Skip to comments.The UN Gun Control Treaty Is Bad for Gun Owners Everywhere
Posted on 09/18/2012 3:46:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
Last time I checked, Americans were responsible for making our own laws. We do not invite foreign nations to have a say in how we govern ourselves within our own borders. Yet if you follow what's been going on with the United Nations this year, you know that the USA came perilously close to having other countries dictate our gun laws. And the fight isn't over yet.
The United Nations has been debating an arms trade treaty for nearly a decade now. Though the treaty is ostensibly focused on military arms, it has long been clear that the majority of U.N. delegates consider our personal firearms to be crying out for international regulation, as well. The focus of the treaty would be a demand that governments regulate the sale and possession of firearms worldwide -- all of them, including yours and mine.
Though I believe that firearms should not be in the wrong hands, the proposed terms of this global gun control treaty would overreach wildly into regulating the sale of firearms to law-abiding citizens. In other words, the proposed treaty is a mechanism for Iran and other tyrannical powers to have a say in your gun ownership.
The George W. Bush administration wisely opposed this concept, asserting that any agreement to regulate private gun ownership would represent a threat to our Second Amendment freedoms. This proclamation was the death knell for the first U.N. gun control treaty conference more than 10 years ago.
But bad ideas at the U.N. never go away; they just fade until the political climate changes. Treaty discussions went underground for several years -- until the Obama administration announced a willingness to consider a new treaty, as long as the parties operated under "consensus."
The debate reached a fever pitch during a monthlong marathon negotiation session in July. The goal was to disgorge a treaty in time for the Obama administration to sign it before Election Day. The draft treaty was odious on its face. Among other things, it would have required the United States to "maintain records of all imports and shipments of arms," register the identity of the "end user" of those firearms and then report the user's information to a U.N.-based gun registry. In several drafts, the treaty would have mandated that every round of ammunition be tracked globally.
What's really ironic here is that the United States already has the most comprehensive system in the world for regulating international arms transfers. Other nations could achieve the stated goals of the treaty process by simply emulating our protocols. But the reality is that the treaty was actually intended as a mechanism to submit our unique Second Amendment guarantees to international inspection -- and condemnation.
As I have mentioned, the treaty negotiations broke down this summer, and that is a good thing. But that doesn't mean the U.N. is giving up the fight. It's just reducing it into smaller pieces. In fact, in late August, an umbrella organization of 23 separate U.N. agencies, known as the Coordinating Action on Small Arms, adopted the first portion of International Small Arms Control Standards. The ISACS text is made up of 33 separate modules, some 800 pages in total. And they're just getting started.
What can we do? We can ensure that we have a president who will not support the treaty and a Senate that will not ratify it. That's not a one-time commitment. Remember that once a treaty is enacted, it can be picked up at any time by a president and Senate. There are smaller gun control treaties that have been floating around the Senate for ratification since 1998.
What can you do? You can make sure that you and every freedom-loving American you know is registered to vote. I'm proud to serve as the honorary chairman of Trigger The Vote, the National Rifle Association's nonpartisan campaign to register voters who support the Second Amendment. We've made it easy on our website; all the tools to register are there, at http://www.TriggerTheVote.org. If you're already registered, you probably know someone who isn't. Share the stakes with that person, and urge him or her to join the rolls of informed voters.
Throughout my life, I've been committed to preserving our freedom from threats, both foreign and domestic. This proposed U.N. global gun control treaty may not be an "invasion" in the classic sense of the word, but believe me; over time, it represents the potential for encroachment of the greatest kind. Protect your rights by registering to vote today.
Others with more expertise may have a clearer view of these things but my understanding is that treaties are like acts if congress; they are inferior to the Constitution and are subject to SCOTUS review. If a treaty were signed that took away a Constitutionally protected right such as those under the first or second amendment it WOULD have the force of law unless overturned by the SCOTUS. There is no solid evidence that this court or any recent court could be trusted to do the right thing but Heller suggests this UN treaty would be overturned. This could take years and lots of government mischief could occur in the interim.
People will simply find ways to hide their guns in a way so they will reach for them.
People are buying extra and burying them in pvc pipe, sealed for weather and element tightness. CthanD even sells a ready made “burial vault”. I suspect folks are planting them in the back 40 of family farms, ranches, yards etc. Unless the feds have the resources to run ground penetrating radar over ever square inch of land in the US, I doubt they will find everything.
That would be the case if we retain the majority in the Supreme Court. If Obama gets his second term, he’ll put in more of the likes of Sotamayor and Kagan and our rights will be gone.
What can you do?>>>>>>>>>>>>
Tell the UN that if that want your guns, they can come and try to take them by force majeur.
Secondly the UN crowd are cowards who wave the white flag every chance they get, so do not elect similar cowards to any electoral office here in our country.
Thirdly, shove the entire UN building off the New York City Cay , into the depths and sludge of New Your Harbor and the East River, after arranging for a jhihadist to fly a 747 into it.
Any time a firearms-related thread is created on FreeRepublic, please be sure to add the "banglist" keyword to it so that interested FReepers don't miss it. Just a suggestion.
Let Freedom Ring,
Sorry, I didn’t think about it
Gotta love the U.N. -- BS's its way to getting funded by the very nations that it then works overtime to strip of their rights. Great work if you can get it, I suppose.
Is it time yet, to take our arms from their hiding places, march uptown to the U.N., and forcibly evict the occupants? Or do we have to wait until blue-helmeted hordes of them march upon our homes to conficate our arms? < /rant >
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.