PDA

View Full Version : A very scary paper about the Feasibility of global gun control


SemiAutoSam
10-22-2007, 8:56 PM
I was doing a Google search looking for information on Rifle magazines and came upon this.

More gun control BS written by people that dont know a thing about guns and what the terminology means. And also do not address the 2nd Amendment what so ever from a first reading of it.

they lump all so called assault weapons together and put a lot of spin on it.

see if you can stomach more than the first few pages.

Here is just one snippet of misinformation. Does anyone see the double speak in the part I highlighted below ?

Focus of an International Agreement
As discussed above, the focus and structure of an international agreement require further exploration.
Ideally, any instrument would be wide-ranging and would define military assault weapons broadly
enough to include:

• Fully automatic weapons
• Selective-fire weapons capable of fully automatic fire
• Semi-automatic military weapons and variants of fully automatic weapons distinguished by
characteristics such as the ability to accept a large capacity magazine.
It should also address:
• The prohibition of the manufacture of these weapons for civilians
• The prohibition of the import/export of military weapons for civilians
• The prohibition of the marketing, sale, and transfer of these weapons
• The prohibition of the possession of these weapons by civilians.
However, given existing standards and the large number of these weapons in civilian hands, the last
element would be the most difficult. A compromise would be to prohibit the unregulated possession
by civilians, thereby strengthening controls over those weapons currently in circulation.


The Feasibility of Increased Restrictions on the Civilian Possession of Military
Assault Weapons at the Global Level




http://guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Releases/wpMAW.pdf

Bizcuits
10-22-2007, 9:03 PM
So in other words... disarm America, so you can invade it...

CSACANNONEER
10-22-2007, 9:10 PM
Apparently, the author wants to exempt select-fire weapons that have semi and burst settings but don't have a FA setting.

Matt777
10-22-2007, 9:21 PM
It's interesting how government's have killed hundreds of millions of their own citizens's in this century alone, but they're focusing on civilians. Interesting...

Steyr_223
10-22-2007, 9:25 PM
From my cold, Democratic, Gay friendly, Zombie Hating, Multi-cultural, tax raising hands!!!

:)

CCWFacts
10-22-2007, 9:28 PM
This sounds like the typical IANSA nonsense. Yawn. They couldn't even get a gun ban passed in Brazil a couple of years ago, and that's a country with few (legal) gun owners, no NRA-with-4mil-members, etc.

None the less, we must remember that our fight is an international fight. We should link up and work with others in every part of the world we can.

williamkwong
10-22-2007, 9:39 PM
From my cold, Democratic, Gay friendly, Zombie Hating, Multi-cultural, tax raising hands!!!

:)

hahah. I love that. :D

chiefcrash
10-22-2007, 10:03 PM
From my cold, Democratic, Gay friendly, Zombie Hating, Multi-cultural, tax raising hands!!!

:)

ah, a new sig for me...

ETD1010
10-22-2007, 10:06 PM
That makes me ill to read that. . . It's almost like they WANT us to be defenseless and mindless..... oh, wait.

Franksremote
10-22-2007, 10:51 PM
It's been/being said that the focus of some is moving more heavily to the international arena as they aren't making the type of domestic gun banning headway that they'd like...

ETD1010
10-22-2007, 10:59 PM
Isn't there some sort of UN conference every year where they try to get the United States to sign a declaration or something to ban gun from the country?? Someone told me that recently..... never heard of it.. but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.

CCWFacts
10-22-2007, 11:14 PM
Judge them by the company they keep:

http://www.iansa.org/images/sirleaf-johnson.jpg

Look at how genuinely delighted Peters is to be in the company of yet another banana republic dictator. Yes this one was democratically elected, in theory, but obviously she's keen on a disarmament program, and democratically-elected African leaders have a solid track record of not having any more democratic elections once they are in power.

The African woman is the President Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia, and next to her is Rebecca Peters, director of IANSA. Gee, why would Liberia want to see civilians there be disarmed? And if Liberia is a model of success of gun control, then it will work just as well here! Just like Liberia is a model of freedom, stability, a successful economy, and all that. Maybe they should come over here and help us out!

If President Johnson-Sirleaf is serious, she'll announce that she will no longer have armed security for herself or her family.

Oh, in other news, President Johnson-Sirleaf is trying to get Liberia's $3bil debt to Western nations canceled. So we're going to pay her and her country $3bil for the joy of them telling us we should have less freedom.

And to add even more irony, if Ms. Peters herself were Liberian, living in Liberia, she would be killed for being what she is. It's probably not safe for her to visit that haven of freedom and security.

Kilbane
10-23-2007, 1:55 AM
They might want to include Global control of machette's in that report also seeing as that was also much in use in other African countries.:rolleyes:

dfletcher
10-23-2007, 7:51 AM
Apparently, the author wants to exempt select-fire weapons that have semi and burst settings but don't have a FA setting.

Not true - they include "military style" semi autos with detach mags. Goodbye M1 carbine, M1A, FAL, AR .......

dfletcher
10-23-2007, 7:56 AM
Rwanda and Darfur - coming to your neighborhood soon......

