'nuff said...
Posted on 06/27/2006 2:19:34 PM PDT by neverdem
They’ve gathered in New York City, the best and brightest minds in the global gun ban movement. Oh, they don’t want you to think for a second that they’re actually interested in your guns. Kofi Annan as much as said so yesterday, when he told the attendees of the Small Arms Review Conference, “This Review Conference is not negotiating a ‘global gun ban’, nor do we wish to deny law-abiding citizens their right to bear arms in accordance with their national laws.” Got it, gun owners? There’s nothing to fear from the UN when it comes to your guns.
It’s too bad for Kofi that many of the countries attending the summit didn’t get his memo. Yesterday’s speeches were full of calls for expanding the current agenda to include the civilian possession of firearms. Hans Winkler, speaking on behalf of the European Union, called the current Program of Action “the key starting point for further action on small arms”. The ambassador from Australia, Robert Hill, spoke glowingly of his country’s gun laws that “require the registration and licensing of all firearms owners, prohibit a range of automatic and semi-automatic long arms and handguns, and mandate minimum firearms safety training and storage requirements.”
The statement from Indonesia’s representative was perhaps the clearest example of what these countries are aiming for.
“We believe that no armed group outside of the State should be allowed to bear weapons. We also believe that regulating civilian possession of Small Arms/Light Weapons will enhance our efforts to prevent its misuse. In our view, the issue of ammunition should also be addressed in the context of the Program of Action because in the absence of ammunition, small arms and light weapons pose no danger.”
Not every country is as transparent as Indonesia. When looking at the statements of the various representatives, what isn’t said is just as important as the words we actually hear. Take, for example, the comments by Brazilian representative Ronaldo Mota Sardenberg. He told the summit, “this Review Conference should not limit ourselves to renewing our commitment to the full implementation of the Program of Action. It should rather be taken as an opportunity to address the Program’s shortcomings, by means of the adoption of substantive aimed at strengthening and complementing its mechanisms.” In other words, what we’ve got right now doesn’t go far enough. This comes from a country tried to ban civilian ownership of firearms outright (the referendum failed last fall).
The anti-gun summit continues for the next two weeks, and you can get daily updates from http://www.NRAnews.com Executive Editor Ginny Simone every afternoon on “Cam and Company”, heard on the aforementioned NRAnews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. Coming up on Tuesday, the United States issues its opening statement.
Cam Edwards is the host of “Cam and Company” on www.nranews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. A veteran talk show host and political analyst, he blogs at www.camedwards.com in addition to his daily talk show. Cam lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and five children.
Should an attempt at confiscation occur, there wuold be no point in last-standing it behind your barricaded doors.
Far better to go for the ones who send the confiscators. Their existence should become nasty, precarious and short.
It's a simple piece of math:
Arms confiscation == dead politicians.
The real and original purpose of the Second Amendment.
Well, I think we all realise that it take No Brains to spend someone elses money....
"In our view, the issue of ammunition should also be addressed in the context of the Program of Action because in the absence of ammunition, small arms and light weapons pose no danger.”
Makes me glad I started reloading.
Arms confiscation == dead politicians.
The real and original purpose of the Second Amendment.
Roger that.
It's the only "hunting" argument with regard to the 2A that has any vaildity.
I've got a little list--I've got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed--who never would be missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who write for autographs--
All people who have flabby hands and irritating laughs--
Gun control advocates and their JBTs
Anti-gun newpaper editors and their reporterees
Weepy whiney bedwetters who want to take your guns
And their allies who dress like SS huns
I've taken a little leeway with the language to make it rhyme. Anyway, you can make up your own lyrics, but you get my drift.
“We believe that no armed group outside of the State should be allowed to bear weapons. We also believe that regulating civilian possession of Small Arms/Light Weapons will enhance our efforts to prevent its misuse. In our view, the issue of ammunition should also be addressed in the context of the Program of Action because in the absence of ammunition, small arms and light weapons pose no danger.”
In a typical show of blatant hypocrisy and bald-faced lying, Coughing Anus and IANSA were busy over the past few days calling US gunowners and the NRA "paranoid" about the UN conference's aims, yet here it is in black & white - they want our guns.
Tell you what, Mr. Indonesian representative, I've got some ammunition. If you'd like it, COME GET SOME. I think that I can arrange for a very rapid delivery, via airmail. Bring plenty of large, zippered bags to collect the great number of small packages that you will receive.
That is excellent! Thanks for posting!
'nuff said...
I'm not comforted by this "correction."
What is it then? A Federation? A Federal Government? A treaty organization?
It is the sovereign power of a political entity. As such the United Nations will be (is?) charged to enforce treaties/agreements. It currently has a "President", a "Congress" (Assembly). No court yet, but give it time. It has armed forces (true, only conscripts of member nations) and seeks ultimately to have superior capability. Some may question whether it can ever be more than a paper tiger. But, it has been the source of much mayhem, and will continue to be.
If it is not a state, it is a virtual, incipient state, one which is poised to be a total state if it achieves its stated aims.
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/
They are obviously attempting to grow it into a government, or State, but it is nowhere near as far along that process as the EU is.
You'll see a lot of defections from SWAT after they start losing guys. There are those of us out there who have been trained and know how to defend against "no knock" tactics. What the Governments of America had better hope is that people that do know how to stop a raid dead in it's tracks don't start teaching everyone they can.
Don't make us the enemy... we will prevail in any fight.
Mike
I suspect you're right, but there will still be a core that won't stop until they're pushing up weeds.
You're absolutely correct... but that is the decision they'll have to make and they should be prepared for the consequenses of their actions if they make that choice.
Mike
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.