The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is Not A Gun-Grabbing Conspiracy

It’s been a while since TTAG attempted to dispel fears about the U.N. Small Arms Treaty. As we’ve said on numerous occasions (enter “treaty” in the home page search box), the U.N. Small Arms Treaty is about getting the rest of the world to sign up to the same controls that the United States uses (e.g. end user certificates) to prevent sales to terrorists and other undesirables . . .

It’s a shame the U.N. is about as transparent a granite wall; the lack of a draft accord has allowed the GG-RAN (Gun Grabbing Red Alert Network) to run wild with rumors of blue-helmeted storm troopers SWAT teaming American gun owners to prize weapons from their [soon-to-be] cold, dead hands.

A Forbes article entitled U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up in Arms has reignited these rumors:

What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail?

While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

  1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
  2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
  3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
  4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
  5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Note the words “almost certainly” before Larry Bell’s source-free Red Dawn-like plot outline for the destruction of Americans’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

While I’ve been upbraided by The Walls of the City for being a lazy journalist (don’t ask), Bell makes this gun blogger look like a New Yorker fact checker (should such a thing still exist).

This is the same Chicken Little routine the Gun Owners of America and the NRA have been selling for a while. Though not recently; sleeping dogs have been lying (so to speak) since last November. That’s when I posted Here’s the U.N. Gun Grab You’re Looking For.

While the price of freedom is eternal cliches—I mean vigilance, it’s a good idea to watch the right threat. As the Brits say, it’s the bus you don’t see that kills you.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

121 Responses to The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is Not A Gun-Grabbing Conspiracy

  1. avatarElle says:

    So what exactly is “the right threat”? What U.N. bus are we not seeing that we are about to be thrown under? Enlighten us please.

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      The link to the ISACS initiative is in the piece (after the jump). I’ll be calling my contacts for an update tomorrow.

      • avatarElle says:

        Thank you! Unfortunately,in my humble mind,the U.N. has lost all moral relevancy,legitimacy and integrity.It only exists to feed its own bureaucracy by expanding into areas it has no business in.I could be wrong.

        I read the Isacs initiative article.My initial response to that was less than enthusiastic coming from a group that nearly elected Syria as head of their “human rights commission.” Please do keep us updated.

        • avatarNicholas Dixon says:

          The U.N. is basically just another corrupted governmental organization.

          How many genocides have they stopped?

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          I’m no fan. But we should keep our powder dry for when we really need it.

    • avatarSteve says:

      How about the stacking of the federal courts with left wing liberal activist judges who will happily uphold unconstitutional laws?

  2. avatarIndyEric says:

    I think there was a SCOTUS case re: Treaty vs. U.S. Constitution. The constitution won.

  3. avatarPale Horse says:

    Anyway, this the same Chicken Little routine the Gun Owners of America and the NRA have been selling for a while……….. WTF?

    TTAG, have you forgotten about Australia, “you (gun owner) are now a Felon (no due process), you have X amount of day to surrender your guns that we the government have deemed bad or face 15 years in prison” (this is a life sentence in Australia)

    Let me ask this question, where will they find you (the American gun owner) when they (UN or the US government for that mater) get there way and come for your guns?

    If you believe that your guns are safe because it’s in the Bill of Rights, you are a fool.

    TTAG, really thought you would have a better grasp on the “Big Picture”

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      Great landing, wrong airport.

    • avatarSteve says:

      What does any of this have to do with the treaty in question?

      1. Treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 Senate majority.

      2. The Supreme court has already ruled that the constitution supersedes international treaties (Reid v. Covert), therefore the government can’t restrict any constitutional right via treaty that cannot be restricted via the normal legislative process. Treaties are not some sort of magical constitution defeating bullet, as some seem to think.

      3. I have not seen anyone anywhere quote anything from the treaty in question that would restrict the rights of US citizens at all.

      • this has not stopped them so far. Look at patriot act, ndaa, sopa, pipa etc etc etc. Just becuase it doesnt fit does not mean they wont push it through anyways just as they did most of these. We have traitors in WA DC and we need to clean house, prosecute and hang, and then get rid of all the “laws” that do not meet constitutinal muster. Then we need to confiscate ALL of these internatinal banksters property and money and put them into their own gillotenes. These evil people should be hunted down and wiped from the face of the earth….period.

