UN Arms Trade Treaty Approved

[RetiredGySgt]

The ATT was just approved by the United Nations General Assembly. Iran, North Korea, and Syria did their very best to block it, but it has finally passed.

You are going to be hearing a great deal of nonsense about the ATT in the coming days. You are going to hear it is a treaty which will allow Obama to come fer yer gunz. You will hear it is a treaty which violates the Second Amendment.

And that is complete bullshit. But don't take my word for it. Read the treaty for yourself: http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/Draft_ATT_text_27_Mar_2013-E.pdf

When someone makes a ridiculous claim about the ATT, give them that link and ask them to quote the part where Obama gets to come for your guns, or quote the part which violates the Second Amendment.

Read it. Seriously. Read the goddam thing before you listen to some on air dipshit or foam flecked rabid blogger or watch some paranoid YouTube video accompanied by doom music.

READ IT!!!

The treaty requires exporters of arms to not export weapons to other countries if doing so:



Small wonder that Iran, North Korea, and Syria tried to stop it.

154 of 193 nations voted in favor of the treaty. That's a slam dunk.

It will become international law once 50 of those countries have ratified it. Considering the overwhelming vote in the General Assembly, that 50 country ratification will probably happen very quickly.


Gun makers are not happy about this treaty. They have been trying to poison little minds against this treaty for a while now, manufacturing all kinds of bullshit about what it is and what it does.

They are going to lose a lot of money if they can't sell arms to shitholes like Iran, North Korea, and Syria or to tinpot dictators.


So read the treaty for yourself. It's not that long. Won't take but a few minutes to read it and arm yourself against the massive landslide of unadulterated bullshit that's about to be shoveled into the mouths of mindless parrots over it.

Does that mean that the US can no longer ship tanks, aircraft, etc to the Middle East?

No, it does not mean that.

Why not? or is destabilizing Israel an accepted out come?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Unless the Senate approves it is not binding on the US, by the way. Just thought you should know, we don't care what 50 insignificant Countries in the UN think.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The ratification process for this treaty is going to make the Disability Treaty which fell short of ratification last year, look like a cake walk.

Every RW nutcase in the country is going to be predicting that this treaty is tantamount to the unilateral disarmament of all American citizens.

Disability Treaty Downed By Republican Opposition

Every leftwing nut case will be busy denying the potential for the treaty to be used to disarm Americans.

 

[Old Rocks]

And every rightwing nut will continue talking like a right wing nut.

 

[g5000]

If you would just pay attention to the wording of the phrase. "Would contribute to or undermine the peace and security"

Checkmate. Gun manufacturers may use imported parts and whatnot. So therefore any weapon in the US could be subject to this treaty, therefore subjecting law abiding citizens to the stipulations set forth in this "treaty." Furthermore, people do buy imported guns throughout the US. Which again would subject them to this resolution. It has plenty to do with my buying my gun at the local gun store.

Get your head out of your backside. Stop being so dense. You aren't winning this argument at all.

The only one being dense is you. The term "peace and security" is a term used several times in the treaty, and if you read ALL OF IT, you would know the context is INTERNATIONAL peace[/quote and security.

They state that right up front in the treaty:

Preamble

The States Parties to this Treaty,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling Article 26 of the Charter of the United Nations which seeks to
promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with
the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,

Underlining the need to prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in conventional
arms and to prevent their diversion to the illicit market, or for unauthorized end use
and end users, including in the commission of terrorist acts,

Recognizing the legitimate political, security, economic and commercial
interests of States in the international trade in conventional arms,

Reaffirming the sovereign right of any State to regulate and control
conventional arms exclusively within its territory, pursuant to its own legal or
constitutional system,

Acknowledging that peace and security, development and human rights are
pillars of the United Nations system and foundations for collective security and
recognizing that development, peace and security and human rights are interlinked
and mutually reinforcing,

 

[g5000]

And again further on:

Object and Purpose
The object of this Treaty is to:
– Establish the highest possible common international standards for regulating or
improving the regulation of the international trade in conventional arms;
– Prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in conventional arms and prevent their
diversion;
for the purpose of:
– Contributing to international and regional peace, security and stability;
– Reducing human suffering;
– Promoting cooperation, transparency and responsible action by States Parties
in the international trade in conventional arms, thereby building confidence
among States Parties

This crap out taking "peace and security" out of context and inventing some bullshit scenario from it at your local gun mart is just that, bullshit.

