Posted on 10/15/2009 11:57:16 AM PDT by Still Thinking
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."
While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.
The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.
Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.
Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.
The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.
A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Get your Glocks now.
They’re trying a new thing these days. Making guns out of metal. Check it out. (Not that that makes this betrayal OK)
AM, can you fix the link so it says “Reuters” and not “Teuters”? Thanks?
The list, ping
Gun groups have warned about this treaty. It would be devastating to 2nd amendment rights for US citizens. The Hussein government could deny it is against the right to keep and bear arms, yet claim that it just HAD to break down all of those doors on private homes in order to enforce the treaty! A typical leftist fraud, scam and dodge.
BTTT
Oh crap you’re right. Will accelerate my plans for a G19...
Now we have to try and anticipate how they are going to Disarm the law-abiding in this country.
International treaty?
Ammo taxed out of existence?
Incremental registration followed by confiscation?
The globalists are acting in a global way. Not a big surprise, although a disappointing one.
This treaty would require federal licenses to own and use a reloading press, not just arms/ammo.
Am I the only one that has little if any hope of recovery?
That’s why I’m in favor of Texas secession.
Just got one two weeks ago. Love it.
Texas lost those preconditions as party to an unconditional surrender.
The right of secession from an oppressive political body is an inalienable right that predates teh US.
In fact, if there were no right of secession, the US would never have existed, considering it was created by an act of secession.
I understood that and agree in principle. However, I thought that by Texas you were referring to its specific reservation of the option to secede upon its acceptance to the Union. That option is now void since it "reapplied" for acceptance pursuant to the surrender of the Confederacy. The only basis for secession that now remains for Texas is by force, just like all the rest of the states. Hence, Texas now enjoys no special status as regards the right to secede.
Good luck with that.
See 17
Right on.
Our rights don't come from Washington. They are ours as much as the air is ours. If force is required to secure and maintain our rights, then so be it. It will probably end up that force and secession are the only route to our rights, but they are our rights never the less.
Sadly, I don't believe there is a single state with the unity of will to go that far. The fascists are going to whittle away at our rights until there are so few left, if the majority wake up, they will be too impotent to fight back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.