International Gun Prohibition

Via Instapundit and Outdoor Life comes this AP article about a new UN scheme to restrict trade in weapons. It is the same old nonsense.

But in the U.S., the NRA says it sees a creeping attempt to limit civilian gun ownership within nations — even though the focus now is on setting standards for arms exports and imports.
 
The international issues “necessarily will come to involve at some point domestic laws and policies regarding firearms,” said former congressman Bob Barr, a leading NRA voice on the subject.
 
“That’s not what we’re looking at here,” countered Greg Puley, of the Control Arms coalition of pro-treaty advocacy groups. “The point is to control trade in weapons that contribute to conflict and atrocities.”

Contra Mr. Puley, US domestic restriction of private gun purchases is exactly the expected outcome here. How could it be otherwise?

Just as domestic restrictions on guns serve to keep weapons from law-abiding citizens without affecting the ability of criminals to obtain them, so international restrictions only make it more difficult for oppressed populations to defend themselves from “conflict and atrocities” perpetrated by their own governments. State supported Sudanese Islamist militias will not be impeded in the least while the defenseless people they kill in Darfur will be blockaded.

Of course the dictators’ club at the UN will support any effort to disarm free individuals. That’s how dictatorships behave. But why should democracies like the UK, Australia and Japan support such efforts? Bravo to the NRA for standing up to the dictators and foolish democrats.

Quote of the Day

IT COULD be argued that since Ahmadinejad’s central message failed to register on his Western audiences that his visit to America was a failure. The fact that no media organs felt it necessary to analyze what he was talking about could be seen as a clear sign that no one is interested in buying what he is selling. But this is a dangerous argument, for it misses a basic truth.
 
Ahmadinejad is not interested in convincing the US government or even the majority of Americans to convert to Islam. He is interested in convincing adherents of totalitarian Islam and potential converts to the cause that they are on the winning side. He is interested in demoralizing foes of totalitarian Islam within the Islamic world and so causing them to give up any thoughts of struggle. In this goal he is no different from any of his Sunni counterparts in Saudi Arabia, al-Qaida, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas or their sister organizations throughout the Islamic world and indeed throughout the West.
 
[. . .]
 
The thing of it is that aside from blind narcissism, there is a reason that the West ignores the dangers facing it. The Western media ignored Ahmadinejad’s message, just as it has insistently ignored the messages of bin Laden and Fatah throughout the years, because Westerners have a hard time believing that anyone would want to abide by the Islamic world view which denies mankind’s desire for freedom.
 
But no matter how ugly an ideology is, in the absence of real competition it gains adherents and power. The only way to ensure that jihadists’ demonic views are defeated is by stridently defending and upholding the fundamental principles on which the Free World is based. And the West hasn’t even begun to take up this challenge.
 
As a result, it has handed its enemies two victories already. It has demoralized its potential allies in the Islamic world, and it has failed to rally its own people to defend themselves.
 
In spite of what the West would like to believe, Ahmadinejad and his allies from Ramallah to Waziristan, from Gaza to Kandahar to Baghdad, are not negotiating. They are fighting. Rather than ignore them or seek to find nonexistent common ground, we must defeat them – first and foremost on the battleground of ideas.

Caroline Glick

A Reflection on Watching Krauthammer

The USA sent Canada its draft dodgers. In exchange, Canada sends us physicians, successful entrepreneurs and other highly productive people. I’d say we have gotten the better of this exchange.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali Video Interview

Via David Foster, this is an excellent video of Ayaan Hirsi Ali being interviewed by a Canadian leftist:


 

UPDATE: More thoughts about independent-minded, outspoken Muslim women here.

What is ridicule good for, anyway?

Well, this for a start.

(via David Fleck)