UN Arms Treaty (MERGED)

This is a discussion on UN Arms Treaty (MERGED) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Spidey2011 I wasn't insinuating that you do think it's a good thing. I was referring to the UN's position on the treaty. ...

Page 8 of 20 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 286
Like Tree149Likes

Thread: UN Arms Treaty (MERGED)

  1. #106
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by Spidey2011 View Post
    I wasn't insinuating that you do think it's a good thing. I was referring to the UN's position on the treaty.
    Derp, sorry, failure to read carefully on my part.

    BTW, I haven't seen one person here talking about blue helmets.
    Just a bit of hyperbole.

    I'm simply concerned about the fact that some (most) of my guns will probably be classified as illegal if this happens to be pushed through.
    Absolutely will not happen. The State Department already forced in language that states that all nations will continue to regulate arms within their borders. This treaty changes nothing in terms of what gun control will or will not be passed here.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #107
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by mprp View Post
    No blue helmets needed. LE will enforce accordingly. Would that not be the first thing to happen?
    My thoughts exactly. I'm sure there will be a few local agencies here and there that have some common sense, but the vast majority WILL enforce it.

  4. #108
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,129
    Whether or not anything comes from this treaty, there is one thing that I can guarantee will happen.

    As soon as Obama's and Hillary's pens touch down on the paper endorsing this treaty, arms and ammo prices are going to skyrocket and any faith that the people had in this administration to uphold the people's 2A rights will be immediately snuffed out (with good reason). ...Looks like I need to go shopping this week...

  5. #109
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by Spirit51 View Post
    Here is a new article from Forbes Magizine about it. I didn't think that Forbes was a "shill" for the NRA.

    U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Forbes
    Mr Larry Bell (the author) does not write for Forbes. He is a contributer. Those that read Forbes know that they do publish writings from contributers that may vary from what the editors think. They do not publish whack a doodles but do publish articles from folks that are on the extreme side of views. So just becasue it is in Forbes does not mean that it is the truth or that Forbes supports the position. Just that it is a view point. With that said here are a couple of key quotes from Mr Bell. They have to do with climate change but shows how the man thinks. He also admits to writing about climate change (and other things) without being an expert on them. He calls himself a researcher.

    The central lie is that we are experiencing a known human-caused climate crisis, a claim based on speculative theories, contrived data and totally unproven modeling predictions. And the evidence? Much is revealed by politically corrupted processes and agenda-driven report conclusions rendered by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which are trumpeted in the media as authoritative gospel.
    I never really call myself a 'scientist.' I’m certainly a researcher, and I certainly write a lot of technical stuff, but, as I make very clear in the preface of my book, I'm not a climate scientist, and I never played one in the movies… . .there’s probably some effect of human impact on everything in our environment. That doesn’t necessarily make it dangerous—and doesn’t even, necessarily, make it bad.
    As far as the article itself about the treaty he does not have any information on the treaty itself. If you read carefully:
    While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

    Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
    Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
    Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
    Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
    In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.
    No actual text from the treaty which would be kind of nice since everyone is specualting. He is worse casing the situation like everyone else by guessing what the exact text will be and how it will actually be followed by the US and how it will impact our citizens.

    Look, I am no no sayer and am following this. But until the stupid treaty is finalized and the wording published to the public I will wait and not worry about it.

    I guess my main point though is the person that posted this makes it sound like Forbes wrote the article and supports the man's ideas. And again, no real information except speculation. No references to the points he makes...just ideas and stuff folks have been discussing for a few years now.

  6. #110
    Ex Member Array Bullet1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    963
    Speaking of WASTED MONEY,,,,, how much have we put in that HOLE.
    We should get out & demand it be moved elsewhere.

  7. #111
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,944
    I was able to find notes regarding the treaty as a pdf. On the U.N. web page. When I get home I will link and post excerpts. It is 121 pages. The notes are stuff the various delegations want included or clarified in the treaty.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  8. #112
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Spidey2011 View Post
    I wasn't insinuating that you do think it's a good thing. I was referring to the UN's position on the treaty. Surely they have SOME detail of what it is going to include, so why not release them? What is so important to them that they can't tell us about it?BTW, I haven't seen one person here talking about blue helmets. I'm simply concerned about the fact that some (most) of my guns will probably be classified as illegal if this happens to be pushed through.

