On Wednesday, Secretary of State John Kerry signed the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), despite the continued call by Americans for the government to cease the crusade against the Second Amendment.
In a legislative two-for, the ATT aims to chip away at both Second Amendment rights and American sovereignty as the treaty puts certain aspects of firearm law under the authority of the international community.
The United Nations General Assembly approved the ATT earlier this year, which has been designed to regulate the traffic and possession of weapons between countries. However, it is likely that the true aim of the treaty is to try and regulate individual firearm ownership while Democrats coyly note, “Don’t blame us; it’s the UN.”
The treaty must be approved by the Senate, which is certainly an uphill battle. However, Kerry’s signing of the treaty ought to worry gun rights advocates and those who value American sovereignty as the President is sure to attempt to rally support for the anti-gun treaty by touting the familiar phrasing, “We must pass ‘common sense’ gun control.”
It is at this point that Americans must be extremely vigilant as U.S. elected officials are actually looking to garner support for a U.N. treaty that will do their dirty work by undercutting Second Amendment protections.
The treaty calls for regulation of firearms and while it’s supporters have claimed that the treaty does not violate our Constitutional rights, the very nature of the treaty’s enforcement suggests otherwise as a registry would be necessary to enforce the provisions of the treaty to crack down on gun trafficking. As the U.N. is largely concerned with where the firearms ultimately end up, it would be impossible to track firearm usage without noting who bought each firearm and when.
Further, the treaty would afford the international community greater powers to regulate arms imports and exports, conceivably allowing for the barring of import or export of certain classes of firearms to and from the U.S. that “endanger women and children.”
With such broad, overreaching outlines as to what the treaty does and does not do, it quite naturally has gun rights advocates worried. The international community is largely unfriendly to the uniquely American concept that firearm ownership is a right and that government is not only allowed to permit such a right, it is duty-bound to uphold and protect that right.
“The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “This treaty threatens individual firearm ownership with an invasive registration scheme. The NRA will continue working with the United States Senate to oppose ratification of the ATT.”
The United Nations is filled with nations with many different backgrounds, many different histories and forms of governments and each approaches individual firearm ownership differently. With America’s concept of freedom as it relates to firearm ownership wildly unpopular in the larger international community, any UN oversight is likely to be hostile to our Second Amendment protections.
Further, the broad mandates of the treaty gives much leeway for the international community to regulate firearm transfers. While globalists try to assuage the fears of Americans by calmly asserting that the treaty aims to regulate heavy weapons like tanks, the treaty has more far-reaching implications than mere heavy arms regulations between nations. As Awr Hawkins noted,
“[T]he ATT contains ambiguities regarding the application of new firearm regulations and import restrictions. And this means the moment the ATT goes into effect… the types of guns allowed to enter America would largely depend on each U.S. Presidential administration’s opinion of what is or isn’t appropriate.”
Considering that President Obama has been increasingly hostile to gun rights in America, it is safe to presume that if the treaty were to go into effect, the Obama Administration would work to undermine Second Amendment liberties while asserting that they are just following the treaty.
Though Kerry will sign the treaty, the Senate would still have to approve it- a fact that might spell doom for the treaty.
Earlier this year, the Senate approved an amendment to the budget that calls for a refusal to enter into the treaty. The amendment, proposed by Senator James Inhofe, is bound to upset globalists and anti-gun rights advocates alike.
Inhofe called the treaty a “non-starter” shortly after its passage, casting a serious doubt over the possibility of the treaty being recognized by the United States. Inhofe stated,
“The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty that passed in the General Assembly today would require the United States to implement gun-control legislation as required by the treaty, which could supersede the laws our elected officials have already put into place. It’s time the Obama administration recognizes it is already a non-starter, and Americans will not stand for internationalists limiting and infringing upon their Constitutional rights.”
By working to cede power to an international body to regulate our Second Amendment rights, the Obama Administration has demonstrated yet again that they will stop at nothing to try to and implement anti-gun measures that will adversely affect Americans and curtail our uniquely American right to keep and bear arms.