The UN will be the ones taking your guns

[jsquared]

How is this not in Area 51 yet. That ^ just set off my crazy alarm.

 

[Lynn2216]

By the way, the UN is compromised mainly of US forces...just FYI...so this thread has no validity.

As of last month we have 128 troops serving in the UN.

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/contributors/2012/Dec12_1.pdf

Our constitution is the law of this nation, not the UN, despite how bad Hilaray and the rest of those traitors don't want it to be. We have to preserve the costitution at ALL costs.

 

[zesty]

As far as I have read, there is NOTHING, nada, zilch, about disarming anyone or controlling imports of guns to the US. if anyone has any information that says otherwise, PLEASE link me to it.

The problem seems to be with data collection required in the treaty. It's a step in the wrong direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty#Opposition

Perhaps the largest source of civil society opposition to the ATT has come from the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), which is the lobbying arm of the NRA. In July 2012 ILA wrote that:

"Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That's a bald-faced lie. For example, the most recent draft treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the 'end user' of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an 'end user' and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S." [18]

 

[dunkel]

So why did the US agree to the UN Small Arms Treaty Then????????

The UN Will only come in once the cork pops off...and they realize that they can't control their goons with fake money anymore.....

If you haven't been noticing Barry has made numerous Executive Orders that stipulate that people who store ammo, weatherproof guns, etc can be detained without question as terrorists against the state....Makes a lot of sense when you look at things going on now doesn't it?

Stop your fear mongering. We did not ratify the small arms treaty.

 

[sjstrick63]

Ain't nobody taking spit from me!!! MOLONE LABE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jsquared]

The problem seems to be with data collection required in the treaty. It's a step in the wrong direction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty#Opposition

Ive looked into this a bit, but again I do believe the controls in place already in the US (and other countries that are a part of the same agreement we are) are being used as the example that others should follow. The UN arms treaty is trying to standardize these controls into a set of rules everyone should follow.

At the same time, I remember looking at an example of an end-user and it was not the individual user of the firearm but the distributor. So using the example above, if I buy a Beretta shotgun now I have to go through a licensed firearms importer, as I am not legally able to import arms directly. In most cases I would not order through the importer directly, I would buy from a store, which would buy from a distributor, which would buy from a dealer, which receives weapons from the importer. In this case the end-user (as defined by the UN) would be the distributor, NOT the person who ultimately buys the shotgun. In fact, the final buyer would be impossible to track in the US since stores stock firearms for general purchase and not for special-order only.

Now, if I was buying some one-of-a-kind shotgun from Beretta, maybe I would be listed as the end-user, since that one gun was imported specifically for my use? I very seriously doubt importers are doing paperwork to that level of specificity, or ever would, but I guess in this case it might be possible that the UN treaty would register that gun to me, at least as a first purchaser. Not likely, but possible.

 

[Inbonuscivis]

Stop your fear mongering. We did not ratify the small arms treaty.

Stop your ignorance. I am not trying to spread fear I am trying to open the eyes of people whom matter to me.

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/un-small-arms-treaty-passes-while-media-sleeps_092012

And I never said we ratified it....I said it passed....and could be something to keep an eye on.

 

[Beerman]

I just don't think 67 senators can agree on anything.

Thats the truth.

 

[dunkel]

Stop your ignorance. I am not trying to spread fear I am trying to open the eyes of people whom matter to me.

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/un-small-arms-treaty-passes-while-media-sleeps_092012

And I never said we ratified it....I said it passed....and could be something to keep an eye on.

We've been through this. You were wrong then and you're wrong now. The UN can pass whatever it likes...you said that the US "agreed" to the treaty. The only way that means anything is of the Senate ratifies it...which has not and will not happen. It's that simple.

 

[Inbonuscivis]

We've been through this. You were wrong then and you're wrong now. The UN can pass whatever it likes...you said that the US "agreed" to the treaty. The only way that means anything is of the Senate ratifies it...which has not and will not happen. It's that simple.

How am I wrong by suggesting something different to consider? You put a lot of trust into individuals who care nothing about you or your "Rights" bro...and in All honesty I hope I am wrong! Because If I am right...well a lot of us won't be here for round 4 of the ODT lowers....

Did the American People want Obamacare? NO but it was pushed through anyway...
Did the American People want Politicians to be paid for life after only serving one term? NO....but they passed it anyway.
Did the American People want the NDAA in which they specifically stated that American Citizens could be detained without due process? NO...but they passed it anyway.

Our Congressmen and Senators do not care about us bro they care about getting reelected and maintaing their power/wealth/control/privledge....so if faced with "Liberty for the People" or privledge for their own which one do you think they will pick time and time again?