We are NOT happy...

[Guest jeweler jim]

Not sure if the links will work and haven't verified everything, but this does not give me the warm fuzzies

 

Obama Administration to Sign U.N. Arms Trade Treaty "In the Very Near Future"

 

 

Posted on May 17, 2013

 

 

Print

Share on print

Email

Share on email

Share

More Sharing ServicesShare on facebookShare on twitter

 

 

As we reported last month, on April 2, the United Nations General Assembly voted 153-4 to pass the Arms Trade Treaty, with the United States voting in favor and several countries abstaining. The vote in the General Assembly pushed the treaty process forward after negotiations twice failed to deliver on the goal of developing the treaty by consensus. The Obama Administration is expected to sign the treaty soon after it is opened for signature on June 3.

 

According to a May 16 Amnesty International article, a senior US diplomat--Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman--has confirmed the U.S. government will be quick to sign the new treaty. According to the article, Countryman said on Wednesday that the United States would sign the ATT "in the very near future."

 

If the deeply problematic treaty is signed, the fight will move to the U.S. Senate, where the Obama administration would need to find 67 senators to ratify the treaty.

 

Of course, anti-gun Amnesty International approves of the treaty and is advocating its signing and ratification. In addition, Amnesty International has gone so far as to claim that the treaty will not affect "domestic gun control regulations."

 

On the contrary, the ATT does indeed threaten the rights and privacy of American gun owners. Signatories will be encouraged to keep information on the "end users" of arms imported into their territory and supply such information to the exporting country. Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms. And the treaty also encourages states to adopt domestic legislation to facilitate the treaty's onerous requirements.

 

A majority of senators have already made clear their opposition to ratifying the ATT. On March 23, 53 senators endorsed an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2014, "establish[ing] a deficit neutral fund" to oppose United States entrance into the treaty. Additionally, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kans.), along with 32 cosponsors, has put forth a concurrent resolution expressing the Senate's opposition to the ATT, as it "fails to expressly recognize the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms and the individual right of personal self-defense... and thus risks infringing on freedoms protected by the Second Amendment."

 

Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified.

[Guest jeweler jim]

Okay, I'll be the first...

If he signs this and he has "sworn to uphold and defend the constitution," is this not an impeachable offense.

Yeah I know I'm dreaming, but would this perhaps be the final nail in his coffin politically?

[Badlands Beady]

Exporting nations, nearly all of which have civilian firearm control regimes far harsher than the U.S., will be encouraged to take the firearm control laws of an importing country into account before approving a transfer of arms.

If this part is true, why would it matter whether the US signs the treaty? The 2A isn't going to be repealed, regardless, so it would seem to me that if Italy, say, were going to refuse to export to us because of 2A, then they'll do it whether we sign or not.

 

Also, I note the word "encouraged." If Italy, again for example, has a choice of making money off of guns sold to the US, will they choose not to?

 

Who are the nations who have chosen to abstain, or vote No?

[Madd Mike #8595]

impeachment means nothing these days

he would NOT resign

[Subdeacon Joe]

Doesn't matter how many time he signs it, two thirds of the Senate must ratify any treaty.

[Col. Nathan C. Riddles, SASS # 7462]

I guesss I was wrong but I thought any treaty with foreign powers had to be ratified by the senate before it could be signed by the imposter in chief.

 

The devil with impeachment. That ain't worth diddly squat. s...p..i...t..! on the porch. Try him for treason. Convict him. Then build a gallows on the steps of the capitol on the same place he took his oath of office, and viloated numerous times & which he had no intention to keep and hang his worthless sorry butt along with about a dozen of his crooked chronies.

[Subdeacon Joe]

Still have to impeach him before you could try him.

[Guest jeweler jim]

Again, my major concern is in the last paragraph...

 

 

Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified.

 

If they ever get the 67 necessary we're screwed. We need to make sure that if we ever get the White House back that all the crap that the current administration has put in play will be eliminated.

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

Again, my major concern is in the last paragraph...

 

 

Unfortunately, once a treaty has been signed, it normally remains available for the Senate to ratify in perpetuity, unless a later president withdraws from it. This means that American gun owners must remain vigilant in ensuring this treaty is never ratified. The NRA will continue to keep gun owners up to date on any movement toward ratification, and will work with our allies in the Senate to ensure the treaty remains unratified.

 

If they ever get the 67 necessary we're screwed. We need to make sure that if we ever get the White House back that all the crap that the current administration has put in play will be eliminated.

Not good to have this thing hanging arould for some loser liberal majority to sign...

 

GG

[Madd Mike #8595]

Doesn't matter how many time he signs it, two thirds of the Senate must ratify any treaty.

does that include the house of reps? or just the senate side which is mostly libs

I sure hate to name drop: folks in the senate that would happly agree

[Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L]

does that include the house of reps? or just the senate side which is mostly libs

 

Only the Senate...

 

"The Senate does not ratify treaties—the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the United States and the foreign power(s)."

 

per:

 

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm

 

GG ~