    Spidey^^^^^^^^

    It must have been drafted by the same bunch who drew up the healthcare reform act,


    Member, the one Pelosi said, "Well we just have to pass it to see whats in it"
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  9. #113
    Senior Member
    Array Armydad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    553
    The liberal progressives (both Dem and Rep) have been working on us for over 100 years. You don't eat an elephant all at once, you eat it one bite at a time. So if this treaty is sold as a way to stop Russia from selling arms to Iran or something like that it will sound plausible. However it will make the sale and ownership of semi-automatic weapons illegal even by private parties. Well, since they do not know who has these weapons they will have to institute a registration process so that they can identify those "illegal" guns. They will make it sound Ok and innocent so that the uneducated and ignorant masses will go along with it. This is how it always works. In time they will have their system set up and perfected and then it will be executed. Make no mistake about it the one world order movement is alive and strong in both political parties. It will be up to the Constitution loving and abiding parties to save us from this mess. People who really believe in the oath to defend and protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic! Along with this thought, why is the Army having active training in urban warfare in places like Saint Louis, Chicago, etc? I sure hope that enough of our service members know to disobey a bad order otherwise the injustice and violation of Constitutional rights as seen in Katrina will look like a picnic in comparison. Other than pontificating on the internet do you have an actual plan in place should this occur? I hope that it never does but the Boy Scout motto of be prepared does apply. I don't need anyone to respond yea or nay, I just hope that you have all of your bases covered.

  10. #114
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by Armydad View Post
    However it will make the sale and ownership of semi-automatic weapons illegal even by private parties.
    The biggest reason I am pro-gun despite being what most on this board would consider very liberal, is that the evidence supports my position.

    I ask you, please produce some evidence for this assertion. If you don't, you are in no better a moral or logical position than antis who blab on about cop killer bullets and deadly assault weapons.

  11. #115
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,944
    ODS HOME PAGE

