarmament is seen relating to health and development "and not just as an isolated area of policy." Saying "we represent the victims of gun violence who will never get to the United Nations," she said the statements delivered at the conference were "very strong on the humanitarian front [because] the real cost of small arms is the damage that they cause to human health and communities' well being." She said this concept "is very much more on the agenda than it was before."
Two areas of international cooperation that have become the subject of debate and study have been the possibilities of international conventions for a universal system of marking and tracing weapons and on regulating arms brokers.
Inoguchi said there could be "an early start of negotiations" on marking "but it is only a starting point." The goal of a universal system of marking weapons would be to make it possible to track illegal weapons back to their source, thus holding either manufacturers or brokers responsible.
An international convention on arms brokers is expected in the future, she said. Most of the efforts in this arena are being made by "like-minded groups," such as the European Union, Inoguchi said, rather than on the international level. While it may be possible to develop "a more enhanced attitude towards brokering, ... we have a long way to go" before there is an international agreement, she added.
Peters said IANSA will be pushing for a legally binding convention on marking and tracing and on brokers.
Resistor ?? Is that still being published ?
Stay Safe Ya'll !
There, that's better.
They haven't made any progress in illicit gun trade. Disarming law abiding citizens does not cut down on illicit trade.
My best buddy from high school retired as an 05 in that group and since we had the same posting albeit different units during my active duty time, they (SOF units) sorta "adopted" me as a young "screwy Looie." That in itself showed they thought me to be a worthwhile individual beyond my status as a "leg" so they called me a "nap" which means "NON AIRBORNE PERSONNEL" rather than the derogatory Lack of ESSENTIAL GUTS (leg).
I rather think it had to do with the annual post wide pistol competition for which I showed up for fun with my bosses blessing and an "arms room .45" and about 800rds of ball ammo. I wound up placing out of all the "new shooters" that year (in 1983 I think there were about 500)...I scored in at #2. Out of all shooters on post...number of competitiors that year there were about 3000; a huge chunk of them from the snake eater units...I came in at #9. That got the attention of the boy's who wear the beanies....and the word circulated that I wasn't the standard useless leg officer, and was in fact the buddy of the "old man," from high school....
Bright eyed and bushy tailed 2LT with great reflexes and very sharp vision. TODAY I have trouble seeing my front sight without using bifocal lenses!
My friend, a just retired SpecOps LTC, says that 90% of all gunowners will meekly hand over their guns with a "Oooooh Please don't hurt me" and that'll be it. I remind him that there are about 100 MILLION gunowners. If 90% "turn them all in" like SLIMESTEIN wants...that'll still leave a group of about 10 MILLION gunowners who are hard core and possibly ex-military and a group of them will be combat vets...that's quite a large army to have to deal with especially in the context of the urban guerilla.
Man those are powerful words. Count on me using them as soon as school starts with both the kids and my fellow teachers who thermselves are mindless liberals.....not stupid, mind you, but "mindless" to the realities of the costs of freedom.
"The US quietly dropped the idea of weapons confiscation. If the US military doesn't want to take on 12 million armed Iraqis, what makes the UN think it has even a ghost of a chance to confiscate weapons here in the US?"
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I'll take a whack at that....
IMO, those "12 million" Iraqis...have seen what a true madman despot can do. And they don't want to be unarmed.
That hasn't happened in the U.S.A. yet...Case in point, millions of Aussies willingly handed in their guns. They didn't/don't think there is anything to fear. Yet.
FRegards,
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.