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

Skip to comments.

BREAKING NEWS: UN Arms Trade Treaty Full Proposed Document
International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights ^

Posted on 07/25/2012 11:19:05 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright

PREAMBLE             

The States Parties to this Treaty.

  1. Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
  2. Recalling that the charter of the UN promotes the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources;
  3. Reaffirming the obligation of all State Parties to settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered, in accordance with the Charter of the UN;
  4. Underlining the need to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade of conventional arms and to prevent their diversion to illegal and unauthorized end use, such as terrorism and organized crime;
  5. Recognizing the legitimate political, security, economic and commercial rights and interests of States in the international trade of conventional arms;
  6. Reaffirming the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory pursuant to its own legal or constitutional systems;
  7. Recognizing that development, human rights and peace and security, which are three pillars of the United Nations, are interlinked and mutually reinforcing.
  8. Recalling the United Nations Disarmament Commission guidelines on international arms transfers adopted by the General Assembly;
  9. Noting the contribution made by the 2001 UN Programme of Action to preventing combating and eradicating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects, as well as the 2001 Protocol against the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in Firearms, their parts and components and ammunition, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime;
  10. Recognizing the security, social, economic and humanitarian consequences of the illicit trade in and unregulated trade of conventional arms;
  11. Recognizing the challenges faced by victims of armed conflict and their need for adequate care, rehabilitation and social and economic inclusion;


(Excerpt) Read more at iapcar.org ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: 2012; att; banglist; guncontrol; treaty; un; unitednations; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-183 next last
Also included in the registration/tracking under this "treaty" are ALL civilian weapons and ammunition.

It MUST be defeated!

“Where liberty dwells, there is my country." –Benjamin Franklin

Islam Delenda Est!

REFUSE. RESIST. Do NOT Submit! ★ FREEDOM! ★


1 posted on 07/25/2012 11:19:20 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

I don’t like the sound of this line...

4. Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within Paragraph 1 above, as defined on a national basis, based on relevant UN instruments at a minimum. Each State Party shall publish its control list to the extent permitted by national law.

Actually I don’t like any of it...


2 posted on 07/25/2012 11:27:03 AM PDT by xenob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator
Can you guys move this to BREAKING NEWS. It needs wide dissemination.

“Where liberty dwells, there is my country." –Benjamin Franklin

Islam Delenda Est!

REFUSE. RESIST. Do NOT Submit! ★ FREEDOM! ★


3 posted on 07/25/2012 11:27:41 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright (An OATH is FOREVER OathKeeper III We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower

*ping*


4 posted on 07/25/2012 11:29:17 AM PDT by Petruchio (I Think . . . Therefor I FReep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
Where specifically are you getting that they want to outlaw gun ownership?? From the preamble ... a little further down than what you posted ...

14. Recognizing the legitimate international trade and lawful private ownership and use of conventional arms exclusively for, inter alia, recreational, cultural, historical and sporting activities for States where such ownership and use are permitted or protected by law;

If you posted a few more points you would see it excludes what you seem to be concerned about ...

What section of the document are they trying to take our right away? ... Post it ...

5 posted on 07/25/2012 11:31:04 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

Obama will sign this of course.

I’m ready for rebellion.


6 posted on 07/25/2012 11:32:33 AM PDT by rurgan (Sunset all laws at 4 years.China is destroying U.S. ability to manufacture,makes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
Article 2, Section 3:

Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system to regulate the export of parts and components to the extent necessary to ensure that national controls on the export of the conventional arms covered by Paragraph A1 are not circumvented by the export of parts and components of those items.

Nope... sorry... not gonna do it.

If this is ratified and signed by Obama, Communism will be completely wrapped around the throat of America. There's nothing in this treaty that allows for state sovereignty to override it in any way.

7 posted on 07/25/2012 11:32:53 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

I followed the link and read it in it’s entirety, but failed to find that part. Please clarify.


8 posted on 07/25/2012 11:33:31 AM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

Coincidence that the media is pushing this mass shooting now at the same time the UN is trying to take over and take away our guns? I think not.