You know, I really don't mind the UN folks for trying - what else can you expect from them and we know they are the bad guys - but the wide eyed loser American "everyone should just love everyone" types are either fools or knwing participants deliberately lying to destroy our way of life.

CCWFacts
10-23-2007, 8:40 AM
but the wide eyed loser American "everyone should just love everyone" types are either fools or knwing participants deliberately lying to destroy our way of life.

Everyone should indeed love everyone. But we can only get there when we can come together with safety and without fear. When all the villages in Liberia are able to defend themselves against governments, rebels, and criminals, then they will be able to have peace. Same reason there isn't much street crime in Texas these days. Peace can happen when the alternative is no longer possible.

CSACANNONEER
10-23-2007, 3:06 PM
Not true - they include "military style" semi autos with detach mags. Goodbye M1 carbine, M1A, FAL, AR .......

I didn't say semi only was exempt. The way this is written, it would appear to exempt select fire weapons that are not FA. I take that to mean that it has to have both a semi and burst modes but not a full auto mode.

CCWFacts
10-23-2007, 3:33 PM
I seem to remember IANSA having a goal of getting rid of everything except hunting long guns. In their definition, a hunting long gun would be single-shot with a max range of 100 meters (yards). Think single-shot shotguns / slug guns maybe (I know, slugs actually have a bit more than 100 yards on them).

Suffice it to say, Ms. Peters wants to make the world safe for Liberian dictators and so on.

I just don't understand it. Ms. Peters would be hacked to death by mobs if she were living in Liberia, or anywhere in Africa really. As that last machete blow landed and she lost consciousness for the last time, would she be thinking, "I'm so glad I'm not armed" or "I'm sure the government will save me" or more likely, "at least they're using machetes!"

otteray
10-23-2007, 6:17 PM
"Isn't there some sort of UN conference every year where they try to get the United States to sign a declaration or something to ban gun from the country?? Someone told me that recently..... never heard of it.. but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true"

I was chastised for bringing this UN issue up in the past... and I agree, the timing was not good (at the time) because of other important issues: microstamping and condors that seek out lead bullets to chew on.
Maybe it's okay to bring it up again since it is relevant to this current topic??
While not a NRA sponsored bill, I still think it was good news:http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=68448
Better than Ahnolds 2nd amendment support, for sure.

SemiAutoSam
10-23-2007, 6:30 PM
Dude you can bash the UN all you want. I do it all the time so a like minded person doing the same would be fine.

IMHO the UN along with other alphabet agencies CFR TLC have nothing on their mind but One World Government.

And in case anyone does not understand what that would mean to those in the US a 100% loss of our national and personal sovereignty.

As a good friend of mine says every so often in reference to what our country has become.

"How do you like communism, Getting everything out of it that you expected?

Isn't there some sort of UN conference every year where they try to get the United States to sign a declaration or something to ban gun from the country?? Someone told me that recently..... never heard of it.. but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true
I was chastised for bringing this UN issue up in the past... and I agree, the timing was not good (at the time) because of other important issues: microstamping and condors that seek out lead bullets to chew on.
Maybe it okay to bring it up again since it is relevant to this current topic??
While not a NRA sponsored bill, I still think it was good news.
Better than Ahnolds 2nd amendment support, for sure: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=68448

oaklander
10-23-2007, 6:50 PM
This sounds like the stuff that Hillary would like to do - here's some quotes from inside the paper:

As discussed above, the focus and structure of an international agreement require further exploration.
Ideally, any instrument would be wide-ranging and would define military assault weapons broadly
enough to include:
• Fully automatic weapons
• Selective-fire weapons capable of fully automatic fire
• Semi-automatic military weapons and variants of fully automatic weapons distinguished by
characteristics such as the ability to accept a large capacity magazine.
It should also address:
• The prohibition of the manufacture of these weapons for civilians
• The prohibition of the import/export of military weapons for civilians
• The prohibition of the marketing, sale, and transfer of these weapons
• The prohibition of the possession of these weapons by civilians.
However, given existing standards and the large number of these weapons in civilian hands, the last
element would be the most difficult. A compromise would be to prohibit the unregulated possession
by civilians, thereby strengthening controls over those weapons currently in circulation.

chris
10-23-2007, 9:30 PM
So in other words... disarm America, so you can invade it...

yep that sounds about right. since it seems there is an all out assault to destroy the dollar on the world market that would seem to be the next step. i just wonder if the people would rise up against an invasion or bend over and take it. the last statement is not intended to insight anything. just would anyone do anything to stop it.

CCWFacts
10-23-2007, 9:51 PM
Wolverines!

Uh hmm, sorry. No one is invading the US. It isn't possible. 10mil landscappers / dishwashers here is not an invasion, precursor to an invasion / military threat of any kind. This UN / IANSA stuff is all about a bunch of dictators, mainly in Africa, keeping their own populations in terror. It has nothing to do with invading the US. If we somehow end up losing some gun rights due to the UN, it will be only as a byproduct of their real objectives, which have to do with keeping dictators in power in other places.