Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Small arms: Good or bad? Obama can't make up his mind

At the same time he supports domestic gun control and the proposed UN treaty of small arms, the Obama administration provides small arms to Syrian rebels.  One of the purposes of the UN treaty is to keep small arms out of the hands of dangerous groups.  The administration is doing precisely what the treaty purports to outlaw.  Of course, in the final analysis, treaties and statutes notwithstanding, the only important thing is whose ox is being gored.  Secondly, how many of these small arms will end up in the hands of U.S. opponents and "terrorists"?  If Assad falls, how will these arms be used?  These folks are not going to turn in these arms if and when Assad is defeated.  Not only is the administration hypocritical, it is foolish to let these additional arms loose in a nation drowning in violent chaos.  As many on both the Left and Right have noted, Obama's moves re the Syrian crisis have been one disaster, or potential disaster after another. 

1 comment:

  1. For people with no conscience, right or wrong is based on the expediency of the moment. If giving weapons to the opponents of one who has been judged to be some sort of enemy is helpful to the cause, all well and good.

    Politicians have for centuries objected to an armed citizenry. It's based on fear: An armed citizenry may at some point "Just say no" to tyranny.