Sunday, July 8, 2012

Arms Trade Treaty Talks - Day 4

Ginny Simone of NRA News discusses Day 4 of the UN Arms Trade Treaty talks with Tom Mason of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities. They discussed the organizational difficulties, the committees that will deal with the scope of the treaty as well as its preamble, the right to self defense (of the state and not the individual), and the refusal of many states to differentiate between military firearms and civilian firearms.

Dr. Ted Bromund of the Heritage Foundation has his summation of the day's event's here. Bromund says that Venezuela won "the crazy prize" for their rant against "imperialists":
In previous sessions, Cuba, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia had all put in strong showings with speeches that were unprincipled and autocrat-friendly, but when it came to crazy, Venezuela lapped the field with a speech that will be tough to beat.

In a lengthy rant attacking the “maturity” of the assembled nations, it denounced the “imperial powers” for arming the Libyan rebels who overthrew Muammar Qadhafi, demanded that the world look seriously at controlling the “imperialists” (i.e., the U.S.) who had nuclear weapons, condemned foreign aid providers for insisting on the “downsizing” of governments, and stated that it needed arms to deal with internal threats (i.e., to continue to oppress its own population).

1 comment:

  1. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.

    -Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

    I, in agreement with the quote from Tenche Coxe above, believe we should also refuse to distinguish between civilian arms and any other arms of military utility.

    As you've pointed out, John, this whole process is a farce in the first place, with the Fakestinian issue and now with Iran being elected the deputy head of the ATT talks.

    We've allowed the anti-rights crowd and their pets in power to define the terminology. Let's stop with this distinction between military and civilian arms, at least in terms of who has the right to own them.