Posted on 12/28/2014 3:31:30 AM PST by HomerBohn
Among the terms of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) are the following mandatory provisions:
1.) Civilians are not permitted to “own, buy, sell, trade or transfer” “[any] means of armed resistance including handguns.”
2.) Also prohibited is the ownership of ammunition/munitions.
3.) All countries participating in the Arms Trade Treaty “shall establish and maintain a National Control System” with a list of all weapons including “their current owners.”
This makes the registration of all firearms–that is, the National Arms Registry dreamed of by American liberals–a Treaty requirement. The registry will be used to enforce the prohibition against civilian ownership of firearms by making certain all gun owners have surrendered their firearms to the state. What the far left has been unable to accomplish at either the state or federal level has become possibly by means of International Law applying to all nations which have ratified the ATT. Should the U.S. Senate ratify the Treaty, each provision would ostensibly assume the force of law in the U.S. as well.
However, just as Harry Reid made it clear that the present Democrat-controlled Senate would not ratify the ATT, a particularly important fact will also prevent any future anti-gun Senate ratifying the Treaty. Two centuries of precedent and the decision in a number of Supreme Court cases have determined that no law may be passed in the United States which conflicts with or serves to change the Constitution. The terms of the Arms Trade Treaty obviously disagree with the 2nd Amendment. That being the case, the Constitution must either be radically altered or the Treaty rewritten. Neither of these is likely to take place.
But why would Barack Obama send delegations to 5 years of Treaty conferences, making certain the document language met Administration approval, if the Treaty terms could not be imposed on the American public even if the document were at some point ratified?
“The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) is a treaty concerning the international law on treaties between states.” Sometimes described as the Treaty of Treaties, it was adopted in May 1969 and entered into force in January of 1980.
Under Article 18 of the Convention, “…a State which has signed or ratified a treaty has the obligation to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of that treaty prior to its entry into force.”
The written Object and Purpose of the ATT:
Object and Purpose: The Object of this treaty is to—Establish the highest possible common international standards for regulating or improving the regulation of the international trade in conventional arms. Prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in conventional arms and prevent their diversion;
For the Purpose of—Contributing to international and regional peace, stability and security; Reducing human suffering; Promoting cooperation, transparency and responsible action by States Parties in the international trade in conventional arms, thereby building confidence among States Parties.
The question is whether the signature of Barack Obama or his agent John Kerry binds the United States by International Law “to not defeat the object and purpose” of the Arms Trade Treaty?
If so, could this entail a calculated scheme by which Obama might claim to be “compelled” to implement the terms of the treaty so as to avoid defeating the treaty’s object and purpose? For example, could Obama bring into play the treaty term calling for a national arms registry, claiming it was absolutely necessary to avoid doing harm to the purpose of the treaty?
I don’t know the legal answer to question. But I do know that, as the most corrupt president in the nation’s history, Barack Obama is capable of implementing any underhanded or illegal scheme he believes he might get away with. And he would undoubtedly go to any lengths to manufacture a method by which he could undermine the 2nd Amendment.
Will this administration spend the next months working to impose terms of an unconstitutional treaty on the American public?
Before anyone gets my vote, I research, and when I did this with Berry Soroteo, I found that he, IMO, wasn't born in the United States, one fundamental requirement of being President, no one remembers him at the “College” he said he attended, he held ONE office in Chicago, and everybody thought he walked on water and voted him into office.
Well now, six years later, everything I thought and read and researched on this jackass has come to past. His next two years in office aren't going to be any different because the Senate leader and the House leader are going to kiss his butt to give him what he wants and by the time he is thru, we won't have a Constitution and we won't have the freedoms our Military have fought and died for, and all because people didn't do their research. So what they voted for is what they got.....
I will NOT EVER give up my gun to anyone EVER!!! I will die first before that happens, and if Barry Soreoto thinks he can take it, there are to many of us that believe in the Second Amendment that will make sure that doesn't happen, but during this next election of President, do your research before you vote!
What treaty?
He will undoubtedly try, and just like everything else he had tried, will fail miserably, as usual. Thank God.
As he has repeatedly demonstrated over the last six years, "O" is just a petty, inexperienced bureaucrat in "way over his head".
