jjjxlr8 Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Well it happened. The UN has adopted the dreaded Arms Trade Treaty. It still has to be ratified by the Senate by 67 votes, but this could be the end of affordable firearm and ammunition imports. It could very well be the end of firearm and ammunition imports, period. Even if the US does not become a party to the Treaty with ratification, if the exporting Country does, it's going to be a serious problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRed05 Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 People opposed to the ATT: Iran North Korea Syria jjxlr8 ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey2721 Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 the un has no place in American law. even more so in American law that pertains to the US Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wagner Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 the un has no place in American law. even more so in American law that pertains to the US Constitution. Good luck getting that point across to some people. Funny thing the media is just ignoring this story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fast5gp Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 It will take 67 votes to be ratified by the US senate. Doubt that's going to happen if it infridges on the 2nd ammendment. Plus the senate already passed a bill that the international Treaties doesn't trumph the US Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjjxlr8 Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 People opposed to the ATT: Iran North Korea Syria jjxlr8 ... I can't help it if I like to collect and shoot foreign guns! The whole Treaty is just like our National Gun Control - it only affects the people who are following the law and will do absolutely NOTHING to prevent crimes against humanity or the import/export of illegal arms. I have no doubt that even the US will continue to illegally supply weapons and supplies to "opposition" forces when it supports our national interests. We have been doing this for MANY MANY years. The only bright side to the end or restriction on imports of ammunition and firearms is that the US manufacturers will have more business. The downside is my shooting hobby will become MUCH more expensive than it already is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjjxlr8 Posted April 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 (edited) It will take 67 votes to be ratified by the US senate. Doubt that's going to happen if it infridges on the 2nd ammendment. Plus the senate already passed a bill that the international Treaties doesn't trumph the US Constitution. For those of you not familiar with the details of the Treaty, there are several significant issues but the main two that I'm concerned with are the tracking requirements and the approval process for importers and exporters of small arms and ammunition. In order to be able to abide by the Treaty and properly track small arms, there will need to be a National Gun Registry. Just like we are seeing in NY, CA, CT, etc., registration is key to confiscation, taxing, or whatever. The 2nd major problem with the Treaty requirements is the significant burden placed on the importers and exporters and the "UN Panel" that ultimately decides whether or not to allow the import/export. The Treaty requires that the importer and/or exporter complete a detailed study of how the particular import would affect the region and surrounding regions. The results of the study will be submitted to the UN Panel for approval or not. If the import "could be used in violent crimes against humanity" (or some verbiage like that), it is strictly forbidden. At the very least, this process will add SIGNIFICANT cost to imports, if it doesn't prevent them all together. If the US doesn't ratify the Treaty, my first concern may not be an issue. The burden/restriction of the imports may still be an issue even if the US is not a party to the Treaty. Edited April 2, 2013 by jjjxlr8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 the UN still has and authoritative voice...LMAO... The UN is flat out a joke, past its shelf life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyM3rC Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 inb4 UN bans importing/exporting high performance cars that could be used in crimes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.