Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

2nd Amendment and Freedom

Moderators: mpallett, bakerjw

Post Reply
johndoe3
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2710
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:02 am
Location: N. Colorado

Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by johndoe3 »

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/p ... ation.html

President Obama signed the UN Small Arms Treaty and sent it to the Senate for confirmation, where the Senate refused to take it up or schedule it for a vote.

Friday, President Trump announced that he sent a letter to the Senate asking them to return it to the White House where he will basically unsign it, overriding Obama's signature.
In a speech to National Rifle Association members on Friday that was part political rally and part pep talk, President Trump called himself a champion of gun rights. Then he proved it, whipping out a pen onstage to sign a letter that would effectively cease America’s involvement in an arms treaty designed to regulate the international sale of conventional weapons.

Mr. Trump said that his administration “will never” ratify the Arms Trade Treaty, which seeks to discourage the sale of conventional weapons to countries that do not protect human rights.

Although the accord was brokered by the United Nations and signed by President Barack Obama, it has never been ratified by the Senate. Experts in arms control note that the accord, even if ratified by the Senate, would not require the United States to alter any existing domestic laws or procedures governing how it sells conventional weapons overseas.
The NY Times underplays the effect of the UN Small Arms Treaty by saying it affects international sales, where it also requires signatory nations to implement internal laws restricting gun sales, ammo and reloading, and others nuisances.

Good step for gunowners by Trump.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time...and those are pretty good odds.
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
poikilotrm
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3851
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:52 pm

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by poikilotrm »

He wants to really be our friend then he’ll do point of sale for cans and undo Lautenberg. Given his acton taken vis a vis bump stocks, I don’t see that happening.
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.
0101silent
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:09 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by 0101silent »

Hypothetical Scenario: Since money problems are a major source of marital problems a husband and wife have a verbal and written prenuptial agreement that bars each other from entering or signing a contract, loan, obligation without the others signature or explicit consent.

A few weeks after the ceremony the wife signs to become an organ donor, obtains a mortgage, several credit cards, and a new car loan. The financial obligations are backed by thier joint marital assets. These contracts are only signed by her with his knowledge, but without the husbands consent.

Another week goes by and the wife crashes her new sports car and is dying.

The husband rushes to the hospital and protests the harvesting of organs citing their agreement... The husbands phone keeps ringing asking why no payments have been made on the new purchases... they threaten to garnish his accounts... again and again he cites his prenuptial agreement and hangs up the phone...
Question: What happens next?
poikilotrm
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3851
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:52 pm

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by poikilotrm »

Prenups have internal force.
The moments I was censored was the moment that I won. That's twice, now.Thanks jwbaker, et al, for my victories.
johndoe3
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2710
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:02 am
Location: N. Colorado

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by johndoe3 »

The NRA lawyers have explained in the following article, exactly why the UN Arms Trade Treaty is so dangerous, in light of mainstream media poo-pooing concerns that the treaty wouldn't affect internal USA gun laws (in their delusions).

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2019050 ... gun-owners
The treaty urges record keeping of end users, directing importing countries to provide information to an exporting country regarding arms transfers, including “end use or end user documentation” for a “minimum of ten years.” Each country is to “take measures, pursuant to its national laws, to regulate brokering taking place under its jurisdiction for conventional arms.” Data kept on the end users of imported firearms is a de-facto registry of law-abiding firearms owners, which is a violation of federal law. Even worse, the ATT could be construed to require such a registry to be made available to foreign governments...

...The vagueness of the treaty and its ease of being “amended” is best exemplified by actions that took place at a conference on the treaty last year. At that conference, proponents of the treaty “welcome[ed]” several living documents into the ATT. While seemingly innocuous on its face, this change incorporated the International Small Arms Control Standards (ISACS) into the ATT...

...Purporting to set the standards for “National Regulation of Civilian Access to Small Arms and Light Weapons,” Module 3.30 creates a means to almost entirely limit civilian access to small arms under the guise of International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and Gender Based Violence. Highlights include, but are not limited to; a ban on civilian possession of “military” style arms – no automatic weapons or magazines with over a 10 round capacity, ballistic recordings, different risk classifications on types of firearms (i.e. calibers over .45 are an intolerable risk to public safety and semi-auto handguns and rifles are high risk), licensing and registration of all firearms, training and storage restrictions, waiting periods, 20-year record retention requirements of sellers, age limits and requiring a demonstrated need to possess a firearm, with self-defense not being one of them.

...Instead, the treaty included language in its preamble that treaty parties be “mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law.” A careful read will show that the use of arms for individual and collective defense is notably missing from this statement, and the statement creates no limitation and is really only an aspirational provision.
In reality, the ATT with the UN adding in the Small Arms Treaty provisions (which they've already done) would implement the entire radical gun-control agenda over all nations which sign on to the treaty.
1. no automatic weapon ownership by civilians
2. max 10 round magazines
3. no civilian ownership of calibers over .45
4. complete national and international registration of all firearms
5. licensing for civilian ownership of firearms
6. strict training and storage requirements
7. elimination of self-defense as a reason to allow a civilian to own a gun
etc.

The above is what Obama signed the USA onto, and we are fortunate that McConnell and the senate Republicans held the line and refused to bring the treaty up for a vote. If Trump had not 'unsigned' the treaty, then if the senate flipped to Democrat in the future, then the D's would salivate at passing this radical gun-control scheme over every State in the USA by international treaty.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time...and those are pretty good odds.
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
0101silent
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 11:09 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by 0101silent »

Assuming that the Obama Administration followed the agreement as it was written at the time... and assuming that Operation Fast and Furious and arming "Moderate Rebels" in Syria complied with the letter and spirit of the UN Small Arms Treaty...
If Trump withdraws from the agreement how will this affect future law enforcement actions(fast and furious) and Humanitarian campaigns(arming rebels)?
johndoe3
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2710
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:02 am
Location: N. Colorado

Re: Trump pulls out of UN Small Arms Treaty--a win

Post by johndoe3 »

Assuming that the Obama Administration followed the agreement as it was written at the time...
Haha, elements of the Obama administration did not follow US law nor international agreements with regards to Fast and Furious. They deliberately OK'd straw gun sales (and didn't track them) to bad actors in Mexico. Part of it was also to supply guns to the Sinaloa cartel and letting in tons of cocaine and heroin to the USA by Sinaloa in exchange for actionable information against the Los Zetas cartel and others.

My guess is that any country wanting to circumvent treaties like the ATT would use cut-outs or multi-layer cut-outs as they've always done. An example is in the Bosnian civil war where unmarked black transport airplanes brought in arms and supplies at night to the muslim terrorist armies (from Qatar and Saudi Arabia) while we were supporting the other side in the civil war. The same sort of cut-outs were used in Syria and Iraq to arm the ISIS side while we openly supplied the other side in the conflict.

BTW, I don't pretend to know why we ended up supporting both sides in the conflicts above; I am only looking at these examples in hindsight. Maybe there were conflicting groups in our government (military wanted to do one thing and the CIA/DEA etc. wanted another thing). Maybe the government openly wanted one pathway, and there was a "deal with the Devil" where Qatar and Saudi Arabia said, "if you want us to do this thing for you, then you need to help us do this other thing in our interests". It was probably for all these reasons and more unknowns.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time...and those are pretty good odds.
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
Post Reply