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.
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.