UN Global Gun Ban?

http://www.stopungunban.org/

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/25/130646.shtml

I don't really know what to make of this. To me it seems slightly biased (The video), but it doesn't really change the subject matter.

WTF? Screw that...

Stupid UN.

Hell no... Over my dead body. Their gonna have to pry my guns from rotting corpse.

I already printed out my 3 letters and sent them to all 3 sources. I also sent 3 letters in my own words expressing my views and opinions about their influence on gun control.

It would help if the article was not talking such shit.

There has been no increase in crime in the UK that has anything to do with guns at all. There were also pretty much no crimes that were being stopped by guns either.

They define the systems of Canada, Australia and the UK as a 'nightmare'. A nightmare where you are some one hundrerd times less likely to get shot, you mean? Bargain.

Meanwhile, nothing the UN decides can affect you. A resolution the UN drafts would have to be signed into law by the President.

If the UN is going to come to a conclusion on something, that's pretty much just an opinion. And there is bugger all you can do about that, all the more so because the gun culture in the US is very rare; much of the world does not have anything close.

If your country is that concerned, it will just have to ignore what the UN says.

we should go back to swords

The U.S., the UK, France, Russia and China (the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council) are the world's leading arms dealers.

Pff, add all those countries' populations together, and then times it by 2, and it's obvious why they're the leading arms dealers: They've got so many f*cking of them!

Humans, Arms or Baddies ?

Human arms are baddies?

"They define the systems of Canada, Australia and the UK as a 'nightmare'. A nightmare where you are some one hundrerd times less likely to get shot, you mean? Bargain." The crime rate in Canada is above that of the U.S..

But the GUN crime rate, hmm?

Guns cause far more crimes than they prevent.

i say put more guns and ammo in the streets and let the world shoot itsself to death.
start sending the nukes. drop the bombs fire the guns and let the dust never clear

surrending your guns is a means of being enslaved to your government

And having guns is a means of freeing yourself from them?

they want to take your defence away. and they will create problem reaction solution scenerios to condition the public. No one wants to rid the world of weapons more than me, but we need to ask about the motivation behind the immense pressure for gun laws inspired by places ive just looke dup such as Hungerford, Dunblane, Tasmania, Oklahoma, etc, etc. Problem-reaction-solution. Getting hold of illegal weapons is so easy that gun laws would not stop anyone who really wanted to kill.

Imagine a scenario where a lone-gunman walks into a crowded shopping centre and guns down a number of innocent people. Terrible enough, but what if at a later time, some innocent school children in a quiet, peaceful school are the targets? The more outrageous and disgusting an event, the more people will demand something must be done; "Guns must be banned",

"Something must be done now!".

Believe it or not, David Icke predicted just such a scenario in his 1994 book "The Robots' Rebellion", before we witnessed the terrible events at
Dunblane.

when these things happen in quiet communities, it encourages even more
powerfully the response of “My God, this could happen to me and my children. Hey, we need protection”. A traumatised mind is also far more susceptible to mind manipulation. The Global Elite also want to remove all guns from the general population in preparation for their final coup d’etat.

So what is the motivation behind such massacres? Answer: The manipulation of the mind and emotions. Where did these mass murders take place? Not in the gangland areas of London, Glasgow, or Sydney, but in quiet little communities where everyone felt perfectly safe. In the same way, the “McVeigh” bomb was not planted in New York or Washington, but in Oklahoma. We would be advised not to underestimate the effect on the collective psyche in terms of fear and a desire for the authorities to “protect” people from that fear.
That means more cameras in the streets and more security guards and cameras in schools so that children are brought up to accept the culture
of being “protected” from danger by big brother authority. A front page headline in, I think, the London Daily Mail encompassed the very
reaction the manipulators wanted to stimulate. It said after the Australia killings: Is nowhere in the world safe anymore? When these things happen in quiet communities, it encourages even more powerfully the response of “My God, this could happen to me and my children. Hey, we need protection”. A traumatised mind is also far more susceptible to mind manipulation.

"No one wants to rid the world of weapons more than me"

Somehow I suspect there are grounds to question that.

So, basically, you advocate armed resistance to the establishment, yes?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
But the GUN crime rate, hmm?

Guns cause far more crimes than they prevent.

People who use guns for crimes get them illegally, you do actually have to have a permit in this country.

Making an illegal gun more illegal isn't going to cut the gun crime rate. In fact, it'll make it harder for regular citizens to defend themselves, and it'd probably increase the gun crime rate.

No, that's nonsense speculation. There isn't a shred of evidence to suggest that armed citizens reduce crime- quite the contrary, in fact.

And addressing the issue of gun legality is a vital part of addressing the general issue of gun culture which is by far and away the largest reason behind the absolutely insane US gun crime rate.

The US has to accept that either its citizens are more gun-psychotic by nature or that the free supply of guns is causing an enormous problem.

Either way, the pressure is on for the issue to be dealt with and very few soruces can see that happening without gun control.

The US is on the defensive here simply because their gun rate is so utterly ludicrous. It is a big black mark against their country that brings great disapproval from other places.

What your point also ignores is that the general and liberal availability of guns in the US in turn feeds a massive increase in the supply of illegal arms too.

If we're going to ban guns. Then that means everyone must banned all guns. Including their respective governments. And for those of you who think that by banning guns we will be leaving in some type of Utopia after guns are banned. Guess what's gonna happen?

People will start using knifes...then cooking fryers...then clubs with a sharp nail in the center...murderers will still find a weapon to kill....so what are we gonna do next? Ban all objects that can kill a person?

Give me a break....

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
If we're going to ban guns. Then that means everyone must banned all guns. Including their respective governments. And for those of you who think that by banning guns we will be leaving in some type of Utopia after guns are banned. Guess what's gonna happen?

People will start using knifes...then cooking fryers...then clubs with a sharp nail in the center...murderers will still find a weapon to kill....so what are we gonna do next? Ban all objects that can kill a person?

Give me a break....