No need to get sarcastic, FRiend. I guess I'm just not bitter enough about the NRA to suit you. I disagree with some things they've done in the past, but I'm not looking for a screw job in the bottom of every Cracker Jack box, either.
I looked at it and it looked like a fairly straightforward statement of principles against a broad-front attack on our rights by the international Lords-Ordainer wannabe's. I've been following them for over 10 years and know the UN cabalists have been on this since the "Poppy" Bush Administration, with Japan and the UK leading, and I know the UN told the NRA to go eff off over a dozen years ago with that patronizing crack about "time to apply lessons learnt" -- which btw tells you the speaker was a gun-hating Brit, FWIW. Only the Brits use (correctly) "learnt" as a participial adjective rather than American usage, "learned".
So yeah, I see them coming, and yes, the NRA has been fighting these guys since they erected their "no-guns" UN treehouse with our money, and I see no reason to start looking for an NRA backstab job now on the identical issues, howbeit they really disappointed a couple of years ago by refusing to return support for other groups fighting other gross assaults on the BoR.
If you understood the historic origins and scope of the treaty power in the Constitution, you would be.
I looked at it and it looked like a fairly straightforward statement of principles against a broad-front attack on our rights by the international Lords-Ordainer wannabe's.
Sad experience has taught me otherwise.