  4. avatarPale Horse says:

    Sorry my bad,

    Rebecca Peters, responsible for gun control in the following countries: Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the UK and Brazil, and last but not least, most likely it will be her office that will be writhing the UN draft.

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      According to whom? Meanwhile, please note: there are plenty of people in the American firearms industry (NGOs as well) watching the U.N. Small Arms Treaty like a hawk (so to speak). When you hear them squawk, then you can start worrying. OK, you can worry now. In fact, click over to ISACS. Same people who worked on banning land mines. But the chances of a gun-grabbing SAT getting Senate confirmation are slim to none.

      • I just posted about that silly Forbes article, I should have known you’d have already been on it. And I like your take on the Small Arms Treaty NOT being a threat to U.S. gunowners.

        I’ll repeat what I wrote on my blob because I know some of your readers don’t like to go over there, they might catch something (common sense, maybe, perhaps open-mindedness).

        “In recent years, under the last two very-different-from-one-another presidents, we’ve invaded Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, without asking the U.N. for their permission and in some cases against their express wishes. Is it reasonable to believe that the United States will suddenly become internationally compliant and allow its gun policy to be determined by the policies of the United Nations?

        No, it’s not. What this is, is more paranoia and fantasy.”

        • avatarRaph84 says:

          Never thought I’d have to agree with you…but +1

        • avatarRuffRidr says:

          “I’ll repeat what I wrote on my blob because I know some of your readers don’t like to go over there, they might catch something (common sense, maybe, perhaps open-mindedness).”

          Or in my case a link on my post was changed to something completely different. When guests to your blog are treated like that, you can expect that they won’t return.

        • You sir are a moronic ignorant idiot. What part of “SHALL NOT INFRINGE” do you not understand?!? There is no hidden meaning and the comma is NOT a pause. Absolute garbage comming from people like you that have no problems stomping all over others rights you do not agree with but then shouting foul when one that you LIKE is chalenged. People like you need to go to china where you fit in like a t.

      • avatarCharles Emery says:

        It’s the “slim” chance that I’m worried about…

      • avatarLawrence says:

        The big business gun manufacturers don’t need us. They will have many customers in all the governments of the world preparing for war.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      Rebecca Peters has had no part in ANY regulatory firearms legislation here in the UK & I doubt her words have carried much weight outside of her own country.
      Virtually all restrictive firearms legislation here in the UK since 1907 has come from Conservative governments, thus pointing up the necessity of eternal vigilance whilst not wasting time on red herrings.

  5. avatarJOE MATAFOME says:

    The U.N.’s so called soldiers don’t even keep their weapons loaded and if they did load them, they don’t even know how to shoot. If these fools ever attemped a raid on U.S. Citizens, you’d see a lot of dead lil UN bitches wearing their silly blue helmets.

    • avatarVermont Guy says:

      If, and I think it is a big if, UN mandated controls are enforced in this country I don’t think it will be blue helmets from India. It will be your local and state police. Possibly guys you’ve know all your life.

      That’s gonna’ make it harder to shoot first.

      • avatarRobert Fowler says:

        No it’s not.

      • avatarawmc says:

        Any cop that follows that order deserves what they get. I just pray that our law enforcement and military take the side of the constitution and refuse to follow that order. If they don’t this country will tear itself apart.

        • avatarplainjane says:

          In reply to:
          awmc says: I just pray that our law enforcement and military take the side of the constitution and refuse to follow that order.

          I guess you don’t remember New Orleans right after Katrina went through and the local cops went through and forcibily disarmed all the law abiding people. Want to bet it can’t happen again???

        • avatarRobert Farago says:

          Yes BUT—at least one National Guard unit refused to carry out the order.

        • avatarDucFanDan says:

          That was New Orleans, not exactly a bastion of American conservative thought. In my county in rural Washington State, the sheriff has publicly fought against legislation that would disarm (or even put restrictions on) the citizens in his jurisdiction. He is quite happy to see law-abiding individuals take responsibility for their own immediate defense. I have little doubt if the UN or anyone else attempted a gun grab, he’d let us know what the gun-grabbers were trying to do, then refuse to carry out any confiscation on Constitutional grounds.

