International Gun Control
The private ownership of guns is under attack world-wide.
The main target are Americans, but the anti-gun NGOs are aware that a direct attack on American firearm rights would not work, immediately.
Here is a contrast between the pro and anti gun groups at the United Nations:
The International Efforts on Gun Control
November 2005
Firearm owners, and most firearm organizations, rarely comprehend why the bureaucrats, and politicians, they are seeking to influence are able to seemingly brush their points aside.
Many individual firearm owners demand their various national associations lobby their governments to protect, or restore their rights. In Britain, Australia, South Africa, and Canada firearm rights have been restricted, or lost. Efforts to lobby the governments in those countries, by respective associations, have, for the most part failed to influence their respective politicians, or bureaucrats.
Often it appears that the firearm owners in different countries do not communicate effectively. Firearm owners in the United States view firearm laws as the fault of firearm owners and governments in those countries. An overwhelming majority looking at the situation in Canada, Australia, South Africa or Great Britain simply feel such prohibitions could never happen in the United States.
This is a critical error. The target of the anti-firearm groups is firearm legislation in the United States. The strategy of many of the anti-firearm groups however, is not to confront American firearm laws directly, but rather to build on successes in other countries.
That is not to suggest there are no efforts, in the United States, against firearm ownership and use. The current referendum in San Francisco to ban the possession of handguns, along with their sale is an example. Anti-gun efforts in the United States are ongoing.
The anti-gun movement world-wide can point to Australia, Great Britain, Canada and South Africa as examples of their success. To firearm owners in those countries, the successful efforts have lead to increased frustrations.
Their frustration leads to calls for more action. Often, firearm owners demand that their associations take measures which will finally attract the attention of their governments. In more extreme cases, individuals, and groups, will debate and argue about their failings internally, publically, and over the Internet. That this helps their opponents is seemingly lost in the debate.
For example, an increase in violent crime, in Canada, Australia, Great Britain, or South Africa can lead to demands that firearms should be used for self defence. Associations in those countries will often point to the United States, and the growing number of states which have legislation that allows for the concealed carry of firearms for self protection.
Such efforts are most likely to lead to failure in those countries, simply due to the fact the associations demanding these rights has not laid the needed groundwork to succeed.
One must realise that for years, countless published research papers written by scholars who the bureaucrats, and therefore, the politicians have come to trust, have been presented to these governments. These published works claim firearms used for self defense are not an acceptable solution. These research papers, presented internationally have helped these governments in forming their national laws. To expect that those governments would reverse their policies without sufficient reason is simply not realistic.
One of the over-riding reasons for these failures, are that often associations have not commissioned the research needed. This has lead to a far more one-sided debate on the international stage. In associations where the research has been done, the funds to publish and distribute papers are rarely committed.
This leads to a one-sided presentation at the international level, where associations do not have the materials which counter the published literature anti-firearm groups have published and distributed.
This is not to suggest that simply by publishing research papers will halt the movement and successess of the international efforts. The pro-firearm side of the struggle is already years behind in many areas. It will take time for the properly researched materials, and scholars to become known and published.
Perhaps, overall, it is a lack of understanding of the strategies and tactics that are being used in the international effort.
The tactics and strategies utilized by each side of the international Small Arms Light Weapons debate highlight very stark contrasts between each side of the debate.
Here are examples of how IANSA, and other anti-gun NGOs, appear to work:
IANSA strives to hold meetings and seminars. They invite participation from various UN officials, fellow like minded groups, government officials, and policy makers. They seek funding from various governments. They publish reports and white papers from these seminars. The papers that fit their agenda are then presented to governments, other like-minded NGOs and also to the world's governments at international conferences.
The United Nations reports by governments, presented at the 2005 Bi-annual Meeting offer an insight of how such funds are available. The Swedish government funds many such meetings and seminars. From 2000 to 2004, the Swedish government offered over $US 51,831,357 in funding to various meetings, seminars and other efforts to control small arms.
They are also funded through donations. IANSA’s work has been supported by funders including the Governments of UK, Belgium, Sweden and Norway, as well as the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Compton Foundation, Ploughshares Fund, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Open Society Institute, Samuel Rubin Foundation and Christian Aid.
The goal of IANSA along with their 600 partner organizations are
* raising awareness among policymakers, the public and the media about the global threat to human security caused by small arms
* promoting the work of NGOs to prevent small arms proliferation through national and local legislation, regional agreements, public education and research
* fostering collaborative advocacy efforts, and providing a forum for NGOs to share experiences and build skills
* establishing regional and subject-specific small arms networks
* promoting the voices of victims in regional and global policy discussions
At the UN this past summer, IANSA issued five published documents. They also assisted in the publishing of papers by other NGOS.
In the three-hour time-block set aside for NGOs, IANSA took two and a half hours of that time. They discussed issues in a panel discussion format, which was certainly well-prepared and presented.
This is not to say that firearms issues are not represented. The pro-firearm NGO, The World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities (WFSA) gave five reports taking about half an hour.
