Secretary of State John Kerry Expected to Sign a UN Arms Trade Treaty Opposed by the Senate and NRA … Treaty Requires Nations to “Establish & Maintain a National Control System,” Including a “National Control List”
Barack Obama’s end run around the US Constitution and the Second Amendment … Secretary of State to sign United Nations Arms treaty that would circumvent Constitution.
Another Obamaination … As reported at The Hill, Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to sign a UN treaty that is strongly opposed by the US Senate and the NRA. A State Department official said the treaty would “reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes,” while protecting gun rights. However, not so fast. If it sounds too good to be true, it most likely is. Just like every idea that stats out with good intentions, there is always a catch. There is a reason why Republicans, the Senate and the NRA are opposed to this end around of the Second Amendment. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) says, “This treaty is already dead in the water in the Senate, and they know it.” Thankfully, these types of treaties require Senate ratification by elected officials of “We the People” rather than Obama giving away Our rights to the United Nations.
Secretary of State John Kerry is expected to sign an arms trade treaty opposed by the Senate and the gun lobby as early as Wednesday, and Republicans aren’t happy about it.
Kerry’s plan to sign the treaty on the margins of the UN General Assembly in New York this week has sparked immediate criticism from GOP opponents.
“This treaty is already dead in the water in the Senate, and they know it,” said Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services. “The Administration is wasting precious time trying to sign away our laws to the global community and unelected U.N. bureaucrats.”
A majority of Senate oppose the treaty because it covers small arms, making ratification impossible in the short term.
When is an arms treaty, not an arms treaty … when it is a front to bypass the US Constitution of course. So what is really is in this treaty that pro-Second Amendment folks are extremely worried about? As reported at the WSJ, ‘Obama’s United Nations Backdoor to Gun Control’.
But the new treaty also demands domestic regulation of “small arms and light weapons.” The treaty’s Article 5 requires nations to “establish and maintain a national control system,” including a “national control list.” Article 10 requires signatories “to regulate brokering” of conventional arms. The treaty offers no guarantee for individual rights, but instead only declares it is “mindful” of the “legitimate trade and lawful ownership” of arms for”recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities.” Not a word about the right to possess guns for a broader individual right of self-defense.
Gun-control advocates will use these provisions to argue that the U.S. must enact measures such as a national gun registry, licenses for guns and ammunition sales, universal background checks, and even a ban of certain weapons. The treaty thus provides the Obama administration with an end-run around Congress to reach these gun-control holy grails. As the Supreme Court’s Heller and McDonald cases recently declared, the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right “to keep and bear Arms” such as handguns and rifles. Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce remains broad, but the court’s decisions in other cases—even last year’s challenge to the Affordable Care Act—remind us that those powers are limited.