9 posted on 07/25/2012 11:34:01 AM PDT by rurgan (Sunset all laws at 4 years.China is destroying U.S. ability to manufacture,makes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

Are you serious? They’re calling for gun registries across the board. One only need look to history in the 20th century to see where that leads.

You’re a complete dolt and ignorant to the rights of man if you believe it’s okay for any global entity to require that we account for the weapon in our possession or their purpose.


10 posted on 07/25/2012 11:35:44 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
If this is ratified and signed by Obama, Communism will be completely wrapped around the throat of America. There's nothing in this treaty that allows for state sovereignty to override it in any way.

What you say is true. You think this marxist/democrat, Muslim Obama won't sign it? Then I have a bridge to sell you.

11 posted on 07/25/2012 11:35:58 AM PDT by rurgan (Sunset all laws at 4 years.China is destroying U.S. ability to manufacture,makes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
I haven't read the whole thing yet, but this is from AmmoLand.com:

Uncovered Documents Show Private Arms & Ammunition to Be Included in Arms Trade Treaty

“Where liberty dwells, there is my country." –Benjamin Franklin

Islam Delenda Est!

REFUSE. RESIST. Do NOT Submit! ★ FREEDOM! ★


12 posted on 07/25/2012 11:36:26 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright (An OATH is FOREVER OathKeeper III We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
You are for this UN tyranny. You must be a democrat mole.
13 posted on 07/25/2012 11:37:42 AM PDT by rurgan (Sunset all laws at 4 years.China is destroying U.S. ability to manufacture,makes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rurgan

I believe he will ignore the will of the Senate and sign it anyway, yes, but according to protocol, the Senate needs to ratify it by a supermajority, which will not happen.

Obama will sign it anyway, I agree.


14 posted on 07/25/2012 11:38:53 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #15 Removed by Moderator

To: xenob

I wonder how the Swiss, where military personnel are allowed to keep their weapons at home, will react to this UN document.


16 posted on 07/25/2012 11:40:03 AM PDT by 353FMG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
Oh, and I didn't say "take away" our guns, I said "registration/tracking". Taking away comes later.

“Where liberty dwells, there is my country." –Benjamin Franklin

Islam Delenda Est!

REFUSE. RESIST. Do NOT Submit! ★ FREEDOM! ★


17 posted on 07/25/2012 11:40:14 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright (An OATH is FOREVER OathKeeper III We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

Does anyone know if there was a terrorist once that wanted to blow this joint up?


18 posted on 07/25/2012 11:41:26 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rurgan
You are for this UN tyranny

No, I'm asking for the evidence before I become concerned ...

I read up to point 14 (which the original poster skipped) and that was enough for me to conclude this is not worth getting all wee-weed up about ...

You must be a democrat mole.

You got me ... I blew my cover.

19 posted on 07/25/2012 11:42:58 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

FU UN and BO.

Will this be the straw that breaks the camels back or will most surrender and hang their heads?

I’m choosing to fight. Come and take them you collection of dictators.


20 posted on 07/25/2012 11:43:16 AM PDT by History Repeats (Drink plenty of TEA, but avoid the Koolaid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: magna carta

What ‘joint’ are you referring to?


21 posted on 07/25/2012 11:43:34 AM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (0bama's Welfare, Food Stamps, Division and Disability 'Legacy')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

I think Obama could interpret various aspects of this treaty in ways that would give him justification to impose various gun control measures on Americans. I believe fast and furious was supposed to provide further justification. If you look at bullet 4: underlining the need to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade of conventional arms and to prevent their diversion to illegal and unauthorized end use, such as terrorism and organized crime. Obama would have been empowered here with both bogus F&F data as well as this language in the ATT. My bigger issue with this, however, is that we have Iran spearheading a treaty that could potentially restrict our ability to arm Israel and Taiwan. What’s more, it further reinforces the notion that guns primarily belong in the hands of governments and not free men. and while it does contain language that supposedly preserves national sovereignty, by its very nature, it erodes national sovereignty. Many of the UN member nations love the idea eroding our sovereignty with various “well meaning and reasonable” treaties. That is, in fact, the primary mission of many of America’s enemies. This treaty helps them more than it does us IMO.


