The UN and Gun Laws: White Supremacy and U.S. Mass Shootings
By Maya Garner
In recent times, the alarming frequency of mass shootings in the United States has come to public attention. As a result, the issue of gun control has sparked heated internal debate and campaigning in the United States. While this appears to be a domestic concern, the U.S. government’s recent withdrawal from the UN arms treaty conflates domestic and foreign policy, and sheds light on the political influence of weapon companies on a national as well as a global scale.
In late April, the U.S. government declared its decision to withdraw its signatory to the UN arms trade treaty, which sets regulations for the global arms trade of conventional weapons, including battle tanks, combat airplanes and warships. The treaty, which entered into force in 2014, puts forward regulations designed to prevent illicit arms trade. The treaty obligates Member States to ensure that arms embargoes are respected and that weapons are not used for human rights violations. Criticism of the Treaty has primarily come from American organizations, such as the NRA, the National Shooting Sports Foundations, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Heritage Foundation, including strong opposition from the Institute for Legislative Action, the lobby-arm of the NRA.
The treaty was signed by the U.S. in 2013, but never ratified. Then in April, President Trump signed a letter to Congress halting the ratification process and declared U.S. intention to withdraw the signature, citing unwillingness to “surrender American sovereignty” and allow “foreign bureaucrats to trample on [Americans’] second amendment freedom.” The National Rifle Association (NRA) is a U.S.-based organization that advocates for gun rights and gun marksmanship and continues to lobby against gun control legislation. The NRA had also previously described the Treaty as violating the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants Americans the right to bear arms. Here, groups in favor of gun control laws will often mention the technological advances since the time the Bill of Rights of the Constitution was drafted in 1791, including the change from pistols to automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles. However, the Arms Trade Treaty specifically states that it will not interfere with domestic gun laws and only applies to international trade. Indeed, the Treaty calls it is “the exclusive right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through constitutional protections on private ownership.” This specification appears to be particularly designed with the U.S. in mind and calls into question the NRA’s motivation to lobby for the U.S. withdrawal from an international Treaty.
The current U.S. government’s policies on domestic and international gun control undermine principles of security within the U.S. and internationally. The U.S. government is the top arms exporter of a multibillion dollar industry, presenting economic interests that risk taking priority over human rights. People’s universal rights worldwide may be compromised by the business of the arms trade. Profiteering from weapons exports may have an inherent ethical flaw, but without the regulations imposed by an international treaty, the risk remains of illicit weapons sales to groups and states guilty of human rights abuses, genocide, or terrorism, and places strain on the United Nations’ ability to enforce arms embargoes, weakening the organization as a whole.
Domestically, the widespread presence and circulation of guns, as well as the lack of gun regulations in the U.S., lead to a large degree of gun violence. According to Amnesty International, there are 30,000 gun-related deaths in the U.S. each year, which amounts to 80% of gun violence among developed countries in the world, with a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun deaths. This correlation persists whether comparing U.S. states, or comparing developed countries in which the U.S. is a significant outlier on this issue. Looking away from the prevalence of gang violence and homicides, the U.S. has come to international attention due to the frequent occurrence of mass shootings. Particularly, certain incidents have made the issue of gun violence come under public scrutiny. This includes the 2012 case of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in which 20 children between the ages of 6 and 7 were shot dead; the killing of 9 people in a mass shooting in a Black church in Charleston in 2015; the killing of 50 people inside an LBGT-affiliated nightclub in Orlando, Florida in 2016; the 2017 shooting of concertgoers in Las Vegas, killing 58 and wounding 422; the 2018 high school shooting in Parkland, Florida, killing 17; the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, killing 11; the 2019 mass shooting in El Paso, targeting a Latino community, killing 22.
The U.S. mass shooting appear to be of a specific character. Unlike the certain forms of terrorism that situates bombings of public places, such as airports or city malls, the perpetrators of these mass shootings do not specifically target random masses of people, but are rather targeting specific demographics. In the case of mass shootings, often lone-wolf attacks by young men with white supremist views, the target is not the State as a whole, but rather certain demographics or institutions. These include ethnic, religious, and social minorities, such as the targeting of Black, LGBT, Jewish, and Latino communities, as well as attacks with misogynistic motivations. The shootings in an Elementary or High School are still confined to certain institutions, though not necessarily to a demographic. The psychological profile of the U.S. mass shooters has also been part of the public discussion, often revealing individuals with white supremist, sexist, xenophobic, or other hateful views. Noticeably, the deadliness of the mass shootings have skyrocketed in recent years and four of the five deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history have taken place since 2012.
As no gun regulations have been put in place in response to the shootings, and since the current U.S. government appears adamant about this issue, International United Nations Watch (IUNW) raises concern over the apparent reversal of progress taking place in the domestic and foreign policy of a permanent member of the UN Security Council. IUNW points to the influence of organizations such as the NRA, which promote economic interests at the expense of the American lives lost due to lack of gun control and international lives put at risk through unregulated, irresponsible arms trade. The UN must call for its Member States to resume the process of disarmament on an international level and must take effective steps to promote disarmament domestically within its Member States.
