BREAKING NEWS: UN Arms Trade Treaty – Full Proposed Document

International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights ^

[Neil E. Wright]

PREAMBLE             

The States Parties to this Treaty.

1. Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
2. Recalling that the charter of the UN promotes the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources;
3. Reaffirming the obligation of all State Parties to settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered, in accordance with the Charter of the UN;
4. Underlining the need to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade of conventional arms and to prevent their diversion to illegal and unauthorized end use, such as terrorism and organized crime;
5. Recognizing the legitimate political, security, economic and commercial rights and interests of States in the international trade of conventional arms;
6. Reaffirming the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory pursuant to its own legal or constitutional systems;
7. Recognizing that development, human rights and peace and security, which are three pillars of the United Nations, are interlinked and mutually reinforcing.
8. Recalling the United Nations Disarmament Commission guidelines on international arms transfers adopted by the General Assembly;
9. Noting the contribution made by the 2001 UN Programme of Action to preventing combating and eradicating the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects, as well as the 2001 Protocol against the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in Firearms, their parts and components and ammunition, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime;
10. Recognizing the security, social, economic and humanitarian consequences of the illicit trade in and unregulated trade of conventional arms;
11. Recognizing the challenges faced by victims of armed conflict and their need for adequate care, rehabilitation and social and economic inclusion;

[stuartcr]

#66

[sam_paine]

Exactly. Since this is a UN initiative, we should expect that it will include anti-2nd Amendment concepts as they have done in their charter on human rights where “gun ownership” is not considered a right of self-defense but a form of oppression against “the children” and their “rights” to be “free of violence.”

Unless the UN document explicitly recognizes the right to bear arms for self defense, then it does not recognize it.

It’s not complicated.

[stuartcr]

Don’t say I didn’t answer.

[sam_paine]

1) “The UN document explicitly acknowledges God given rights to self-defense with personally owned firearms.”

2) “The UN document explicitly refutes God given rights to self-defense with personally owned firearms.”

3) “The UN document ambiguously ignores God given rights to self-defense with personally owned firearms.”

It’s #3 now and will provide a stepping stone to get to #2.

You asked a poster where the gun registry was in the doc, I asked you where #1 was.

It’s not there. So your answer is that you’re wrong.

[stuartcr]

ok

[353FMG]

“Until we bring the international community up to that standard of the 2nd amendment....”

.
No, not possible.

Besides, it is NOT up to us to educate the international community — it is for us to stay autonomous and not allow an insiduous foreign organization like the UN to dictate national policy.

They should establish their headquarters elsewhere.

[philman_36]

I've been trying for years to get FReepers to R-E-A-D and they all want to be spoon fed individually.

ALL?! Please amend your assertion. You know better.

[Carry_Okie]

ALL?! Please amend your assertion. You know better.

You are correct. In making that assertion I was thinking of those with whom I get into circular debates.

A bit touchy, aren't we?

[353FMG]

“.....and look what happened.”

.
The people considered him for POTUS and then they even re-elected him to be their senator.

Pretty astute, huh?

[rurgan]

Also Obama and the UN are conspiring for the UN to take over the INternet.

The UN Wants Complete Control Over The Internet And That Would Mean Unprecedented Censorship, Taxes And Surveillance

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-un-wants-complete-control-over-the-internet-and-that-would-mean-unprecedented-censorship-taxes-and-surveillance

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/06/22/will-un-regulate-internet-battle-for-net-freedom-nears/

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/05/30/united-nations-internet-regulation/

[philman_36]

A bit touchy, aren't we?
With you, no. With this whole situation, yes.

People have been trying to warn others about this for years and now, all of a sudden, people take interest.

And some people still won't open their eyes to what is taking place right in front of them!
They're still convinced that "it can't happen here" despite a decade of effort at this site alone to inform people of what was coming down the road.

It's mostly just frustration. So much effort was expended and so little progress was actually made.

None can say that I didn't try to do my part.

[rurgan]

Also Obama and the UN are conspiring for the UN to take over the Internet.If you could ping them also on this.

The UN Wants Complete Control Over The Internet And That Would Mean Unprecedented Censorship, Taxes And Surveillance

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-un-wants-complete-control-over-the-internet-and-that-would-mean-unprecedented-censorship-taxes-and-surveillance

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/06/22/will-un-regulate-internet-battle-for-net-freedom-nears/

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/05/30/united-nations-internet-regulation/

[xzins]

The UN wants to rule the world.

There is zero doubt in my mind about that.

They see themselves as the forerunner of a coming world government.

[Carry_Okie]

The UN wants to rule the world.

No, those who CONTROL the UN want to rule the world. The main reason the UN exists is as a Constitutional get-around for those who seek to game the system. They don't like a "limited government" that cannot deliver the goodies.

[sam_paine]

They’re running at a feverish pitch on Internet, IP, Guns, Disabled children’s rights, etc etc and some think it’s no big deal.

[combat_boots]

[ForGod'sSake]

It wasn't so bad in the early days of FR.

Having been around here since '98 I can absolutely vouch for that. If nothing else, there has been a noticeable increase in pettiness, particularly over the last few years. You and I are probably familiar with some well known personalities that used to frequent FR who no longer spend any time here. Probably due in large part to the pettiness that has become all too prevalent.

[Carry_Okie]

I really miss hopalong.

SW RIP.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

Thank you for your post...you are absolutely correct.

[ModelBreaker]

“Recognizing the legitimate international trade and lawful private ownership and use of conventional arms exclusively for, inter alia, recreational, cultural, historical and sporting activities for States where such ownership and use are permitted or protected by law;”

There’s a killer provision. It does not recognize a legitimate role for for firearms for self-defense or revolt against tyrants. So Obama will be signing onto a treaty that makes an armed revolution against the Iranian mullahs illegitimate.