For example, the Canadians insist that it is important for the ATT to recognize the legitimacy of lawful trade in firearms as well as that it recognize "the lawful ownership of firearms by responsible citizens for personal and recreational uses." They propose adding the following two paragraphs to the Preamble of the Arms Trade Treaty.
Recognizing that the purpose of the ATT is to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit and irresponsible transfer of conventional arms and their diversion into the illicit market, including for use in transnational organized crime and terrorism;I would also add in there the self-defense of individuals but it seems that the United Nations concept of lawful self-defense extends only to nations and not to individuals.
Noting that the ATT acknowledges and respects responsible and accountable trans-national use of firearms for recreational purposes, such as sport shooting, hunting and other similar forms of lawful activities, whose legitimacy is recognised by the State Parties.
Given the recent experience with their own Firearms Registry and what a colossal and expensive failure it ended up being, it is no surprise that the Canadians say any additional reporting commitments be practical and realistic. They note for large importers and exporters maintaining detailed records of each and every transaction would overwhelm "virtually any administrative system now in existence."
They go on to add that any reporting requirements must not contain so much details as to impair the national security of individual states nor compromise "the legally-protected information of private companies or the personal information of private individuals."
I love their last point where they insist that if any new administrative unit is needed to implement and administer a new ATT then its funding should come out of the existing UN budget. Moreover, any new personnel would come from existing UN agencies and be located within existing UN institutions.
The points that the Canadians make notwithstanding, I still think the best treaty is no treaty and that the US should have told the UN to stick their ATT just like it did when John Bolton was the Ambassador to the UN.
This demonstrates once again that the UN is anti-American, corrupt, incompetent, and dominated by loathsome governments. Time for the US to depart. Past time really.
ReplyDeleteThe Original Canadian Long Arms guns registry (handguns are a different kettle of fish here and have had to be registered since 1933 I think it was) was to have cost about ten million dollars. Not even that, the Liberal government at the time claimed. They said it would be self-financing through fees. Well, a decade or so later the estimated costs reached one billion dollars, possibly up to three billion by the time it ended. Actual costs are hard to find since the registry was passed over to the RCMP from the civilian agency and it was mixed into their budget.
ReplyDeleteFiasco is putting it mildly, and as for the original claimed intent, to prevent crime, it prevented absolutely none. Not one. The RCMP estimated there were still about 25 million unregistered guns out there, almost one per person in this country. People being loathe to trust any government that claimed there would be no confiscations (there were crackdowns on several types)
From a financial point of view alone, you can expect an inflated administration rate of about 300% more than bargained for. Let alone the costs not figured in because of the failure of many small businesses, in Canada that meant anything from sporting goods stores to Ma and Pa grocery outlets in the hunting areas, hunting outfitters, hunting lodges, guides, etc. And another offshoot of all this was the population BOOM of such species as deer, geese, moose, ducks...you name it. In parts of eastern Ontario the number one cause of serious automobile accidents are deer strikes.
There should be no registration of any privately-owned firearms by anybody, period.
ReplyDelete