Posts Tagged ‘UN Gun Control’

The UN Continues Pushing to Take Away Your Second Amendment Rights

September 26, 2012
We can all breathe a sigh of relief that the Obama administration was forced to pull out of signing the Arms Trade Treaty in July.  Following its actions, China and Russia also balked.
So congratulations, once again, are in order — as your hard work paid off handsomely.  Over 50 US Senators ultimately signed a letter opposing this abomination!
But don’t think the UN has pulled back from its unremitting efforts to destroy your constitutional rights.
Earlier this month, the UN’s “Review Conference on Illicit Small Arms Trade” adopted an anti-gun “consensus outcome document” with the acquiescence of the Obama administration.
Among other things, the document, in the UN’s own words, “underscored efforts in marking, record-keeping and cooperation in tracing small arms ….”  We all understand that this verbiage is code for national gun registration.
And in the words of the UN, “Member States agreed to strengthen national measures on marking ….”  Now “marking” can mean many things.  But we know from records of UN discussions, that one of the things it means is “microstamping.”
This procedure to imprint a unique identifier on fired cartridges, may or may not be safely scientifically achievable.  And at any rate, it is very costly.
Thus without admitting it, microstamping requirements could effectively put an end to your Second Amendment rights.
Now, the “consensus outcome document” will certainly not have the punch of a Senate-ratified treaty.  Nevertheless, we cannot assume it will not be a threat — or that the President won’t try to implement certain parts of it through Executive Order.  Of course, Barack Obama could do an illegal Executive Order or illegal regulation with or without UN encouragement, and that is something we might be facing during a second presidential term, if he is re-elected.

The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty WILL restrict your gun rights

July 10, 2012

As GOA reported before the holiday break, the United Nations has begun discussions over finalizing language in the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) — talks that are expected to last all month.

Senator Moran has prepared a letter, which GOA has in its possession, demanding that the Obama Administration oppose any treaty that would sacrifice Americans’ gun rights — even if it means “breaking consensus” at the July conference.

“We are concerned that the Arms Trade Treaty poses dangers to rights protected under the Second Amendment,” Senator Moran says in his letter.

You have to ratify the ATT to see what’s in it

Despite the risks to our liberties, there is much double-speak taking place at the UN.  The talks in New York are reminiscent of the process that Americans saw with the passage of ObamaCare. Remember Nancy Pelosi’s famous quip: “You have to pass the [health care] bill so you can see what is in it”?

In similar fashion, the gun control details in the ATT will “not be publicly available” until the treaty has been agreed to by all the member nations.

It makes you wonder if Pelosi is being paid as a consultant at these meetings.

Make no mistake about it; UN officials are using secrecy to their advantage, claiming the treaty will not infringe upon the rights of individual gun owners.  They claim the treaty only deals with international transfers of firearms.

But Moran counters that the treaty will expand federal gun controls and lead to the registration of firearms.

The Arms Trade Treaty WILL restrict your gun rights

The Moran letter quotes a draft of the treaty, noting that it requires nations to “monitor and control” arms in transit and to prohibit the unauthorized “transfer of arms from any location” — a requirement, he says, that implies a huge “expansion of federal firearms controls that would be unacceptable on Second Amendment grounds.”

And the draft version of the treaty calls for the creation of a “U.N.-based firearms registry for all firearms that are either imported into or transit across national territory.”  Can you imagine any greater infringement of your privacy … giving UN bureaucrats the “right” to collect information on you as a gun owner?

Some 130 Representatives sent their own letter to the President on Monday reminding him that the Second Amendment guarantees the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms” and declaring that the U.S. has no business supporting a treaty that infringes on the Bill of Rights.

The House letter is a good first step, but getting a similar one sent from the Senate is even more important.  After all, IT’S THE SENATE — and not the House — which must ratify the ATT.

Since the treaty will be finalized later this month, it is very important for Senator Moran to get at least 34 Senators on his letter — meaning he would have enough votes to prevent the treaty’s ratification.

ACTIONPlease click here to send a message urging your Senators to sign on to the Moran letter right away.  Senator Moran’s office says that Senators have been very slow to respond to his request for more signatories.  But he needs these signatures right away!

Push for Gun Control Treaty Continues

July 18, 2011

A UN committee wrapped up a week-long series of meetings on a massive treaty that could undermine both U.S. sovereignty and the Second Amendment.  This is the third round of meetings by the so-called “preparatory committee” on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) as the UN gears up for final negotiations in 2012.

