Interpol's chief recently drilled a hole in the rationale for a global anti-gun program. The idea being touted by far-left internationalists is the concept of an organization, such as the United Nations, passing firearms laws that would have an impact on people throughout the world including the United States, gun-policy expert John Snyder -- the man the Washington Post and New York Times called "the dean of Washington gun lobbyists" -- told Law Enforcement Examiner on Friday.
"For many years," Snyder noted, "the anti-gun establishment has been putting forth the idea that gun control is necessary for public safety. During an Interpol conference in Cartegena, Colombia, Noble indicated that in an open society an armed citizenry can protect people from terrorist attacks.
"The General Assembly of Interpol, the international criminal police organization, held its 82nd annual gathering in Cartegena. Noble's comments came after the official opening of the session," according to news reports.
Snyder said, "It's time for law-abiding gun owners and rational police officials to unite for a safer world."
Noble's comments followed a deadly attack in September by Al-Shabaab, an Islamist group, at the Westgate Shopping Mall in Nairobi, Kenya. The attack killed at least 67 civilians.
Noting that terrorism is an evolving problem, Noble said, "Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem. One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."
Enclaves could include any places where people gather, such as malls, theaters, supermarkets, town squares, churches, etc., Snyder added.
"Ask yourself," said Noble, "if that was Colorado, if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly? What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."
"For me it's a profound question. People are quick to say 'gun control, people shouldn't be armed,' etc., etc. I think they have to ask themselves: 'Where would you have wanted to be? In a city where there was gun control and no citizens armed if you're in a Westgate Mall, or in a place like Denver or Texas?" noted Snyder, who is a former editor with the National Rifle Association.
"The answer is obvious," said Snyder, a board member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, the Council for America, and the American Federation of Police & Concerned Citizens.