If the pro-gun NGOs were to abandon the UN, what would happen?

First, as much as possible, at the UN the First Committee on Disarmament works had, along with the anti-gun groups, specifically IANSA…

http://www.theinfozone.net/salw10.html

…to exclude them from as many meetings as possible.

Why?

I suggest that it is because they do not want people actually knowing what is really going on.

It is important for each intelligent gun owner to keep aware of what is going on internationally.

http://www.theinfozone.net/salw4.html is one source for detailed information on what is happening at the UN on disarmament issues.

http://www.theinfozone.net/salw9.html is a contrast between the pro-gun and anti-gun NGOs at the UN.

One thing which has remained constant as gun rights are attacked, far too often, gun owners, who by nature are independent thinking individuals, are all made more susceptable by that spirit of individualism.

The UN works on concensus, and the tin pot dictators and ‘dudley do-right’ countries are all on a disarmament will work to make us all safer kick.

When firearm groups and firearm owners are divided in opposition, we all lose our rights.

You can be in Australia where handguns over .38 cal. are gone, pump action and semi-automatic shotguns are gone, and the laws are very restictive.

You could be in Britian where handguns are gone, and it is possible knives are next, and gun laws are extremely restrictive.

You could be in Canada where .25 and .32 handguns are gone, and all gun owners must be licenced and their weapons registered.

As Americans, one could say, ‘So what!’. However, what that does is ignore the simple fact that the real target of the UN is America’s gun laws.

Read the transcript of the debate between NRA’s Wayne Lapierre and IANSA’s Rebecca Peters at

http://www.theinfozone.net/salw5.html

It is up to each of us, to learn who our friends are, and who our enemies are and then to focus our efforts on our real opponents.

TIZ