The WFSA is not the only registered NGO at the United Nations. The Sport Shooting Association of Australia (SSAA) and the American National Rifle Association are also registered NGOs, but do not appear to have made presentations at the 2005 meetings in New York.
Most gunowners may not have heard of The World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities. WFSA President Dr. Carlo Peroni describes WFSA saying, "We are an association of associations with approximately 40 member groups. Included among these are most of the larger hunting and shooting groups in the world, as well as firearms-related trade associations. Our associations represent over 55 million hunters and shooters world-wide."
After the 2001 United Nations Meetings, the WFSA American Secretariat, Thomas Mason stated, "We need to have at least 100 groups at the next meeting... but we of the hunting and shooting sports community have got to increase our presence." The WFSA appears to have thirty-one members at present.
"The world's firearms community played a very active role in the July 2001 UN Conference on Small Arms. Hunters, sport shooters, gun collectors, and other parties representing commercial interests worked hard to prevent the conference from overtly opposing the legal civilian possession of firearms. Yet disappointingly, the conference failed to precisely define the focus of UN arms control efforts. In the future, the conference's Program of Action (PoA) should seek practical and realistic measures to address the illegal trafficking in small arms. Meanwhile, the firearms community will continue to independently pursue several of its own regulatory programs."
The WFSA has held seminars on several topics over the past several years. The most recent seminars were on Responsible Care of the Shooting Range Environment, Sept 2005, and on Lead in Ammunition, Sept 2004.
Previous seminars were held on a variety of subjects that appear more directly related to United Nations related efforts.
These included seminars on;
* The Legal, Economic and Human Rights Implications of Civilian Firearms Ownership and Regulation - May 2-3, 2003
* Export, Import and Brokering of Small Arms and Firearms: Identifying the Problems - Partnerships for Solutions" - June 13-14, 2002
* A workshop on "Defining 'Small Arms' as they Pertain to 'Firearms' for the 2001 UN Conference on Small Arms was held at the Imperial War Museum in London, April 27, 2001
* Comment of the Firearms Community on the UN Firearms Protocol Definition of an ''Antique Firearm''
* Technical and Manufacturing Aspects of Firearms Marking In the Context of UN Regulation Efforts
These earlier conferences were commented on in United Nations media releases. Since the May, 2003 seminar, the WFSA have not held any seminars directly related to their United Nations efforts. Neither have almost all of the firearm groups in any of the countries most affected by restrictions on their members firearm ownership.
By contrast, IANSA has through 2005 held seminars or meetings;
* October 19 to 21, 2005; Annual meeting of the International Parliamentary Forum on Small Arms and Light Weapons.
* July 12, 2005, Joint Action on SALW – Parliaments and Civil Society: Side-event at the Biannual Meeting of States 2005
* Women and Firearms, an international campaign
* "Action for Arms Control in a World Awash with weapons", April 15 to 17 2005, Nairobi (Kenya)
* Global Week of Action Against Small Arms 2005, June 6 to 12
The American National Rifle Association (NRA) received NGO status in 1998. The NRA did not make any presentations at the United Nations during the 2005 meetings.
In 2004, NRA participated in a firearm debate between the association's executive Vice President Wayne Lapierre and Rebecca Peters of IANSA.
The SSAA did not participate in the 2005 United Nations Meetings. The SSAA attended a meeting in Papua New Guinea Gun Summit 4-8th July 2005.
The pro-firearm side at the July 2005 United Nations Meetings, presented twelve pages of presentations to the meeting, and no published materials were apparently prepared for these meetings.
This contrasts to the NGOs on the other side of the issue, The IANSA presentation to the meeting included 357 pages of material outlining all aspects of their presentation. This does not include the press releases, or updated materials available online at the IANSA website.
There are experts who state that the foundation of the anti-firearms movement began with a paper by Dr. Arthur Kellermann. Kellermann wrote, in 1986, that a firearm in the home lead to a 42 times greater chance of being a victim of gun violence. While his report has been widely disputed and debate, this report is still used widely today by groups like IANSA.
The next international seminar being hosted by the international firearm community is a seminar on firearm safety. The Coalition of Licenced Firearm Owners in New Zealand, in conjunction with the New Zealand Police and the Mountain Safety Council. It is not known yet if the proceedings of that seminar will be published.
IANSA have unveiled their next effort. They state, "The aim is to increase awareness and gain more support in political circles and to build momentum for the January 2006 UN Preparatory Committee meeting (Prep Com) for the Review of the Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons.
"The action will be launched on 21 October in Mexico, at the annual meeting of the Parliamentary Forum on Small Arms & Light Weapons, and will run at least until the Prep Com in January 2006. At the Prep Com, the Control Arms Campaign, together with parliamentarians (MPs), will organise a fringe meeting to show governments that elected MPs support the Global Principles for Arms Transfers as well as national initiatives to prevent gun violence through debate and adoption of the Model Parliamentary Resolution on SALW."
The next United Nations meetings on Small Arms and Light Weapons will be held in January 2006.
webpublished with links at
http://www.theinfozone.net/salw9.html
