"The Small Arms Survey in brief"

"The Small Arms Survey is an independent research project located at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland."

The question is: independent of whom or what?

"It serves as the principal international source of public information on all aspects of small arms and as a resource for governments, policy-makers, researchers, and activists."

Considering the number of researchers and policy research institutes, why not simply declare that you are "the principal international source" as if the other "think tanks" are somewhat lacking in international recognition or authority?

The project has an international staff with expertise in security studies, political science, international public policy, law, economics, development studies, conflict resolution, and sociology. The staff works closely with a worldwide network of researchers and partners.

About those partners: Amnesty International, Federation of American Scientists- Arms Sales Monitoring Project, United States, gunpolicy.org, Human Rights Watch, United States, Saferworld, United Kingdom, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, Sweden, UN Department for Disarmament Affairs-Conventional Arms Branch, United States and others that all have the same common interests: the socialistic control over world governments with a disarming of both nations and individuals. To the knowledgeable citizens of the United States, I have to say nothing  or do nothing further other than to list the anti-American partners that collaborate, or should I say collude, with this so-called "independent" organization. But continuing on with our tour of this organization's "independent status...."

Objectives

To serve as the principal international source of impartial and public information on all aspects of small arms and light weapons.

"Impartial," I don't think so!

• To act as a resource for governments, policy-makers, researchers, and activists in terms of information and research on small arms issues.
• To be an independent monitor of national and international governmental and non-governmental policy initiatives on small arms.
• To be an outlet for policy-relevant research on small arms issues.
• To act as a forum and clearinghouse for the sharing of information as well as the dissemination of best practice measures and initiatives dealing with small arms issues.

Again, I question how independent their monitoring may be. While I do not question their statement that their function is to disseminate the best practice measures and initiatives dealing with small arms issues, I do question their motives in supplying statistics and materials that will be used by many of their sponsors for spreading their socialistic gun control programs in the guise of seeking a peaceful world.

Common sense dictates where there are a multitude of people and a scarcity of resources, some people will fight and claw their way to the top of the pack in order to obtain or control a disproportionate share of the spoils. This is human nature and has been the way of man since time immemorial. Leaders and followers. People wanting to assume power at the expense of other people. Nations wanting to assume power at the expense of other nations. Common sense will also tell you that organizations such as these so-called impartial think tanks are almost always found to adhere to the goals and aspirations of the leadership and those who fund the organization.

But it becomes clearer still, that there is a hidden agenda behind the "altruistic" and lofty goals of the organization.

"Drivers Behind the Idea"

"The proliferation of small arms and light weapons represents a grave threat to human security."

This is a prejudicial statement which proves that the organization does not come into the discussion with either clean hands or an unbiased viewpoint. Therefore, all of the research studies, findings and conclusions must be reviewed on the basis that the organization's researchers, wanting to secure or maintain funding, will somewhat adhere to the organization's core beliefs. My belief is that where "free" citizens are armed, and criminals are unsure if a person is "packing,"  crime diminishes. If any one can point out a contradictory opinion, I would be pleased to take it under consideration. 

"The unchecked spread of these weapons has exacerbated inter- and intra-state conflicts, contributed to human rights violations, undermined political and economic development, destabilized communities, and devastated the lives of millions of people."

Excuse me, but this statement seems to be fallacious. I am unaware of any law-abiding, gun-owning individuals who are performing the above described activities. If truth be told, the above description seems more relevant when applied to nation-states which are led by religious zealots or power-hungry dictators.

"The future success of efforts to deal with small arms and light weapons depends in large part on the development of accurate information concerning the global flow of these weapons and on reliable analyses of the causes and consequences of their proliferation."

Like politics, crime is "local" and that "global" solutions which are applied to a populace often deprives the citizenry of the right to self-protection and increases the probability of despotism in the region as governments begin to rule their subjects with impunity. Global weapons flow by arms dealers, often with state approval, are solely within the purview of the individual governments involved.

