Diplomats are expressing cautious optimism that seven years of efforts to reach an agreement on the “first treaty on weapons ranging from side pistols to combat aircraft and warships” will not collapse on Thursday, the AFP reports today.
Despite disappointment the treaty does not go far enough, the foundation-funded Amnesty International predicts it will be adopted by United Nations member nations.
The treaty, however, will encounter determined opposition in the United States.
“Disguised as an ‘International Arms Control Treaty’ to fight against ‘terrorism,’ ‘insurgency’ and ‘international crime syndicates,’ the UN’s Small Arms Treaty is in fact a massive, GLOBAL gun control scheme,” Kentucky Senator Rand Paul explained when the treaty was first proposed.
According to Paul, the treaty will enact tougher licensing requirements in the United States; will lead to the confiscation and destruction of all “unauthorized” civilian firearms; will outlaw the trade, sale and ownership of all semiautomatic weapons; and create an international gun registry ahead of full-scale confiscation.
The United Nations admits registration is the objective. “Each State Party shall establish or update, as appropriate, and maintain a national control list that shall include the items that fall within paragraph 1 of this Article, as defined on a national basis and, at a minimum, based on relevant United Nations instruments,” a draft submitted to the United Nations Final Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty states. In addition to tanks and aircraft, the paragraph cited in the U.N. document mentions “small arms and light weapons.”
In response to Paul denouncing the draconian aspects of the treaty and what it will mean for the national sovereignty and Second Amendment rights of Americans, the globalist foundation mounted a campaign in 2011 to portray the Kentucky senator as a rightwing conspiracy theorist and loon.
Last week Senator Paul introduced a budget amendment making it more difficult for the implementation of any international globalist treaty to establish an international gun registry or gun ban. Early in the morning on March 23, James Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, introduced the amendment. It passed on a vote of 53-46.
“We’re negotiating a treaty that cedes our authority to have trade agreements with our allies in terms of trading arms,” Inhofe said. “This is probably the last time this year that you’ll be able to vote for your Second Amendment rights.”
Scrambling to save face and placate the Republicans, Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy introduced an amendment clarifying his belief that internationalist treaties do not negate the Constitution and the Second Amendment.
Democrats and Soros-funded activists are keen to underplay the significant damage the treaty will inflict on the Second Amendment as they scurry to gain traction in a floundering attempt to disarm the American people. Think Progress insists the U.N. Arms treaty “in no way will effect civilian ownership of firearms,” a conclusion at odds with the language taken from the U.N. document cited above.
Opponents of the treaty, however, point out that ratification by the Senate may be irrelevant.
“We’ve seen all too many times how the Obama administration bypasses Congress and implements its agenda through executive orders,” writes Richard Larsen for the Western Center for Journalism. “Don’t be surprised if the White House attempts to circumvent the Senate’s ratification of the treaty altogether and declares the ATT ‘in effect’ by Executive Order. After all, constitutional limitations on government, and our constitutional rights, are only valid if honored and upheld, something this administration fails at when it conflicts with their agenda.”
National registration ahead of confiscation has worked like a charm in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Britain. It will also work in the United States short of any effective resistance.