U.N. Arms Treaty?

[Lot2Learn]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

I am not exactly sure what to think about this. I read something about it in the NRA website but it is a bit confusing to me. In any case, I have written my Senators about it...

[RoyGBiv]

Political theater as far as USA is concerned..
Needs 67 Senators to vote in favor, but NRA claims 58 have signed a letter pledging to oppose ratification.

Math... 100 - 58 already opposed = 42 undeclared...
Even if all 42 undeclared vote in favor, it's still far short of the 2/3 majority needed to ratify.


LaPierre, who serves as NRA executive vice president, warns that the “UN’s refusal” to remove civilian firearms and ammunition from the scope of the treaty amounts to a declaration that only governments should be gun owners.

But he revealed he was set Wednesday to tell the UN gathering that 58 U.S. senators had signed a letter saying that they would refuse to ratify any treaty that includes controls over civilian guns or ammunition.

Ratification by two-thirds of the Senate is necessary before an international treaty negotiated by the executive branch can become U.S. law.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-treaty-could-put-us-gun-owners-in-foreign-sights-say-critics/

[Lot2Learn]

Ok Roy...

Thats a good start...I am concerned that it even got this far. I want everyone to know what is going on here and not to sit by. Thanks for looking that up for me. Either way " The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." This is just a reminder for people to call their senators. The beautiful thing about this country is that it is a participatory form of governement. We all need to be active and let these people know what we think.

[Lot2Learn]

I hope I am not the "boy who cried wolf" here, but this still has me concerned. I know that there are some here on this forum and elsewhere that keep saying that the Senate would never ratify such a treaty. While I really want to take comfort in that statement, I am still actively writing my senators and here in MN, well I guess we are considered a blue state. All I am saying right now is that it is not hard to contact your senators and let them know how you feel, tell your friends to do the same. This is a government where the citizens get to and have a responsibility to participate. I hope this inspires just one person to do just that.

[Byron]

Feel free to let your Senators know how you feel, but this treaty is not a threat. It won't get ratified, and even if it did, it doesn't do what people are afraid of. Before writing anyone, I would encourage reading the actual treaty.

From one of the early ATT (Arms Trade Treaty) documents in July 2010:

The ATT as it name implies is about the international trade in conventional weapons. Nothing in the ATT should be construed as a possible mechanism to impinge on the right of states to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership, exclusively within their own territory,
Source: http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ATTPrepCom/Documents/Statements-MS/2010-07-14/14072010-UK-E.pdf

From the Report of the Preparatory Committee in March 2012:

6. Recognizing further the sovereign right of States to determine any regulation
of internal transfers of arms and national ownership exclusively within their
territory, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership,
Source: http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/statements/docs/20120712/20120712_US_E.pdf


It just flat out does not say what critics claim that it says. In fact, it says quite the opposite: that it has no power over domestic law.

Additionally, a lot of "legal analysis" being done online claims that this would somehow override the Constitution because of our Supremacy Clause. The problem with that line of thinking, however, is that the Supremacy Clause absolutely does not work that way.

Supremacy Clause - Concerns about Treaties (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause#Concerns_about_treaties)
...and...

Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty," although the case itself was with regard to an executive agreement, not a "treaty" in the U.S. legal sense, and the agreement itself has never been ruled unconstitutional.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert


TL;DR version:

-This will not pass.
-Even if it did, it specifically exempts any influence over domestic policy
-Even if it tried to exert any domestic power, there would be no legal authority to do so

[LHS]

What about importation? Would the treaty affect the ability of US citizens to get, for example, cheap Russian ammo or surplus guns?

[gtmtnbiker98]

What about importation? Would the treaty affect the ability of US citizens to get, for example, cheap Russian ammo or surplus guns?
That is the intent of the ATT, to regulate International Trade of Small Arms.

[LHS]

That is the intent of the ATT, to regulate International Trade of Small Arms.

Precisely my point. It doesn't have to directly affect US law to affect US gun buyers.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Precisely my point. It doesn't have to directly affect US law to affect US gun buyers.Unfortunately.

[JHC]

IMO this treaty will most likely hurt most the people it is purported to help. Dictators running nation states will get their arms. Their oppressed subjects and their resistance movements may be most impacted with an ever increasingly tight stranglehold on them. IIRC the UN doesn't have much problem getting their dictator members to sign on the treaty.

[JConn]

IMO this treaty will most likely hurt most the people it is purported to help. Dictators running nation states will get their arms. Their oppressed subjects and their resistance movements may be most impacted with an ever increasingly tight stranglehold on them. IIRC the UN doesn't have much problem getting their dictator members to sign on the treaty.

This is not about human rights. It's about control. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind. Dictators and human rights abusers don't go through official channels. This worries me a lot. It will impact the 2a in a negative way.

[nonameisgood]

Of course it's about control, and it might well reduce availability of cheap import arms and ammo. But Byron is 100% right.

As for ratification (keeping in mind that the talks broke down today, if the pop media is correct), never trust a politician.

[JConn]

Of course it's about control, and it might well reduce availability of cheap import arms and ammo. But Byron is 100% right.

As for ratification (keeping in mind that the talks broke down today, if the pop media is correct), never trust a politician.

x10000000000000000

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2

[JHC]

This is not about human rights. It's about control. Anyone who thinks otherwise is blind. Dictators and human rights abusers don't go through official channels. This worries me a lot. It will impact the 2a in a negative way.

+1 to lock up the monopoly on violence. Fascists. All in the quest of chasing utopia.

[ToddG]

This is not about human rights. It's about control.

/thread

[JHC]

Congratulations NRA! http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/articles/2012/nra-stops-un-arms-trade-treaty.aspx


"The Conference on the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (U.N. ATT) has broken down and will not report a draft treaty to the member nations."

[JConn]

So we have bought some time. This will be back especially if this election does not go well. Many governments would like to see the US disarmed, not just ours.

[JHC]

So we have bought some time. This will be back especially if this election does not go well. Many governments would like to see the US disarmed, not just ours.

Dubya sank an earlier attempt at this in his 1st term. How many times have they run this scam?

[Kyle Reese]

I just bought an AAC Mini 4 to celebrate.

[JConn]

Jealous. I bought a lower and 20 mags.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2

[dbateman]

I didn't know where else to put this.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/25/us-arms-treaty-un-idUSBRE8BO00B20121225

It looks like it's back on.