"Effective governmental or non-governmental action depends on a correct diagnosis of the problem, yet policy-makers, analysts, and activists often lack basic information concerning the production, transfer, stockpiling, and use of small arms and light weapons around the world."

The basic information required by governments starts with the common sense question: Are the citizen constituencies as free as those in the United States? Are their rights, including the right to own and bear arms, protected by their respective constitutional documents?

"The strengths and weaknesses of various policy instruments (such as gun buy-back schemes, strengthening of export controls, codes of conduct, firearms, or ammunition marking) also need to be assessed on an ongoing basis so that best practices can be spread from region to region."

Is this an indication of a foregone conclusion that governments must restrict arms and that what the organization is speaking of is "effective arms control methods?"

"Recognizing the need to address these complex issues, the Swiss government, in conjunction with other interested governments, established the Small Arms Survey project in 1999. The project is located at the Graduate Institute of International Studies, Geneva, Switzerland. It is also linked to the Graduate Institute's Programme for Strategic and International Security Studies (PSIS)."

Oh, the height of irony and hypocrisy: correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Swiss government require that all males of a certain age be provided with instruction in the care and use of firearms and that at least one weapon can be maintained in each household? Isn't this the very same Swiss government who facilitates the great bulk of illegal global arms trafficking with their super-secret banking system?

A cursory glance at Wikipedia for a few tidbits:

"The gun policy in Switzerland is unique in Europe. The personal weapon of militia personnel is kept at home as part of the military obligations. This, in addition to liberal gun laws and strong shooting traditions, has led to a very high gun count per capita."

But, of course, these are official guns and not often counted in comparative statistics.

"When relieved of duty, Swiss militiamen have the choice of keeping their personal weapon and other selected items of their equipment. In this case the battle rifle is sent to the weapons factory where the fully automatic function is removed, the rifle is then returned to the now rightful owner. The government sponsors training with rifles and shooting in competitions for interested adolescents."

"The sale of ammunition — including Gw Pat.90 rounds for army-issue assault rifles — is subsidized by the Swiss government and made available at the many shooting ranges patronized by both private citizens and members of the militia. There is a regulatory requirement that ammunition sold at ranges must be used there. However, David Kopel and Stephen D'Andrilli say "the rule is barely known and almost never obeyed"

What can YOU do?

Realize that most messages of self-serving special interests are crafted from a combination of seemingly credible statistics and source and then mixed with the desired message which may be based on something not so credible: the opinions and desires of the special interest organization.

Like all organizations, the first goal of an organization is to perpetuate itself by appealing to sponsors and then to reward the organization's leadership with prestige and profits while cultivating their sponsorship by putting forth organizationally-directed messages in favor of their sponsors.   

Common sense indicates that the above gun statistics do not say anything about the totalitarian nature of some of the nations listed nor the freedoms granted or denied to their citizens... which is precisely the point overlooked by those seeking to impose gun control on their fellow citizens.

Self-defense is an undeniable human right that is ignored by most human rights organizations. Considering that most of these organizations have a high component of socialists, Marxists, communists and others, one wonders if the disarming of a nation's citizenry is a prelude to an increase in government power or a de facto dictatorship?

Support those organizations which advocate crime control over gun control. If you are unsure of the difference, simply ask yourself what is the likelihood that the government (police, sheriff, etc.) will be in the immediate neighborhood and prepared to act against your assailant exactly at the moment you are threatened?

Support those elected officials who want to preserve your Constitutional rights and not those who want to subvert your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, one step at a time. There is no elected official that is smarter or possesses better knowledge of liberty than the common man. The problem is that we have to fight to keep it that way.

In the final analysis, you are responsible for your own actions and will decide your own future in the coming election cycle. Do not be bamboozled by faux statistics or irrational arguments. Simple ask yourself: am I losing some of my freedom and am I paying more for the government's programs which are restricting my rights. Every man and woman can be a patriot ... including some rare politicians. Vote accordingly.

-- steve

A reminder from OneCitizenSpeaking.com: a large improvement can result from a small change…

The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius