Yet another reason not to trust in either so-called “international law” or the U.N. From Townhall, via Instapundit, the following quotes from the 2001 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 problem isn’t the unregulated possession of small arms and light weapons by civilians. The problem is unrestricted ownerhisp of small arms in the hands of warlord militias nd terrorists. Anything less is an internal national issue and no business of the United Nations.
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.
Where the hell does the UN get off telling member countries how to conduct their internal affairs? Militaries & WMD’s are one thing. My 70+ year old mother having access to a firearm to defeat a 19 year-old thug is another. But, hey, it’s not like the would-be dictators gave up. Five years later, they’re back with a new conference.
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.
The U.S., in the person of Robert Jospeh, undersecretary of state, told them where to get off:
“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.�
Europe is already finding out what a bad idea surrendering soveriegnty to an unelected (and largely foriegn) bureaucracy is; as a bureaucrat myself, I think it’s the worst possible government aside from a mass murdering dictator (or entire party of dictators, such as China).
Don’t say no — say hell, no. And using a bullet for the period isn’t out of the question.