UN arms bans 'repeatedly defied'

Status
Not open for further replies.

gunsmith

member
Joined
May 8, 2003
Messages
5,906
Location
Reno, Nevada
I AM SHOCKED! SHOCKED I TELL YOU! YOU MEAN ALL THE GUN BANS IN THE WORLD WILL NEVER WORK!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4813972.stm

_38946253_rebel_ap203b.jpg


UN arms bans 'repeatedly defied'
A rebel soldier with a rocket-propelled grenade launcher
Weapons continue to flow into many countries despite embargoes
UN arms embargoes are systematically violated and need to be made tougher if they are to end conflict and curb human rights abuses, campaigners say.

Each of the 13 UN embargoes imposed in the past decade has been breached, the Control Arms Campaign has found.

The group, including Oxfam and Amnesty International, says unscrupulous arms dealers are "making a mockery" of UN attempts to tackle global conflict.

It is calling for states to agree an arms trade treaty.

It says such a treaty would enable governments to act more effectively to prevent arms falling into the wrong hands.

Currently, although arms embargoes are legally binding under the UN charter, many member states have not ratified them into laws that would make violations a criminal offence.

Arms to Liberia

"Over the past 10 years, systematic violations of UN arms embargoes have met with almost no successful prosecutions," said Irene Khan of Amnesty International.

"Unscrupulous arms dealers continue to get away with grave human rights abuses and make a mockery of the UN Security Council's efforts."

Campaigners say that arms embargoes have only been used in eight of 57 conflicts between 1990 and 2001, including Ethiopia and Eritrea, Iraq and the former Yugoslavia.

Embargoes are currently in force in Ivory Coast, Liberia, Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Sudan.

But, in one incident in 2002, campaigners say, enough arms were flown from Europe into Liberia to kill the whole population and keep armed groups supplied for a whole year. No-one was ever prosecuted, despite a UN embargo being in place at the time.

In their 43-page report, the group says that UN teams responsible for monitoring embargoes often have "woefully inadequate resources and time".

It says import and export documents are routinely faked and state officials often cover up arms transfers.

The Control Arms Campaign - which also includes the International Action Network on Small Arms - plans to use the next 100 days leading up to a UN conference on small arms, to lobby members of the Security Council to support an international arms trade treaty.
 
Bans do work! The US requires an export permit for gun parts exported to Canada over $100. which effectively means I can't buy gun parts from small American suppliers because they paper work for those companies is to onnerous for the amount of sales involved. Why because the UN has this G.D. idea that small arms and their parts are baaaaad and must be controlled.

What the beaureaucrats end up doing is putting so many barriers up front they effectively stiffle the movement of gun & gun parts. Fortunately I have enough friends and relatives Stateside to get around this nonsense. All it does is end up costing American companies jobs which is a darn shame IMHO.

Canadian gunsmiths are equally effected as their ability to aquire US made gun parts for US made firearms is equally curtailed. You have to wonder sometimes for whom are governments are working for. I guess in the final analysis this type of trade is but a small part of our overall trade between our two countries but if you are working for a small US company making gun parts it might have a larger effect on your earnings.


Take Care
 
History has proven many times over that the only way to prevent "human rights abuses" is to make sure that arms are equally in the hands of everybody. If you attempt to prevent arms getting into the hands of "civilians," all you do is allow these corrupt governments to channel arms into the hands of those who would violate the human rights of those who are disarmed, and/or the government itself becomes the human rights abuser. If everyone is armed to the teeth, things eventually settle down in most cases. The alternative is not peace but genocide, the peace of the mass grave.
 
I have a really stupid question to ask before I get back to work.

Situation 1:
Guns flowing into a country, little control, everyone is armed to the teeth, there is widespread civil war but not all that many deaths (hundreds to low thousands), even over a period of years. Eventually, the shooting gets so bad that it begins to impinge on other nationalities' interests and a third party steps in to mediate.

