Guns & Ammo Network


Collapse bottom bar
Subscribe
News Politics

What the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty Means to You (UPDATED)

by David Fortier   |  September 27th, 2013   |   162

United_Nations_HQUPDATE (9/27/2013): Despite heavy opposition from U.S. Senators and civilians, Secretary of State John Kerry signed the controversial United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) on Sept. 25.

The treaty establishes regulations for countries who sell or trade weapons across their borders. Official United Nations documentation would be required for the transaction of all types of weapons, from tanks to small arms.

Kerry and the Obama Administration hope their support will motivate other countries to sign on, but so far only six nations have ratified the treaty. The ATT requires ratification from at least 50 countries to become U.N. policy. China and Russia were among 23 nations who abstained from voting.

Many of the countries who didn’t sign the treaty cited vague language in the document that fails to punish countries who don’t play by the rules.

The new global legislation also threatens the constitutional rights of American citizens.

According to NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre on NRA News, “The U.N. has consistently refused to recognize the legitimacy of a firearm in any individual citizen’s hands, anywhere in the world, including the United States of America.” LaPierre added, “[The ATT] is nothing more than gun registration by a different name.”

Though Kerry’s signature is a questionable move on the global playing field, international treaties require 2/3 U.S. Senate approval for official ratification. To date, at least 35 of the 100 U.S. Senators have rallied against the ATT, citing the treaty’s infringement of constitutional rights.

Among those opposed, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., wrote a letter to President Obama, warning him not to take action without senate approval.

Despite the fact that the treaty would make imported firearms unavailable to American consumers, Kerry claims it would actually protect American people.

After signing the document, Kerry said, “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes.”

In response to Kerry’s ATT signature, Chris Cox, Executive Director of the NRA-ILA said, “The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.”

While it appears treaty ratification is essentially dead in the water, it’s still up to the American people to contact their Senators, and remind them to support their right to bear arms.

Original story below:

Currently there is a frenzy of speculation in the media concerning the Arms Trade Treaty the United Nations is pushing. This is nothing new of course; the United Nations began working on this treaty in 2006. However, delegates are convening this month to “elaborate a legally binding instrument on the highest possible common international standards for the transfer of conventional arms.”

The big change since 2006? Whereas then-President George W. Bush opposed the treaty, President Barack Obama is an ardent supporter of it. Due to this support many, including the Executive Vice President of the NRA Wayne LaPierre and 130 U.S. lawmakers, have spoken out against it saying it would strip Americans of their God given firearm rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Personally, I think the United Nations is a useless organization and I will not vote for President Obama in the upcoming election. Stepping back, however, it’s difficult to cut through what is blatant fear mongering and Washington politics as usual. If we were to believe everything we are being told about this matter, I would expect U.N. blue helmets to be kicking down my door at any moment. Carefully peering out of my bunker though, it appears to be a beautiful sunny day outside with not even an ATF entry team in sight. What gives?

Is it possible perhaps that the NRA is doing what the NRA does best: raising money? As a Life Member of the NRA, I am well aware of the good they do. I have long supported them with my hard-earned blue collar paychecks. But they are a political organization, and everything they say should be taken with a grain of salt. The same can be said for every politician. In the age we live in, none are to be trusted no matter if there’s an “R,” “D” or “I” after the name. Listen to what they say, then verify for yourself. Don’t be anyone’s patsy.

Now, let’s take a brief look at the Arms Trade Treaty itself. This is how the U.N. presents it:

“The global trade in conventional weapons – from warships and battle tanks to fighter jets and machine guns – remains poorly regulated. No set of internationally agreed standards exist to ensure that arms are only transferred for appropriate use.

Many governments have voiced concern about the absence of globally agreed rules for all countries to guide their decisions on arms transfers. That is why they have started negotiating an Arms Trade Treaty.”

Basically, they would like to regulate the sale and international transfer of weapons, both large and small. They are doing this to prevent the sale of weapons to groups the international community does not feel should be receiving them. Proponents of the treaty claim experts monitoring the international arms trade have recorded more than 500 violations of U.N. arms embargoes in the past two decades. Of these, only two resulted in trials and convictions. One concerned a Dutch businessman selling components to produce mustard gas to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. The other concerned two retired Chilean generals, plus seven others, for selling arms to Croatia in 1991.

The problem many have with this treaty is who decides what constitutes “appropriate use.” In many countries, there simply is no appropriate use for firearms and ammunition outside those issued to military and L.E. units. In many others firearms are tightly regulated, with only competition guns or perhaps some hunting models allowed.

The fear is the U.N. — especially with its long track record of failures — would meddle with the rights of American citizens and disrupt the American firearms industry. Many fear the Arms Trade Treaty would be a first step down a very dangerous road that could eventually lead to the disarming of American citizens and the destruction of the U.S. firearms industry. This is especially troubling when you consider the U.N. and the rest of the world give not one whit for the firearm rights of the American citizen.

While the curtailment of U.S. citizens’ firearm rights is certainly a possibility, there is more at stake then just this. The U.S. is the largest arms exporter in the world, and there are very real concerns the Arms Trade Treaty could be utilized to hinder U.S. industry and further damage our economy. Plus, there are very real concerns regarding U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. has long had very close relations with both Israel and Taiwan, and there are concerns the Arms Trade Treaty could be utilized to hinder or halt sales along with the transfer of technology to these two countries in particular. There is also the possibility the U.S. would be hindered in supplying other allies in various places around the world as well. To be frank, there is a lot at stake for the U.S.

One July 6, the Obama administration declared the United States will not allow the U.N. to impose any restrictions on Americans’ gun rights. Rose Gottemoeller, acting Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, tweeted the following message the same day:

Unfortunately for President Obama, the average American firearm owner does not trust him, his administration or his Attorney General. This is especially true with the on-going Fast and Furious scandal and cover-up, which many believe was a False Flag operation with a long-term goal to curtail Americans’ gun rights.

UPDATE (7/30): Arms treaty negotiations have failed in the U.N., and according to CBS News, the country to blame — or thank — for the unraveling is the U.S. and the National Rifle Association.

G&A Polls

Loading...

powered by

 

 

  • Marvin

    Anyone who believes that the Obama administration would protect our second amendments rights is a fool. Members of this administration have repeatedly stated their goal to disarm the citizens of this country who can legitimately own and possess firearms. The treaty that will be signed by the Obama administration will take affect and be enforceable until it is ratified by the Senate. With Harry Reid and the Dems in charge of the Senate you will see this treaty ratified and a substantial loss of our right to own personal firearms. This is the fist step to a total loss of our freedom to a "World Government."

    • Anthony

      I agree Marvin. The Obama Administration has done absolutely nothing to protect our rights under the Constitution. In fact the exact opposite is true, they have done everything they can to undermine the Constitution. This is a can of worms I don't think they should open but I'm sure they will anyway.

      • Alex

        What exactly has the Obama administration done to undermine our Constitution. That's what you wrote, now back it up with facts. I'm a gun owner, holder of a CCW.

        • Jack

          Just one example, introduced a tax in the Senate which against the Constitution, ObamaCare.

        • Gerry

          I'm a Life Member of the NRA and I agree with you. Every one of these articles are short on actual facts and long on "possibilities, concerns & many believe". Conjecture that the NRA is raising money is the only statement that rings true in this article.

        • Rick

          PULL your head out of the sand , and do a little reading !!! its not our responsability to educate you !!! its yours !!!

          • Alan_T

            Alex & Gerry probably already know Rick , they are liberal trolls here to try to spread propaganda .

        • Barney

          Get your head out of the sand and read the reports from D.C. (District of Columbia) A>K>A> USGovernment on prpopsed firearms restrictions.

