Britain Takes Issue with U.S. on Gun Lobbies

[Drizzt]

Britain Takes Issue with U.S. on Gun Lobbies
By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Britain gingerly took issue with the United States on Thursday, warning that a U.N. conference to curb small arms should not be ``blown off course'' by gun lobbying groups.

Saying the devastation wrought by small arms and light weapons was one of the ``greatest humanitarian challenges,'' of the day, Ben Bradshaw, the Foreign Office's undersecretary of state, called on the conference to take ``real and decisive action'' without giving specifics.

John Bolton, the U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs, laid down the gauntlet on the opening day of the conference on Monday, rejecting key provisions of a draft document that is to end the two-week meeting on curbing small arms and light weapons.

He said some draft measures were ``contrary to our constitutional right to keep and bear arms'' and criticized any constraint on legal trade and arms manufacturers.

In response, Bradshaw said the purpose of the conference was not to interfere with domestic laws but to cut down on the more than 500 million light weapons in the world that have caused devastation in conflict zones.

``We should not allow ourselves to be blown off course by unfounded fears spread by powerful lobbying organizations,'' he said, referring to the U.S. National Rifle Association, a major supporter of the Bush administration.

Bradshaw said Britain would donate a minimum of 19.5 million pounds, or more than $27.3 million, over the next three years to U.N. agencies and other disarmament organizations seeking to combat the flow of small arms.

LEGALLY BINDING CONVENTION

The European Union (news - web sites) wants the conference to take steps toward a legally binding convention to control trafficking in small arms and light weapons as well as have a follow-up conference in five years. The United States objects to both measures and Bradshaw did not mention them.

He said he would be speaking to Bolton about the conference because ``we think it is more constructive to speak about what they can support.''

But he also criticized to reporters a U.S. trend to stand alone on major international issues, including the small arms conference and the Kyoto pact on global warming.

``If I were a congressman I would be concerned about how my country was seen abroad,'' he said.

A senior U.S. official, briefing reporters, denied as ''disinformation'' allegations the United States would walk out of the conference if it did not get its way.

``We don't intend to walk. We intend to stay and negotiate constructively and in the hope that we can have a consensus document outcome which everybody can accept which will have a practical and real effect in beginning to address this serious problem,'' said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The United Nations (news - web sites) defines small arms as revolvers and self-loading pistols, rifles, sub-machine guns, assault rifles, light machine guns, heavy machine guns, mortars, hand grenades, grenade launchers, portable anti-aircraft and anti-tank guns and portable missile launchers.

The senior U.S. official predicted the conference would not be able to agree on a definition and said the question would probably be left to individual governments to decide.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/2001...rms_un_dc.html

[orlando5]

What do you expect from a police state like the UK? UK don't even trust their own citizen. The UK have a class system and only the rich are privilege. The other 99.9999% of UK citizen can eat dirt.

[Don Gwinn]

Go home and talk your own countrymen into ratifying the Kyoto Accord, and then come slinging your not-so-subtle insults about how we're the big bad Americans who won't sign it.

No, that will NOT make us change our minds about that suicide pact, but at least it's a little bit more honorable.

On the other hand, I am shocked--shocked, I tell you--that Great Britain thinks the U.S. is being arrogant about guns. They thought it was arrogant to demand the right to juries of our peers and representation in government 225 years ago and nothing has changed.

[croyance]

But he also criticized to reporters a U.S. trend to stand alone on major international issues, including the small arms conference

Yes, it is terrible when a major player refuses to be one of the sheep. This is an entirely seperate issue of being right or wrong. There is no need to fall in line just because everybody else endorses the same position. This is our right as a sovereign country. It is country's right to stand by their belief.

The rest of my responses gets rather rude.

I am begining to think that there are two nations on this globe. The US and the UN. Hopefully, Mr Bush can keep them seperate for a while.

