PDA

View Full Version : UN ignores its OWN data


vantec08
04-02-2011, 5:31 AM
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/united-nations-ignores-its-own-data-to-promote-gun-ban/?singlepage=true

Veggie
04-02-2011, 10:26 AM
Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defense is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right.” There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defense is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.

Disgusting.

hoffmang
04-02-2011, 11:01 AM
The most interesting graph of that article compares per capita gun ownership to a country's corruption index:

http://pajamasmedia.com/files/2011/03/UN_graph_5_-_Corruption.jpg

If there is any argument that private firearms ownership serves as a check and balance on government, this is pretty strong evidence.

-Gene

N6ATF
04-02-2011, 11:04 AM
:puke:

Legasat
04-02-2011, 11:27 AM
Politicians ignoring the pertinent data? Imagine that...:rolleyes:

compulsivegunbuyer
04-02-2011, 12:01 PM
Self-defense is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.

The poor disadvantaged gentlmen pistol whiping your wife and raping your 14 year old daughter, you have no right to take their life. They had a hard life. You should feel epathy.

CCWFacts
04-02-2011, 1:48 PM
The poor disadvantaged gentlmen pistol whiping your wife and raping your 14 year old daughter, you have no right to take their life. They had a hard life. You should feel epathy.

That's right, that freelance wealth redistributor / unconventional dating practioner is entitled to all those things, and instead of being given a load of buckshot to the chest should be given a free place to live, welfare, free education, and a job with no performance requirements. He wouldn't be doing those things unless he was being oppressed by capitalists, so he is actually the victim in that scenario.

I wish I were joking... you can find sincere arguments like that in PhD thesis in the UC Berkeley women's studies, African American studies, etc, departments.

ZombieTactics
04-02-2011, 2:36 PM
Self-defence is a widely recognized, yet legally proscribed, exception to the universal duty to respect the right to life of others. Self-defense is a basis for exemption from criminal responsibility that can be raised by any State agent or non-State actor. Self-defence is sometimes designated as a “right.” There is inadequate legal support for such an interpretation. Self-defense is more properly characterized as a means of protecting the right to life and, as such, a basis for avoiding responsibility for violating the rights of another.

Note the side-stepping of the issue. Rather than engage the issue and discuss whether self-defense can or should be considered a right, they simply avoid it by using the phrase "inadequate legal support for such an interpretation". Inadequate = "not enough to make us happy". Legal Support = another way of saying it's "only a question for lawyers and judges". Interpretation = "it's just a matter of opinion, and we intend to enforce ours".

"Disgusting" does not begin to describe adequately this level of intellectual and moral corruption.

craneman
04-02-2011, 4:12 PM
Just one of the many reasons why we should not be a part of the U.N. I, for one, do not believe it does us any good. Just more of our tax dollars flushed away, and for what? So THEY can try to dictate our lives. Our freedoms. Our beliefs. OUR country. No thanks, I'll pass.:mad:

Seeker
04-02-2011, 7:34 PM
The UN should be kicked out of this country. The UN needs to get their priorities straight. They wanna protect by disarming the good people? :nuts:
Sounds like they wanna protect tyrannical governments and criminals if you ask me.

hoffmang
04-02-2011, 7:49 PM
The UN needs to get their priorities straight.

Oh but they do have their priorities straight. A majority of the nations in the UN are dictatorships of some flavor. The last thing the dictator wants is armed rebels.

-Gene

Apocalypsenerd
04-02-2011, 8:06 PM
I posted this to my FB page. Hopefully some of my lefty leaning friends will see it.

Bhobbs
04-02-2011, 8:39 PM
Oh but they do have their priorities straight. A majority of the nations in the UN are dictatorships of some flavor. The last thing the dictator wants is armed rebels.

-Gene

This x10000000

The UN cannot be a legitimate conference for peace and human rights when many of the members violate the principals they are supposed to defend.

rero360
04-02-2011, 9:17 PM
While I understand the principle of keeping one's enemies close, I still think the UN headquarters there in NYC would make a great homeless shelter or VA hospital or even an art gallery.

MP301
04-02-2011, 9:32 PM
The UN being here in America is unsettling because the blue helmets would not give two ****s about shooting US citizens. if they were enlisted and ordered to shoot us, they wouldnt hesitate like our own military would.

Of course, the same would definately be true of how everyone would feel about shooting back! :p Blue helmets would have about the same respect as Zombies I would imagine.

If our gov. ever did use UN to deal with "civil unrest" here, it would be a safe bet they would probably not be wearing UN uniforms...but US military attire.

johnny_22
04-03-2011, 5:02 AM
"25. Again, the Committee’s interpretation supports the requirement that States recognize self-defence in a criminal law context. Under this interpretation of international human rights law, the State could be required to exonerate a defendant for using firearms under extreme circumstances where it may be necessary and proportional to an imminent threat to life. Even
so, none of these authorities enumerate an affirmative international legal obligation upon the State that would require the State to allow a defendant access to a gun. "

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,UNSUBCOM,,,45c30b560,0.html

So, you could have the God-given right to self defense, but, no need for the God-given right to the tools. That is thorough thinking!

cdtx2001
04-03-2011, 6:06 AM
I posted this to my FB page. Hopefully some of my lefty leaning friends will see it.

And those lefty friends will agree with the UN and still say that guns should be taken away except from the police (and criminals).

vantec08
04-03-2011, 6:11 AM
And those lefty friends will agree with the UN and still say that guns should be taken away except from the police (and criminals).


How did you know my liberal sis-in-law said that EXACT thing?

ubet
04-03-2011, 7:48 AM
If I run for potus on the platform of kicking the un out of this country, and pulling out of it, think I could win?

cortayack
04-03-2011, 10:04 AM
The UN is about Global Government!!! Thats the goal! And USA is playing its role........

FourTenJaeger
04-03-2011, 3:15 PM
I'm sure every anti-gunner in the US Would support the UN Global gun bans.
Makes me ******* sick to my stomach.

QQQ
04-03-2011, 5:22 PM
Might I point out that the R-squared values on all of these are likely very, very low.

Apocalypsenerd
04-03-2011, 5:46 PM
And those lefty friends will agree with the UN and still say that guns should be taken away except from the police (and criminals).

Perhaps you are less persuasive than I. To date, i have spent time discussing 2A issues with 3 of my more rational lefty friends.

One of my left friends is an avid 2A supporter, saved up some money, and bought himself a high end 1gun. He shoots pretty regular now. He thinks politicians need to keep their hands off guns.

Another lefty friend has gone from from wanting a total ban on all firearms to thinking that hunting rifles are OK. He no longer thinks all weapons should be banned at a federal level or even controlled at a state level. He thinks local municipalities should control access to guns.

The third lefty is thinking about it. I believe he still wants a total ban on guns, but has started reading the more reliable studies on gun and crime.

scarville
04-03-2011, 7:40 PM
Might I point out that the R-squared values on all of these are likely very, very low.
The Spearman's coefficients listed for the Guns/Capita versus Freedom, Economic Index and Corruption are significant at .05. Assuming over 100 data points which is probable since the UN has 192 members.