 

[g5000]

Read this:

Each importing State Party shall take measures to ensure that appropriate and
relevant information is provided, upon request, pursuant to its national laws, to the
exporting State Party, to assist the exporting State Party in conducting its national
export assessment under Article 7. Such measures may include end use or end user
documentation.

The US Constitution is thoroughly protected here.

 

[Clementine]

The ATT was just approved by the United Nations General Assembly. Iran, North Korea, and Syria did their very best to block it, but it has finally passed.

You are going to be hearing a great deal of nonsense about the ATT in the coming days. You are going to hear it is a treaty which will allow Obama to come fer yer gunz. You will hear it is a treaty which violates the Second Amendment.

And that is complete bullshit. But don't take my word for it. Read the treaty for yourself: http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/Draft_ATT_text_27_Mar_2013-E.pdf

When someone makes a ridiculous claim about the ATT, give them that link and ask them to quote the part where Obama gets to come for your guns, or quote the part which violates the Second Amendment.

Read it. Seriously. Read the goddam thing before you listen to some on air dipshit or foam flecked rabid blogger or watch some paranoid YouTube video accompanied by doom music.

READ IT!!!

The treaty requires exporters of arms to not export weapons to other countries if doing so:

(a) would contribute to or undermine peace and security;
(b) could be used to:
(i) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law;
(ii) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international human rights law
(iii) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to terrorism to which the exporting State is a Party; or
(iv) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to transnational organized crime to which the exporting State is a Party.

Small wonder that Iran, North Korea, and Syria tried to stop it.

154 of 193 nations voted in favor of the treaty. That's a slam dunk.

It will become international law once 50 of those countries have ratified it. Considering the overwhelming vote in the General Assembly, that 50 country ratification will probably happen very quickly.


Gun makers are not happy about this treaty. They have been trying to poison little minds against this treaty for a while now, manufacturing all kinds of bullshit about what it is and what it does.

They are going to lose a lot of money if they can't sell arms to shitholes like Iran, North Korea, and Syria or to tinpot dictators.


So read the treaty for yourself. It's not that long. Won't take but a few minutes to read it and arm yourself against the massive landslide of unadulterated bullshit that's about to be shoveled into the mouths of mindless parrots over it.

Does that mean that the US can no longer ship tanks, aircraft, etc to the Middle East?

Good question. Obama has sent billions in money, fighter jets, tanks and weapons to a terrorist supporting organization. He should be arrested.

 

[Antares]

One wonders why a pissant like g would want to submit to anything the UN does.

 

[OKTexas]

My two major objections, first it creates another UN bureaucracy that we will wind up funding the lions share of. Two, the amendment process, would amendments be subject so senate ratification? For me that's enough to vote no and I will tell my senators exactly that.

Unless you plan to write him a fat check......your Republican Senator wont give a fuck what you have to say.

Ya know, you make a pathetic cynic. Carry on.

 

[legaleagle_45]

The US Constitution is thoroughly protected here.

A treaty can not violate the Constitution, so that was never a concern (for me anyway). However, the treaty can be employed as a justification for executive action which I would disapprove. It is possible to be opposed to a law upon grounds other than the Constitution

 

[t_polkow]

It will never get ratified by the Senate either way.

And thank God and the NRA for that.

 

[legaleagle_45]

It will never get ratified by the Senate either way.

And thank God and the NRA for that.

Really should not bother you. If the proponents of the treaty are being honest than the impact of the treaty is merely to mimic existing US law. Thus, the US ratification of the treaty will neither add to or detract from the impact of the treaty. On the other hand, if the provisions of the treaty carefully managed by IANSA are susceptable to mischief, then that mischief has be avoided... So, no harm no foul.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

(a) would contribute to or undermine peace and security;
(b) could be used to:
(i) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law;
(ii) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international human rights law
(iii) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to terrorism to which the exporting State is a Party; or
(iv) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to transnational organized crime to which the exporting State is a Party.

Who decides what action is subject to these clauses? What are the specifics? With out specifics any thing could be ruled to meet the standard as one is not established.

At the very least the provisions would require a registry of arms held by private citizens and subject Arms manufacturers to provide detailed lists of what they produce and who they sell it to.

A registry is unconstitutional and illegal.

Further all these clauses could be construed to permit the confiscation of all private arms due to the fact criminals can and do obtain arms from numerous sources. It could be used to shut down gun stores and gun sales due to the fact there is no way to confirm no weapon lands in the hands of criminals. Using the the first clauses the UN could argue that violent crimes violate the Treaty and could order the forced confiscation of all weapons in private hands.

