The NRA has managed to conflate legal ownership of a gun with the protection of vicious, criminal arms dealers and war profiteers all over the world, and one has to wonder why.
No, actually IANSA, the NGO that essentially runs the conference, is the one doing that. They are the ones trying to incorporate language in the July 4th UN small arms conference to restrict the lawful CIVILIAN ownership and use of firearms.
Don't take my word for it, go straight to IANSA's web site and see for yourself. Some excerpts:
http://www.iansa.org/members/IANSA-media-briefing-low-res.pdf2. Regulation of civilian ownership of weapons
(snip)
Governments should agree to:
• Promote gun owner responsibility by requiring all firearms to be
registered. Individuals permitted to own guns and ammunition
must be held to account for their security, use and misuse.
• Define minimum criteria for private ownership of guns with
a national system of licensing. These should include proven
capacity to handle a gun safely; knowledge of the relevant law;
age limit;
proof of valid reason; and a security screening based on
criminal record or history of violence, including intimate partner
violence.
Licences should also be required for ammunition.• Prohibit civilian possession of military-style rifles, including semiautomatic rifles that can be converted to fully automatic fire and semi-automatic variants of military weapons.
• Introduce safe storage requirements to prevent gun accidents,
suicide, misuse and theft.
The IANSA agenda document also includes these gems:
Elements of effective national gun laws: an example from Australia
• Gun ownership should require a licence obtained by meeting a series of criteria which include a minimum age, a clean criminal record, undergoing safety training and establishing a genuine reason for needing to own a gun.
• All guns must be registered at time of sale or transfer and when the licence is renewed.
• There is a 28-day waiting period to buy a gun.
• ‘Genuine reason’ must be proved separately for each gun, effectively imposing a limit on the number that any one person can own.
• Guns cannot be bought or sold privately but only through licensed dealers or the police.
• There are strict requirements on how guns must be stored.
That is COMPLETELY unacceptable to American gun owners, whether Dem or indie or repub. Fuhgetaboudit.
I should point out that the head of IANSA is the individual who brought sweeping gun confiscation to Australia, and she has made it explicitly clear that she intends to bring it
here.
It's a good bet that the money behind the NRA is in gun running and the illicit arms trade. It's not just sales of hand guns or hunting rifles that they're interested in--but rather protection and promotion of massive movements of weapons (small and large, including WMD), the militarization of every conflict, and the NEED (or perceived need) for more and more weapons of every kind.
No need to speculate; look it up for yourself. The NRA's money comes primarily from annual membership dues and contributions from individual gun owners; corporate donations are a very small piece of the pie and come mostly from companies that do NOT sell arms to foreign governments or combatants (most don't even make military weapons at all).
This conference would not be in the LEAST bit controversial had IANSA not declared war on civilian gun ownership in the United States. The July 4th conference has very little to do with Lord-of-War-style arms smuggling, and very much to do with bringing Aussie-style gun confiscation to the USA.