In one of the first such efforts, the crossbow was banned by Pope Innocent II in 1139 for use against "christian" enemies as being a weapon "...hated by God". It was apparently acceptable to use the device against adversaries of the non-christian persuasion.
For the most part such bans on arms have gone ignored or un-enforced except against ordinary subjects and serfs by their feudal or political "leaders".
Enter the 20th century and the unpleasantness of 1914 1918 "to make the world safe for democracy". By 1914, technology had outpaced military tactics to the extent that waves of infantrymen were ordered by slow to learn tacticians into frontal assaults on entrenched defenders equipped with Hiram Maxim's machine guns, not to mention poison gas and long range artillery. These horrors were sufficient to inspire the formation of the League of Nations by the "well meaning" victors for the purpose of avoiding the future need of such efforts to make the world safe for democracy.
A glance at recent history reveals how well the League worked out in such localities as Manchuria, Ethiopia, Spain, the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia and which resulted in a resumption of the hostilities placed on temporary hold in November of 1918. Since the League of Nations was such a success in promoting "peace through collective security" (irony alert) the new and improved version was launched in August of 1945 and designated the United Nations. Of course the victors of the second act of the world conflict were not about to allow pipsqueak former colonial nations to wield real power, thus the division of the new body into the General Assembly and the Security Council. It was thought that merely allowing third world powers the opportunity to engage in what amounted to a debating club would suffice to forestall any pent up urges they might have regarding the wielding of real power. WRONG! The "great powers" failed to perceive the second law of bureaucracies known as "mission creep" which is "the expansion of a project or mission beyond its original goals, often after initial successes". Examples of this phenomenon include the March of Dimes and the "humanitarian" intervention in Somalia 1992. The most egregious example of "mission creep" however is the juggernaut known as the United Nations .
It is doubtful that the founders of the UN in 1945 foresaw the multiplicity of agencies that would be emerging under the aegis of their creation such as:
The notorious Goebbelesque pronouncements (“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the ... consequences of the lie..." ) of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) which have been issuing forth for 20+ years under the auspices of the UN Environment Program have gained substantial traction in the service of unlimited governmental power. It is understandable that a substantial portion of politicians have subscribed to this nonsense as it increases their power and insures their perquisites. There is a possiblity however, that a turning point has been reached. Data collected over the past decade fails to validate the predictions of the computer models that the warmistas have utilized. This has caused them to not only spin the reasons for their error but in other instances to actually fabricate misleading data.
Why is it that the term "strangle in the cradle" only comes to mind in retrospect? In any event, there may be an up side to the present economic downturn; the politicians may shrink from burdening us with "Son of Kyoto". At least one can "hope".