Amnesty International is an organization that is supposed to oppose tyrannical dictatorships all over the world. As a human rights organization, one would think they would stand for, you know, human rights. That should include the right to self-defense.

After all, how many of the dictators they work against have made it impossible for anyone to oppose them? Banning guns is often one of the first moves a dictator makes. They don’t like people being able to stand up to them and you don’t stand up to armies that will shoot you with harsh language.

You’d think Amnesty International would support the right to keep and bear arms. But, alas, it doesn’t.

A group known for calling out abusive governments around the world is wading into the gun control debate in the United States.

In a conference call with journalists last week, Amnesty International called American gun violence a human rights crisis and condemned the federal government for deeming guns “essential” during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The international human rights group now has a small staff devoted to an effort called the End Gun Violence Campaign, taking similar positions to groups that support gun restrictions like Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense In America, Giffords, and March For Our Lives.

The Amnesty International campaign includes efforts at the federal and state levels, including in Ohio, where the group lobbied legislators against a controversial “stand your ground” bill. The session is on hold other than COVID-19–related issues, and the bill’s fate is uncertain.

Some of the legislation Amnesty International is pushing for are universal background checks and so-called red flag laws, which would allow courts to temporarily remove firearms from people deemed at risk to themselves or others.

In other words, Amnesty International is continuing its support for outright tyranny.

Make no mistake, that’s precisely what they’re doing here. By pushing for red flag laws, they’re directly opposing due process of law. By pushing for universal background checks, they’re also pushing for creating a system that can be used to track lawful gun ownership which can then be used (theoretically, at least) as a de facto gun registry.

By opposing gun stores remaining open, they mimic the position of other anti-gun groups who have tipped their hands on guns. It’s not about “common-sense gun reform” or whatever euphemisms they prefer. It’s about restricting our God-given right as much as possible. They wanted gun stores closed because they don’t want people to buy guns. Period.

Amnesty International doesn’t oppose tyrants anymore. It’s working to create a world where tyrants can blossom. There is no surer way to prevent tyranny and oppression than an armed populace, yet Amnesty International wants to work to prevent that populace from being armed. It seems they’re not so much worried about human rights in general, just the rights they personally approve of.

Too bad for them that without guns, all the other rights are up for grabs. Take a look at England, for example. People are prosecuted for saying mean things. So much for free speech, right? Where’s Amnesty International on that one?

That wouldn’t have happened if the people of England maintained some semblance of an armed population, but they don’t and it did.

We’re not going down that road because for us, actual human rights matter.