but there is also a kernel of truth. The International Action Network on Small Arms, the NGO that has a great deal of influence on the agenda of the UN Conference on Small Arms, IS trying to put gun control on the table at the conference. FWIW, IANSA is the group that brought sweeping gun confiscation to Australia.
Here's what they have to say about the direction in which they wish to push the conference, from IANSA's own web site. Some relevant excerpts:
http://www.iansa.org/members/IANSA-media-briefing-low-res.pdfGovernments 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.
(benEzra's comment: How many of us gun owners could "prove" to the government that we have a "valid need" for a particular gun?)
• Prohibit civilian possession of military-style rifles, including semi-automatic rifles that can be converted to fully automatic fire and semi-automatic variants of military weapons.
(benEzra's comment: Parts (a) and (b) of this statement have been law in the United States for many years, as such weapons are tightly controlled by the National Firearms Act of 1934. But part (c) would outlaw the most popular civilian target rifle in America. Worse, most U.S. gun control groups interpret this to mean banning ALL civilian rifles with handgrips that stick out.)
• Introduce safe storage requirements to prevent gun accidents, suicide, misuse and theft.
(benEzra comment: And also to prevent self-defense. They're talking about requiring guns to be always unloaded, even if locked in a safe, with strict inspection requirements.)
And where they want this to go (again, excerpts):
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.
(benEzra's comment: How many of us gun owners could "prove" to the government that we "need" a particular gun?)
• When deciding whether to grant or renew a licence, police can take into account all relevant circumstances.
• People convicted of assault are banned from having a gun licence for five years. (benEzra: Existing U.S. law bans gun possession for life under these circumstances, not 5 years. No problems there.)
• 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. (benEzra comment: see above. And if you can't "prove" you "need" all the guns you lawfully own, the guys with machine guns and black body armor come to YOUR door to collect them...or else...)
• There are strict requirements on how guns must be stored. (benEzra comment: And the requirements they have in mind don't allow defensive use.)
I have no problem with the U.N. Conference on Small Arms, but I have a big problem with IANSA, and if IANSA brings these proposals to the table--as they clearly wish to do, since they attempted to do so at the last meeting--then yes, I would oppose it. IANSA did bring gun confiscation to Australia, and they have made it explicitly clear that they wish to accomplish the same thing here, using the Convention on Small Arms as a vehicle if they possibly can.