        • George

          Read the NDAA Act Alex. And thats just one document.

        • Bob

          You don't sound like a gun owner.

        • John T.

          LOL! Are you serious?!?! Where do you live, under a rock? Where do you want me to begin? Seriously, if you don’t believe that this administration hasn’t been working to undermine the Constitution, then your either obtuse, or have been totally tuned out to the last 5 or so years.

          Let begin with the last load of gun control nonsense that they tried to foist on us. You remember all of those “assault” rifle ban proposals that ended up DOA in congress, don’t you? Obama continues to use every opportunity he can get to pimp more gun control legislation. Your CCW “right” would be gone in a heart-beat if he had his way. Don’t believe it? Ask his partner Rom Emanuel how this administration feels about CCW permits. “Assault” rifles are easy targets for legislators. Even many of the idiot republicans jumped on board. Apparently, they don’t grasp the concept of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED,” either. The point is that this administration has absolutely no pretense at wanting the utter destruction of the Second Amendment.

          How about the executive order that prohibits the importation of surplus US made firearms that would be sold through the CMP. Constitutional violation? You bet! Those rifles would be sold for the purpose of fostering marksmanship activities through the CMP. By refusing to allow those rifle to be imported, this administration is infringing on the very purpose of the Second Amendment. Can’t have a Second Amendment without ARMS! These are US made service rilfes, the very definition of ARMS that the founders intended when they ratified the Constitution!

          Not necessarily a constitutional issue, but this administration really got the ball rolling early on, in their war on gun owners, with Operation Fast and Furious. I guess it’s okay to try and restrict the US citizen’s access to arms, but drug cartels acquiring arms with BATFE approval is another matter entirely. The Fast and Furious fiasco was a set up from the start. The plan was to funnel guns across the border and then blame lax us gun laws for drug violence, using trace data. Unfortunately for this great and glorious administration, they got caught. That’s okay, because Holder won’t ever have to explain it all. He doesn’t care that he’s currently in contempt of congress. Why should he? You apparently don’t.

          How about the unconstitutional use of several government agencies to target political opposition? Using the IRS to audit and harass Tea Party or other conservatives has to violate at least the First Amendment. Rouges you say? Yeah, except that the highest levels of leadership of the IRS were involved. The EPA is also being investigated for using their powers to harass conservative opposition. Nice. Reminds you of a third world banana republic, doesn’t it?

          How about the NSA spying on US citizens? Bush’s fault, right? The Patriot Act is a load of garbage, but the major violations of privacy are happening on obama’s watch. Spying on US citizens is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but no big deal, right?

          Then we have that “train wreck” called obama care. Of course the supreme court found that pile of rubbish constitutional . . . as a TAX! Nice end run around the constitution. If we can ever get the turds in congress to pass the Fair Tax, we could then repeal the current tax laws. . . but I digress. The point is that the DOJ managed to force this non-sense down our throat by arguing that the penalty for not having insurance, is a tax. Which it is. However, the concept of FORCING people to engage in commerce is NOT constitutional. Yes, car insurance, blah, blah, blah. The difference is that nobody is forcing you to drive a car, but they are forcing you to have health insurance.

          Speaking of abortions… then we have the administration trying to force Catholic hospitals into paying for contraception for their employees, which of course conflicts with their religious practices. Along with that is the continual threat to revoke their non-profit status, if they refuse to comply with government edicts. Funny that the administration is not threatening any of the other orthodox religions that oppose abortion and contraception. Other religions, like . . . oh, I don’t know, maybe ISALM. Of course there are not many Islamic hospitals here in the US to threaten, but, you get the point.

          Look, I could go on for hours and I’ve already wasted enough time. CCW and gun owner? Yeah, fantastic. Thanks, hero, for your insightful and thoughtful comment. With gun owners like you, we’re sure to keep our rights.

          Why I am I being such a jerk? We have the first president in my lifetime that openly mocks the constitution and you have the gall to ask for examples?

      • edward satterfield

        we cannot trust obama he was for gun control in chicago before he was president and hillary and bill clinton were just as bad,no democrat is to be trusted,they want our second amendment rights stripped away and they have said so.

        • George Urbaniak

          Not true Edward, Joe Manchin, Democratic Senator from West Virginia, is rated A+ and better by the NRA for his pro-gun stance. There are many Democrats that are pro-gun. It is the East and West Coast Democrats, primarily, that are anti-gun and must be watched. Interestingly, the pro-gun ratings for politicians I've received from NRA seem to show more pro-gun Democrats than Republicans!!! I was very surprised at this myself, but it is so. I am not a Democrat, nor a Republican, I am for what is best for this country. Whoever has the best ideas along those lines gets my vote — its that simple!

          • mike

            i completly agree we need to stop with the labels and fighting one another so we can fix all the stuff that is wrong with this cuntry

          • John T.

            Yeah that’s great, until those pro-gun democrats vote the party line. Al Gore was a pro-gun democrat, until it no longer suited his purposes, then he became rabidly anti-gun. When he was in congress, he was “A” rated by the NRA.

            Although I do agree with the concept of voting for the ‘most’ qualified individual, despite party affiliation, the reality is that PARTY MATTERS. Very often, congress votes along party line. The blue dogs might be torn between supporting party sponsored legislation and upsetting voters at home, but more often than not, they will vote the party line. Why? Because being outside the loop in politics is worse than pissing off voters. It’s hard to unseat an incumbent, and they know it. The democrat party, as a whole, supports gun control. The party platform, the DNC, supports it! Don’t fool yourself.
            Two years ago I was arguing with a democrat who’s precis was that obama had been in office for x amount of time and he hadn’t done anything as far as gun control was concerned, therefore obama was not truly anti-gun. Well, so much for that. Obama had made some anti-gun moves, prior to Newton, but now, without an election to worry about, he’s way more overt.

            It’s not just west coast democrats, because OKC, KC, Houston, Dallas, etc, etc, etc, democrats continue to push the gun control agenda. Open your eyes.

    • matt

      Well its a good thing the dems aren't in charge then, besides which its the UN, which means that it has no power until its ratified not before, and its targeting primarily the sale of stuff we can't buy anyway

      • Geoffrey

        Thats how it always starts. Oh do not worry we are just going to stop you from getting this gun and then just another one and soon just the guns in your house not the Hunting gun in the gun club then oh just that last gun thanks soon you have a guy at your door coming in to take you away because we see that you might still have a gun that you kept and while we are at it we will pick up your kids who you taught to shoot because they might go against us in the future. G.

        • Dave

          Exactly, just look at what happened in England. Now just to go hunting (rifle only) they need a permit to buy 6 rounds of ammo.

    • John Myles

      I am in TOTAL agreement with you. Obama and
      Harry Reid are total enemies of any person who enjoy
      gun ownership and practices safe use of same.

    • Patriot-Research

      Marvin, I also agree with your statements, but let this be known to all involved in this Treaty and the Obama Administration, that if they attempt to disarm the American People that will bring on a Civil War in this Nation. That all all part of their Communist agenda. People really need to do their research and wake-up to whats going on in our Government.

      • Goodwater

        Why do you think the drones are flying all over the U.S.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mr.razorray Raza Ray

      Do any of you know the entirety of voting records of all Democrats/Republicans/Independents pertaining to 2A issues or is it just easier to paint with a broad brush so that your political leanings come to the fore?

      Fact: A NC Democrat cosponsored HR 822.
      Fact: Senate Republicans shelved HB 111 here in NC.
      Fact: Brady Campaign started and run by a Republican w/ Reagan's blessing and support.
      Fact: Harry Reid's gun voting record: http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Harry_Reid_Gu
      Fact: Mitt Romney is ANTI-2A, but "so called" Republicans will still vote for him?