        • avatarTed says:

          As a 13 year veteran of a large police department and a sergeant, I swore to defend the US Constitution and I will! Especially the 2nd Amendment! I would never take a law abiding citizen’s gun from them. I cannot think of any police officer that would do that.

      • avatarChristie says:

        that’s not really true. I know many people in local law enforcement and I’ve asked them about “what if you were instructed to seize personal collections of firearms” and the answer I get is that they wouldn’t comply. I think they (government) would have a very hard time finding the forces to “take weapons” away from law abiding citizens. Do I trust the government not to try it someday, no.

  6. avatarihatetrees says:

    This would have to get through the Senate with 67 votes… Kinda unlikely…

    RF is correct. This is a non-story. Focus on what matters, like a possible Obama SC pick in 2015 that could reverse Heller.

  7. avatarKeith says:

    The point seems to be that attacking the Small Arms Treaty is using resources that would better be used against ISACS.

    Two points:

    1) This is awful trusting of the U.N. given that they are so opaque. That in itself merits skepticism if not a pre-emptive attack.

    2) The Small Arms Treaty could be the trojan horse with ISACS in its belly. If SAT is not all that bad, I can just see the pro-ISACS folks selling it as SAT II.

    Even if the NRA is Chicken Little (because it makes us open our wallets to them), their approach of attacking all gun regulation as a great menace does have the effect of keeping the trojan horses outside the wall.

    On many fronts, the U.N. is a clear and present danger to the sovereignty of the U.S. or any other country, come to that. I’d need a pretty good argument not to oppose any U.N. product–certainly a better argument than you have made here.

    • avatarjohn says:

      I agree whole heartedly with you sir, any and all gun legislation ahould be considered an evil. If you give them an inch, even a harmless meaningless inch, I promise they will take a mile. I experience the evils of beauracracy everyday and cant be convinced otherwise. I hope the words of a service member in baghdad help solidify your convictions

  8. Robert I am with you on not wasting energy on Chicken Little scenarios, but the treaty is not nearly as benign as you seem to think. It is hard to get information from the UN, but an earlier report that I saw stated that they were going to be using CIFTA (Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms) as a template, just extending it worldwide. If you read CIFTA carefully, however, you will see that a strict interpretation would require a government license to so much as load a magazine since, by their definitions this would constitute “manufacture”. Likewise adding or changing out a scope, modifying furniture, adding accessories, removing accessories all constitute “manufacture”. Now do I think they will get it ratified? Oh Hell no! Do I think that would stop an anti-gun administration from attempting to implement it via Executive Orders (Kyoto anyone?) regardless? Again, Oh Hell no!

  9. avatarjk says:

    Robert, you may not see the UN as a major threat to our gun rights, but I see them as a major threat to all of our natural rights. It is a power hungry organization that is corrupt to the core and, based on historical actions, has no moral ground to dictate policy or procedures to any nation or people. I assure you my powder is dry and ready for any power that threatens my sovereignty as an individual citizen. Any UN occupation blue helmets that come within my range of vision will be fired upon.

  10. avatarstevelyn says:

    Well I guess that little propaganda piece you wrote sucking up to the UN puts you in the enemy camp.

    MOLON LABE

    • avatarRobert Farago says:

      Guess again.

      • avatarRaph84 says:

        Rob,

        You seriously rock. I wish there were more people like you in the gun rights community that would call BS on these silly infowars type conspiracy theories.

  11. avatarHomobangbangamus says:

    Sorry boys, these people have decided that they want you disarmed and blind and deaf as well. And they don’t care about your constitution and bill of rights. They don’t think you’ll do anything to stop them.

  12. avatarg_karlweiss says:

    Elle says “I could be wrong.”

    NO, ELLE. Ur ‘DEAD ON’ RIGHT! …DEAD on!!!! _ : 0

  13. avatarIke says:

    We may have nothing to fear from the forthcoming UN treaty, but we have plenty to fear from the UN and our very own ATF…. In 2003, ATF’s Gary L. Thomas presented a paper to the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research in Geneva, Switzerland, published in the following document, “The Scope and Implications of a Tracing Mechanism for Small Arms and Light Weapons”. Click here to read the entire document: http://www.unidir.org/pdf/ouvrages/pdf-1-92-9045-147-5-en.pdf

