[behzinlea]

I get a little tired of these “Treaty Threads” that do not offer factual acknowledgment that treaties have to be ratified by 2/3 of the Congress before they can take effect in the US.

From the article: "The Heritage Foundation's assessment of the small arms treaty brings up a horrifying proposition that the theory of 'international norms' means the U.S. might be bound by the treaty even if we never sign on. Basically, once the small arms treaty is accepted by enough nations, the argument can be made that the provisions become accepted practice and binding on all nations. Based on that logic, America is hurt by the U.N. treaty whether we are a party to it or not. Such a vague and ill-defined set of circumstances is exactly the type of Trojan horse President Obama needs as cover to inflict his dream of an anti-gun utopia on America."

[Charlespg]

From the article: "The Heritage Foundation's assessment of the small arms treaty brings up a horrifying proposition that the theory of 'international norms' means the U.S. might be bound by the treaty even if we never sign on. Basically, once the small arms treaty is accepted by enough nations, the argument can be made that the provisions become accepted practice and binding on all nations

let them try to enforce it and they will be blood spilt