Folks the UN is behind all the gun control, national registry and gun confiscation stuff here in America. Obama is just taking orders from them. Folks a Treaty CAN NOT override the 2nd amendment. Do not forget: The federal government may not lawfully circumvent the U.S. Constitution by international treaties. It may NOT do by Treaty what it is not permitted to do by the U.S. Constitution...Treaties: WHEN are they part of “the supreme Law of the Land”? by Publius Huldah, a retired Constitutional Lawyer in Middle Tn. , a friend of mine I might add, whose article you can find all over the web.
On March 18, 2013 in New York City the next round of negotiations is scheduled to begin, with one aim in mind: eradicate private gun ownership.
On Christmas Eve, 2012, the United Nations General Assembly approved a resolution to renew negotiations on the global Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).
The measure was approved by a vote of 133-0, with 17 countries abstaining.
As reported by Reuters, the foreign ministers of Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, Finland, Japan, Kenya, and the United Kingdom — the countries that drafted the resolution — released a joint statement praising the passage of the resolution to move ahead on the global gun ban.
“This was a clear sign that the vast majority of U.N. member states support a strong, balanced and effective treaty, which would set the highest possible common global standards for the international transfer of conventional arms,” the foreign ministers said in their statement.
As The New American has reported, when the treaty was being deliberated in July, the United States was the only obstacle preventing the global arms control regulations from being imposed on the world.
Miraculously, however, all the points of the agreement Secretary of State Hillary Clinton found so distasteful in the summer were made so much more palatable after President Obama’s reelection, and every single attack on the right to bear arms remains in the version of the treaty approved on November 7.
Within hours of his securing his reelection, President Obama placed a late night call to the U.S. United Nations delegation ordering them to vote in favor of a passage of L.11.
A story in The Hill reports, however, that “The U.S. mission to the U.N. denied that the timing of the election had anything to do with the treaty’s talks being delayed.”
Regardless of the questionable timing of the Obama administration’s green light to the globalists’ gun grab, the U.S. government was now placing its full weight behind convening a “Final United Nations Conference” for the proposal of a treaty imposing worldwide gun control regulations.
In July, 51 senators sent a letter to President Obama and Secretary Clinton encouraging them “not only to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership, but to ensure — if necessary, by breaking consensus at the July conference — that the treaty will explicitly recognize the legitimacy of lawful activities associated with firearms, including but not limited to the right of self-defense.”
The failure to pass an acceptable version of the treaty in July is in the president’s rearview mirror, however, as Reuters reports that “adoption of a strong, balanced and effective Arms Trade Treaty” could be imminent.
Reuters quotes Brian Wood of Amnesty International:
After today’s resounding vote, if the larger arms trading countries show real political will in the negotiations, we’re only months away from securing a new global deal that has the potential to stop weapons reaching those who seriously abuse human rights.
The definition of an “abuse” of “human rights” will be left up to a coterie of internationalist bureaucrats who will be neither accountable to nor elected by citizens of the United States.
With good reason, then, gun rights advocates oppose approval of this treaty.
After all, it does seem more than a little incongruous that a nation that places such a high value on gun ownership that it enshrined it in its Bill of Rights participates in an organization that opposes gun ownership so staunchly that it has an Office for Disarmament Affairs. An office, by the way, that the U.S. Deputy Director, Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Steven Costner, proudly announced would be moving from Geneva to New York City.
Lest anyone believe the U.S. delegation official’s promise to Reuters that “we will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” consider the fact that a report issued after the conclusion of the last Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) conference in July listed the goal of the agreement to be UN control of the “manufacture, control, trafficking, circulation, brokering and trade, as well as tracing, finance, collection and destruction of small arms and light weapons.”
That is a very comprehensive attack on “all aspects” of gun trade and ownership. Notably, the phrase “in all aspects” occurs 38 times in the draft of the ATT. The United Nations will control the purchase of guns and ammo, the possession of guns and ammo, and any guns and ammo not willingly surrendered to the UN will be tracked, seized, and destroyed.
A question that must be considered is what the UN will consider “adequate laws.” Will the globalists at the UN consider the Second Amendment’s guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms without infringement to be a sufficient control on gun ownership?
A more urgent and pertinent question is whether in the United States any laws will be passed at all.
As was witnessed on Wednesday, President Obama is prepared to accelerate the disarmament himself, if he can’t convince Congress to go along.
A story in Politico demonstrates President Obama’s infamous “We Can’t Wait” mantra in action.