Correspondence from Senator Coburn on UN Arms Trade Treaty

[Twana Blevins]

Dear Mrs. Blevins,

 

Thank you for writing in opposition to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.  It is good to hear from you.

 

As you may know, in July the United Nations held a conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, with the goal of regulating the global arms trade.  The conference did not agree to any treaty, however.  If the UN had agreed to a treaty, President Obama would have had the constitutional authority to enter into it, but it could not become binding law until ratified and approved by two-thirds of the Senate.

 

I do not believe there are enough senators to ratify a treaty of this nature.  In fact, during negotiation of the treaty, 44 senators, including myself, signed a letter distributed by Senator Jerry Moran notifying President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton that we would oppose ratification of any treaty that “in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition, and related items.” (http://bit.ly/Q4ZU5G)

 

In the letter, we noted our concern with the hostility of previous treaty resolutions’ language regarding private gun ownership, such as the call for the “highest possible standard” of control.  We also noted that UN member states have regularly argued that an arms trade treaty, to be effective, would require controls on transfers within states.  Such controls could result in unacceptable infringement of Second Amendment rights.  We were also concerned the treaty could be overly broad, covering “all types of conventional weapons,” making it unenforceable.  Finally, we stated our intention to oppose any treaty that placed the burden of controlling crime on law-abiding U.S. citizens rather than the states who have failed to block trafficking that is already illegal under existing laws and agreements.

 

Although the Arms Trade Treaty failed, supporters of the treaty have said they will continue pursuing it. I remained concerned that a UN treaty on the arms trade would compromise U.S. sovereignty and could increase violent crime.  Placing restrictions on law-abiding American gun owners will not curtail the brutal violence in other parts of the world.  Instead, governments should enforce the laws already in place, secure national borders, and punish those who commit criminal acts. 

 

I recently became a co-sponsor of the Second Amendment Sovereignty Act (S. 2205) which would prohibit the Administration from using the “voice, vote, and influence” of the United States during the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty negotiations to restrict in any way the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens, including regulation of civilian firearms and ammunition. 

 

Our freedom as a nation depends on our return to the principles of the U.S. Constitution and this cannot be achieved by trampling on the Second Amendment.  I will work to ensure the rights of Americans are upheld.  I oppose any and all efforts to mandate gun control on law-abiding citizens.  As a gun owner myself, I staunchly support gun ownership and firmly believe we have a constitutional right to bear arms.  At the federal level, you can be sure I will continue my efforts to strengthen our right to bear arms.  Additional gun control laws will do nothing to improve safety or reduce crime.  In fact, gun restrictions, no matter how well-intentioned, will simply ensure that only criminals have access to guns.  For more information about my efforts to protect the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding citizens, please see my website: http://bit.ly/JesLmE

 

Thank you for contacting me about this issue.  I will do all that I can to oppose gun control legislation and keep international law out of the U.S. judicial system.  Best wishes.

 

Sincerely,

Tom A. Coburn, M.D.

United States Senator

 

TC: cak

[Ronald Christopher]

Actually, any Treaty does not override our Constitution. It may stand equal to our Constitution but not above it. Therefore, even if passed, it will not remove our guns. On the bright side, if our senators and obama sign this type agreement, they can be held for Treason, Fraud and Violation of Oath of Office. That is, they failed to protect and defend our Constitution.

[Sylvia Joyce Guy]

Thank you Mr. Coburn, I so appreciate the way you live up to our voting assurance that you are the right man for this job.  We appreciate your faithfulness to God, Country and State and our Constitution of the USA.   

I so appreciate how you give us the awesome facts of what we are sincerely up against and YES, I so believe Americans will give up food, belongings and more but not our FREEDOMS.  Thank you Sir for one more victory...God bless you!

Joyce Guy, Minister-OK

[Ron Cross]

Honestly folks, it's to late. We've been committed to this program since the 1960's. Most folks haven't seen the facts of what I say. It falls into State Dept Doc 7277 "Freedom From War." Public Law 87-297 . The NRA and other so called gun rights groups  have failed to tell their supporters the facts of the matter. They have gone as far to say, the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution secures this right. That is a falsehood.... Sadly the right exsisted prior to the US Constitution, the Constitution only affrims the right dosen't grant it. You can look it up for youselves. Title 26 USCs sect 241 n 26. The word. "infringed" means no more than it shall not be infringed by congress. We'll we can see how that has worked out now...

So, what I see happening... Is it is possible that this, "Treaty" will be honored by the US. It may be at the cost of a civil up rising. Still it dosen't matter, it's a done deal through the UN Treaties which violate our rights and national sovereignty. You can see my videos with the facts.  I do indeed have the documents to support what I say, you can see them in my video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goLd5xSj39o&feature=plcp