The most comprehensive treaty of its kind, the ATT would regulate weapons trade throughout the world on everything from battleships to bullets.

And as information trickles out of Turtle Bay in New York City, it is obvious the UN is getting more clever about taking the focus off of “small arms.”

With an eye cast in the direction of the U.S.—in particular, toward the U.S. Senate which must ratify the treaty—the most recent Draft Paper for the Arms Trade Treaty recognizes in its preamble “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.”

That statement, taken by itself, is troubling.  Americans’ right to keep and bear arms exists whether or not it is “recognized” by some UN committee.  The right enshrined in the Second Amendment predates our own Constitution, and does not need an international stamp of approval.

But the preamble aside, the scope of the treaty is what’s most damaging.  Though negotiations will continue for another year, some provisions are certain to be contained in the final draft.

The ATT will, at the very least, require gun owner registration and microstamping of ammunition.  And it will define manufacturing so broadly that any gun owner who adds so much as a scope or changes a stock on a firearm would be required to obtain a manufacturing license.

It would also likely include a ban on many semi-automatic firearms (i.e., the Clinton gun ban) and demand the mandatory destruction of surplus ammo and confiscated firearms.

Any suggestion that the treaty might not impact all firearms—right down to common hunting rifles—was thrown out the window after seeing the reaction to the Canadian government’s motion that hunting rifles be exempted from the treaty.

The Canadian representative caused a stir among the other delegates this week when he proposed that the treaty include the following language: “Reaffirming that small arms have certain legitimate civilian uses, including sporting, hunting, and collecting purposes.”

While Canadian gun owners were pleased with even the slightest movement by its government to protect gun rights, the proposed language is yet another indication that ALL firearms are “on the table.”

Feeble as it is, Canadian proposal was viewed as a major wrench thrown in the works, and had the anti-gunners crying foul.

Kenneth Epps is a representative with the Canadian anti-gun group known as Project Plowshares.  According to Postmedia News, Epps said Canada’s move is hampering efforts to forge a comprehensive global arms control regime.

Noting that there is little difference between a sniper rifle and a hunting rifle, Epps said, “The problem is that once you introduce exemptions, others will do the same.  It’s the thin edge of the wedge….From a humanitarian perspective, all firearms need to be controlled, and that’s the bottom line.”

Such statements are eagerly welcomed by the Obama administration.  Since it has been largely stymied in pushing gun control in Congress, U.S. negotiators will push the envelope as far as they can.

The U.S. Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security, a key negotiator of the ATT, is anti-gun former Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher of California.  Tauscher said last year that her team at the State Department “will work between now and the UN Conference in 2012 to negotiate a legally binding Arms Trade Treaty.”

In 2009, newly confirmed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reversed the position of the Bush administration (which voted against the treaty in 2008) and stated that “The United States is prepared to work hard for a strong international standard in this area.”

International standards, however, may not be the only, or even the primary, objective.  Former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, observes that, “The hidden agenda of a lot of the people who sought to negotiate a small arms treaty really had less to do with reducing dangers internationally and a lot more to do with creating a framework for gun control statutes at the national level.”

Bolton explains that pressure from the groups agitating for the treaty—groups such as Amnesty International, Oxfam, and the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA)—is geared toward constraining the freedoms of countries that recognize gun rights.  “And specifically, and most importantly, [to] constrain the United States,” Bolton said.

Negotiators, from abroad and within the Obama administration, view arms control as  protecting human rights, rather than seeing civilian disarmament for what it is—the favorite tool of despots, dictators and tyrants to maintain power by engaging in mass murder and genocide.

And, perversely, in many instances those resisting an oppressive, genocidal regime would be held in the same light as criminals and terrorists and be legally prohibited under the ATT from purchasing weapons.

U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) makes this point in a letter he drafted to President Obama: “[T]he underlying philosophy of the Arms Trade Treaty is that transfers to and from governments are presumptively legal, while transfers to non-state actors…are, at best, problematic.”

Sen. Moran’s letter, in which he is joined by other pro-gun Senators, warned that any treaty “that seeks in any way to regulate the domestic manufacture, assembly, possession, transfer, or purchase of firearms, ammunition, and related items would be completely unacceptable to us.”

U.S. freedom is clearly in the sights of the ATT.  The time to take action is now, before the treaty moves into final negotiations.

ACTION: Urge your Senators to oppose any UN effort to impose restrictions on the Second Amendment, and to sign on to Sen. Moran’s letter to President Obama in opposition to the ATT.

Click here to send your Senators a prewritten message.


%d bloggers like this: