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. ...
Just a bit of hyperbole.BTW, I haven't seen one person here talking about blue helmets.
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.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.
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...
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.As far as the article itself about the treaty he does not have any information on the treaty itself. If you read carefully: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.
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.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.
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.
Speaking of WASTED MONEY,,,,, how much have we put in that HOLE.
We should get out & demand it be moved elsewhere.
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
I would rather die with good men than hide with cowards
If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."
M&Pc .357sig, 2340Sigpro .357sig
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.
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.
ODS HOME PAGE
So lets see what these evil conspirators have in store for us.......
and later6. 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.
Canada:1. Each State party shall have the sovereign right to withdraw from the treaty.
Cuba: (Cuba!)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
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
“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”.andRecognizes 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.
Denmark:Transfers of conventional arms within a State will not be regulated by the
treaty.Germany: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.Malawi: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.Mauritania:The treaty should not apply to the:
(a) Regulation of the movement or possession of conventional arms within
the territory of a State party;
New Zealand:Mauritania (on behalf of the League of Arab States)
[30 March 2012]
(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
(b) Recognizing the sovereign right of States to regulate transfers of arms
within their territories;andA 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
Poland: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.andA specific provision making clear that the treaty is not to regulate domestic
transfers or interfere with gun-ownership rights should also be included.Saudi Arabia: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.Sweden: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.Thailand: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.The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: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.Venezuela (The Bolivarian Republic of- Yes the government of Hugo Chavez!):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.
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.The sovereign right of States to regulate arms transfers within their territory in
accordance with their respective domestic laws must also be recognized.
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis
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.