Editor,

Senator Harry Reid is generally not popular in rural Nevada. However, he continues to hold his Senatorial position simply because he continues to win elections. He has maintained some support in rural Nevada, because he has consistently vocalized his support of the Second Amendment.  This has won him support from groups such as the NRA, law enforcement, hunter groups and similar organizations. His victories have been slim, sometimes very slim. This “vocal” support for the Second Amendment has probably carried the day for Harry time and time again.

However, Harry’s “actual” support of the Second Amendment is questionable. I would submit to you, it is an outright lie, comparable to anything Barrack Obama has brought forth to date.

You all might remember a very serious vote taken in the United States Senate last May. The Statement of Purpose from that Bill read; “To Uphold Second Amendment Rights and Prevent the United States From Entering Into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.” The Senate passed the bill, but by the narrowest of margins, 53-46. The 46 Senators that voted against the above bill supporting the Second Amendment were all Democrats or Independents, and yes, Senator Reid was one of the 46.

But let’s take a little bit closer look at the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The UN Treaty is driven by the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA).  It’s easy to follow UNODA on the Internet; it’s all there.  Every conceivable point made by UNODA about firearms follows the theme that guns are harmful. They cause death, rape, pillage, enslavement: the list goes on and on. Never once are firearms considered from the standpoint of enjoyment, hunting, or even such a basic concept as protection against the very things that UNODA considers as the necessary reasons for getting ride of firearms. That could become very important when governmental leadership becomes out of control, forcing such issues as Martial Law and State Militia upon it’s citizens.

UNODA also makes the point that once a nation state approves the Arms Trade Treaty, they will abide by the treaty. The United States of America came within four votes of approving the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty in 2013, and as such would have thrown away the Second Amendment of our Constitution.

Unfortunately, the problem of firearms control doesn’t entirely go away just because Harry didn’t get his way on the Arms Trade Treaty. The Security Council weighed in on firearms control during recent months. Some have speculated that the Security Council’s involvement came about because of USA’s failure to support the Arms Trade Treaty.  Regardless of the reason, the Security Council passed resolution 2117 on September 26, 2013, fourteen to zip, with only Russia abstaining (and yes, the US delegation was one of the fourteen). Resolution 2117 lists 21 points dealing with firearms control, but perhaps of most interest is point number 11; “CALLS FOR MEMBER STATES TO SUPPORT WEAPONS COLLECTION, DISARMAMENT —”

Do “you” still think Harry supports the Second Amendment? I don’t, and I think it’s about time Nevada demanded some answers from its senior Senator. Kind of sounds like; “if you like your guns, you can keep your guns” PERIOD.

Anthony L. “Tony” Lesperance
Paradise Valley, Nevada

Speak Your Mind

*