Saturday, May 26, 2012

The UN Arms Trade Treaty

HuffPost published an article outlining the details of the UN Arms Trade Treaty and describing how things are now.

There are currently no international laws or treaties regulating the international sale of conventional weapons. You read that right. There is more international oversight of the sale of bananas and iPods than grenade launchers and AK-47s. As a result, the bullets killing our troops in Afghanistan and the weapons used by warlords to commit genocide in Africa are purchased on the black and grey international weapons markets that thrive in this unregulated environment. Thankfully, all of that is about to change -- at least, we hope.

You'd think there would be universal support for a treaty that will help stem the flow of weapons and ammunition to terrorists, warlords, pirates and dictators -- that would help save American lives and reduce atrocities around the globe. But if so, you haven't met the NRA and Heritage Foundation.
Sadly, for these groups, politics and money are more important than protecting our troops, patriotism and moral decency. And in the ATT, they see a way to raise money by telling their base that Obama and the UN are coming to take your guns. 

 They know full well that 1) the ATT charter forbids it from having any impact on domestic gun laws or sales, 2) the Obama Administration has said it would oppose any treaty that threatens the Second Amendment, and 3) no international laws trump our Constitution. But what are facts when money is to be made and political muscles can be flexed?
Why would the NRA pretend that this international agreement would have a direct impact on individual US gun owners when in fact it won't?

Well, I'd guess for the same reason La Pierre keeps telling the members Obama will come after their guns.

These lies instill fear into civilian gun owners and drive NRA membership as well as gun purchases.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment. 


  1. I've looked at the proposals for language in that treaty. There are calls for licensing of all private owners, for controls on ammunition manufacture and sale, for banning of many commonly held firearms, and so forth. You'll have to excuse me when I don't trust the treaty or the organization that is pushing it.

    The good news is that enough senators have pledged not to allow it to be ratified that it has no chance in America. Unfortunately, it may cut off the trade in surplus arms that brings so many good old firearms here for us collectors. What a waste.

  2. Hey man I know your hearts probably in the right place here, but I urge you to look closer as what the language in the treaty. Also, take a look at what happened in Australia when the UN talked them in to signing away there gun rights. If you do not like guns then you will most certainly love this treaty.

    But please allow me to ask you to look into your heart, and refelct on the men who gave us freedom, and ask yourself what were those men fighting for. They were fighting for sovereignty, independence, and our freedom. I think they would be deeply hurt to tihink we would sign our 2nd ammendment sovereignty over to a foriegn power. I've listen to the UN's proposal on what they want. And its not good. They said that the US should have to listen to them when it comes to our rights, not our own govt.

    Please do not support this treaty. We, as a nation, know what is best for our own rights. Thank you.

  3. This treaty would force an international gun registry, ban reloading of ammunition and forbid the storage of ammunition. Every SINGLE round of ammunition would have to have a serial number. This treaty is a backdoor attempt to circumvent the 2nd amendment.

  4. Here's a scenario: Clinton participates in making the treaty, Obama signs it, the Senate refuses to ratify it, and gun owners of America vote the bum out of office as a result.

    Works for me.