That didn't take long! UN arms treaty is back

[carracer]

Executive orders first.

 

[mobiushky]

I have been hearing a lot of talk about this UN treaty. I've heard people say it it goes into affect that it would supersede our 2nd amendment. Or like above, ban US weapons and tax and regulate ammo. Does anyone know where I can look to find the truth on this.

That's a difficult proposition because it involves researching 3 seemingly separate treaties.

You could start with the anti-gun sight below to try to understand the scope of the treaty. What all it will actually cover. And note that the US is pushing for "small arms" to be added.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms_trade_treaty

You could read the Op-Ed in Forbes magazine from June of 2011:

http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

Being an NRA member you could go to the NRA pages dedicated to this issue.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2009/un-arms-trade-treaty.aspx?st=&ps=

http://www.nraila.org/search.aspx?s="Arms Trade Treaty"

But the bottom line is, you have to decide what you call truth I guess. If you don't believe any of the above, not sure what else to tell you.

 

[conandan]

That's a difficult proposition because it involves researching 3 seemingly separate treaties.

You could start with the anti-gun sight below to try to understand the scope of the treaty. What all it will actually cover. And note that the US is pushing for "small arms" to be added.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms_trade_treaty

You could read the Op-Ed in Forbes magazine from June of 2011:

http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

Being an NRA member you could go to the NRA pages dedicated to this issue.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2009/un-arms-trade-treaty.aspx?st=&ps=

http://www.nraila.org/search.aspx?s="Arms Trade Treaty"

Thank you for the extra links. I have read some of the NRA bulletins on the subject. It's impossible to know who is has the right information and who's just putting out their opinion. My only hope is that congress won't pass it in any form.

 

[sirpuma]

Apparently this would not affect domestically-made civilian arms.

Would this have any effect on imports of civilian arms?

Yes. Basically the gist of it is that it will either heavily regulate or outlaw exportation/importation of small arms. So all those Browning, Remington, Beretta, Taurus, and countless other US branded firearms or foreign firearms that are currently available in the US will no longer be able to be exported/imported or some such muckity muck. The wording in it doesn't limit it to military arms but small arms in general.

 

[rscottie]

It is time to start calling your senators and letting them know that in no uncertain terms if they vote to pass this garbage they will be voted out of office.

 

[mobiushky]

That's a difficult proposition because it involves researching 3 seemingly separate treaties.

You could start with the anti-gun sight below to try to understand the scope of the treaty. What all it will actually cover. And note that the US is pushing for "small arms" to be added.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms_trade_treaty

You could read the Op-Ed in Forbes magazine from June of 2011:

http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

Being an NRA member you could go to the NRA pages dedicated to this issue.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2009/un-arms-trade-treaty.aspx?st=&ps=

http://www.nraila.org/search.aspx?s="Arms Trade Treaty"[/QOUTE]

Thank you for the extra links. I have read some of the NRA bulletins on the subject. It's impossible to know who is has the right information and who's just putting out their opinion. My only hope is that congress won't pass it in any form.

Here's how I see the analysis. The UN treaty is wide ranging and intentionally vague. Ambiguity in law is the breeding ground of those who would take away rights. When I read these laws or treaties or whatever, I always have the attitude of "What could this lead to in the event that someone I disagree with was in control of implementing this." That's what most of these commentators are doing. There is very little specifically spelled out in the treaty. But the ambiguity leaves the door open for someone who wants to impose an ideology to do so. Case in point, Amnesty International responded to the news. At the end of their response they added this:

"The Treaty should not be a frozen tablet. When it enters into force, a robust Arms Trade Treaty could be the starting shot for a new global process that can be further strengthened to really protect people on the ground."

Now, what does that mean? To me it means that an anti-gun organization sees this as a foot in the door and a way to make things tougher on guns. And the vague nature of the treaty would allow that to happen.

 

[jsanchez]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/07/us-arms-treaty-un-idUSBRE8A627J20121107

Obama quit talks because he didn't want to give Mitt ammo, well now that he got reelected he's not worried about it.

They claim they wont' accept a treaty that hurts the 2A. Well if I can't buy an XD or a Glock or any other gun built in a different country, I feel that hurts.

Here's whats going to happen if this takes place:
Can't buy a gun built in a different country so you have to buy American.
American made gun prices will skyrocket, A) Supply and Demand, B) along with the treaty, expect new taxes on guns and ammo, along with all sorts of new red tape.

/gets out a bowl of jalapeno popcorn

Hi point makes great pistols and rifles out of Ohio, lifetime warrenty. $500 gets you a 45 pistol and rifle. Cool deal!

 

[jsanchez]

Apparently this would not affect domestically-made civilian arms.

Would this have any effect on imports of civilian arms?

+1

 

[compmanio365]

It is time to start calling your senators and letting them know that in no uncertain terms if they vote to pass this garbage they will be voted out of office.

