Posted on 06/28/2006 11:01:38 AM PDT by RKV
A remarkable thing happened at the United Nations yesterday. We, the United States, told the world “no”. The messenger was Robert Joseph, the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Speaking before the dozens of nations that have gathered for the review conference on Small Arms and Light Weapons, Joseph told the world in no uncertain terms where the United States stood.
“The U.S. Constitution guarantees the rights of our citizens to keep and bear arms, and there will be no infringement of those rights,” he proclaimed to the dignitaries and functionaries. “The United States will not agree to any provisions restricting civilian possession, use or legal trade of firearms inconsistent with our laws and practices.”
Now, if this sounds familiar, it should be. It was five years ago that UN Ambassador John Bolton said something similar during the first conference on small arms. Then, as now, many countries wanted the conference to discuss and implement controls on the civilian possession of firearms. In fact, the draft version of the Program of Action specifically referenced civilian possession, stating the following:
The illicit trade in small arms and light weapons can be exacerbated by the unregulated possession of small arms and light weapons by civilians not part of responsible military and police forces. The measures below can contribute to addressing this aspect of the illicit trade in these weapons.
(a) States will establish appropriate national legislation, administrative regulations and licensing requirements that define conditions under which small arms and light weapons can be acquired, used and traded by private persons.
(b) States will seriously consider the prohibition of unrestricted trade and private ownership of small arms and light weapons specifically designed for military purposes (e.g., assault rifles, machine guns, grenades and high explosives produced for military purposes).
When John Bolton spoke at the opening of the summit in 2001, he said, “We request that Section II, paragraph 20, which refers to restrictions on the civilian possession of arms, to be eliminated from the Program of Action, and that other provisions which purport to require national regulation of the lawful possession of firearms… be modified to confine their reach to illicit international activities.” The delegates blinked, and the language was removed.
Will the same happen in 2006? The civilian possession of firearms promises to be a contentious issue once again. On Monday and Tuesday of this week, countries like Mexico and Indonesia spoke glowingly of the need to ensnare civilian gun owners in the UN’s web of gun regulation. It will once again take steadfast resolve from the US delegation to stop the gun banners from expanding the Program of Action to try and regulate legal firearms.
Accept of course for those unConstitutional laws that we stupidly put up with ourselves...
Could have saved myself some typing. ;-)
Can I steal that photo for future threads?
They should have auctioned off the privilege of saying this. I would have started the bidding at $500. I should be so lucky as to have the opportunity to address the gun grabbers of the world.
Hehehehe! AZ is one of the States where guns are legal to be carried. We are always locked and loaded!
Here's a thought - forget the amendment to ban burning the US flag, try burning the UN flag.
Right. Like all those RPGs, AKs, in Serbia and Mogadishu came from America. Make no mistake people, this is about ONE THING. DISARMING AMERICA SO THE BLUE HELMETS CAN HAVE THEIR WAY HERE TOO.
I gave a lecture to 100+ foreign college students on America and firearms last Friday. I guess they expected me to come out, gap-toothed and in my cammys. I think I shocked a few - it certainly was my intention to do so. A smart assed Saudi mentioned Hiroshima and Nagasaski, then I put chart up on how many people Mao, Stalin and Hitler killed, then he shut up. Funny, he was one of the few (less than 5%) who had shot a gun. The nicest kids were a couple of guys from South Korea. They had both done their national service and we traded stories about shooting the M16 (or K1 as the call it there). I even had them repeat the Eddie Eagle mantra with me - Stop, Don't touch...
Ya gotta admit, blue helmets make good targets. :-)
WEre the foreign students shocked due to what you said, specifically, or was it that you weren't a combination of the Terminator and Barney Fife?
Is Robert Joseph available to come speak to the California Legislature? They already seem well along in implementing UN-like gun control schemes.
I found that most had a very poor grasp of world history, and even fewer had a clue as to US history. I read relevant portions of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They were on average 18-19 year olds so the skulls full of mush phenomenon was in evidence. I did my very best to be 100% subversive - in particular I had photos of young American college students shooting at our range. The one of a very stunning young red-headed coed shooting my AR got their attention in particular. I basically told them that their governments don't really trust them and that they had good reasons not to trust their governments. A few came up afterward to actually inspect the guns I had brought and I think I am going to see if I can invite a few up to the range. Its a bit difficult because I have to trust their english proficiency in order to ensure safety (theirs and mine).
I wish. Turns out our governator flunked the Constitution part of the citizenship exam also. And he actually was required to study that stuff to gain citizenship.
Good for you RKV.
But RKV, the media says that all foreign students are geniuses and Americans are dolts compared to them.
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.