Few Iraqis Meet the Deadline for Turning in Their Guns

Washington Post ^ | June 15, 2003 | Daniel Williams

[AntiGuv]

BAGHDAD, June 14 -- The Iraqi guard at the entrance of the police academy, one of several places where citizens could surrender illegal weapons to U.S. occupation forces, shook his head when asked how many had met today's deadline for handing over guns without penalty.

"We've had plenty of reporters, but no weapons come in," he said.

A two-week weapons amnesty program designed to reduce the number of heavy armaments in the hands of Iraqis ended today with scant results. Nationwide, 123 pistols, 76 semiautomatic rifles and shotguns, 435 automatic rifles, 46 machine guns, 162 antitank rocket-propelled grenade launchers, 11 antiaircraft weapons and 381 hand grenades had been turned in as of this morning, according to the U.S. military. There seemed to be no last-minute rush.

[dasboot]

If I were an Iraqi--- say , a Shi'ite--- and the US guv told me I had to turn in my only effective means of defending myself and family against Ba'athists, I'd tell 'em to pound sand, too.

This policy rankles my sensibilities.

I don't recall reading anything about US Military being assaulted by lone pistol-wielding gunmen: more human bombs and organized foreign militias.

Whose stupid idea was this?

[dasboot]

Roger that!

This ain't gonna engender any warm fuzzies among the people we want to infect with liberty. Regardless of the strategy intended, the message is clear: we are the new tyrant in town.

Is Bloomberg in charge?

[dasboot]

A gratuitous post to fix my tag......

[harpu]

I don't recall reading anything about US Military being assaulted by lone pistol-wielding gunmen: more human bombs and organized foreign militias.

Too bad, because you need to read, or at least retain more. Facts are...that there have been many Iraqi civilian (or Iraqi civilian lookalikes) walking-up to military check points or roving military/civilian units that got off one or more shots that have killed or wounded one or more of our troops.

I'm a hugely positive 2nd Amendment nut but before the Iraqis get their gun rights...BUT let's get the Iraqi population stabilized first.

I can see it now; the NYSlime, WashCompost, the LABlame will be using the military collecting Iraqi weapons as just another example of Bush's double speak; 'guns for Iraqi civilians-bad'; but 'guns for U.S. civilians-good'.

[dasboot]

OK, assuming you are correct, will implementation of this policy change thing one damn whit for the better? I doubt it.

[niteowl77]

Misleading. We want the grenades, mortars, RPGs and missiles used by the fanatics and mercenaries, but are soft-pedaling Mohammed Q. Public's AKs. If I were an Iraqi, I'd want to keep my rifle for protection too, but I'd also be doing whatever I could to make sure the Ba'athists didn' t ever bother my family again. If that meant giving up a Stinger or fingering Fayed Abu Lunatiq, I'd probably do it under these circumstances.

We offered the Iraqis a carrot. Some of them don't like carrots. So we will find another way to accomplish our goals, complete the mission (whatever it may be) and protect our troops in the bargain. There can't be one simple solution to the problem, because geographical, political, ethnic and religious divisions won't allow it. A policy that might work in - for example - Humboldt, IA may not get the same results in Hartford, CT, so who can expect a one-size-fits-all policy to work in a place like Iraq? Ultimately, it boils down to this- they lost, and they can either make the best of the situation, or they can do otherwise. As a nation, we don't like putting peoples' heads in the vise, but if they want to make us be the bad guys, then that is their decision.

As far as the Second Amendment applies to Iraqis, while I would agree in principle that our Bill of Rights should be universal, I am not naive enough to assume that an extreme - absolute might be a better term - interpretation of them viv-a-vis Iraq is wise or beneficial at this time. Can the Iraqis handle solid food yet? Obviously, not all of them can.

FWIW, my son has been shot at during his deployment in that theater, so my tolerance for fine theory may be lower than normal. Reality will do that.

[AntiGuv]

Just as a pure hypothetical, do you suppose that the Iraqis who turned in those listed weapons would've been more likely to fire them at Coalition forces or at diehard Ba'athists?

[OXENinFLA]

I bet the dems are watching this close.

To see how we might react if they every get that UNCONSTITUTIONAL assault weapons ban passed into law.

I can see both sides of the this problem in Iraq.

1. The US forces doesn't want to be shot and killed by rouge Iraqis. So take away all the guns.

2. Iraqis don't want to be without weapons to protect themselves and their families and wonder if will they ever get their guns back.

[The Shootist]

Let me add my 2 cents.

How the devil can we ask/force/demand that the Iraqis disarm? We should train and support local militia groups in Iraq, not take away their means of self-defense.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Durn but our gob'mint is dense.

[OXENinFLA]

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030614_1318.html

Army Sweeps Iraq City for Militia Arms
U.S. Army Troops Sweep Iraq City for Suspected Militia Leaders, Illegal Arms


---As the program ended, the American civilian administrator of Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, warned that anyone found with an unauthorized weapon from Sunday on could be jailed for up to a year and fined.

Iraqis were allowed to keep small arms, including assault rifles, in their homes and businesses for their own protection, but could not carry them in public, said Bremer's order, published after midnight.

"No one in Iraq, unless duly authorized, may possess, conceal, hide or bury" banned weapons, said the order. Family heirlooms also had to meet the requirements.

In recent weeks in Fallujah, brigade commander Col. David Perkins met repeatedly

[OXENinFLA]

Didn't we disarm Germany & Japan?

[niteowl77]

Hypothetically? The former if around - say - Balad, Fallujah, etc; the latter elsewhere. Different behaviors get different treatment.

[AntiGuv]

Just as an idle thinking exercise: if you had to venture a guess, what percentage of these weapons do you suppose were turned over in Fallujah, and what percentage in, say, Basra?

[niteowl77]

Honestly, I would just say, "more in Basra," but I wouldn't have a clue in either case. One could also speculate on how many weapons are now making their way here and there with the help of those multinational Murderers for Allah®.

In any event, turning them in is one matter, while using them is quite another.

[AntiGuv]

IIRC, Japan has always had total abolition of private ownership, so whatever firearms were in circulation on the home islands were in possession of the police forces. Moreover, the Japanese institutions survived the war largely intact; and essentially transitioned from the militarist leadership to General MacArthur.

The 1928 Law on Firearms and Ammunition had already mandated universal registration and/or confiscation during the Weimar period. The 1938 Nazi Weapons Act expanded these gun control statutes and, to make the long story short, greatly facilitated the postwar regulation of private firearms ownership.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Bang

[The Shootist]

"Didn't we disarm Germany & Japan?"

That is a good question, I think, and a legitimate comparison.

The difference, as I see it, is that neither Germany nor Japan had a history of an armed populace. If you recall, one of Hitler's campaign platforms was "gun control", which was supported by those he later killed, the Jews. The Japanese on the other-hand, were never to my knowledge, allowed possession of fire-arms, except perhaps antiques (muzzle loaders).

If a "well regulated militia" is set up in Iraq, we will give the average Iraqi citizen needed respect and the ability to protect themselves, their families and their property from bandits, terrorists and thugs. Perhaps this could be a token of our respect to an (formerly) oppressed people?

[harpu]

"...will implementation of this policy change thing one damn whit for the better? I doubt it."

How 'bout NOT getting 'sucker punched' (i.e.; 'shot & killed') by some yahoo Iraqi wanabe paramilitant!