22 posted on 07/25/2012 11:43:34 AM PDT by RC one (this space intentionally left blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dartuser; rurgan; Travis McGee

Again, it’s not a disarmament demand, it’s a registration demand, which is counter to American gun rights anyway.

Read some history concerning registration schemes during WWII and in Soviet Russia and follow where they lead.

I’m sure Travis could provide some informative graphics of the same.


23 posted on 07/25/2012 11:45:44 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TribalPrincess2U

the UN


24 posted on 07/25/2012 11:47:49 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

The UN is the ultimate evil in the world, a den full of marxist vipers so vile they make a multi-headed hydra seem saintly. For you to attribute anything but the ultimate evil motive to this enemy of America and freedom shows you are a democrat


25 posted on 07/25/2012 11:48:51 AM PDT by rurgan (Sunset all laws at 4 years.China is destroying U.S. ability to manufacture,makes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

>What section of the document are they trying to take our right away? ... Post it ...

Here’s your UN mandated gun registration system:

Article 2

4. Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within Paragraph 1 above, as defined on a national basis, based on relevant UN instruments at a minimum. Each State Party shall publish its control list to the extent permitted by national law.

There’s also provision for an international bureaucracy to monitor the guns in civilian hands.

Personally I don’t much cotton to such nonsense.


26 posted on 07/25/2012 11:49:57 AM PDT by drbuzzard (All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RC one

I agree about restricting our ability to arm Israel and Twaiwan, that’s crazy ... I just don’t see where its a threat to me owning a private shotgun or pistol.


27 posted on 07/25/2012 11:50:15 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: dartuser
private ownership and use of conventional arms exclusively for, inter alia, recreational, cultural, historical and sporting

That is not what the 2nd Amendment is about.

I read up to point 14 (which the original poster skipped) and that was enough for me to conclude this is not worth getting all wee-weed up about ...

If you are not "wee-weed up", then you neither understand and/or support the Constitution.
28 posted on 07/25/2012 11:54:48 AM PDT by PA Engineer ("We're not programs, Gerty, We're People")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PA Engineer

I see nothing in this that takes away my 2nd ammendment rights ...


29 posted on 07/25/2012 11:59:48 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

They’re calling for gun registries across the board. One only need look to history in the 20th century to see where that leads.

Oh please. They can’t even keep the Social Security and voter rolls accurate. There is NO WAY that they will be able to keep track of every weapon world wide much less United States wide. It is impossible to implement so those upset...don’t be cuz it could never happen. Thankfully we have a very incompetent government.


30 posted on 07/25/2012 12:00:32 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

They have been working toward this for some time, below is EXISTING law already on the books.

22 USC 2552 - Sec. 2552. Definitions
As used in this chapter - (a) The terms “arms control” and “disarmament” mean the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination, of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement including the necessary steps taken under such an agreement to establish an effective system of international control, or to create and strengthen international organizations for the maintenance of peace. (b) The term “Government agency” means any executive department, commission, agency, independent establishment, corporation wholly or partly owned by the United States which is an instrumentality of the United States, or any board, bureau, division, service, office, officer, authority, administration, or other establishment in the executive branch of Government.

http://vlex.com/vid/sec-definitions-19203838

22 USC 2551 - Sec. 2551. Congressional statement of purpose

An ultimate goal of the United States is a world which is free from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of armaments; in which the use of force has been subordinated to the rule of law; and in which international adjustments to a changing world are achieved peacefully.

It is the purpose of this chapter to provide impetus toward this goal by addressing the problem of reduction and control of armaments looking toward ultimate world disarmament.

The Secretary of State must have the capacity to provide the essential scientific, economic, political, military, psychological, and technological information upon which realistic arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament policy must be based.

