Firearms: the Canary in the Coal-mine of Civil Rights
Commentary by Clive Edwards


A story by Rebecca Peters, director of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) is featured by Dick Dahl in the October 8, 2004 edition of the journal “Join Together Online – Take Action Against Substance Abuse and Gun Violence”. Ms. Peters is concerned about “a new, increasingly international dimension to the NRA (National Rifle Association of the USA)”. It would seem Ms. Peters has no problem with anti-gun organizations such as hers spreading like cancer around the globe, but let anyone show up with a dissenting opinion and her hypocrisy is exposed. According to Ms. Peters, “Increasingly, the NRA is setting its sights on the rest of the world with an apparent goal of cowing leaders in other countries….” I suppose it’s all a matter of whose ox is getting cowed. “The UN and IANSA are most assuredly pursuing actions to achieve regulations over small-arms proliferation, Ms. Peters is quoted as saying, “but the thing that the NRA sees as so threatening to them is something that most people in the world see as a completely reasonable level of regulation.”

I daresay neither UN nor IANSA go from community to community around the world and present unbiased information which would enable people to make up their minds on the issue. As a matter of fact I suspect the UN deals nefariously behind closed doors in the execution of its policy. When one considers the membership of the UN is composed primarily of dictators, statists, fascists and communists served by a bureaucracy of careerist sycophants who have an interest in controlling their subjects why on Earth would the UN support firearms ownership? And yet that is exactly what it must do in order to earn the credibility of the vast majority of citizens. Simply put, the wrong people are in charge of the United Nations. It is the freedom fighters, not the dictators who should have input. “Liberty” shout be the rallying cry, not “Peace, Order and Good Government” (weasel words that have approved every genocide in history). Unless, of course, “Civil Society” is a bigoted society – an updated code-word for “White Man’s Burden” and guilt arising from eighteenth and nineteenth century imperialism.

This could explain why the UN and Civil Society are so schizophrenic. They want everyone to play nice, no pointy sticks in the sandbox meanwhile terrorists are taking over the school and statists are claiming the right to kill innocents in order to deny terrorists victory. The UN sends the blue berets out to protect the innocents, who must of course surrender their means of protecting themselves to the UN (or possibly worse, the national government in question) and when the bad guys come out to play the blue berets are told by their political masters to go for tea, we’re dealing with this behind closed doors thank you very much. But of course Rebecca Peters doesn’t see life this way, despite having spent “four years in New York City working on a gun violence prevention project”.

Most if not all gun owners and pro-gun supporters are aware of the deaths and injuries firearms cause. These facts are weighed against additional facts, such as those that prove firearms are used more frequently to dispel danger. If the UN and bleeding-heart antigunners were able to look at both sides of the equation…but of course they can’t. They are blinded by a belief in government as all seeing, all powerful and all just. They believe if they can get rid of all the landmines, all the guns, all the pointy sticks then by wishing it so the lion will lie down with the lamb and not dine on lamb.

Like the caged canary coal-miners of old took underground in the hope poison gas would kill the bird before it killed the men, the loss of the right to firearms is the warning that other rights are soon, perhaps immediately to be lost. Ask the survivors of any of the recent genocides presided over by the United Nations.

- 30 -

Copyright 2004