      As a Libertarian I laugh at the absurdity of the "right" and "left" when it comes to their perception of all things 2A and have to hold my nose, as the writer of this article has, when it comes to the propaganda driven NRA of which! I too, am a member.

      Fat Chance ANY gun grabbing legislation will pass in this nation regardless of political rhetoric. Think before ye post.

      • mikey D

        YOU GO BOY TELL TO PULL THERE HEADS OUT OF THERE BEHINDS AND FIND OUT THE TRUTH Thank you Ray!!!

      • John T.

        Again, party matters. Yes, indeed, the Republicans are no saints. Most of them would sell us down the river for political expediency just as quick as the democrats. BUT, as a party, as a whole, the Republican party is generally MORE pro-gun than the democrats.

        Romney was the lesser of two “evils.” If he had won, we, the Nation, would have been better off. Instead, we got another four years of the obama.

        By the way, I clicked on the link you provided, and according to your own link, Harry Reid is hardly pro-gun. So, what was your point, that Harry Reid supports gun control?

        You are correct about Ronald Reagan, which truly makes me sad. I guess it’s as Sowell once said, to paraphrase, “sometimes, some really intelligent people say some really stupid things.” Perhaps age and the assassination attempt had a lot to do with this? Anyway, the origins of the Brady Campaign doesn’t alter the fact that their most ardent supporters are so called “liberals” and democrats, not Republicans and especially not conservatives.

    • Steve

      Has anyone notice that this subject has got extremely limited media attention? With the exception of FOX news, I haven't seen anything on our rights be threatened.

    • CaptMike

      Harry Reid is pro-gun – look it up. He was behind the creation of one of the largest shooting parks in the country and is endorsed by the NRA

      • Voyager

        They're pro-whatever when it gets them votes, and doesn't mean anything, but when it comes time to make the hard calls, they always vote for the statist.

        Recall how many of the "staunchly" pro-life democrats, when it came to chose whether they were going to vote to use taxes to fund abortion, or vote against Obamacare, they all nicely lined up and voted for Obamacare?

        • LiberaltarianND

          "They're pro-whatever when it gets them votes, and doesn't mean anything, but when it comes time to make the hard calls,…"

          Wouldn't your comment also be true of any politician, regardless of political affiliation or beliefs? Here in the red state of North Dakota last year the state legislature considered and passed a bill upholding the rights of individuals to keep lawfully owned firearms, properly secured, in privately owned vehicles of all types while parked on land owned, rented, leased, or otherwise controlled by an employer or business, forbidding the employer or business from enforcing so-called "gun-free" zones.
          Guess what, it was sponsored by a Democrat, passed overwhelmingly through a state senate committee, which was half Dems, yet rejected by one representative in my district, a Republican. I was worried that the other representative, a quite liberal Dem, would also reject it, but he didn't telling me that he voted for the rights of the individual. The state senator in my district, also a liberal Dem with an A+ NRA rating, sat on the senate committee that approved the measure and suggested it be sent to the house to be voted on. They weren't scared of the Republican majority, they acted and voted on principles that are shared by North Dakotans and Americans.
          Be careful when making "blanket pronouncements" labeling one side as the bad guys. After all, the "insurance tax" in the Affordable Health Care Act (aka "Obamacare") recently upheld by the US Supremes, was originally an idea that came out of a Republican think tank in the 90's and was supported by Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
          I recommend that each of you get to know your representatives infyour state and federal delegations and pay attention to EVERYTHING they do, not just the "hot button" issues.

      • John T.

        Okay, I looked it up. Harry Reid IS NOT PRO GUN. Or, yours and my definition of PRO GUN vastly differ. Supporting magazine bans and background checks do not make someone pro-gun in my opinion. I guess you support such things?

    • Mike

      Sit, Watch, and Wait. When apporiate remember "This We'll Defend". Blue helmets will be easy to see coming. It will be the neighbor that you always thought would be true to freedom that wil catch you by surprise.

    • keno

      I dont think any president will lift a finger to protect the 2nd amendment, or any amendment indicating rights and civil liberties for the american sheeple. A tactical agenda is in place where, obviously, small agitating events continue occurring over time, to gradually sway the mind-set of the sheeple in the direction these people – powerful internationalist people – they want them to go. And no expense has been spared to employ the best human behavior experts to study research experiment and derive the best means to this end, or to implement a course of action to achieve an objectie.

  • mmkkpro

    Its going to end up like the movie terminator,the population will be hunted down by 30,000 armed drones,population will have to survive in sewers ,caves where ever they can while politicans will be living like kings,our children have been sold out,no future for our grandchildren,i love my country but the fact is all that matters is greed,and slavery for the masses,one world government means complete destruction of freedom,human rights

  • https://www.facebook.com/josh.nieman Josh Nieman

    In the first part of the article you mention the need for a skepticism to anything said by any politician, regardless of party affiliation. You then cite various quotes and promises by people with anti-gun and anti-self-defense legislative support who are now claiming they will support our right to self defense and/or firearm ownership. I think that says it all, right there.

    They're full of it.

    • Goodwater

      A treaty signed by the president and passed by the Senate becomes law and overrides our Constitution. Remember, Justice Ginsberg herself stated that we need to be guided by international laws not what our Constitution says.

  • Jim

    While I don't think this will have a major impact on American gun rights, and will more impact the ability of the firearms industry to fulfill overseas orders and the ability to import cheap weapons, curios and relics to the US along with the ammunition that goes with them, I don't agree with the treaty in principle in the terms "appropriate use" clause.__As the saying goes, one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter wether it be the IRA, Mujadeen, Vietcong, Redfaction, etc. This has the potential to cut of countries from weapons they may need to fight for thier independance. Sounds more like a way to keep that from happening.

  • brian payne

    i would never consider giving up my guns, never. first off, theyre worth too much, second, what if sometime in the future, i would need them? id be caught pissing into the wind, i think….

    • Phil

      Right on Brian, when you hear they have my guns you'll know I'm dead !!!

  • Daniel

    History has a way of repeating its self & the only way some one can have/take my guns is after they Pry It From My Cold Dead Fingers! One Nation Under God is no longer said durring the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools! My question is how long will it be before our money No longer says "In God We Trust"??? http://snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp

    • http://www.facebook.com/fx.macfarlane FX MacFarlane

      Notice a lot of other folks, including the picture taker didn't have their hands over their hearts either. "

    • Tommy

      I just read the other day that the only time a sitting president didn't go to the Memorial day services for our fallen soldiers was THE LAST THREE YEARS IN A ROW!!! PRESIDENT I'LLBOMBYA HAS SHOWN OVER AND OVER, HE IS NO FRIEND OF AMERICA. He won't salute the flag, he refused to be sworn in on a bible, using the koran instead. He and Killary both have said they are for the treaty. So in the event that the Demoncrats try to run her for president in 2016 keep that in mind…

      • wibbys1

        You got it right Tommy!

    • Les

      Where do you live that the Pledge is not said, or not said correctly, in the schools? Our public school corporation recites the Pledge every morning, and at school board meetings. I can't imagine we are alone in this.

    • matt

      In god we trust and under god, came about in the fifties when we were concerned about the godless commies. It was meant to set us apart from them

      • Gary

        And pray tell what do we have in the White House now???

  • Mack Missiletoe

    I agree with Daniel. Didn't check the link though.

