Should we be afraid that the UN Arms Trade Treaty is a foot in the door to circu

1. 60

   jdmanistaposted 11 years ago

   Should we be afraid that the UN Arms Trade Treaty is a foot in the door to circumventing the 2nd Am?

   replyreport
2. 68

   Volitansposted 11 years ago

   No, we shouldn't. The UN Treaty you reference doesn't even exist yet, for one thing. No formal proposal has been submitted yet. So there's one reason not to fear.
   
   Second, this treaty, as it has been discussed, deals strictly with the international trade. It says nothing and never has been pointed towards domestic arms sales. Furthermore, the treaty does not ban the sale of arms or the private ownership of guns. The theoretical treaty is strictly concerned with preventing the sale of arms to terrorists, organized crime, and those who wish to commit genocide.
   
   There is a separate treaty that would like to take a stab at domestic arms sales, but unlike the Small Arms Trade Treaty, this other treaty has not received any recognition or support from the United States. Even if this treaty were signed by the President, it would not be considered binding on the USA unless it was ratified by a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate. And even if that happened, the Constitution trumps any and all international treaties, as ruled in Reid vs. Covert.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      jdmanistaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you for your input. I think that it is a stretch but I get worried as a Conservative any time liberals like Obama and Holder jump on board so quickly. Also, the question was "is this a foot in the door"? Thanks again.

      replyreport
3. 0

   Old Empresarioposted 11 years ago

   I don't think so. Since when has the US ever followed UN-mandated law or any international law? We're a rogue nation that does what it wants. I happen to agree that we should not let the UN tell us what we can and cannot do on our own soil.

   replyreport
4. 60

   jdmanistaposted 11 years ago

   I agree that this could be a bit of a conspiracy theory but here's my point. Entering into this treaty means that each member has to abide by the rules which are agreed upon. From what I have seen this means that they can regulate the movement of everything from small arms to submarines. Therefore, if our representatives decide that they must restrict the movement and the sale of these arms within our borders in order to abide by this treaty then they can decide it is within their power to sidestep the second amendment in order to follow the global law. Whether you believe in the means or not we have seen multiple instances of this president utilizing executive orders to make decisions with huge implications for our country. So, does the need to abide by new world order over power our individual states right?

   replyreport