    Mr. Thomas proposed three stages of firearms tracing:
    (4.4) LOW-, MIDDLE- AND HIGH-COST OPTIONS FOR
    ESTABLISHMENT OF EFFECTIVE FIREARMS TRACING SYSTEM
    AND THEIR EFFECTIVENESS
    1. (4.4.1) Construction of a “Bare Bones” Tracing Mechanism
    2. (4.4.2) A “Middle of the Road” Tracing System [Now being implemented in the U.S.]
    • centralization of records;
    • computerizing records;
    • inauguration of data collection on used guns that have re-entered the commercial market;
    • collection of ‘crime gun’ data;
    • expansion of access of law enforcement to the records. [Including corrupt foreign police]
    3. (4.4.3) A “Gold Standard” Tracing Mechanism.
    web-based registration and tracing;
    • web-based record-keeping for all manufactured, imported, exported and transferred firearms;
    • widespread and improved Integrated Ballistics Technology;
    • interoperability of tracing systems with other record-keeping systems such as fingerprint and DNA databases.

    If you are looking for a “smoking gun”, here it is. Despite laws prohibiting registration, ATF is actively working toward full firearms registration in the United States, and has been constantly working toward this “Gold Standard” for years. Each incremental new ‘reporting’ regulation is consistent with this goal. For example, ATF ruling 2008-2 now requires dealers with computer systems to turn over computer files of all firearm transactions (names and addresses) when they go out of business. The proposed multiple long gun reporting also fits right in.

    Ok, I’m now going to take off my tin foil hat…..
    “You’re Not Paranoid if Someone Really Is Watching You”.
    “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” (attributed to Edmund Burke)

  14. avatarVan says:

    Another editorial piece from the Washington Times.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/27/the-un-gun-grabber/

    I am going to me mildly concerned based upon general principle.

  15. avatarHomobangbangamus says:

    Oh, and about that bus, while you’re watching for the one you don’t see yet, they’re flying a in a cluster bomb. The common denominator is that in every case, you are totally defensive. ALWAYS, a loosing strategy. They have declared war upon your constitution and your bill of rights and when you ask them about it they lie to your face and tell you it isn’t true and then they attack again. Everything they do empowers them and diminishes you and the power given you by God and codified by those documents and they never stop the attack because their is no consequence for them. The body politic is protected from the knowledge of their deeds by a media and entertainment complex which wholly agrees with them and promotes their success at every opportunity.

    The only power you still have left, aside from the last remedy of consideration, is the net but even there they assault you. They seek to prevent your access to truthful information and the discussion thereof because it benefits them, to do so and harms, in fact destroys their aspirations if they don’t.

    There are but a hand full of them and yet we allow them to proceed as if they own us and all of the power of the universe. If we continue to allow them do so, they will own us and our children as well and in our universe, they will gain all the power they need to keep it that way for they and their children. It’s hard to remove the boot on your throat without a gun, the very thing they wish to remove from you.

  16. avatarScott says:

    The UN is transparent on this initiative. See: http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ATTPrepCom/index.htm All documents related to it are here. But remember there is no small arms treaty. It is an Arms Trade Treaty on all non-WMD weapons. But you can only get so much info on this at the treaty has not been fully negotiated yet and governments don’t want their positions to be out in the public so they can better negotiate later.

  17. avatarMike says:

    Mr. Fargo

    You show great faith in the UN politicians. I can’t trust our Mayor to honor his words and I can cross the street, go down seven houses and talk to him face to face. Do you really think you can trust a politician 12,000 miles away that doesn’t even begin to share your values.

  18. avatarChristie says:

    You basically attributed the Small Arms Treaty to trying to catch the rest of the world up with our (USA) gun control laws but the UN doesn’t care about the WE THE PEOPLE of the USA or our constitution. Do you honestly believe that other countries wouldn’t have any say in the regulations before they signed and that an adminstration like Obama’s wouldn’t agree to some increased control. Once it’s signed, it trumps our laws. Ask the people of germany, Russia, Australia, China, etc how things went for them when they had their guns taken away – oops, they’re dead or victims of increased crime. Most gun owners are the kind of people who want to (and do follow) laws so if control tightened, they may sadly have to choose between being able to defend their household or be arrested. We should never allow ourselves as Americans to be put into that position to begin with.

