U.S. gun violence a human rights failure (Part II and End)


Part II: Benefits of firearms industries

The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years, stirred by a series of mass killings by gunmen in civilian settings. In particular, the killing of twenty schoolchildren in Newtown, Connecticut, in December 2012 fueled a national discussion over gun laws and calls by the Obama administration to limit the availability of military-style weapons. However, compromise legislation that would have banned semiautomatic assault weapons and expanded background checks was defeated in the Senate in 2013, despite extensive public support.

Gun control advocates sought to rekindle the debate following the shooting deaths of nine people at a South Carolina church in June 2015. These advocates highlight the stricter gun laws and lower incidents of gun violence in several other democracies, like Japan and Australia.

In June 2015, President Obama made a speech lamenting the NRA’s extremely strong “grip” on Congress’s neck. Dramatic as this may sound, it’s not too far from the truth. The gun lobby has poured so much money into Congress that it’s breathtaking.
Between 2000 and 2013, the NRA, the firearms industries, and the ultramilitant organization Gun Owners of America poured over $81 million into House, Senate, and presidential races. This so far outstrips anti-gun spending as to make any comparisons seem laughable. In the first quarter of 2014, gun control groups managed to spend about $250,000 on lobbying in Washington. By contrast, the NRA alone spent over $800,000 in that time period.
This overspending has real consequences. When the issue of expanded background checks came before the Senate in 2013 in the wake of the horrifying Sandy Hook massacre, 46 senators voted down the bill. It was later revealed that 43 of them had previously received financial help from the gun lobby, with 38 of those 43 receiving over $15,000 each. However, the NRA spent literally millions to support or defeat certain individual candidates in their political races.

Money aside, the gun lobby is also good at manipulating campaigns. If a senator is pro-gun, the NRA will launch wall-to-wall attack ads against his opponent at election time. On the other hand, an anti-gun candidate will receive a level of harassment guaranteed to make their lives miserable and cost them a close election.

Some of the purported violations do, in fact, represent legitimate instances of the Obama administration’s increasingly anti-constitutional lawlessness and abuses. For example, the UN committee said U.S. government officials responsible for torture, enforced disappearances, “unlawful killings,” and similar crimes ought to be prosecuted and punished. It also blasted the Obama administration’s global mass-murder spree using drones, as well as the spying perpetrated by the National Security Agency (NSA). All of those U.S. government crimes, of course, could be dealt with simply by enforcing the U.S. Constitution as written.    
Among other supposed “human rights” violations, the UN committee identified “the overrepresentation of individuals belonging to racial and ethnic minorities in prisons and jails,” state and local law-enforcement activities such as “excessive use of force,” the death penalty, domestic violence, alleged “criminalization” of the homeless by state and local authorities, prison conditions, juvenile justice, and more. To comply with its “recommendations,” however, the U.S. government would have to go even further outside its constitutional boundaries and essentially take over state and local government. 
All of the very real problems identified by the UN committee — torture, impunity, murder-by-drone, unlawful spying, brutal forced “psychiatric” treatment, mass incarceration, and more — would not even be an issue if authorities were following the U.S. Constitution and respecting the people’s God-given rights. Many of the other alleged “problems,” though, arise from a fundamental conflict in the understanding of human rights. In the American system, rights such as self-defense and gun ownership come from God and cannot be legitimately infringed on by government, which is instituted specifically to protect those rights. So full of human rights and democracy!./.
Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 10 ]

yobro yobro 1/11/15 18:54

A number of gun advocates consider ownership a birthright and an essential part of the nation's heritage. So hilarious!

Jane smartnic 1/11/15 18:55

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

LawrenceSamuels 1/11/15 18:56

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that has led to many mass killings by guns in US.

Gentle Moon 1/11/15 18:57

Federal law sets the minimum standards for firearm regulation in the United States, but individual states have their own laws, some of which provide further restrictions, others which are more lenient.

John Smith 1/11/15 18:58

The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited the sale of firearms to several categories of individuals, including persons under eighteen years of age, those with criminal records, the mentally disabled, unlawful aliens, dishonorably discharged military personnel, and others.

Love Peace 1/11/15 18:59

Yes, and we call them human rights and democracy!

MaskOf Zero 1/11/15 19:01

Hillary Clinton, the leading 2016 Democratic Party U.S. presidential contender, called Monday for a "sensible" overhaul of U.S. gun control laws in the aftermath of the country's latest deadly mass shooting.

Only Solidar 1/11/15 19:02

The United States, with less than 5 percent of the world's population, has about 35–50 percent of the world's civilian-owned guns, according to a 2007 report.

Deck Hero14 1/11/15 19:04

The United States also has the highest homicide-by-firearm rate among the world's most developed nations.

Pack Cassiopian 1/11/15 19:05

That's a demonstration for over-human rights and democracy.

Your comments