UN Gun Ban

[USMCsniper]

look here http://stopungunban.org/

:cursing: :nono:

This 4th of July United Nations will meet at New York ”” using our tax dollars to finalize a U.N. treaty that would strip all citizens of all nations of their right to self-protection (right to bear arms), and strip you of your rights under the Second Amendment.

write letters and raise heck.

 

[bioprof]

Not that I support any form of gun registration of any kind, but I think the NRA is blowing things out of proportion again to bolster their fundraising. According to the UN web site (http://www.un.org/events/smallarms2006/), the purpose of the meeting is to implement controls on the illegal trade of weapons. I don't see in any of their statements that they want to ban the legal ownership or transfer of weapons. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

I just read in the newspaper this morning that Canada is planning on eliminating their registration of firearms because it hasn't done anything to curb gun violence and is extremely expensive. In fact, their murder rate has increased since the implementation of gun registration. The only guns that have been registered are legal firearms owned by law-abiding citizens. Hmmmmm, for some unknown reason, the criminals don't seem to be cooperating with the registration of their stolen and illegal firearms. I wonder why that is????

 

[faw3]

I like the part that goes " think Americans should have guns the rest of the world has" (or close to that) OH GOODY WE ALL ARE GETTING NEW AKs. :rotf: Oh ya both of ya are right they would love to take them away and the nra would also love your money and ya I do belong to the nra. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[wszumera]

How many countries in the UN have a Constitutionally protected right to arms?

This picture outside tbe UN pretty much sums up their view

Clutch

 

[bioprof]

Here's an interesdting link straight from the UN:
[url] http://www.un.org/events/smallarms2006/pdf/SettingRecordStraight.pdf[/url]

Note that they explicitly state that they have absolutely no intentions to ban the legal manufacture or sale of firearms, nor do they have the jurisdiction to do so.

Also, contrary to what the NRA says, they are not going to be meeting on the 4th of July. The UN will be closed on the 4th of July and will be having a fireworks display in honor of our holiday.

This is exactly why I will never be a member of the NRA. Their distortions are so far out that they are on the verge of outright lies.

 

[Stophel]

I'm no longer an NRA member either...If I hear them say one more time "we don't need any new gun laws..we need to enforce the ones we have now", I'm gonna scream. NO we DON'T need to enforce the ones we have now!!!

 

[tnlonghunter]

I don't know what the UN's actual legal jurisdiction is in the U.S. or any other country, but they should have absolutely none that is not expressly agreed to by the citizens of that country. I seriously doubt that the current administration or congress would agree to any such legislation that would be imposed on us. Even if congress did, I really doubt that the average gun owner here would give enough of a hoot to abide by a U.N. resolution. Just a thought.

And from a practical stand point, I really doubt that there is any way that guns will ever be completely banned here. The American mentality towards independence and the right to bear arms is too deeply entrenched for it to actually go forward very far. Too many people would fight it. Not that we should stop, but I really think it's too much a part of us to let them be taken away permanently.

 

[AZ-Robert]

I am a member of the NRA. That said, I agree with Bioprof's statements on this issue (see above). The NRA is putting some spin on some talks in the rarified atmosphere of the UN in order to pull in some more contributions. As with all "spin", there is some truth... the UN is holding talks in July (beginning on the 8th) on controlling the illegal international arms trade. The NRA's concern is certainly overstated and, as Bioprof points out, the UN really has no jurisdiction within any country. The sovereignty of individual nations is one of the core principles on which the UN is founded.

Don't lose sight of the fact that UN is a collection of nations, not some nefarious world government with its own resources. If they want an army, they have to ask us to provide it -- or the money they need to pay the expenses of some other nation's army. So beyond not having jurisdiction over the internal affairs of this nation, they have no ability to enforce any ban on guns.

And, to put it in perspective, the UN has banned genocide, wars of aggression, international trade in slaves, etc. Yet you don't have to look far to find examples of all those things right in the here and now. If "they" can't handle that, what makes us think "they" are going to try and impose a ban on the legal ownership of guns by the citizens of any country, much less the one paying the bills?

 

[Erzulis boat]

I have been an NRA member since 1986.

I have been watching the NRA slowly become an affront to logic. Instead of changing with the times to address reasonable young people, it is now sounding like 1970's paranoia.

The scare tactics are beyond BS. The statements on the mailed literature is embarrassing, it makes ME look bad too.

Nevertheless, I still will contribute, because the NRA has, and will, continue the struggle.

The NRA would not be able to function if the board of directors were as loony as the literature, so why insult the very people that are funding the organization?

I am a military contractor. We need the technology flow that comes from the individual for small arms development. Do not dumb down the talent pool with lowbrow propaganda.

If you are going to engage in any type of debate...do not quote the literature. Granted, the opposing force will lie with aplomb...but the truth will out, every time. The only people that matter are the intelligent reasonable folks, and they will come round.

I had better stop....

 

[Blivetmaker]

The picture also portrays the effectiveness of their peacekeeping in Srebrenica. A nice gun indeed. I imagine the dutch were armed with that particular model when they retreated. The 8000 civilians would probably be quite vocal about it's lack of effectiveness...if the dirt that got shoveled over them wasn't in the way...

Sorry Claude. The U.N has pushed a few buttons too many on my dashboard.

 

I get calls all the time from the NRA for some emergency or another. I used to be a avid member but got tired of the guilt trip phone calls wanting more money. I didn't re-up this time. They still call and thank God for caller ID. They are as bad as any other salesman. If I join up again, I ain't giving them my phone number. :cursing:

 

[Slake]

I'm astonished at the bangs the NRA has recieved here instead of the UN. I think that the US should get out of the UN and I think the UN should be out of {after way too many years} the US
The UN is anti American, it is corrupt and they don't do the jobs they should do
I'm not gonna say the NRA is perfect and they have some outlandish fundraising efforts. I am a member and will remain so.
The UN, has collapsed into ineffective costly {for us} beauracratic horse puckeys {not my word of choice} and it should be moved to, hmmmmmm how about to paris france.

 

[jtmattison]

look here http://stopungunban.org/

:cursing: :nono:

This 4th of July United Nations will meet at New York ”” using our tax dollars to finalize a U.N. treaty that would strip all citizens of all nations of their right to self-protection (right to bear arms), and strip you of your rights under the Second Amendment.

write letters and raise heck.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this is a political discussion :winking:
:nono:

Sorry fellers but I'm locking it.

HD