    Americans will not give up their guns! Guns are our basic defense from oppressive governments and invading enemies. This is knowledge. This is something that comfortable anti-gun people unfortunately may not understand–if you take away our guns America will be unable to defend herself. We will then be attacked some time later. Enemies do not want to fight in America BECAUSE many of us have guns. As citizens we blend in and could take down an enemy soldier at any time. Sound Familiar? Yeah… Iraq.

    I wish the world were peaceful too, but it's not. It's a hard wall to sit against. If you want to continue enjoying your cushy life you NEVER give up your defensive tools.

    Also, if the government tried to take all our guns away–there'd be a war. I speak out of wisdom. I do not want to fight in a war or have to shoot someone–but I will fight for my nation's freedom and safety. A group of people unlawfully trying to disarm us by force is an enemy of the USA whether they realize it or not. I'm not saying it's appropriate to shoot them–for instance I would not shoot Police during the Katrina incident–I'd take them to court and sue the sh1t outta them for taking my guns unlawfully and again for not giving them back properly.

    Anyone with a slick tongue and a pretty face who comes to you and tries to talk you away from your guns… better keep an eye on them they have ill intentions.

    President Theodore Roosevelt had it right.

    • Durwin

      Unfortunately, people do not read or pay attention. Two things Lenin and Hitler had in common, among many, is that they gained power via armed citizens and once in total power, stripped them of their weapons. Why, to keep their power of course.
      That is the goal of many in this country, not just poiticians, but various corporations as well. Why, so they can do whatever they want, without regard to the public's desires. I have repeatedly said to limit terms in Congress. Why? To lower certain ones from gaining too much individual power.
      Some say that Tom Kratmsn's book, "A State of Disobedience" is an overboard characture of the liberals and conservatives and not realistic. However, read it again and keep in mind of what is happening in the world and you can see the possibilities of it happening.

    • LiberaltarianND

      Amen, brother Mack.

    • the thief

      Be weary though of "disaster" situations. No one is taking my method of defense, how am I to know what a soldiers intentions are? Just because another man, wearing a symbol on his shoulder, toting a weapon, tells me what to do, doesn't mean he has power over me. I am. You have no control over what I will do with my body, when I encroach upon another's rights, than another has an obligation to reprimand me. But as for me, I will carry, and never give up my right to defend myself, my family, and my lover.

  • https://www.facebook.com/michael.edelman2 Michael Edelman

    Can we trust Obama to keep his word? Not if past experience is any guide. Remember that he promised no American with an income under $250,000 would see a tax increase. And he did assure Putin that he'd be a lot more "flexible" after the election.

    • http://www.facebook.com/fx.macfarlane FX MacFarlane

      Yet to see where anyone in that category does.

  • DocRod

    First of all, I will never support Iran having any power over our nation under any circumstances. Putting a hostile government such as Iran in charge of the enforcement of this treaty is a direct violation of our Bill of Rights and an affront to all American citizens. It is mental illness, and the American people will not tolerate their profoundly sick society to have any influence over our lives. All that you have to do is read the sections of the treaty specifically aimed at America to understand what our true enemies are trying to do to us:

    In order to avoid being labeled a “human rights abuser,” the United States (along with all member states) is ordered by the UN to comply with the ATT. To compel this compliance, the ATT empowers the UN to force Congress to:

    • Enact internationally agreed licensing requirements for Americans

    • Confiscate and destroy unauthorized firearms of Americans while allowing the U.S. government to keep theirs

    • Ban the trade, sale, and private ownership of semi-automatic guns

    • Create and mandate an international registry to organize an encompassing gun confiscation in America.

    I think… NOT!

  • Jay Wright

    Looks like having guns no one in an official capacity knows about might be a good thing.

  • Anishinabi

    Four more years and we will all be living in "Chicago." Last chance to turn the ship around.

  • Ross Walters

    Yet another anti-Obama rant meant to whip gun owners into a frenzy.
    Fact is there is no more proof Obama is anti-gun than evidence that Romney is pro-gun.
    Go ahead and vote for the candidate of you choice but don't let fear color your vote…that was a Bush election gimmick.

    • Paperjamin

      Romney is no different from Obama. Both are bought and payed for puppets. I think this whole frenzy is about rallying the people behind Romney, which no real republican should support. The powers that be are picking Romney, he even attended Bilderberg this year.
      We all know how to save this country, but too many have been brainwashes to believe he's "crazy" What is crazy about upholding the constitution, having sound money policies, and thinking that by policing the world we are making friends. Everyone who disagrees with me, or Dr Ron Paul, please research for yourselves and not the disinformation that the media is feeding us. We are all being lied to on a massive scale…..

    • John

      Look at Obama's voting record while he was a senator for the state. That will tell you what he is all about.

    • informed

      Do some research buddy. look into legislations he voted against and the anti second amendment rights group he backed.

  • mythaeus

    What you failed to mention are some very important information that helps gun owners understand and be ready to fight the treaty, IF necessary.

    First of all, the wordings aren't all there yet. That's what the UN meeting until the end of this month is about. The NRA is there to keep watch and hopefully ensure that private gun ownership is not impacted by the treaty. People need to support the NRA because they are the only one doing anything against it right now. As individuals, we can't do anything at the moment.

    Secondly, treaties must be ratified by the US Senate by 2/3. That's a HUGE hurdle even for a Dem-controlled Senate. The chance of it getting ratified, especially if it includes measures against private firearm ownership, i.e violating 2A, it extremely, extremely low. Still, anything is possible. If it gets there, we need to call our Senators and express concerns and tell them to vote against the treaty.

    Thirdly, if by some ridiculous chance that it passes and POTUS signs it (I said POTUS because I don't trust Romney when it comes to gun rights either), the NRA will step in with a lawsuit. Here again is where supporting the NRA is needed. If necessary, the case will go all the way to SCOTUS, where precedent has been well established (in at least 3 separate SCOTUS decisions) that treaties cannot trump the Constitution. Now, if by some anti wet dream miracle that SCOTUS reverse its stance….well, then molon labe.

    Point is that while the impacts are true, the fact is that it's nearly impossible for it to ever become one.

    Al
    PS: FTR, while I'm an NRA member and a certified instructor, I rarely ever push people to support the NRA because of its past conducts, most recently inviting Colonel Romney to the hen house. Still, they are the best we have in something like this.

    • nate

      There is also N.A.G.R national association of gun rights fighting this as well. Check em out

  • FH Brass

    I cannot believe the level of hatred and fear-mongering being expressed by many on this page especially over nothing! President Obama has not sought to control any American's guns up to now nor do I expect he ever will. For all of you opposed top the regulation of the international sale of weapons you should remember that there are lots of very nasty people in the world who currently have access to some very nasty weapons and who, given the opportunity, would not hesitate to use them against us and in fact already have already done so that would no longer would have that ready access. They go by names like Taliban, al Qeada, and any of a couple dozen terrorist groups that have no love for the US or any American and are willing to demonstrate that hatred with a gun. Y'all need to lighten up a bit and remember that G W Bush was responsible for more hits to our civil rights than B H Obama ever has!

    • Sig 556

      I guess you have not heard about " Operation fast and furious" Obama Holder and crew in action. Wake up !

    • Emil

      you will have to do more than just making this statement
      Y'all need to lighten up a bit and remember that G W Bush was responsible for more hits to our civil rights than B H Obama ever has!

      that sure not how I see it!

    • Al aidt

      You Sir are sadly misinformed. In every instance that Obama has voted, in each elected office he has hejd, he has voted against the 2nd Ammendment. He even told Sarah Brady he was going to get gun control under the table. You need to do some research. This is the most dangerous president to our freedom in history. Wake Up, this guy is a true SOB.