The Secretary shall have the authority, under the direction of the President, to carry out the following primary functions: (1) The preparation for and management of United States participation in international negotiations and implementation fora in the arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament field. (2) The conduct, support, and coordination of research for arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament policy formulation. (3) The preparation for, operation of, or direction of, United States participation in such control systems as may become part of United States arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament activities. (4) The dissemination and coordination of public information concerning arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament.

http://vlex.com/vid/sec-congressional-statement-purpose-19203839


31 posted on 07/25/2012 12:01:28 PM PDT by Mechanicos (When did we amend the Constitution for a 2nd Federal Prohibition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

Registration= confiscation. One inevitably leads to the other.


32 posted on 07/25/2012 12:07:24 PM PDT by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Oh please, when it comes to something the government really wants to do they will, even at the point of a gun. Look at the IRS for example. This would be similar to the jihadist’s, government officials would be on their hunt for the Holy Grail in their eyes!!


33 posted on 07/25/2012 12:10:41 PM PDT by gbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

“It is impossible to implement so those upset...don’t be cuz it could never happen.”

That’s the sort of thinking that fills concentration camps.


34 posted on 07/25/2012 12:11:06 PM PDT by GenXteacher (You have chosen dishonor to avoid war; you shall have war also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Oh please, when it comes to something the government really wants to do they will, even at the point of a gun. Look at the IRS for example. This would be similar to the jihadist’s, government officials would be on their hunt for the Holy Grail in their eyes!!


35 posted on 07/25/2012 12:11:42 PM PDT by gbs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher

“Yes, officer ... I had a Glock, I had a break-in last week and it was stolen ... I have no idea who took it.”


36 posted on 07/25/2012 12:12:24 PM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: xenob
How about this line?

Under article 5:

3.be used to commit or facilitate gender-based violence or violence against children;

This treaty is a clear attempt by globalists/marxists to erode national sovereignty with exploitable political themes embedded in the text.

It's surprising that the authors left out gun violence against animals. /sarc

37 posted on 07/25/2012 12:13:21 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Wow... you’re either awfully trusting or woefully ignorant. Regardless of your beliefs on the subject, they have no business knowing who owns what. If your belief is such as it is, then you should also agree that they have no business with that data in the first place.


38 posted on 07/25/2012 12:14:24 PM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: drbuzzard
4. Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within Paragraph 1 above, as defined on a national basis, based on relevant UN instruments at a minimum. Each State Party shall publish its control list to the extent permitted by national law.

A "control list" is not a "UN mandated gun registration system." Here is a link to a Commerce Department site re: export controls. There is a link to a "control list" on the page. A "control list" is basically a list of (a) specific items covered by certain import/export provisions and/or (b) criteria for determining whether items are covered by said import/export provisions.

In this context, Article 2 lists 8 categories of "conventional arms" covered by the treaty. The "control list" would be a document that defined what types of arms fall into each of the categories. It's not a gun registry.

39 posted on 07/25/2012 12:17:10 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

So...what about this??

We are told at every turn that “treaties supersede the Constitution of The[se] States United” -— nugatory. Here is what Article VI, paragraph 2 actually stipulates on the issue: “...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, any Thing in the Constitution [of any State] or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. [Emphasis added.]”

The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution declares: “We the People of the United States...do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union of 1777 had proven so inadequate and imperfect in their ten year life that they were supplanted in 1787 by the Constitution “in Order to form a more perfect Union.”

Whereas the Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776 is the Charter of These States United, disclosing and proclaiming its purpose and reason for being, the U.S. Constitution of September 17, 1787 is the ByLaws laid down by the States detailing the day-to-day operation assigned to the Union and setting it in motion. The States, the creators of the Union, gave no authority to the central government via the U.S. Constitution for a treaty to be consummated with a foreign nation (1) that would empower treaty functions that they did not allow the U.S. government to have, or (2) that would obligate this Union and its States to do something that is contrary to the U.S. Constitution, or (3) that would transfer functions and activities assigned to the Union to any agency outside of the Union. That’s elemental, prima facie, self-evident. So, at the outset, to even entertain the idea that treaties supersede the Constitution is specious.

By Article II, Section 1, paragraph 7, the President is required to swear he will: “...preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Article VI, paragraph 3 requires all Federal and State officers to also swear:”...to support this [U.S.] Constitution...”

Article I, Section 10, paragraph 1 declares: “No State shall enter into any Treaty...”