IMHO here's where we stand now:
Many of the police departments across the country have burned their bridges with their strongest supporters on the right due to their heavy handed tactics re 2nd amendment issues, constant support of unconstitutional gun control regs and open disdain for anyone associated with the Tea Party.
They never had the support of the left and now even the administration is turning on them so there're basically out in cold. (Note I said many not all, there are many who support and understand the Constitution.)
Then we have the FBI. They lost a good deal of support from the right after Ruby Ridge and Waco. Here too the left has always hated them. (see Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn)
Next are the rest of alphabet agencies: BATF, IRS. Pretty much hated by everyone too.
Followed by the US military. Constantly screwed by the administration. Still loved and supported by the right, hated and despised by the left. Any doubts which side most of the military will support if the SHTF.
So the pieces are being laid out on the board and soon it will be game on. I think BO has pissed off all the wrong people and overplayed his hand. I also think he will continue to overplay his hand and may actually try something stupid at some point and use UN troops on US soil for whatever crisis he creates. Hope I'm wrong.
As per the article, SCOTUS has ruled in the past that no treaty may usurp the laws and protections on the books in the US. That’s not stopped people like Obama in the past though.
“I am ready to die defending this right.”
You are not alone, friend.
As has been said it is not a treaty in fact, it is just a forign wish list that the present President has agreed with, it has no force of law.
And should some insane senator wish to think other wise..
“this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty”
“The concept that the Bill of Rights and other constitutional protections against arbitrary government are inoperative when they become inconvenient or when expediency dictates otherwise is a very dangerous doctrine and if allowed to flourish would destroy the benefit of a written Constitution and undermine the basis of our government.”
Justice Black. (FDR appointment)
Reid v. Covert 1957
So even if the Executive branch wished to make a regestry it would have to go to the Congress to make a law, then prove that what ever law was passed would have to fit into the ordered liberty of the Constitution
“The Court is correct in describing the
Second Amendment right as “fundamental” to the American scheme of ordered liberty, Duncan v. Louisiana”
McDonald v. CHicago
As a “fundamental” right the use of “strict scrutiny” should be applied.
Now for the purists out there that will not vote for a Rino or even a semi conservative for president... 5-4 is a minimum to keep the court, ANY non-democrat is less likely to put a person like Ginsburg on the court. just a thought to keep in ones decision making.
President’s signature is not worth the paper it is on in this case. He cannot abrogate the constitution or case law around it.
Turn on Fox news for 15 minutes. There will be a propaganda story telling you how great a President Jeb Bush will be.
I paid attention while GW Bush passed the patriot act, bailed out banks and car companies, banned light bulbs, started two nation building projects that wasted thousands of lives and a trillion dollars. At the end the Republican brand was mud.
If you want to vote for a new world order socialist go right ahead. Do not come down on me for voting against the leftist republicants.
> 1.) Civilians are not permitted to “own, buy, sell, trade or transfer” “[any] means of armed resistance including handguns.”
2.) Also prohibited is the ownership of ammunition/munitions.
3.) All countries participating in the Arms Trade Treaty “shall establish and maintain a National Control System” with a list of all weapons including “their current owners.”
This is not accurate, and none of the language in quotes is actually from the treaty. The treaty is bad, yes, but repeating falsehoods about it doesn’t help anyone.
But we all know it’s heading there. He just jumped a step. Consider him a prophet...: )
The UN is moving to take guns away from the “world”. Don’t believe me?
http://disarmament.un.org/treaties/t/att
Text of the treaty in multiple languages:
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf
No shite! The only thing the UN is is a posh country club for self proclained big fishes that WE pay for. Not unlike corporate welfare we give to the likes of Buffett.
bookmark
He can try. I would strongly recommend he not.
Agreed.
Paraphrasing Andrew Jackson: “ The half breed can make his decisions; now let him enforce it”.
[Disclaimer: Jackson allegedly never said the words ascribed to him. What he wrote in a letter to his friend John Coffee was: “the decision of the Supreme Court has fell still born, and they find that they cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate.”]
He can try.
I hope you’re right but they are following the formula thats worked for communists time after time historically.
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.