Sorry to say it, but that is a waste of time. It is quite clear that the elected care little about the opinions of the electorate. Most are too apathetic to look up and realize what is going on and will keep voting for free stuff or not at all, not knowing or caring about their freedoms being taken in exchange. The elected know that the few like us will be a minor annoyance at worst and can easily be ignored. Either your senator already will vote against gun control, or for it....your words will not change their decision either way.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

All the taxes on firearms and other arms are unconstitutional in the first place. They were asked to be put in place by the sportsmen groups to help pay for the conservation of hunting areas.

You cannot tax a right period. The power to tax is the power to destroy, which, is the point you've made.

It is very dangerous to be right when the long established authorities are the ones who are wrong...

 

[Freedom1Man]

It is very dangerous to be right when the long established authorities are the ones who are wrong...

That is the beauty of being a single, heartless, bastard. Who can they kill that would hurt me?

 

[TechnoWeenie]

That is the beauty of being a single, heartless, bastard. Who can they kill that would hurt me?

Do not fear the man who has everything, fear the man who has nothing to lose.

 

[Jack House]

Everyone seems to be hung up on whether a UN gun ban treaty would affect us in the US directly, by banning us from owning guns.

Can we all pretend for a moment that it wont have that direct affect? It really doesn't need to. All it needs to do is prohibit other nations from exporting weapons to the US for civilian use. Then BAM! Just like that, a massive portion of the gun industry is destroyed for us. How many of our guns are 100% made in the US? Very little, of the guns that are actually made in the US, a lot are actually manufactured, or have parts manufactured, overseas.

 

[Freedom1Man]

Do not fear the man who has everything, fear the man who has nothing to lose.

Is that why I am told I am so scary?

I thought it was because the "Art of War" gave me a new twisted perspective on how people think.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Everyone seems to be hung up on whether a UN gun ban treaty would affect us in the US directly, by banning us from owning guns.

Can we all pretend for a moment that it wont have that direct affect? It really doesn't need to. All it needs to do is prohibit other nations from exporting weapons to the US for civilian use. Then BAM! Just like that, a massive portion of the gun industry is destroyed for us. How many of our guns are 100% made in the US? Very little, of the guns that are actually made in the US, a lot are actually manufactured, or have parts manufactured, overseas.

This would have the economic effect also of raising the prices drastically of the domestically produced weapons, making many of them unattainable for many who need to also buy shelter, food, and other necessities.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

This would have the economic effect also of raising the prices drastically of the domestically produced weapons, making many of them unattainable for many who need to also buy shelter, food, and other necessities.

Wouldn't it make firearms a commodity very suscipible to business cycles? if firearms costed so much more because of the treaty, no one could afford to buy them, so demand after spiking would crash, leading to layoffs, shutdowns, furloughs, etc at the production facilities, naturally of course in a market with weak demand then prices would decrease until they can be afforded, then many people will buy the, leading to another spike in prices, until no one can afford and the price goes down.

Supply and demand does dictate that a global arms treaty is bad news for the firearm industry and the shooting public.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Wouldn't it make firearms a commodity very suscipible to business cycles? if firearms costed so much more because of the treaty, no one could afford to buy them, so demand after spiking would crash, leading to layoffs, shutdowns, furloughs, etc at the production facilities, naturally of course in a market with weak demand then prices would decrease until they can be afforded, then many people will buy the, leading to another spike in prices, until no one can afford and the price goes down.

Supply and demand does dictate that a global arms treaty is bad news for the firearm industry and the shooting public.

I didn't go as far as to say that no one could afford them, but if it did go that far and businesses failed because of then the price would continue to rise because even less would be produced. Although taking away potential restrictions from the government it may signal capitalist that more companies need to make guns domestically according to the business cycle.

Yep it is bad news for the shooting public, I wonder though like many "protectionist" measures if some domestic industries back this treaty because it would create the demand for their product and raise their prices and profits even though it hurt the consumers and other businesses because they would have less money to save or spend on other products.

If you have time I recommend Hazlit's Economics in One Easy Lesson. And it is an easy read.

 

[Gil223]

You know you live in a Country run by idiots if....
They believe that being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you "safe". Pax...

 

[WalkingWolf]

The success of any UN treaty depends on the states succumbing to it. And then there are out of work machinists in every state. It only takes a lathe and a mill.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

The success of any UN treaty depends on the states succumbing to it. And then there are out of work machinists in every state. It only takes a lathe and a mill.

Admittidly though many laid off machinists don't have access to a steel mill, iron mine, facility and CNC screwing machines. To manufacture firearms on a level needed to void any effect of a crushing international treaty would be very difficult if not impossible to accomplish.

That's why it's important that we make sure this treaty never sees ratification. However a question I have, if the US doesn't ratify and the rest of the world does, will the treaty restrict the import of firearms into the US by default? Although I guess many companies will probably just open plants in the US or import stuff just right to circumvent the law like how Chevy imported the LUV pickup truck without a bed attached in the 1970s to avoid light truck taxes