All civil magistrates are bound by oath to abide by the U.S. Constitution, and nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is any authority given for these United States to be subject to and bound by any earthly piece of paper that abrogates or is alien to the Constitution of the United States. As a matter of fact, Article VI, paragraph 2, the latter half of which is quoted at the outset above, in its first half, says only three (3) pronouncements are “the supreme Law of the Land”:


40 posted on 07/25/2012 12:18:20 PM PDT by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dartuser; stuartcr; Neil E. Wright; xenob; Petruchio; rurgan; rarestia; TribalPrincess2U; 353FMG; ..
I see nothing in this that takes away my 2nd ammendment rights ...

stuartcr and dartuser, could you please kindly point us all to the line that recognizes my legitimate God-given right to carry a concealed or open carry firearm for self-defense against another person? Against an unlawful entry by a law enforcement officer??

41 posted on 07/25/2012 12:22:26 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
Included in this treaty, Article 2 is the following:

Weapons included:

h. Small Arms and Light Weapons

- 2. Each State Party Shall establish and Maintain a national control system to regulate the export of munitions to the extent necessary to ensure that national controls on the export of the conventional arms covered by Paragraph a1 (a)-(h) are not circumvented by the export of munitions for those conventional arms.

- 3. Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system to regulate the export of parts and components to the extent necessary to ensure that national controls on the export of the conventional arms covered by Paragraph A1 are not circumvented by the export of parts and components of those items.

- 4. Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within Paragraph 1 above, as defined on a national basis, based on relevant UN instruments at a minimum. Each State Party shall publish its control list to the extent permitted by national law.


42 posted on 07/25/2012 12:23:42 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

Perfect strategy. RESIST, RESIST, RESIST. We’re the freedom fighters, and we need to fight this enemy of the people in the White House, like freedom fighters in wars past have done.

RESIST, RESIST, RESIST BY ANY AND ALL MEANS.


43 posted on 07/25/2012 12:24:07 PM PDT by itssme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
I warned FReepers about this five years ago. I still get stupid posts about "67 Senators" and "unconstitutional treaties are void."

There has never been a treaty invalidated by the courts despite the fact that some of the enforcement powers of treaties on the books wildly exceed the Constitutionally enumerated powers of the Federal government.

44 posted on 07/25/2012 12:26:45 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

From the Pre-amble:

“14. Recognizing the legitimate international trade and lawful private ownership and use of conventional arms exclusively for, inter alia, recreational, cultural, historical and sporting activities for States where such ownership and use are permitted or protected by law;”

Note the word - ‘exclusively’.

This seems to be an enumerated list.

They seem to have left out ‘the Peoples defense of their Constitution’.


45 posted on 07/25/2012 12:27:06 PM PDT by bluecat6 ( "A non-denial denial. They doubt our heritage, but they don't say the story is not accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; dartuser

Hint: “self-defense” is not a “recreational, cultural, historical or sporting activity.”


46 posted on 07/25/2012 12:28:07 PM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

Is anybody surprised at this?


47 posted on 07/25/2012 12:28:07 PM PDT by wastedyears ("God? I didn't know he was signed onto the system.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

I believe the “inter alia” covers you ...


48 posted on 07/25/2012 12:29:41 PM PDT by dartuser ("If you are ... what you were ... then you're not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: dartuser

It’s Pandora’s box, like the healthcare bill. who knows what it will really accomplish-nothing good for America though, we can be relatively certain of that. Democrats and the UN want to establish a registry of gun owners. It has been their wet dream for some time. A national registry, of course, is a necessary precursor for a national confiscation which would be a necessary precursor to an invasion. This treaty does seem to indicate that national registry would be required by member nations. We know who that primarily affects. There’s nothing good about this for America. It should definitely not be ratified.


49 posted on 07/25/2012 12:29:48 PM PDT by RC one (this space intentionally left blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; P-Marlowe; Lancey Howard; Girlene; darrylsharratt; smoothsailing; 4woodenboats; ...

Ping to #42 and then write your senators;


50 posted on 07/25/2012 12:30:28 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-183 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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