gunsmith
member
get your barf bag ready,it's the new york times
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/11/o...b07eb82b39acb3&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
The World's Deadliest Arms
he deadliest weapon in the world today is not a nuclear bomb or an infectious agent, but a machine gun. Small arms kill half a million people a year, picking off American soldiers in Iraq, turning Liberian thugs into powerful warlords and allowing 12-year-olds in eastern Congo to terrorize their neighbors. The ease of obtaining AK-47's helps turn grievances into wars.
Controlling small arms is complex. Guns are easily concealed, trading and retrading in a quasi-legal netherworld. Last month, countries met to examine their progress on pledges made at a United Nations conference on the small-arms trade in 2001. Most nations had done little or nothing. That is a mistake. Countries can take measures to make small arms harder to obtain for illegal groups and to catch and punish illegal traders.
Most illicit arms transfers begin as legal ones. Shipments get rerouted to a clandestine buyer, or guns are simply resold. That is how the Taliban and the rebels in Liberia ended up with American weapons. Often arms brokers are complicit. The United States requires American arms brokers worldwide and foreign nationals who live or work in the United States to get licenses for every arms deal, even one that does not touch American soil. This law should be replicated everywhere, but equally important, the United States should begin to enforce it.
Other needed changes would tighten requirements on arms exporters, which include America, most major European nations, China, Israel, Russia and several other former Communist countries. All nations should agree to international standards for bills of lading — at the moment easily falsified — and the marking of weapons. Most governments do mark weapons so their origin can be traced, but they do not do so in standard ways.
In addition, no nation should grant a company a license to export weapons until it can show that the recipient government has issued an import license. Exporting firms should also be required to show that they have ensured that the buyer truly exists.
The United States, which has the best laws of any major weapons exporter, could become a world leader on the issue simply by exhorting other countries to meet American standards. Instead, Bush administration officials have opposed international agreements that would tighten regulations worldwide, arguing, absurdly, that limiting small-arms traffic is a step toward violating the rights of American gun owners.
SO THE NY Times DON'T LIKE THE WAY BUSH IS
opposed to international agreements I SAY THANK GOD!! I DID NOT VOTE REPUB FOR HIM TO DO WHAT THE DANG U.N WANTS
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/11/o...b07eb82b39acb3&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
The World's Deadliest Arms
he deadliest weapon in the world today is not a nuclear bomb or an infectious agent, but a machine gun. Small arms kill half a million people a year, picking off American soldiers in Iraq, turning Liberian thugs into powerful warlords and allowing 12-year-olds in eastern Congo to terrorize their neighbors. The ease of obtaining AK-47's helps turn grievances into wars.
Controlling small arms is complex. Guns are easily concealed, trading and retrading in a quasi-legal netherworld. Last month, countries met to examine their progress on pledges made at a United Nations conference on the small-arms trade in 2001. Most nations had done little or nothing. That is a mistake. Countries can take measures to make small arms harder to obtain for illegal groups and to catch and punish illegal traders.
Most illicit arms transfers begin as legal ones. Shipments get rerouted to a clandestine buyer, or guns are simply resold. That is how the Taliban and the rebels in Liberia ended up with American weapons. Often arms brokers are complicit. The United States requires American arms brokers worldwide and foreign nationals who live or work in the United States to get licenses for every arms deal, even one that does not touch American soil. This law should be replicated everywhere, but equally important, the United States should begin to enforce it.
Other needed changes would tighten requirements on arms exporters, which include America, most major European nations, China, Israel, Russia and several other former Communist countries. All nations should agree to international standards for bills of lading — at the moment easily falsified — and the marking of weapons. Most governments do mark weapons so their origin can be traced, but they do not do so in standard ways.
In addition, no nation should grant a company a license to export weapons until it can show that the recipient government has issued an import license. Exporting firms should also be required to show that they have ensured that the buyer truly exists.
The United States, which has the best laws of any major weapons exporter, could become a world leader on the issue simply by exhorting other countries to meet American standards. Instead, Bush administration officials have opposed international agreements that would tighten regulations worldwide, arguing, absurdly, that limiting small-arms traffic is a step toward violating the rights of American gun owners.
SO THE NY Times DON'T LIKE THE WAY BUSH IS
opposed to international agreements I SAY THANK GOD!! I DID NOT VOTE REPUB FOR HIM TO DO WHAT THE DANG U.N WANTS
