Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mikelets456; GOPJ; Bob
"...it wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market as well."

That's already built into the Arms Treaty in such a way that even Kennedy/Roberts may swing with them and here is why.

First, a link to the text of the treaty: "The Arms Trade Treaty (A/RES/64/48)"

Excerpted below is the section of this Treaty that calls on States{nations} for an implementation:

"Calls upon all States to implement, on a national basis, the relevant recommendations contained in section VII of the report of the Group of Governmental Experts (See A/63/334)."
Next is a link to the text of the referenced report: "Report of the Group of Governmental Experts to examine the feasibility, scope and draft parameters for a comprehensive, legally binding instrument establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms (A/63/334)"

Excerpted below is the only one of three section (27-29) in above referenced "section VII" ("Conclusions and recommendations") dictating the responsibilities and required actions of signatory States:

29. The Group acknowledged the respective responsibilities of exporters and importers. In order to begin improving the current situation, the Group recognized the need for all States to ensure that their national systems and internal controls are at the highest possible standards, and that States in a position to do so could render assistance in this regard, upon request. {Emphasises added.}
How can America agreeing to implement UN requested "internal controls" of our "nation system" of gun regulations not be surrendering American 2nd Amendment rights?

Once signing such a treaty, what should Americans expect if the UN should "request" a tighter "standard" of US "internal controls" on guns and America's elected government officials refuses to comply?

All out LAWFARE, financed by the same leftist front groups (Soros' included) to force compliance through US courts! Note the "supremacy clause" of the Constitution which provides that the “Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.” {Emphasis added}

27 posted on 07/09/2012 2:08:59 PM PDT by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: drpix; GOPJ
You are one of the very few on this forum who comprehends the grammar of the supremacy clause, Patrick Henry's protestations notwithstanding.

This was truly a very dirty deal.

30 posted on 07/09/2012 2:23:40 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson