The Ukraine has had a rough time of it of late and most are aware that things are still very unstable. First, there was the previous president, Viktor Yanukovych, walking away from the bargaining table to join the European Union (EU). Then, he was permanently ousted and replaced (temporarily they said) with an oligarch by the name of Arseniy Yatsenyuk. Supposedly, actual elections are scheduled for this coming May. We’ll see if that materializes.
In between then and now though, it would appear that Ukraine is making its move to unite with the EU. In order to make that happen, they have some housekeeping to deal with and of primary importance is disarming folks. Yep, removing weapons from those groups classified as militias.
The order was seconded on Thursday by the French ambassador to Ukraine, Alain Rémy, who said the disarmament of the militias that helped overthrow the former government is a central requirement for the European Union to begin disbursing financial aid, along with the government fighting corruption.
In order to actually get in bed with the EU, the incoming nation (to be “absorbed” by the EU) must be willing to do its part. That means eliminating what are called “illegal” weapons. But exactly what type of weapons are they and who has to turn them in? Primarily, we are talking about people who are involved with voluntary militia groups and have the dreaded “assault rifle.” If a person is not part of the national guard or some other military or police group, then these weapons must be turned in.
Though some politicians in Ukraine are not in agreement with the new order, they have said they will comply. What about the average citizen? Does any of this affect them?
The hunting weapons are legal, if the owner has a permit. In Ukraine, people 21 and older may apply for a license to own a shotgun for hunting, and those 25 and older may apply for a permit to own a rifle.
Pistols that fire nonlethal plastic or rubber bullets are also legal for citizens who can demonstrate a risk of assault because of their profession, which in Ukraine can include law enforcement officers for off-duty use, civil servants and journalists.
Hunting weapons are fine if the owner has the necessary permit. Pistols appear to be of the non-lethal type, the kind that can only fire plastic or rubber bullets. It appears that Ukraine has previously dealt with pistols. I find it fascinating that the EU has rules like this for incoming nations that wish to be part of the EU. You play by the EU’s rules or you don’t play at all. The EU is heavily connected to the U.N. as well, which is very likely the reason for the restrictions on individual gun ownership.
Let’s not forget that 46 senators recently voted to give Americans’ gun rights away to the United Nations. Fortunately, 53 senators voted against it so the Small Arms Trade Treaty was not validated and entered into by John Kerry, though he wasted no time in signing it.
All of this simply reminds us (or should) that the dictators who have come and gone in the past religiously took guns away from the populace. Dictators are not stupid. They know that people with guns can (and will) fight back. I can see no other motivation for the EU wanting to have this same type of control over the population of nations within the union.
A statement made by a member of parliament in Ukraine stated it best and did so possibly without truly realizing how candid his remark would be.
Arms out of control of the state are of course a factor in instability, and should not be allowed to drift by inertia.
Very interesting. “Arms out of control of the state are…a factor in instability.” Of course they are because a populace with guns means the state does not exercise full control over that populace and that, is exactly what they want and need to have.