Action Alert: Obama Supports UN Gun Treaty That Hobbles 2nd Amendment

[Patricia M. McBride]

Time to let your senators know you don't want them to approve this nightmare giving control over what Americans can have in relation to the second amendment, but our king put his worthless signature on it.  Even those in his own party in the senate are warning "the one", the treaty will be a "non starter" since it violates the constitution.

.....................................................................

Apr 2nd

Posted by NTEB News Desk in Gun Control

The United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday signed off on a sweeping, first-of-its-kind treaty to regulate the international arms trade, brushing aside worries from U.S. gun rights advocates that the pact could lead to a national firearms registry and disrupt the American gun market.

The long-debated U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) requires countries to regulate and control the export of weaponry such as battle tanks, combat vehicles and aircraft and attack helicopters, as well as parts and ammunition for such weapons. It also provides that signatories will not violate arms embargoes, international treaties regarding illicit trafficking, or sell weaponry to countries for genocide, crimes against humanity or other war crimes.

With the Obama administration supporting the final treaty draft, the General Assembly vote was 154 to 3, with 23 abstentions. Iran, Syria and North Korea voted against it.

American gun rights activists, though, insist the treaty is riddled with loopholes and is unworkable in part because it includes “small arms and light weapons” in its list of weaponry subject to international regulations. They do not trust U.N. assertions that the pact is meant to regulate only cross-border trade and would have no impact on domestic U.S. laws and markets.

Critics of the treaty were heartened by the U.S. Senate’s resistance to ratifying the document, assuming President Obama sent it to the chamber for ratification. In its budget debate late last month, the Senate approved a non-binding amendment opposing the treaty offered by Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, with eight Democrats joining all 45 Republicans backing the amendment.

“The U.S. Senate is united in strong opposition to a treaty that puts us on level ground with dictatorships who abuse human rights and arm terrorists, but there is real concern that the Administration feels pressured to sign a treaty that violates our Constitutional rights,” Mr. Moran said. “Given the apparent support of the Obama Administration for the ATT, members of the U.S. Senate must continue to make clear that any treaty that violates our Second Amendment freedoms will be an absolute nonstarter for ratification.”

Mr. Inhofe likewise said Mr. Obama should take the Senate vote seriously. source – Washington Times

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/

[amanda choate]

Patricia, the notion that you do not have time is just balderdash. C'mon, really. You suggest that this nation should side with Syria, North Korea and Iran on a UN treaty, yet you offer no evidence for this position.

If I ever suggest that we side with these three regimes, I promise you I will bring a treasure trove of proof. Because for me, that would be pretty big leap, and would reflect a seismic shift in our relations with the rest of the planet.

[Patricia M. McBride]

You apparently also do not read and if the comment you just posted is any evidence of your thought processes when you read what someone writes, you are in big trouble.

[amanda choate]

That is what I thought, no evidence.

[Patricia M. McBride]

Then, you are going to have one heck of a long wait Amanda, because I am up to my eyeballs busy and don't have time to do research for you just now.   Get over.  Those in the know about such things say it is a BAD treaty as most of the UN treaties are anyway.

[amanda choate]

The folks against this treaty are North Korea, Iran and Syria. If it promoted tyranny wouldn't they be for it? I believe that if these countries are against something then we should be for it.
Show me one thing that limits second amendment rights. I'll wait.

[Patricia M. McBride]

And look at all the countries that have real gun control and you will find countries where freedom is at a minimum and tyranny flourishes.  I understand "the one" thinks he should rule all things, but personally, since I don't agree with much of anything he does, I prefer having a choice rather than his decisions rammed down my throat whether I like them or not.  You, on the other hand might agree with him and princess one, but I do not.  I think they are arrogant and ignorant.

[Patricia M. McBride]

Keep reading stuff put out by liberals Amanda.  The folks that are against have good reason to.  It is vague and does not define much and it could go either way and personally, I don't think Obama would have supported anything that didn't support his gun control and registration stance.

[amanda choate]

First, Israel signed it. Second, every country votes their best interest first. This isn't altruism. Look at the countries that voted against it. IT deals with arms trade between countries, it has nothing to do with domestic gun laws. Nothing whatsoever.

Here it is:https://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/

[Patricia M. McBride]

Now you aren't being serious.  Perhaps you can explain the value of this treaty with the UN considering the UN has been of little or no value in pretty much everything they have injected themselves into.  Certainly aren't being very effective with Iran.  And quite truthfully, I believe the United States, like Israel, must act in it's own national interest.  And taking it a step further, if this were only about gun running (certainly something this president and his administration know something about) or selling guns to bad people, they might get more support, but it isn't.  It is about them eliminating or defining the second amendment in OUR constitution.  The treaty is especially vague and does not clearly define some elements, and that is why it will not get passed.  The UN was leaving itself open to take some liberties (and I think that is exactly why Obama supported it thinking he might get his way using the elements of the treaty.   And another quick question, do you really believe the folks who are already sneaking weapons in to al Queda, Hezbollah and Hamas are really going to stop based on a UN treaty?    I think not and think it would be naive to think they would.

[amanda choate]

Maybe we could avert war with North Korea by letting them know we support their right to export arms to whomever they choose. International arms trade of weapons is important to a safer world. Where would the Hutus be without it. Or al Queda for that matter? Hezbollah would be toothless as would Hamas. We can't be picking winners and losers. Let the free market prevail.