After proclaiming that the ATT [UN Arms Trade Treaty] “does not aim to impede or interfere with the lawful ownership and use of weapons,” the CASA [the UN's Coordinating Action on Small Arms] paper ['The Impact of Poorly Regulated Arms Transfers on the Work of the U.N.'] goes on to say that “United Nations agencies have come across many situations in which various types of conventional weapons have been … misused by lawful owners” and that the “arms trade must therefore be regulated in ways that would … minimize the risk of misuse of legally owned weapons.”

How, exactly, would the ATT do that if it doesn’t “impede” or “interfere” with lawful ownership? The U.N. would have a lot more credibility on the ATT if it didn’t imply so regularly that the problem is as much lawful ownership as it is the international arms trade.

Of course, CASA isn’t just concerned with lawful ownership; it’s also campaigning against “community attitudes” that “contribute to the powerful cultural conditioning that equates masculinity with owning and using a gun, and regards gun misuse by men as acceptable.”

All this just goes to show that the U.N. regards gun ownership — even under national constitutional protection and for lawful activities — as a cultural failure that it needs to redress and that it has no patience at all with the idea that self-defense is an inherent right.