When faced with a hard-nosed progressive lizard who is in favor of the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) for whatever whiny, do-gooder reasons, it only takes a few questions to neutralize their dystopian fantasies. Simply ask –
“Do you support regime change in Syria? In Iran? In North Korea? In any country which, at some point in the future, a government kills the citizens under its alleged protection, freely, for whatever purpose? If so, how can you support the ATT, which would ensure that no freedom movement ever again had access to the armaments necessary to prevail against a repressive regime?”
“If it’s really a conspiracy theory that the UN wants to outlaw personal firearms ownership, then why have they refused every proposal to specifically exempt firearms in private ownership, as well as firearms manufactured and sold in the private, domestic market, from these draconian registration requirements and other terms of the ATT?”
“Why does the ATT require *micro-stamping* of ammunition casings for privately owned guns?” This is completely superfluous to the ATT’s stated aim of “preventing revolutionaries and drug cartels from having access to weapons.” All this *micro-stamping* will do is drive the cost of firearms and ammunition up for the average private owner who complies with the law. Micro-stamping is easily defeated by anyone with a desire to do so – this is a proven fact, and much discussed lately.
“If the UN isn’t interested in eliminating personal ownership of firearms, then why is the statue in front of their headquarters a “twisted gun” – specifically a Colt Revolver? Why not a Twisted AK-47, or a Twisted M-60 machine gun? ” No, they chose a Colt Revolver – you know, “Colt, the gun that won the west”. A revolver – a revolver has NO MILITARY VALUE. What the revolver is, is a gun which uniquely symbolizes the American tradition of personal firearms ownership. Why THAT particular gun for the statue? Are they really that stupid, or do they think that we are?
In the ensuing argument, repeatedly remind them that, had the ATT been in force in 1760, there would have been no American Revolution, nor French Revolution, nor Mexican Revolution. Further, hundreds of freedom movements around the world in the last 250 years have found it regrettably necessary to take up arms against their oppressors to create fair and stable governments…
The UN’s ATT would functionally GUARANTEE that there would NEVER AGAIN BE A SUCCESSFUL REVOLT AGAINST TYRANNY, thus ENSURING THAT TYRANNY WILL PREVAIL.
WE HAVE BEEN WARNED
~Those who abuse Liberty, do so at their own peril!