With all of the recent debate over gun control, and the looming threat of mass gun restrictions, many Americans have grown tired of the gun rights issue. We had bigger things to deal with, like the equal opportunity for all individuals to get special federal tax breaks and other benefits for being married… I’m a little curious why ANYONE would want the government in the middle of their relationship, but… other internet activists were up in arms about the Mosanto Protection Act that was hidden within the recent budget bill that was passed earlier this week (BTW, it’s no longer effective in 6 months, and will have to be renewed) -few were paying attention to the international Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that has had many worried since the UN Conference began in July of last year.
Everyone remembers the whole gun rights debate a little while ago, right? There were many who only saw the limited discussions taking place within the United States and were unaware of the larger threat that was present. In truth, passing another gun ban through our present Congress would be difficult, no matter how many innocent children you use in your anti-gun propaganda. The Supreme Court has made several key rulings in gun rights cases over the past few years, affirming the “sovereign citizen” view of the 2nd Amendment -that it is the right of every individual to protect themselves and their surrounding community and that this right shall not be infringed by the authority body which we were trying to keep in check.
But the UN does not have anything in its charter that guarantees the citizens of its member states the right to bear arms. In fact, the ATT would put heavy leverage against many of the members states’ military capabilities, particularly Iran, Syria, and N.Korea -which ultimately caused the treaty to miss its scheduled review date on March 28th. The concern for many Americans was whether or not the US would participate in this treaty and whether or not it would affect the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the US. There is language in the treaty concerning the ability of member states to regulate their own internal arms transfers, but ignoring the globalization of the arms trade and the impact it has is a little silly -I mean… isn’t that what this council is supposed to be looking at?
Of course, complete disarmament has been the idealistic, Utopian goal of the UN since the progressive era in 1960s, and the US State department has stated that it will work with the UN towards this. A couple of measures have been taken by both Republican and Democrat Senators that would ensure that the ATT, or any other international treaty, will not affect the US Constitution, despite President Obama’s support of the negotiations that would severally limit the availability of ALL arms and ammunition -all over the world… including the United States. This was tacked onto that budget bill and will also have to be renewed. The ATT lists the usual suspects as targets of the UN’s disarmament actions, but there’s also a focus on drug/crime syndicates (gangs)… suddenly, we’re entering the world of domestic terrorist insurgency.