Day two at the gun ban conference

Townhall ^ | 28 June 2006 | Cam Edwards

[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.

[RKV]

The socio-economics of foreign students who can afford to travel to the US for summer language instruction is such that they are the product rich families (not just upper middle class). I had pretty high expectations and was a bit let down. I work at a community college and get to meet plenty of kids this age, and our best kick their butts. Maybe that's why all the euro kids want to listen to our music, not the local dreck. MTV gives the kids overseas a pretty unrealistic idea of life in the US. The kids even agreed when I mentioned it - since they had a chance to actually experience US life.

[Smokin' Joe]

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.

I guess they know who is really, ultimately, going to guard the border.

I'd bet a chunk of the Mexican economy is wired/money ordered/otherwise sent from gringoland...and the powers that be down there 'don' wan' no steenking interference...'

[backhoe]

From an old post:

6 posted on 11/30/2005 1:57:22 PM EST by Jeff Head

To: Monterrosa-24; Jeff Head

Heartbreaking pictures! I've seen thousands of atrocity pics of that era but not these. Thanks.

Although it's been a while since I've seen those pictures, they never lose their impact. I always think about the women I've cared about, family, and friends.

Kindly note a few things...

1) In the first picture, some of those women are pregant. Double murder, IMO.

2) In the second picture, not all are dead- yet. Just badly wounded.

3) The only thing that could have saved them, was another group of hard men, with guns in hand. Think about that for a while.

Not marches, not laws, not protests, not protocols- real men, with real weapons.

41 posted on 11/30/2005 3:51:47 PM EST by backhoe

27 posted on 12/03/2005 2:46:47 PM EST by backhoe (What Part of "Shall Not Be Infringed" is so hard to understand?)

 

Posted by backhoe to All On News/Activism 11/01/2005 7:28:41 AM EST · 35 of 38

 

 

Click the pic to go to the Gun Facts v4.0 download page!

6 posted on 11/30/2005 1:57:22 PM EST by Jeff Head

To: Monterrosa-24; Jeff Head

Heartbreaking pictures! I've seen thousands of atrocity pics of that era but not these. Thanks.

Although it's been a while since I've seen those pictures, they never lose their impact. I always think about the women I've cared about, family, and friends.

Kindly note a few things...

1) In the first picture, some of those women are pregant. Double murder, IMO.

2) In the second picture, not all are dead- yet. Just badly wounded.

3) The only thing that could have saved them, was another group of hard men, with guns in hand. Think about that for a while.

Not marches, not laws, not protests, not protocols- real men, with real weapons.

41 posted on 11/30/2005 3:51:47 PM EST by backhoe

Heartbreaking pictures! I've seen thousands of atrocity pics of that era but not these. Thanks.

Although it's been a while since I've seen those pictures, they never lose their impact. I always think about the women I've cared about, family, and friends.

Kindly note a few things...

1) In the first picture, some of those women are pregant. Double murder, IMO.

2) In the second picture, not all are dead- yet. Just badly wounded.

3) The only thing that could have saved them, was another group of hard men, with guns in hand. Think about that for a while.

Not marches, not laws, not protests, not protocols- real men, with real weapons.

[Vinnie]

Gee, and the MSM and all the other UN defenders were assuring us the UN was only concerned with "illicit" trade. Funny how the first thing the UN does is attempt to link lawful posession by private citizens of firearms with illicit trade.

My thought also.
It wasn't two days ago we heard the illict trade only argument.

[Alas Babylon!]

Yes, good news, indeed.

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.

To the dictators who make up most of the countries in the UN:

Historic Gonzales Flag of 1836 (Texas Republic).

[Kim]

Post that on some lib website and see how they REALLY feel about flag-burning.

[Alas Babylon!]

Funny how the first thing the UN does is attempt to link lawful posession by private citizens of firearms with illicit trade.

That's because most of the countries representing the UN are dictatorships. The UN is simply a gang for thugs to look legitimate and justify the oppression of their own people. Treating a dictatorship the same as one would a representative democracy is tantamount to approving that dictator's terrorizing of his own people. Why should we, who have spent so much of our blood and treasure ensuring our freedom, give legitimacy to the same types whom we fought for that freedom? It simply never made sense to me.

The biggest thing a thug dictator is afraid of is the people rising up and overthrowing him. So disarming them has simply got to be a top priority.

[paul51]

“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.”

Can he forward that message to the governors of CA, NY, NJ, MA. ?

[RKV]

Thank you for posting that. I take it that is the original? MOLON LAVE!

[RKV]

Don't even get me going about the NAU. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

[RKV]

I am not so sure that there can be an illegally purchased gun. Pardon me for being dense. Maybe it is reasonable/moral/legal to prohibit convicted violent felons from owning firearms, but I wonder if that is just an opportunity for abuse of process by the "elites." In terms of the average law abiding citizen, there is no way to justify requiring them to get government approval to buy a gun or to register their purchase of a gun. The problem is that we have so many laws today, that it is impossible not to break the law. That is intentional by the way. Certain elements in our society consider that a feature not a bug.

[Charles Martel]

I'd bet a chunk of the Mexican economy is wired/money ordered/otherwise sent from gringoland...and the powers that be down there 'don' wan' no steenking interference...'

There's a line in an old Billy Joel tune that goes something like: "...before the Mafia took over Mexico."

Border control? Fuhgeddiboudit!

[ExSoldier]

How much more dangerous and irrelevant must the UN become before it is relegated to the dustbin of history, as was the League of Nations?

I don't fear the UN. It'd be like worrying about the keystone cops on dope.

I greatly worry about the organization that will replace it.

The majority of the UN membership is comprised of two bit punk dictators and some serious marxist/maoists. None of them like us. We have a fairly close relationship with but a very few...and we still spy on them just as they spy on us. It's all about being number one and staying that way. The rest of the world is always looking for subtle ways to knock us off the top spot. Gun control is just one way. Moving from the dollar to the Euro as the basis for international transactions...especially for oil is another one. But that's sort of a moot point. Ever since we went off the gold standard, our money became a valueless commodity, anyway.

[Tench_Coxe]

“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.”

A fine statement, bold even. Color me a skeptic, however. I can't help but think this was followed with a quiet Clintonian " A least for now ".
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

[BigTom85]

It looks like your a resident of Kaliforniastan... mabey you can do it for him!

[philman_36]

"A remarkable thing happened at the United Nations yesterday. We, the United States, told the world “no”. "
I'm hoping that the minute that "no" turns to a "yes" folks realize that it's time. Shut down the electricity, water, transportation, communications...everything.
Shut everything except the door out.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 29.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

!NUTS

[PLMerite]

"I'd bet a chunk of the Mexican economy is wired/money ordered/otherwise sent from gringoland..."

Money sent home from expat Mexicans in the United States is the second largest single source of income for Mexico. First is either oil or tourism, and whichever of those two isn't first is third.

[Eastbound]

". . . I am going to see if I can invite a few up to the range."

Hi, RKV. Sounds great! I would check with someone who knows what the laws of the nations are that might present a problem with a foreign national shooting some weapons here. If I remember correctly, Larry Becraft (attorney who spoke at the Waco Memorial gathering a few years back) mentioned that one of the reasons the judge signed the warrant on a gun related charge was that the near-blind guy who Koresh let shoot one of the weapons there was a foreign national who's country had a law against their citizens firing weapons here. I might be wrong, but thought I better mention it. I have the speech on tape somewhere. I'll dig it up listen to it again if I can find it.