Kerry signs UN Arms Treaty

We should take the lawful & political steps necessary to remove Kerry from office. The American People should not tolerate politicians who continually violate our rights.

 
I am still not clear on as to why that Obama has not been impeached. These elected officials do not represent our interests.
 
Originally Posted By: YellowhammerYou knew it was headed that way. Even if the senate does not ratify it, it is still going to cause problems.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/09/25/un-arms-treaty-will-be-menace-to-us-for-years-to-come/

Don't worry, guys and gals, John Kerry guarantees that this will have absolutely no negative effect on our 2nd Amendment rights:

Originally Posted By: John Kerry sez"Make no mistake, we would never think about supporting a treaty that is inconsistent with the rights of Americans, the rights of American citizens, to be able to exercise their guaranteed rights under our Constitution.”

And we all know his long standing regard for the truth, don't we?:



Quote:United States Signs Global Arms Trade Treaty
By Hayes Brown on September 25, 2013 at 10:22 am


Secretary of State John Kerry signs the Arms Trade Treaty

CREDIT: ThinkProgress
UNITED NATIONS — The United States on Wednesday finally added its name to the signatories of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), a step sure to please human rights activists and enrage Republicans.

Secretary of State John Kerry signed the treaty on behalf of the United States on Wednesday, making the U.S. the 91st country to do so. “I signed it because President Obama knows that from decades of efforts that anytime we work with cooperatively with the illicit trade in conventional weapons, we make the world a safe place,” Kerry said. “And this treaty is a significant step in that effort.”

The legal arms trade, comprised of both the import and export weapons, constitutes around $70 billion annually. Attack helicopters, tanks, and other larger arms are covered under the treaty, as well as small arms and ammunition for these weapons. Under the terms of the treaty, states are required to determine whether the shipment of arms to a second country would be used to commit atrocities or violate human rights or if they could diverted for such a purpose, and report back to the U.N. Secretariat on their efforts.

Counter to worries that the ATT will constitute an infringement of the Second Amendment in the United States, the American Bar Association has concluded that Americans needn’t fear such an outcome. As the ABA points out in their white paper, import restrictions on firearms have been ruled constitutionally valid. At present, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms already regulates and tracks the import of firearms into the United States, leaving no need for further domestic legislation regarding the ATT’s implementation. Exports of firearms, the ABA also notes, are not protected under the Second Amendment.

“This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom,” Kerry said. “In fact the treaty recognizes the ability of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legit purposes. Make no mistake, we would never think about supporting a treaty that is inconsistent with the rights of Americans, the rights of American citizens, to be able to exercise their guaranteed rights under our Constitution.”

The U.S. voted in favor of the treaty in April, as did the vast majority of the world. In fact, only Syria, Iran, and North Korea voted against it.

Activists have been urging President Obama to sign the Arms Trade Treaty for months now. At the end of a meeting with Obama administration officials in August, members of a coalition of activists ranging from religious evangelicals to arms control advocates to passed along a letter to the President, urging swift action on the ATT. “Your Administration demonstrated leadership by supporting the Treaty through its development,” the letter read. “Signing the Arms Trade Treaty will demonstrate strong US leadership and help create important momentum for the treaty.”

Conservatives have been insisting, absent real evidence, that the ATT will kick the U.S. down a slippery slope towards mass gun confiscation. The National Rifle Association — never fans of the treaty — has been fundraising based on that premise, urging its members to write to their senators to vote against the treaty. For the treaty to be ratified, two-thirds of the Senate will have to vote in favor of it, giving the ATT slim prospects in the face of virulent GOP opposition.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/0...s-trade-treaty/


Regards,
hm
 
Fox News just had Judge Napalitano on the air in a discussion about the treaty at hand...In his opinion, while the existence of a treaty trumps statutory law, it does not (and cannot) trump the Second Amendment as written into our Constitution...

While I'm sure that this is something that will eventually got to the Supreme Court, and I don't agree with any treaty that even smells like it will be a violation of our established rights and laws, it is an opinion that I do respect...
 
The left will tie itself up in knots to spin this treaty anyway they wish to interpret it. It is what they do. Unfortunately they'll tie up the country over their interpretation and use the cover of this distraction to launch other assaults on our freedom that we wont see until its too late. They throw more poop up than a zoo caged monkey to see what sticks and call it law. Sickens me they think they are smart/elite when they really are cowards, theives and self serving.

T2G
 
Originally Posted By: Tommy2GunThe left will tie itself up in knots to spin this treaty anyway they wish to interpret it. It is what they do. Unfortunately they'll tie up the country over their interpretation and use the cover of this distraction to launch other assaults on our freedom that we wont see until its too late. They throw more poop up than a zoo caged monkey to see what sticks and call it law. Sickens me they think they are smart/elite when they really are cowards, theives and self serving.

T2G

thumbup.gif
thumbup.gif


As OT stated, those in the know say that no treaty can overrule the constitution. That, and the fact that Obama, Kerry, et.al swore an oath to "protect and defend the constitution"..........................

Regards,
hm
 
Back
Top