I can continue to name reasons this could be used to remove the 2nd amendment, this is so vague and open to interpretation as to allow any gun grab anyone thought they could get away with.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you would just pay attention to the wording of the phrase. "Would contribute to or undermine the peace and security"

Checkmate. Gun manufacturers may use imported parts and whatnot. So therefore any weapon in the US could be subject to this treaty, therefore subjecting law abiding citizens to the stipulations set forth in this "treaty." Furthermore, people do buy imported guns throughout the US. Which again would subject them to this resolution. It has plenty to do with my buying my gun at the local gun store.

Get your head out of your backside. Stop being so dense. You aren't winning this argument at all.

The only one being dense is you. The term "peace and security" is a term used several times in the treaty, and if you read ALL OF IT, you would know the context is INTERNATIONAL peace[/quote and security.

They state that right up front in the treaty:

Preamble

The States Parties to this Treaty,

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling Article 26 of the Charter of the United Nations which seeks to
promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with
the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources,

Underlining the need to prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in conventional
arms and to prevent their diversion to the illicit market, or for unauthorized end use
and end users, including in the commission of terrorist acts,

Recognizing the legitimate political, security, economic and commercial
interests of States in the international trade in conventional arms,

Reaffirming the sovereign right of any State to regulate and control
conventional arms exclusively within its territory, pursuant to its own legal or
constitutional system,

Acknowledging that peace and security, development and human rights are
pillars of the United Nations system and foundations for collective security and
recognizing that development, peace and security and human rights are interlinked
and mutually reinforcing,

HA! What a loon. That is a cover! The whole planet is aware of our gun control debate! It came up not soon after the Sandy Hook massacre. Irony? I think not.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The treaty requires exporters of arms to not export weapons to other countries if doing so..... could be used to..... commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law;

Of course, ANY gun "could be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law".

So could any car, if you drove it up on a sidewalk and started mowing down pedestrians.

So, this treaty flatly forbids any export of any gun to any country, period.

Ummm, those fighters we just sent to Egypt had guns in them, right? Uh-oh. Send 'em back, Mohammed.

BTW, any international treaty that contradicts the U.S. Constitution, is null and void within the borders of this country.

 

[Lakhota]

UN Arms Trade Treaty Approved

Good. Another step in the right direction.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

UN Arms Trade Treaty Approved

Good. Another step in the right direction.

Yep those gun free zones help the bad guy out plenty

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The ATT was just approved by the United Nations General Assembly. Iran, North Korea, and Syria did their very best to block it, but it has finally passed.

You are going to be hearing a great deal of nonsense about the ATT in the coming days. You are going to hear it is a treaty which will allow Obama to come fer yer gunz. You will hear it is a treaty which violates the Second Amendment.

And that is complete bullshit. But don't take my word for it. Read the treaty for yourself: http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/Draft_ATT_text_27_Mar_2013-E.pdf

When someone makes a ridiculous claim about the ATT, give them that link and ask them to quote the part where Obama gets to come for your guns, or quote the part which violates the Second Amendment.

Read it. Seriously. Read the goddam thing before you listen to some on air dipshit or foam flecked rabid blogger or watch some paranoid YouTube video accompanied by doom music.

READ IT!!!

The treaty requires exporters of arms to not export weapons to other countries if doing so:

(a) would contribute to or undermine peace and security;
(b) could be used to:
(i) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law;
(ii) commit or facilitate a serious violation of international human rights law
(iii) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to terrorism to which the exporting State is a Party; or
(iv) commit or facilitate an act constituting an offence under international conventions or protocols relating to transnational organized crime to which the exporting State is a Party.

Small wonder that Iran, North Korea, and Syria tried to stop it.

154 of 193 nations voted in favor of the treaty. That's a slam dunk.

It will become international law once 50 of those countries have ratified it. Considering the overwhelming vote in the General Assembly, that 50 country ratification will probably happen very quickly.


Gun makers are not happy about this treaty. They have been trying to poison little minds against this treaty for a while now, manufacturing all kinds of bullshit about what it is and what it does.

They are going to lose a lot of money if they can't sell arms to shitholes like Iran, North Korea, and Syria or to tinpot dictators.


So read the treaty for yourself. It's not that long. Won't take but a few minutes to read it and arm yourself against the massive landslide of unadulterated bullshit that's about to be shoveled into the mouths of mindless parrots over it.

Talk about nonsense the OP is full of it.
A large portion of Americans own foreign made firearms
this treaty affects ammo and parts (components) of those firearms.