    • OldCyeKoe

      I don't care who you want to dump the blame on. I didn't like Bush and I can't stand Obama. Neither was presidential material. Yup, some real turd-balls have guns and intend to use them against us. Laws, however, have NO EFFECT on lawless people. Gun laws and restrictions only impact law-abiding citizens, NOT criminals, third-world terrorists or lunatics.

  • ArmedLiberal InMO

    Consider this. At least 13 of the Dems in the Senate have sent open letters to the State Department stating that they will not allow US Soverignty to be upserped by an International treaty. That puts even less likelihood on getting 67 Senators to ratify the treaty, unless some GOP Senators would be willing to send us all under the bus.

    Keep them all aware that We the People are watching.

    • Gary

      As near as I can tell the GOP sells its votes to the highest bidder with Romney at the lead so beware.

  • Tavi

    As with most Obama & Crew legislation, we must simply wait till it is enacted in order to find out what is in it.

  • Bill K

    I believe, what I call the Old Guard, will rise to the occasion and defend the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, like the original fathers and patriots did, many years ago. As the Japanese found out in WWII, if the U.N. and it's puppets try to take firearms away from law abiding citizens of the USA, they will awaken a "Sleeping Giant".

  • MarineImaging

    In God We Trust appeared on the money in the 50's but In God We Trust appeared in the development of every founding document of this country and in letters and in the minds of those hitting the beaches and fighting through the jungles…, don't belittle God or our Trust in Him.

  • Don

    There is no greater symbol of freedom than being able to legally purchase, own, and use a firearm for all legal reasons, including self defense. This is why I donate frequently to the NRA.

  • T.D. Honeycutt

    David, I'm pleased you wrote this. I agree with most of what you said. I don't believe the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty has any affect on my rights as a gun owner, concealed carry permittee (important description), hunter, shooter, security officer, NRA member etc.
    Like you, I believe the NRA campaign is just that. I received an email entreaty just the other day. If there's an appeal for money in any message, you can reasonably expect that the primary purpose is to raise money.
    I don't trust President Obama or any politician to protect my rights – ultimately laws protect rights, and the Supreme Court is the arbiter.
    The Supreme Court did just that in the Heller and McDonald cases (and now citizens of Illinois and the District of Columbia must enforce those rights, it won't happen without citizens taking charge). There is an individual right to possess and use and carry – with reasonable limitations – firearms. Anything that comes out of the United Nations must be ratified by the Senate. There's no sneak attack here.

  • RETFED

    IT IS MY BELIEF THAT MOST DEMOCRATIC ADMINS DO NOT SUPPORT THE 2ND. I VOTE FOR THE INDIVIDUAL BUT I ALWAYS KEEP MY EYE ON THE BALANCE OF POWER IN WASHINGTON. I DO NOT DESIRE TO LET ENOUGH ANTI 2ND FOLK GET IN POWER TO CURTAIL THE 2ND. THERE ARE MANY DEMOCRATIC POLS WHO DO SUPPORT THE 2ND WHO I COULD VOTE FOR UNLESS IT WOULD GIVE DEMS THE POWER TO CURTAIL THE 2ND. ANY POLITICIAN IS SUBJECT TO ARM TWISTING BY HIS PARTY( IF IN POWER) TO WITHHOLD GOODIES FOR HIS STATE OR DISTRICT OR CUSHY ASSIGNMENTS. I ALWAYS VOTE TO PROTECT THE SECOND AMENDMENT FIRST THEN DEAL WITH ALL THE OTHER ISSUES.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bert.mccurley Bert Mccurley

      Finally someone who seems to understand the facts! Every politician is subjected to scrutiny by there own party! Just remember if they were to go after our 2nd amendment rights they would find out why our founding fathers put them there! Besides we have the largest private army in the world, hunters and gun owners in the UNITED STATES (some very well trained!)

      • DoubtfulinTX

        That’s only if they don’t dis-arm all of us first. Any government stockpiling 2 billion rounds of hollow pt ammo as well as thousands of firearms while at the same time trying to pass stringent new gun laws has something up it’s sleeve. No doubt.

  • Bill Carrier

    As free men living in a free nation we should never allow a so called international treaty to undermine the Constitution and the Sovereignty of the United States. To do so is nothing less than TREASON! Any elected official who votes to ratify this abomination should suffer the wrath of all voters in the next election!

    • dstudie

      No, they should face a trial and execution for treason.

  • Warren

    Matt, by your comment it would appear you have read the entire document. If you have, and you understand all the legalese, then one must assume you are also an attorney. Right????????????????

  • CDB

    Just more laws to hide behind and hinder us from doing the right thing, like supporting our ally Israel or others in thier fight for freedom, which up until a short time ago was our nations goal, spreading of freedom and democracy. Freedom of choice, in determining ones own destiny. Just lost that with Healthcare law, it's un-Constitutional. Fast and Furious proved the Fed's goal with weapons to Mexico, and allowing the President of Mexico to state their gun problem and drug wars was our fault. President wanted to exercise Executive Privledge to help hide that and cover Holder with Congress. First sitting AG in history charged with contempt. When asked if his Justive department would prosecute him, they said "no". No surprise there. Constitution is 14 pages long, Healthcare law is 2,700…..really. We'll need a whole new branch of government just to interpret it and administer it, those are the people that will make the law. Same will go for the UN Treaty, law, or the interpretation of it will be made by those appointed to the position. Think they will be pro-gun and pro-Constitution?

  • Ned

    Here's a link to text from the proposed treaty, and easy to follow points showing the potential damage: http://www.captainsjournal.com/2012/07/11/u-n-arm

    As for statements like "what has Obama done to undermine gun rights, I say – check out the REAL reason for Fast & Furious. It wasn't to promote gun rights: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/what-fast-and-f

  • BJC

    Obama and his administration are doing everything they can to take freedom away from the American people. Our freedom of choice has already been infringed upon with the so called healthcare law witch is unconstitutional no matter what Obama's supreme court says. It's full of things that have nothing to do with healthcare. Why dose it have in it a sales tax when you sell your home, what dose that have to do with healthcare, nothing it's just Obama's underhanded way of of stealing from the American people. Obama and his administration have to go, no if's, and's, or but's. When I joined the military I pledged to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. Obama and his administration are domestic threats to the Constitution of the United States of America.

  • Don Neil

    I think we should definatly not support this treaty and remove all support of the UN . I also believe Eric Holder and his constiunts should be tried for muder and given stiff prison sentences

  • https://www.facebook.com/matthew.groom.16 Matthew Groom

    "They are doing this to prevent the sale of weapons to groups the international community does not feel should be receiving them."

    Yeah, like guerrillas, rebels, and minorities resisting genocide. The international community doesn't feel like YOU should be receiving them either, BTW. What makes you think they'll allow a company which sells guns to civilians to sell guns to the governments of foreign nations?

  • tony

    For all of you that blame the Obama administration need to remember that gun bans hve been in place long before he came along. If you want your freedoms, vote for Ron Paul. He wont be on the ballot, so write him in, and see what happens. Then you will see what kind of corrupt bs we are dealing with. They will never let a constituional warrior be president because this goes way above the presidents head. Obama is just a willing pawn. Write Ron Paul in.

  • Trevor

    Almost as great a concern as our rights within the US are our rights beyond our borders. A treaty such as this could absolutely decimate the hunting industry in southeast Africa, South America, New Zealand, etc… Many of those guides, PHs, and outfitters have bases or affiliates in the US.