    So lets see what these evil conspirators have in store for us.......
    Algeria:
    6. Algeria does not support the inclusion in the scope of application of the treaty
    of internal transfers of arms, hunting or sport shooting arms used for recreational
    purposes, and collectors’ weapons.
    and later
    1. Each State party shall have the sovereign right to withdraw from the treaty.
    Canada:
    The goal of the treaty should be to curtail illicit and irresponsible transfers of
    conventional arms, and their diversion from legal trade into the illicit market. The
    treaty should not impede the legitimate trade in conventional arms, nor should it
    discourage or undermine the use of firearms for recreational activities or other
    forms of lawful and responsible ownership and use as recognized by States parties.
    Canada is particularly concerned that the treaty not place new burdens on lawful
    firearm owners.
    Canada therefore believes that the goal of the treaty should be clearly stated in
    its preamble and requests the inclusion of the following two (or similar) preambular
    paragraphs:
    “Recognizing that the purpose of the Arms Trade Treaty is to prevent,
    combat and eradicate the illicit and irresponsible transfer of conventional arms
    and their diversion into the illicit market, including for use in transnational
    organized crime and terrorism,
    “Noting that the Arms Trade Treaty acknowledges and respects
    responsible and accountable trans-national use of firearms for recreational
    purposes, such as sport shooting, hunting and other forms of similar lawful
    activities, whose legitimacy is recognized by the States Parties”.
    Cuba: (Cuba!)
    Recognizes the sovereign right of States to decide how to regulate internal
    arms transfers and the need to establish and maintain controls over the private
    ownership of conventional arms.
    and
    Transfers of conventional arms within a State will not be regulated by the
    treaty.
    Denmark:
    Firearms for hunting and sport shooting should be covered by the treaty, but
    there may be good reasons for distinguishing between the transfers of, for example,
    thousands of hunting rifles for an arms dealer in a foreign country and the temporary
    export of a rifle for personal use during a holiday trip. This should be reflected in
    the provisions of the treaty. As an example, the Protocol against the Illicit
    Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Their Parts and Components and
    Ammunition, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational
    Organized Crime, stipulates in its provisions on general requirements for export,
    import and transit licensing or authorization systems that States parties may adopt
    simplified procedures for temporary import and export for verifiable lawful
    purposes such as hunting and sport shooting.
    Germany:
    Germany considers that an arms trade treaty should not regulate transfers
    occurring exclusively within a national context. In addition, military transfers, either
    to a State party’s own troops or to allied troops within internationally recognized
    missions and/or operations such as those led or mandated by the United Nations,
    should be excluded.
    Malawi:
    The treaty should not apply to the:
    (a) Regulation of the movement or possession of conventional arms within
    the territory of a State party;
    Mauritania:
    Mauritania (on behalf of the League of Arab States)
    [Original: English]
    [30 March 2012]
    1. Principles
    (a) Fully complying with the letter and spirit of all principles enshrined in
    the Charter of the United Nations, including the legitimate right of States to acquire
    conventional weapons for legitimate self-defence and their right to produce, export,
    import and transfer conventional arms, their equal sovereign rights, the right to
    territorial integrity and political independence, the right of self-determination of all
    peoples, as well as all other principles of the Charter, including those prohibiting the
    use of force and threat of use of force and those promoting the pacific settlement of
    disputes;
    (b) Recognizing the sovereign right of States to regulate transfers of arms
    within their territories;
    New Zealand:
    A second cluster would record the legitimate role of the arms trade, including
    the right of States to manufacture as well as import, export and carry out other forms
    of transfer of conventional weapons for their self-defence and security needs and in
    order to participate in peacekeeping operations, as well as the sovereign right of
    States to regulate internal transfers and the ownership and possession of arms within
    their territories.
    and
    Persons travelling outside their home country with their weapons for
    recreational purposes, for example to take part in shooting competitions or for a
    hunting expedition, would not be affected by the terms of the treaty because, though
    they will cross international boundaries with the weapons, they would not be giving
    up title or control.
    Poland:
    A specific provision making clear that the treaty is not to regulate domestic
    transfers or interfere with gun-ownership rights should also be included.
    and
    The scope of the treaty should embrace all types of conventional weapons and
    materials, including small arms and light weapons and ammunition. Sporting and
    hunting weapons might but do not necessarily need to be included. We understand
    that the scope of the treaty also includes also activities to be controlled, which are
    specified in section IX.
    Saudi Arabia:
    Saudi Arabia wishes to affirm the importance of elaborating a universal
    instrument that curbs the illicit trade in conventional arms. At the same time, the
    proposed treaty on trade in conventional arms should not be used as a pretext to
    interfere in the internal affairs of other States in order to control their capacity for
    legitimate self-defence or to politicize or use sustainable development standards to
    that end.
    Sweden:
    The treaty should not regulate the movement or possession of controlled items
    within the territory of a State party, or their transfer to a State’s own armed forces
    abroad.
    Thailand:
    The inalienable rights of all States to regulate their internal affairs, protect
    territorial integrity and ensure political independence and commitments to the
    principle of sovereign equality in acknowledgement of peace and security should be
    assured.
    The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia:
    In terms of the range of transfers to be covered by the treaty, the former
    Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is of the view that they should be clearly defined
    and should realistically be confined to international transfers, for example, arms and
    related technology from the territory of one State to another, including Governmentto-
    Government or State-to-State transfers.
    Venezuela (The Bolivarian Republic of- Yes the government of Hugo Chavez!):
    The sovereign right of States to regulate arms transfers within their territory in
    accordance with their respective domestic laws must also be recognized.
    So forgive me if I don't get overly excited by the stories that Alex Jones and his buddies are putting out. The entire pdf is 121 pages long, I am sure that there are some snippets in it that they will spin like a gyroscope. Please take the time and read it for yourself and decide for yourself if the jackbooted thugs in the blue berets are on their way.
    torgo1968 likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  12. #116
    Member Array W9HDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Wausau, WI
    Posts
    228
    Too bad that link doesn't work...

  13. #117
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,944
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  14. #118
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    ODS HOME PAGE

    So lets see what these evil conspirators have in store for us.......
    Algeria:
    Canada:
    Cuba: (Cuba!)
    Denmark:
    Germany:
    Malawi:
    Mauritania:
    New Zealand:
    Poland:
    Saudi Arabia:
    Sweden:
    Thailand:
    The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia:
    Venezuela (The Bolivarian Republic of- Yes the government of Hugo Chavez!):
    I don't know mcp1810, seems to be a lot of wiggle room there.

    I look forward to seeing how someone is going to discount all of that.

  15. #119
    Member Array Bhamrichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Birmingham, AL.
    Posts
    234
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal...

    Alabama Constitution of 1901 - That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.

  16. #120
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,803
    What is your point? It is a bunch of politicians with an agenda writing to two other politicians with an agenda about a treaty that has not even been drafted yet.

Page 8 of 20 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

ammo prices rising because of treaty
,
did clinton sign the att
,
did hilary sign small arms treaty
,
did hillary clinton sign a treaty july 27
,
did hillary clinton sign the small arms treaty with the un
,

did hillary clinton sign the un small arms treaty

,
freedom from war
,

freedom from war snopes

,
politifact small arms treaty
,

un at&t treaty

,
un small arms treaty forum
,
would reid v. covert deny the small arms treaty
Click on a term to search for related topics.