Radio Commentary

Kofi Wants Your Guns

f there’s a policy that involves greater government control and fewer personal freedoms, chances are United Nations bureaucrats will advocate it—with glee. Little things like national sovereignty or even natural rights seldom get in the way of the UN’s vision. And more and more, the UN envisions a gun-free world. For the past several years, three separate UN agencies have been promoting the notion that allowing individuals to own firearms promotes global conflict.

The argument goes like this: Rwanda, Bosnia and other bloody hot spots are the product of guns, not deep-seeded, centuries-old ethnic and tribal hatred. And many times, weapons owned by private citizens make their way to war-torn regions, adding fuel to the gunfire. The answer for this?

Take away an individual’s right to own arms, of course. A line from one UN report is particularly ominous: "All [countries] should improve the safety and security of their societies, so their citizens would not see the necessity to arm themselves." That one’s a gem. Call me cantankerous, but since when is it government’s duty to make its citizens see the "necessity" of anything?

By the UN’s logic, if the crime rate is reduced enough, guns shouldn’t be available, even for hunting or collecting. Although all this might sound like a wild rant from the black helicopter crowd, there can be no denying the UN’s interest in global gun control. "As creatures of government," wrote UN watcher Ronald Baily, "UN functionaries do not accept or respect the principle that gun ownership might be a citizen’s right." Fortunately, there are still a few Americans that do. u


Journal front | Search | Comment | Sponsors