  • Jeepers Creepers

    If money and power Goes to heads of most people. THEN WE need a president that can keep a cool head understand that the money and power is not all his to control. My write in vote will be for Sarah Palin or the last Of JFK's children. One of them would make a great president. Not money hungery or head power hungery.
    I also would like to Keep all my handguns (37) and rifles (5). But that number goes up and down. Buy and sell. I would like to keep that freedom. If the U.N. Treaty passed. Could I still reload for my firearms? Most are wildcats and no over the counter ammo is made for them.

    • ZENPATRIOT

      Under the UN treaty, you would have to obtain a manufacturing license to handload.

  • James Greene

    This is the kind of writing that keeps me subscribed both on line and in print to Guns and Ammo. As a democrat, and an NRA member, I am grateful for the thoughtful consideration given to this issue. In fact, the demonizing tendancies of the NRA are what kept me from joining for several years after I became a gun owner. I don't know if I will like where the treaty will end up, but I am waiting untll they actually write something before passing judgment.

  • Paul

    It was stated a long time ago by a certain communist leader that " communissiom will win the war in the U.S. without ever having fired a shot " something to think about. People wake up it's only a matter of time before the law abbiding citizen will become a common wanted criminal for owning a firearm.

  • Sgt. Dale

    The U.N can have my guns when the PRY MY COLD DEAD HANDS FROM THEM!!! I took an oath to uphold the Costitution in 1986. I will fight and die if I must to keep my OATH! If the UN sends in Blue Helmets or whatever, I will do my best to let them know that they are taking on a Patriot. They will bleed red. I WILL BLEED RED, WHITE. AND BLUE. My question to you readers is. Will you bleed red, white, and blue or just be YELLOW?

    • dstudie

      In the Book of Revelation it speaks of the anti-Christ. He will wear a blue hat and be pure evil. What color is the helmet of a U.N. soldier? Blue. The U.N. is pure evil and a tool of Satan.

      • Xin_Loi

        Try telling that to Michael New.

      • D Slag

        Btw, you are mixing scriptures from the Book of Revelation with predictions from Nostradamus. The Bible NEVER says the anti has a blue hat. It does however speak of the anti as evil. Nostradamus said there would be a Third World War and it would be someone with a blue hat. Please state correct information, otherwise people take it as fact which it is not.

    • rugercat45

      That’s right! Maybe The U.N. needs to hear it a bit louder HEY, ALL YOU UN GLOBALIST IDIOTS- LISTEN TO THIS-WE WILL TURN ANY ATTEMPT TP TAKE OUR ARMS INTO YOUR VIETNAM! YOU WILL HAVE TO KILL US ALL!

    • Ron Davis

      Hey idiot, the UN treaty has nothing with gun ownership in the US. Didn’t you read the article numbnuts?

  • wibbys1

    Absolutely right we don't trust Obumster and his commie cronies. He has proven over and over he hates the American way.

  • Mack Missiletoe

    The day Americans are stripped of their rifles is the day they are no longer Americans. We will not allow government or any other organization–that's what government is, an organization to serve the people–take away our defenses.

    If government takes away our rifles they are not serving us. They are serving themselves or another nation. Soon enough we would be invaded–for we would have already been invaded from the inside and without firearms to protect ourselves resistance would be limited and we would be overrun.

    Do not live in fear! You will sacrifice defense for security–a security you already have with your rifle. I am not against government but the issue has come up a few times. At the very least it is against the law to take away a man's firearm unless he is mentally ill or commits crimes with them.

  • John

    I don't remember the name of the Japanese officer that said this during WWII but it went some thing like this. I would hate to invade America because there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.

    Second, I work in a prison and if I understand correctly the definition of a criminal is one who does not obey the law. How many people in the U.S. believe that criminals would give up their guns if they are outlawed? How many honest citizens would give up their guns because it is the law, and then be left defenseless?

  • Billy

    Consider this, The Constitution gives us the the right to bare arms. It does not say anything about owning Ammunition….
    It's like have a cigarette without a match.

  • VINCE

    welcome to nazi germany

  • Antonio

    It starts with a small political win, a treaty that doesn't seem to mean much, "won't affect the rights of the American people," and when the dust settles it's follow up by an amendment, then a regulation, then a law. I don't care how it's written, this is the first step to disarming Americans.

    NATO has enough issues. They can't handle Syria, Egypt, the Middle East, etc., what the hell business do they have cornering us, and how stupid can we be to fall for it?

  • Joe

    Mr. Fortier made a big time mistake by down playing this United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. He should have kept his fingers off the keyboard. He is a major gun writer basically saying that we should trust the Obama Administration and the United Nations.

  • Roger Thorley

    RFT
    Spare a thought for us Brits,I am a small time gunsmith in the UK (fully licenced with import permit).Until a couple of years ago I could get most firearm parts from the US without any trouble but now it is almost impossible,your BATFE have bought out licences which your gun dealers need to export which are extortionate.
    The result is if I want a part costing $50 it costs hundreds of dollars,so no sale.I contacted them about the situation but they where not interested.

  • Bruce

    All treaties need to be ratified by our congress and the president. Write your Representatives and Senators and express your opinions and how you will vote if they ignore you. I have done that several times and I have signed all the petitions that are pro 2nd amendment. Europe wants America to bend to their rules. We kicked them several times and bailed them out a couple of times. I prefer the American way of life and I think from History our forefathers would totally agree with me.

  • James

    We are in a position as GUN OWNERS to join together, to not argue over the media wording of the facts at hand. As NRA members or as proud American gun owners, we have to work together to stop tyranny. Obama was voted in by using trickery. I myself (a Republican) did not see the full reach of his anti American agenda. He has shown, at every turn, that he is trying to cripple America. I say this as someone who has supported my President, once in office, no matter the party. Obama is the symbol of what our tolerance for EVERYTHING bad has brought. We take Christian prayer from schools yet are forced to let Muslims have their prayer time no matter where they are. We are so ignorant to think a No Weapons Allowed sign will stop a criminal from taking their guns where they want to. We must learn to be the Americans that our forefathers were. Americans that stand united, not divided, on issues like this. I am not saying vote for Romney so much as saying vote against Obama. Then we have a start on taking America back. Then we can learn from the Obama mistake. Further more I hope we see that we can not leave our great nation in The hands of smooth words and empty promised.

  • Taylor

    You guys are clearly mislead! Your fighting the battle of TWO evils. The Dems vs. Repubs. Neither party has your best interest at heart. Nor do they work for, "We The People!" The government of today is no more than the "Good cop bad cop" senerio. Smoke and mirrors. They get you to fight amongst one another like idiots, and behind closed doors they all meet with the same agenda!

  • Brandon

    Many people agree that Obama-and select others-must be removed from office. Y'all also agree on supporting the NRA, and hopefully Gary Johnson (the Libertarian candidate).

    But, not a one has taken a solid look at our "allies". Israel, as half-decent as it has become, has much to owe to us and every other charitable nation in the world. Its weapons, its industrial sector, organized militia, its martial art (Krav Maga), and increased protection from the Palestinians…all given to them from someone else. There are others wanting nothing less than extinction for these runts, whom still believe that a higher force regards them as the "Chosen Race". Didn't the story in the Bible tell us that the Hebrews ran away from Israel because the ancient Palestinians-or Canaanites-were reminiscent of giants? These "Chosen" certainly lacked courage-and allies-back then, and what about during WWII, before the Japanese instigated the U.S. with the Pearl Harbor attack? They were certainly a frightened lot of scurrying mice before an aggressive world power stepped in on their behalf, so what would that say about their "strength" and "courage" now?

    The Israelis are dependent on the world to keep alive, just like Greece, Italy, Tibet, Taiwan, Eastern Europe, and select African nations with valuable resources. Not to say that the last 72 years of our politicians' mistakes haven't put the country on the path toward this fate, but I would rather we not become China's bitch. So we need to look at ourselves, and to solutions for our own problems, and then to consider our alliances.