[Justin Moore]

Britain (and France too) needs to remember that WE saved their ass during WWII They seemed to have forgotten that over the years

[Hellfire.45]

As far as I remember there was this "little" group called the AEF (American Expeditionary Force) that the Germans ran into in WW1. Although France was already overrun, the Americans (6th U.S. Marine regiment) stopped their advancement dead at Chateau-Thierry. If the AEF didn't arrive in France when it did, let's just say the British wouldn't be so anti-gun. Because it would have been part of Germany... or they would of had to actually fight on their own turf and see what defending themselves was all about. Just a guess though Another case of saved by the Americans? I think so.

[Justin Moore]

Tony Blair has us to thank for not having to live under Nazi rule Allthou its hard to tell Britain from WWII Germany some days eh?

Good lord, I'm beginning to sound like one of those 'right wing kooks' or 'extremists'

[Coronach]

...yup. That was their stance on small arms back in 1776, and it hasn't changed since.



Mike

PS I'd love to hear our ambassador to the UN or the UK explain it to them like that, verbatim.

[KSFreeman]

Can't we move the UN to Kabul, Afghanistan? That would raise standards in both nations. Plus I would love to see all those sissies at the UN explain gun confiscation to the Taliban!

[Tshoes]

Well they couldn't whip our founders butt's....so NOW they want to try a different route.
I have never seen a country so hell bent on self destruction as those idiots.
Where IS MAGGIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bud Helms]

Ben Bradshaw, the Foreign Office's undersecretary of state (UK):

"If I were a congressman I would be concerned about how my country was seen abroad,'' he said.

[RANT]
Here it is, IMHO. We need to understand the real meaning of that statement. It doesn't only mean "Why do you want to be different?" It has been used in arguments by the liberal socialists (LS) here at home, as in, "We have had cheap gas for decades. All the other 'civilized' nations of the world pay $4 per gallon." Or, "Our 'gun homicide rate' is ___ (fill in the blank) times that of all other civilized, industrialized nations of the world. And they have handgun ownership restrictions, licensing and registration."

Have you ever realized just how badly the LS want to be accepted by the rest of the world. The Continentals. The EU now. And this guy is playing on it, probably knowingly.

Do we want to be like the rest of the world? Do you want to live in barracks-like apartments at the edict of the UN, so the poor (yes, I DO feel sorry for them) of Somalia, Chechnya and Slovenia can move UP to that standard of residence? Do you want to give up your SUVs and ride scooters and bicycles, so that those poor oppressed people can have bikes and scooters too?

[color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color][color=#FF0000]█[/color]? My GGG Grandfather put it on the line, the By God Continental Line, against King George and broke an oath given under duress while he was at it (a Highland Scot). That was a death sentence right there. Now, I am supposed to be reasonable and put on my sheep suit so that the EU won't think we are toooooo individualist?

Mr Bradshaw, we do not want to live like a citizen of any other nation but this one. We do not subscribe to the zero-sum theory that our life style and beliefs are at the expense of a citizen of the UK or The Czech Republic, simply because they live under galloping Socialism. And I don't worry much about what Mr. Bradshaw thinks of that. Stoopid Bahstid!

I will not voluntarily surrender to a bureaucrat my birthright in return for a popular international position. A birthright, not only earned by ancestors whose blood runs in my veins, but ALSO every freedom seeker that has made this land his/hers since that time and helped to continue building that birthright for their descendants.

Ever notice the expedient mix of absolutist theories and relativist theories projected by this type of bureaucrat? ... We would eliminate your ownership of small arms (absolutist) so that you are more like the rest of the world (relativist).

These people (globalists) do not understand the price of freedom, even two hundred years later. But the saddest thing is, some of us don't either.
[/RANT]

I thank God every day for the "oceans" that separate us.

