This week, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” The scope of the proposed treaty is vast. It covers tanks, military vehicles, aircraft (including drones), ships, submarines, missiles and ammunition. It seeks to regulate arms import, export, transfer, brokering, manufacture under foreign license and technology transfer. The proposed global regulation instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.”
The George W. Bush administration opposed the treaty when it was first proposed in 2006. However, the Obama administration is giving it high-level support. This has generated legitimate alarm on Capitol Hill. Last week, more than 125 members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton registering strong objections about the treaty language being drafted, which they say is “likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.” In particular, the members are concerned about an international arms treaty that infringes on “the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms that is protected by the Second Amendment, as well as the right of personal self-defense on which the Second Amendment is based.” They conclude that the ATT “should not cover small arms, light weapons or related material such as firearms ammunitions.”
Arms Trade Treaty backers argue that because the treaty will only regulate international trade, it poses no threat to individual gun rights. That propaganda aside, defenders of the Second Amendment are right to be suspicious. The recent Obamacare debate over the Constitution’s Commerce Clause highlighted that goods and services need not actually cross state lines to be considered “interstate.” Successive Supreme Court rulings have extended the term to any commerce that even indirectly affects interstate markets - which in practice means all commerce. A ratified treaty, with constitutional authority, could be interpreted in a way that any weapon made with foreign components - or that might some day be exported, or that affects the overall arms market - could be said to be part of “international” trade.
There are also concerns that the ATT would be so broad, vague and poorly defined that it could be used as a political tool to obstruct otherwise licit U.S. arms sales and transfers to countries like Israel and the Republic of China (Taiwan). Some backers want the treaty to contain language regarding human rights, international humanitarian law and “sustainable development” that could be applied in ways that frustrate U.S. global strategy and oppose U.S. national interests. The final draft won’t be ready for a vote for several weeks, but even if radical changes are made to it, U.N. gun control is a misfire for America.
The Washington Times
A Defense of the U.S. Constitution From Its Domestic Enemies.
The post Twana provides below tells the story. The political apparatus spews lies and distortions to serve their own power hungry interests, and "we the people" believe them without studying the US Constitution.
Our Declaration of Independence also gives us another option if the maggots in Washington refuse to return to the Constitution.
Just finished banging out [yes a pun ] mails & phone calls to some of our 'leaders' This , if accepted is an act
of treason !! We will NOT allow the current occupants to surrender our national sovereignty to a bunch of 3rd
world thugs who murder their own citizens. What absolute hypocrites !! Fast & Furious being stonewalled & they
would give away our very Constitution !! There is a companion treaty LOST which would give up control of our
coastal waters !! Including mineral & navigation rights to , GUESS WHO !! no brainer . Scott Browns answer on
the Law Of The Sea Treaty stunned me, he thinks it's a good treaty !! Feel free to give him a shout . Give me your
thoughts . Thanks Charlie L
Scott Brown won his seat as a potential conservative but ended up a closet liberal....LOST treaty another unconstitutional effort...these people in Congress are without a doubt the most threatening enemies to America.
YEP.. Congress,Supreme court, Pesident has always have been a major threat to Liberty....Thats why the Founding Fathers left the job of policing them to WE the PEOPLE a job we failed at doing. Four branches of guvmint 1 We the People 2. executive branch, 3 Judical Branch,4 Legislative branch ..3 of those 4 branches are ABOVE the Law it seems.
Sure seems every law the GUVMINT critters pass restricts our Liberty & we lose FREEDOM.
Harry, it might not be too long, if the Lost Treaty and the ATT is enacted by the Senate and/or Signed by SOS Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama. They will not have to worry any longer, the pain of having the constitution will be removed from their consciousness never more to be remembered...GOD Bless America and the Patriots who will reset the Supreme Law of the Land, "The Original Constitution" with several things more clarified so future progressives, if they survive, will not be able to re-interpret what the original framers had not anticipated, happened.....
A post Twana added detailing authority under the US Constitution clearly explains the LOST, UN Gun Control cannot be legal under the US Constitution as there is no authority to do it. It the US Senate does pass the LOST and UN Gun Control, it will be a usurpation action, not supported by the US Constitution......both illegal actions, treasonous in my opinion.
hell,Harry,this administration has done soo much that can be proven "treasnous",
but, as long as the dems holds the senate, who in hell is gonna touch them!!!
I say, hold the entire democrat party for treason, all you have to do is look at their record.
they swore to uphold the constitution against ALL enemies, both foreign and domestic
and they have failed miserably.
the dem. party is guilty of Fannie & Freddie costing the taxpayers millions and franklin raines and his cohorts walked away with millions and are still employed by obama.
hang -em high!!
old sarge,'nam vet,'68,'70
Too many violations by the Obama Administration to count.....a Congress with integrity would have already impeached and convicted. It won't happen so we just as well stop talking about it and focus on rejecting the enemy at the ballot box which includes the anti-America Senate as well as Obama......the Senate and Executive control must be reversed and hold the House..........then we'll see what the republican apparatus does. If they don't make immediate reversals of Obama decisions/legislation, then we begin the removal process of republicans and replace with verified conservative/libertarian motivated servants.
For the most part, Congressional nominations have already been made, so it's mostly the same bad actors running. If you don't like your Republican rep, who're ya gonna vote for, the Democrat? Will that really move the ball down the field for us? Yes, but toward the wrong goalpost.
"we the people" must not vote for any democrat! we must fill both the senate/congress with republicans and Romney!! to have any chance of saving
America.! I want my America back!!
the one that this government sent me and millions to vietnam to fight against
old sarge,'nam vet,'68,'70
We need to chase the u.n. out of The United States of America. Kenya might be a good place for them.