Situation 2:
Gun control. No one has guns except one side. The other side is rapidly slaughtered, and a new regime is in place in a matter of weeks or months. Death toll is in the hundreds of thousands to low millions.

It would seem to me that #2 is "more acceptable" to the vast majority of people, simply because they don't have to read about the conflict over their morning paper as long. They simply wish that the millions would hurry up and die already so they don't have to read about it anymore.

Does this make sense, or am I off base?
 
you know jibraun

in a weird way that makes sense, I never thought of it that way.
...rwanda?? no guns just machetes and still a genocide that no one remembers
 
"Unscrupulous arms dealers continue to get away with grave human rights abuses and make a mockery of the UN Security Council's efforts."

Isn't that a bit redundant?

The UN usually makes a mockery of itself.

Jubei
 
While most here seem to recognize the obvious, that the concept is ideologically flawed and not feasible, they seem to be missing what is in operation here. An incremental agenda.

In this case, just another co-operative media article aimed at manufacturing consent.

Key sentences:
UN arms embargoes are systematically violated and need to be made tougher if they are to end conflict and curb human rights abuses, campaigners say
"Unscrupulous arms dealers continue to get away with grave human rights abuses and make a mockery of the UN Security Council's efforts."
These articles appear week after week, year after year highlighting the "failure after failure" so as to create the public demand for a U.N. with bigger teeth. Both legally and at the operational end.

-------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
The UN bans have been very effective at disarming the vulnerable minority groups who rely on UN aid for survival. This in turns opens the way for their annihilation as the UN peacekeepers look the other way. It's happened over and over again across the third world.
 
Interesting theory, jlbraun. It probably would be really interesting if one could dig up stats about occurances that may have occured that way.
I take it you have never heard of Pol Pot.
Don't feel bad most people haven't or can't quite place the name.
Mostly because he did his thing quickly against a recently disarmed population

Same thing with Hitler.
He just pushed it too far and took too long to do it
 
When are the cities of....

New York, Wash DC, Chicago, Boston, etc going to petition the UN to help them enforce the arms embargo that has been in effect for many years but has done nothing to keep guns out of the hands of the criminal eliment......chris3
 
The UN bans have been very effective at disarming the vulnerable minority groups who rely on UN aid for survival. This in turns opens the way for their annihilation as the UN peacekeepers look the other way. It's happened over and over again across the third world. -Cosmoline

good observation. seems to me that no fully developed, industrialised nation really has any true concern for any restrictive action put forth by the UN. it is an organization that thrives on "championing" the needs of the third world.

the problem is, it needs to keep the them enthralled, so it seeks to disarm third world nations, put them at the mercy of armed forces that seek to ravage them, and all in an effort to be able to be able to provide aid when that ravaging comes, and manufacture "evidence" of it's necessity as an organization.

it's like certain unscrupulous black leaders in the states, who, though extremely vocal, do virtually nothing to address the real problems of urban minority life, because if they did, and the problems began to be solved, they would no longer have a purpose or a voice.
 
Oh, make no mistake. The Hutus were very well armed. They used the machette because they wanted to be up close and personal when they killed their victims.
 
Remember to aim just under the rim of the blue helmets. Cause soon they will try to take our rights away.

My belief will be after the next presidential election. I have a feeling that the Democrats will take the next election with Hillary Clinton. I suspect then the UN will get to enforce the arms embargos.
 
Each of the 13 UN embargoes imposed in the past decade has been breached, the Control Arms Campaign has found.

If #14 is an attempt to disarm the American public, place bets on it being "breached" rather spectacularly - kind of like the security on the Russian Presidential motorcade on the show "24" was breached a couple of weeks back.

I, of course, advocate nothing but legal action ("legal" being a rather more complicated word than "is" is) - I'm just ready to place a bet on lots of people in this country being "somewhat displeased" with the UN in the aftermath of such an embargo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top