  19. avatardrewkitty says:

    The UN position on denying people around the world the right to self-defense makes the UN participant in atrocity.

    I note that the UN Firearms Protocol requires member states to establish firearms tracking systems. http://www.poa-iss.org/FirearmsProtocol/FirearmsProtocol.aspx

    ” requires that States implement a series of control measures on firearms and ammunition such as maintaining records on firearms markings and transactions, marking firearms for the purposes of identification and tracing and establishing effective export, import and transit licensing systems. Importantly, the Protocol requires mandatory marking not only at the time of manufacture, but also at the time of import to facilitate the identification and tracing of each firearm.”

    Tracking is the necessary prelude to confiscation. Disarmed civilians plus hatred plus armed government agents equals genocide.

    http://jpfo.org/pdf02/genocide-chart.pdf

    Never mind the 2nd Amendment. Where are the self-defense rights of people around the world made into IDPs (UN speak for refugees) when they are forced out of their homes and off their lands by gun-toting paramilitary thugs whose guns are specifically EXCLUDED from the UN Protocol?

    “The Protocol is not designed to apply to all possible transfers in firearms. Particularly, Article 4 states that it shall not apply to state-to-state transactions or to state transfers where the application of the Protocol would prejudice a state’s right to maintain national security as specified within the United Nations Charter.”

    This is the price of recognizing self-defense as a human right, but forbidding people access to the tools to defend themselves.

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at Article 3 states in full, “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”

    This right is useless without the actual capability to exercise it.

  20. avatardavid clarke says:

    What the UN members want is to stop scenarios such as what is happening in Libya today. As long as the people of the world lack the means and ability to defend themselves against oppressive government the despots at the UN will reign supreme.

    • avatarCaptain Jangaroo says:

      The U.N. has nothing to do with Libya other than what the United States has put them up to.

      Libya, and all the recent destabilizations of the governments of the Arab world, including Iraq, are CIA-lead U.S. insurgencies. Ultimately the U.N. should put a stop to it, but can’t due to unfair U.S. pressure.

      Stupid and evil people think that it’s okay to break the rules when it serves or seems to serve their interest. They are the real enemies of civilization. And people who think that an America which functions by treachery, deceit, bribery, insurrection and illegal war is superior to one that functions by the rule of law or is even acceptable at all, are little more than traitors to the Nation.

      America didn’t acquire its positive reputation as an ignorant bully on the world scene. But now it is acquiring a negative one for it.

      • avatardvn says:

        LOL, unfair US pressure??? We have nothing to do with the UN other than be stuck with it’s housing bill every month, LOL, they are living in NY city off of our money. Go ahead call me ignorant, but at the end of the day our government is under the full control of the NWO already, Rockefeller, Rothschild and all those other dicks have full control and until we force the UN out to sea in a watery grave they will continue to go for the failed one world government. Unfortunately, the only way now we can take back our nation and it’s sovereignty is by the use of force.

        • avatarJake says:

          Do you really think the US federal gov’t is any less controlled by the same people than the UN? Gotta get rid of every aspect, like a tumor, if you leave one scrap in there it’ll be three times bigger than it originally was in no time.

  21. avatarCaptain Jangaroo says:

    Well, it seems like you’ve cornered the clownfest here.

    Never more astonishing how the most ignorant and abjectly uninformed Americans think they know the first thing about anything in life. And I tell you what, they’re gonna set everybody straight on what’s true about politics and future social developments. As if.

    They are lucky to be able to tie their own shoes.

    It would amuse me for you idiots to encounter a U.N. like you want, one with guts, who would treat you hillbilly psychos like you should be, mowed down with machine gun fire for threatening soldiers on patrol. That would make my day.

    • Wow, a NWo shill in the grass. You must think we as a group are moronic in nature and cant read or follow actions by these people. I have read their own white papers in which it states their end goal is COMPLETE GUN REMOVAL FROM ALL CIVILIANS PERIOD. You can talk round in circles all you like but your still an nWO shill and will get whats comming to you just like the rest of these bastages.

  22. avatarAharon says:

    Death by a Thousand Tiny Cuts.

  23. avatarmary ann says:

    and you didn’t learn from “Operation Fast and Furious.”

  24. avatarBeast With A Billion Backs says:

    Term #4 Of the agreement
    Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for FULL-SCALE GUN CONFISCATION.

