As New York City plays host to a conference that will shape the UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) into final form, most 2nd Amendment supporters are concerned that stealth language or overly broad applications woven into the document will serve to separate Americans from their right to keep and bear arms. After all, why else would preliminary versions of the Treaty be so difficult to obtain and U.N. pre-conference position statements remain consistently absent from the internet?
Barack Hussein Obama leads the most anti-gun rights Administration in the nation’s history. Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, Janet Napolitano, and recently appointed ATF Acting Director B. Todd Jones have spoken often and passionately about the importance of implementing more restrictive gun control legislation.
But the gun-grabbing Regime will not be able to ratify the UN’s global gun control measure without first securing a 2/3rds majority of Senators to vote in favor. And it won’t be easy to convince 67 politicians to sign onto a document that countless critics have spent nearly a decade rightly representing as a worldwide assault on the 2nd Amendment. Especially not as the American public must once again be told that the document has to be “passed” in order to find out what’s IN it!
Late last year, the Heritage Foundation obtained an ATT “Draft Paper” from an NGO participating in the Treaty mark-up. The Paper makes it clear that the finished product would be broad in scope, controlling everything “from rifle scopes to battleships.” And although the Treaty purports to monitor only “international arms transfers,” document language shows the UN also wishes to control “internal transfers” as “any firearm transfer—meaning any change in ownership…might conceivably somehow affect another nation…”
Therefore, the ATT will demand that signatories control and monitor “transfers including ‘transport’ across national territory.” To accomplish this, a nation would necessarily “maintain records of all imports and shipments of arms that transit their territory,” creating records on “the type of arms transferred and their ‘end users’.” So as international records would be kept of all weapons bought and sold within the United States, the Treaty would create not only a global arms registry but the rules by which arms might be transferred and to whom.
Would Senators sympathetic to global arms control try to slip these and other unconstitutional ATT edicts past American voters?
DC politicians—including Republicans—have already written purposely misleading and legally ineffective language into both the 2012 and 2013 National Defense Authorization Acts for the sole purpose of deceiving the American public into believing that their constitutional rights were being looked after. As for treaties, they commonly include “reservations”, that is, language designed to “define and limit the effect of a ratified treaty.” A few dedicated, gun-grabbing Senators might get the idea of attaching a codicil to the ATT, claiming it would prevent the ratified Treaty from imposing upon the 2nd Amendment rights of the American people, thereby safeguarding the right to keep and bear arms.
Of course, they wouldn’t bother to inform Americans that the Arms Trade Treaty specifically forbids any reservations that are “incompatible with the object and purpose” of the Treaty! Would members of the Washington political class be so dishonest as to try such an underhanded stunt?
It’s doubtful that a sufficient number of Senators would risk the fury of the NRA and gun-owning voters. But then again, stranger things have certainly happened in the nation’s capitol. After all, a Supreme Court Chief Justice has just prostituted both himself and the Constitution!
Maybe keeping tabs on the Senate wouldn’t be such a bad idea.
Follow Coach at twitter.com @KcoachcCoach
Photo credit: Gregory Wild-Smith (Creative Commons)