*************

BTW, I don't think that our "whippin' their butts" or "savin' their asses" is relevant. There are some things you do out of necessity or as a result of your beliefs for which you don't expect repayment or recognition. We don't need to remind these people of our contribution to the state of mankind today. They know it well and it doesn't matter to them. If anything, I believe they would undo it, if they could, just so the credit isn't due. This kind of attack is a way of doing that. 'Knock 'em down a notch or two ... arrogant bahstids! Good Luck Mr. Bradshaw!

********

No jokes about Scots and sheep suits!

[DAVID NANCARROW]

Saving their hides on several occasions is beside the point IMO. It's just flat none of their business that we recognise a God given right to keep and bear arms. We won't take it from the moronic liberal do-gooders who think they know better than the working men and women who have made the good things our country enjoys today, and we sure as hell are not going to put up with a foreign do-gooder who wasn't elected or appointed to our government-speaking of which, when did the UN become one, let alone someone who we are supposed to pay homage or listen to?

[Mike Irwin]

They don't like the US standing alone on major issues....


AWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW....

Maybe if they had something resembling any international power left, they could have a say in our stance.

But since we're really the only big boy on the block anymore, we can do pretty much what we want.

[KSFreeman]

TShoes, where's Maggie? You mean Margaret Thatcher the PM that took away the semi-autos and slide-actions after Ryan went nuts in Hungerford? Yikes.

Thatcher was anti-gun. Ronnie Raygun was anti-gun (in Kalifornia and signed the machine gun ban in `86). I do not know where this rubbish that "conservatives" want to defend the right to arms came from.

[GSB]

On the other hand, I am shocked--shocked, I tell you--that Great Britain thinks the U.S. is being arrogant about guns. -- Don Gwinn

I seem to recall there was some other Englishman named Gage who thought we were arrogant about our guns too. Some nations never learn, I guess.

[Will Beararms]

Any Questions?

[C.R.Sam]

Betcha Golda Maier coulda whipped Maggie Thatcher....at anything.

Far more Scots live abroad rather than in Scotland for good cause. They could whip a lot of Kings men but the elitest Royals are prolific breeders and just kept coming.

Sam

[paratrooper]

And all this from a nation ( thanks to our intervention in 2 , count 'em , 2 world wars ) that will put you in jail for defending yourself from a robber or attacker with what they consider "too much force". Does anyone here remember the "Looney Left" in England . They're back . And Tony is their "boy" .

[Tshoes]

Thanks, wasn't aware of Maggie stand on that, nor Ronnie's........in her defense, at least she would be a far cry better than the dork now in power.
He is HELL bent on getting US all into the UN stable, as fast as possible.

[DFBonnett]

Old Nigel can go piss up a rope. They shot their wad a hundred years ago and haven't been worth squat since. Who gives a rat what they think? The next time the Germans are about to kick their ass (and there will be a next time), let them ask someone else to save it.

[Hard Ball]

The Brits loved our guns in 1940. They pleaded for everyone they could get.

[Waitone]

I am proud to come out of the closet and admit that I am a
Scots-Irish-American, 3 generations in the US.

Does anyone know why so many of my type live in the US?

It was because the Brits went to Irish and said, "Tell you what. Let's make a deal. You leave the country and we won't kill you."

Now you in GB may may dislike the idea of commoners possessing firearms. It is a fact of history over here in the colonies that access to firearms is part and parcel with our freedoms; Freedoms we have not intentions of surrendering by getting on a boat to go some where else. You can write your UN position paper and I'm sure you will feel better about yourself, but at the end of the day you have done nothing but try (sic, try) to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Law abiding citizens are not the problem which you are trying to address.

[Sodbuster]

There's good reason that Winston Churchill was called the Last Lion. Nothing but sheep and lambs any more in Tony's Britain.

[jimpeel]

That's funny. They weren't "taking issue" with American gun lobbies when they were placing advertisements in American gun magazines begging for Americans to send them firearms during WWII!

Again, the question everyone should ask foreigners who decry our firearms is "Are you from one of the countries whose ass we saved; or one of the ones whose ass we kicked?"

In this case, we know the answer.