    Here's my idea: the U.S. timber industry should swallow its prejudice and allow for the full legalization of marijuana and hemp products. Weed will sell like a wildfire, cut out a huge chunk of the black market, and generate revenue to pay off our moronically acquired debts. Of course we'd have to halt all spending that contributes to the federal deficit temporarily, but the timber industry would finally have a competitor in the paper market. Black market…eh, boo hoo, now let's sell the 10 other drugs and illicit goods we have.

    Any intelligent points to be offered can and will be viewed in due time. The ravers and ignorami who troll these places: go physically stimulate your anus with a rusty railroad spike.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003722495644 Amanda Johnson

    Too bad the statement including "legitimate"…right to self defense. You don't get to choose who is legitimate….mother f'ing people.

  • Steve Masters

    Glad to see the NRA helped to stop this from hapening. This would set in motion the events that may lead to yet another civil unrest and creat division of our prized government. I think all polititians supporting this should listen to the 1954 radio episode of Gunsmoke called "Beurocrat". Guns are what protect our people when the police cannot. And this treaty would only stop the honest anyway- the bad-guys are not going to stop and give up arms, so why should regular people? Good work to the NRA.

  • weeone

    does the tweet from the Secretary Rose the same as law. can it be sited in court as a ruling?

  • dude

    only way you get my guns is when i become a zombie then i expect you to pick my guns up and keep fighting

  • Mike

    You all do know that Obama did pass a bill which allowed people to carry concealed guns in national parks. He expanded the use of concealed carry on federal property. Unfortunately yes he is in favor for an "assault weapons" ban, but carry laws over the past few years have become more lenient in most states. I feel that he will not go out of his way to ban guns in America, but if someone came up with a plan to do so he might follow.

  • Mike

    I highly suggest everyone watched this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyfkQkchlu4

  • Derek

    The Rockefeller/Rothschild established United Nations has plans for "a New World Order, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle conducts the nations, when we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order" George H.W. Bush, 1991. Plain and simple, Obama is head of the UN security council, violating Artical1 Section8 of the constitution, and he is a UN frontman. The UN is world government, and it's authoritarian, period. anyone who supports the UN is a TRAITOR, and once this world dictatorship is engineered into place by staging hell on earth and using world government as the only option for restoring order, then begins the genocide and death the elites want.

    • dstudie

      According to the bible, they will fail in the end and will be totally destroyed. A new world without them will be established and there will be eternal peace in god’s city.

  • DoubtfulinTX

    Ironic how the UN passed this arms treaty right AFTER Obama and his admin have already sent numerous tanks and fighter jets to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. That was convenient.

    • anonymous

      I was going to ask how this would change the CIA supplying arms to rebels….

    • PsychoDawg

      What an effing muslim terrorist lapdog that our so called leader is… This whole situation infuriates me!

  • John Baker

    Well at least you partially get to the truth of the matter. The opposition is about the gun industry and not our rights. My rights are not dependent on cheap imports. The NRA claim that this would effect our rights is utter extremist hogwash. I know this is the part where everyone freaks out on me and spews a bunch of ideology but to bad.

    I worry about my rights in the long run because of the long term effect of bs. Do it enough and people stop believing you even when it’s true.

  • bob

    so all being said this article said nothing

  • Bud

    Not sure about the guy tha wrote this. He says he won’t vote for Obama in the next election and unless he is referring to Mrs. Obama that is a dumb statement!!!!

    • Joe Bob

      The original article was written before the re-election of “The Chosen One”, so the writer is not an idiot. The updates, which comprise a small amount of the article in it’s present form, are more recent. Even so, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Obumma declare himself eligible for another term, or if his man-bride decided to run. There is a possibility that this could limit or ban purchases of Glocks, Berettas, etc and their replacement parts as well. The way around this is for foreign gun manufacturers to set up shop in the US, and preferably in states that don’t hate the Constitution, like Connecticut. Seriously, gun co’s, why are you still set up in that pathetic state?

    • Nramem

      Voting to keep the Dems in the Senate and winning the House would help Odumbo with his agenda. We need to take the Senate and keep the House to stop him doing any more damage and to try to undo what he’s done already.

  • Kristy Lee

    I don’t recognize the authority of the U.N. I am a citizen of the United States of America and therefore only bound to the laws of the American Constitution.

    • TedCrunch

      That’s the problem! This administration is starting to sign over our Constitution to the U.N. If that isn’t treacherous, I don’t know what it is.

      • Robert Zraick

        Not “treacherous”, “treasonous”. But I agree with you.

        • dstudie

          No administration can sign away our rights and our Constitution. That constitutes treason. Treason is punishable by death. I do not recognize the U.N. as an organization at all. It is a crime syndicate just like the Mafia, La Cosa Nostra, drug organizations. They are no better and need to be taken down.

      • Ron Davis

        You are making statements my 5 year old can disprove.

  • TedCrunch

    Kerry said, “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes.”

    Kerry is an idiot if he thinks this won’t diminish anyone’s freedom. He’s as thick as two short boards because he just doesn’t get it that Americans don’t want other countries to have anything to do with our ways or our laws. He knows darn well that most Americans are against this, so he’s doing this for himself, not for America. I wonder what the Obama voters who own guns think of this betrayal. Let’s hope that Congress sees this for what it is, and refuses to ratify this document.

    • Robert Zraick

      So True. It will be the government which defines “arms for legitimate purposes”. Just how stupid does he think we are? They will say that legitimate purposes does not include to protect ourselves from a treasonous government or a tyrant.
      Kerry is a liar. Please let’s get rid of him as soon as possible.

      • Lambros Linardakis

        no there’s only 2 things that can save the us and the rest of the world.1.a revolution against the us government.2.the overthrow of the UN(the red cross can handle humanitarian stuff,as always they get shit done while the un argues about who’s problem it is) other than that we’re fucked

        • Robert Zraick

          I agree. Both completely controlled by the Banking elite.

  • armyvet706

    What in the hell is wrong with congress? Why are they letting this flaming idiot get away with his crimes against America? How much longer are we gonna put up with this shit?

    • rivahmitch

      Because by diminishing our ability to resist their corruption they increase their power.

    • Nramem

      4/64 ARMOR, MAY 67-DEC. 69 ROCK OF THE MARNE, ARMYVET706 !!

  • Herbrt

    I think this article is tongue-in-cheek. If one were to view the UN Disarmament Committee’s well stated purposed of ‘banning the private ownership of all rifles and handguns made after 1898′ –the final end game of regulation, licensings and registrations of all ammo and firearms might be properly placed in perspective.

  • Suzanne

    “I will not vote for President Obama in the upcoming election”….???!!!
    Obama can’t run again! This is his second term! He’s a lame duck! The best thing we could ever do is simply block anything he ever champions… better still… have him arrested for treason, sedition, war crimes, bribe taking, etc.
    And also arrest Harry Reid, John McCain, Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden… et al. If any congressional traitor lives in your county, you have the right to print out their records and take it to the sheriff, and mount an effort to arrest them… the sheriff will need to get an FBI agent and probably a provost marshall on the detail.

    • jib quinn

      There was a two term limit imposed on the Mayor of NY until he decided he wanted a third. These things are not set in stone. Some of our “Public Servants” feel that they are above the laws that apply to the rest of us.

    • Robert Zraick

      It is not out of the question that he might try for a third term. FDR did it. And there are parallels. Both Socialists. Both good with rhetoric and using it to gain popular support. FDR promised a new deal. Obama promises a fundamental change.

