I was reminded recently of the U.N.’s efforts to violate our gun rights. From a U.N. report on small arms:
The principle of self-defense has an important place in international human rights law, but does not provide an independent, supervening right to small arms possession, nor does it ameliorate the duty of States to use due diligence in regulating civilian possession.
Minimum effective measures that States should adopt to prevent small arms violence, then, must go beyond mere criminalization of acts of armed violence. Under the principle of due diligence, it is reasonable for international human rights bodies to require States to enforce a minimum licensing requirement designed to keep small arms and light weapons out of the hands of persons who are likely to misuse them….
The criteria for licensing may vary from State to State, but most licensing procedures consider the following: (a) minimum age of applicant; (b) past criminal record including any history of interfamilial violence; (c) proof of a legitimate purpose for obtaining a weapon; and (d) mental fitness.
So the U.N. thinks it can require member states to impose gun control. And, oh wait, let me guess the “proof of a legitimate purpose for obtaining a weapon” will be similar to how concealed carry works in New Jersey: unless you are wealthy, famous or politically connected you the state does not think you have a legitimate purpose.
Note also the ironic phrase “requirement designed to keep small arms and light weapons out of the hands of persons who are likely to misuse them”. How many tens of millions of people were killed by governments in the last century and now the U.N. (an organization of governments, not of the people) is telling us we can’t be trusted. Right.