      Both came to power during a economic crisis. Both have promoted massive socialistic schemes. FDR social security (which has come into trouble) and Obama ACA (with will come into trouble).

      Both have failing economic policies and FDR entered WWII to cover the failure of his policies, just as Obama has toyed with World War recently.

      So I would rule it out,

      But I think, while there are parallels, Obama will just go straight to dictatorship.

      • Nataenelas

        FDR is who put term limits in place for POTUS.

  • Dan Sullivan

    A treaty does not trump any rights, frankly anything in our Constitution. The Federal Government does not posses the power in any stretch to make that happen. Does not mean they wont try, they already converted local law, still sad to think the elected refuse to listen to the voters and what it is going to take to correct the abandonment of the Constitution. If recent events are a valid read, all must go, the good can return via the election, the rest are pardoned to obscurity, no more free speech for them, no books, no lobby, no tv, nothing. They can vote, travel free, associate as long as no attempt to enter power again. Then there must be reform, man its going to be biblical, real old testment, wrath of insane people for awhile.

  • Dwightmannn

    What? We are supposed to trust the lying pustules of political corruption we have in DC NOW?
    I think not. . ;

  • this is nutty

    “The new global legislation also threatens the constitutional rights of American citizens”
    No, it does not. In any way. Period. This is extremist, ignorant nonsense. The moment you realize all of your fears have to be assumed, is the moment you realize you are an extremist nutbar. FYI… You must love terrorists being able to buy weapons more easily… Yay, NRA? *sigh*

  • brewby

    Every day and in every way we inch closer and closer to a time when “Someone” will have to overthrow an out of control government. Will that “someone” be the military, as it probably should be, or will it fall to the rank and file citizenry to do the job?

  • LetsTryLibertyAgain

    I for one welcome our wise and benevolent UN overlords.

    • donald f quinn

      Nice picture. Speaks more than a thousand words…

  • jman69

    The U.S. signs an arms treaty, but arms the Syrian Rebels who have Al Qaeda fighters helping them?
    KICK THE USELESS U.N. OUT OF US SOIL!

  • Jim

    Did anyone proof read this? The second paragraph has “counties” which I believe should be “countries”. Then they spell LaPierre’s name “LaPierra” in the middle???? Come on!

    • dylanpolk

      Apologies, both errors have been fixed.

      Dylan Polk
      G&A Social Media Editor

  • Leatherstocking

    The treaty is useless as many of the arms are given to insurgent groups by governments (inlcuding the US) and then resold. Governments sell under the table constantly and older weapons are transferred by military and police authorities. The US itself has a century long record of arming groups from Afghanistan Islamists (against the Soviets) to
    Nicaraguan guerillas to anti-Castro Cubans (list goes on and on).
    When Rose in her tweet qualifies it as “legitimate right of self-defense” take the safety off as that in no manner secures the Second Amendment. We are moving down the slippery slope of registration followed by confiscation. I drove through Maryland this morning. Their new law became effective today, banning 45 weapon types, limiting magazines to 10 rounds and adding certain “safeguards” to prevent ownership. Now I am sitting in New Jersey where you can’t buy a BB gun and need a permit/license to buy ammunition. The end of private gun ownership is coming, one step at a time.

  • rifflizard

    Frankly, I DON`T give my government PERMISSION to give away our Constitutional rights, nor the sovereignty of it`s 50 states. I like MANY others took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America against all ENEMIES, foreign and DOMESTIC. Obama and his treasonist administration ARE domestic terrorists. I believe the sooner we bring them to justice the better. Unfortunately for that to happen we must first endure Martial Law which will of course lead to civil unrest followed by a (hopefully military lead) coup. I know I will be by the ready, to uphold my oath to this countries Constitution ,not with cheap talk, but with bloodshed, so that my children and grandchildren can continue to live in a country free of the political perversions that this shameful Obama administration has brought to bear on this once GREAT country. GOD BLESS AMERICA, THE CONSTITUTION, and THE REVOLUTION! Let`s hope God has mercy on these treasonist politicians, as WE the PEOPLE SHALL NOT!

  • J. M. Pyne

    We always jump to the UN coming after us when we discuss the ATT. I am more worried about Shotgun News. Look at the pages filled with imported ammo, surplus guns and accessories. The ATT is a perfect tool to use to prohibit these from coming here. Benelli shotguns are imported from Italy. What about them? This is more sinister than the Blue Hats coming to my door.

  • Rob

    This “treaty” cannot be enforced. It is against our Constitution. It is against our laws. And I for one will NEVER bow to the UN. Bring your pretty blue hats, if you think anybody in this country will hand over, or register their weapons with that corrupt group of GLOBAL POLITICIANS, come and try to take them. They would be surprised how many would rather die free and fighting than hand over our guns with our rights and live in a totalitarian country. Were getting close enough to that now.

  • Timothy All Knowing

    The UN is the most corrupt organization in the world, barely beating out the Obama administration. Never trust either.

  • needful

    the UN is a giant leech on the balls of the USA!!!we should kick all their ass back to where they came from and put the 3.5 billion dollars we put out to run that joke of a club house and put it in to securing our borders!!!!!!

  • Bruce_in_San_Jose

    One can never tell, but the Supreme Court has ruled time and again that UN treaties DO NOT impact Constitutional rights.

  • al

    I have news for all posters commenting about the Constitution. It has been nothing but a door mat for a several generations now. 90% of the laws passed by Congress in the last 75 years are unconstitutional, regardless of what the Extreme Court says. It doesn’t take a genius or even a well educated person to understand what is and what is not in the Constitution. See if you can find justification for the laws they enact. Over time the masters (The People) become slaves to their creation…some willing slaves and some under duress and threat of death. The IRS has the power to kill you and WILL use it. If you don’t pay Caesar, and you resist when they come for your stuff, they will use whatever force it takes to subdue you. If you resist to the extreme, a SWAT team will kill you. If you didn’t know it, failure to pay taxes carries a death penalty, in the extreme. If you are less than 40 years old, you have no idea how much freedom you don’t have that I had growing up in the 1940′s, ’50′s, and 60′s. The late ’60′s is when the Fed REALLY started to grow and exercise power it did not legally have…and no one stopped then and no one will now.

  • mike

    give me a call dale ill stand with you

  • PsychoDawg

    You cannot beat a free man. You can only kill a free man. I AM A FREE MAN! The UN is a farce, and without the US, it’s nothing. I do not care who wears the sissy blue beret. If I see it in my country on an armed soldier, he will be treated as an enemy and dealt with accordingly as an invader…. I’ve had ENOUGH!!! I took the oath to uphold and defend the constitution as well. This is unconstitutional and illegal… Our current administration should all be locked up at gitmo.
    I know you hear me at the NSA and I don’t give a flying….
    MOLON LABE!!!!!!!!!

  • PsychoDawg

    You cannot defeat a free man. You can only kill him. I AM A FREE MAN!!! Blue helmets at arms in the US constitute an invasion force and should be dealt with accordingly. I too took the oath of enlistment and swore to uphold and defend the constitution. I will. The UN is a force of evil and never should be allowed to enter this nation. That eyesore in New York should be bulldozed. I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!
    Oh, by the way, read all you want NSA… I don’t care!
    MOLON LABE!!!!

  • PsychoDawg

    Black crosshairs show up nice on powder blue… I just wonder which would work better, 175SMK, 168SMK or 155 Palmas….. Hmmmmm

  • John

    They’re saving all the guns for the DOJ cartel trade and the leftovers will support al-qaeda in Syria. Nuff said ? Impeachment ? YES WE KENYA !

  • Seanoamericano

    UN American UN Elected UN Accountable UN Wanted UN Acceptable

back to top