    The Title of the article
    The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is NOT A Gun-Grabbing Conspiracy

    Conclusion, if they tend to confiscate nearly all my guns because there semi automatic i would say it is A Gun-Grabbing agreement.

    • avatarMichael A. R says:

      OK Beast,
      I’m am a firm proponent of our second amendment rights, but come on man, did you even read the article. It’s hard to break free of the shotty totin red neck that never went to college persona that the anti-gun media has seemed to stick on us, when we leave comments like that. The article above states that it is not a gun-grabbing scheme and cites the Forbes article, in which you quoted, as lacking facts. I don’t know either way, I will have to look into the legislation, but if I had to side I would support the Forbes view point. But when your argument uses part of the article in which to author states as faulty, you can’t be taken seriously. Gun owners need to get educated, read legislation, and stop simply following everything the next gun conspiracy theorist writes in an article. We need to unite and make sure we retain our rights through the proper channels. Although I will say, force is an option but should be a last resort.

  25. avatarDuane Eldredge jr. says:

    When anti`s like Mayor Bloomberg equates gun owners with rapists, then you know that all he cares about is getting all guns away from everyone. He has bodyguards, the rest of us have to protect ourselves. You cant count on the police to be there, when seconds count, they are only minutes away.

  26. avatarTom says:

    Freedom involves a lot of personal dangers. I don’t like the idea of people carrying guns all over the place but I value my freedom more. If you step back for a minute and look at the big picture you will see that gun control is a small part of whats going on here. The European Union, World Trade Organization, International Court, NATO. Recently countries like Greece are being asked to give up their sovereignty in exchange for cash to stay afloat. These are very very dangerous times for people who want to be free. I don’t believe in isolationism BUT we have to make our government leaders draw back or we are going to be part of something that we are NOT going to like. At some point in the future we, along with other people in this world, will need guns to protect our freedom, not from terrorists but from our own government bodies. As you can see today, governments are turning their soldiers against their citizens in many countries. If you think that couldn’t happen in the USA you are very foolish.

  27. avataraaron says:

    Lets look at the facts folks…and no, these numbers do Not come from any “pro-gun” website. CDC, Dept. of Justics Statistics, FBI’s own website. 12,500 People in the U.S. were killed by firearms last year. 23, 500 people died from “falling” accidents…such as tripping and hitting your head, and falling out of dorm room windows. Don’t believe me? Look it up. Guns are actually quite safe, there is no reason an intergovernmental body needs to tell US what would make us safer. Rediculous.

  28. avatarFred says:

    I don’t know what the real motive is behind this treaty. I will have to read it myself as should all of you. But I can tell you this, with the advanced technology that the US and ‘others’ have, unless you have your gun in your hand and loaded, most won’t remember where they have it stored, and even if they did, it would be very difficult for anyone to hit your intended target. When the mind is impaired, YOU are impaired. DEW you agree?

  29. avatarJB says:

    I any of you morons believe that this is not an unadulterated move to make ALL civilian handguns, rifles and shotguns illegal, you are living in a fairy world. IANSA led an effort to confiscate over 700K rifles and shotguns in Australia. This is not about “protecting us from terrorists”, it is about the government being the only group with weapons.
    By the way, don’t you think that every tyrannical dictator in Africa wants their population unarmed? This means genocide can occur in a much more expedient and orderly manner, if and when they so chose.
    Get you heads out of your rear-ends and realize that this article above and the treay are complete crap. Anyone who refuses to see or admit this probably deserves what they get. Not me.

  30. avatarNailer45 says:

    Let the UN and US Government try to ban citizens of the US from owning firearms, that alone would start a Revolution . UN , hmm is that short for United Nazi’s.

  31. avatarminchoff gomorkovsky says:

    the bottom line is not any argument about the efficacy of global gun control, it is whether the constitutional mandate that “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed” is or is not upheld. it is hard to imagine that any treaty regarding small arms control would not somehow infringe the right to bear arms, thereby making the treaty unconstitutional and any related laws or attempts to enforce such laws null and void.

  32. avatarbuzz says:

    Here we go again…in Canada it’s been a disaster (national long gun registery), it finnally had to be abollished (by the conservative prime minister) I guess
    Canada will have no need to draft another one now that the “THUGS” at the so
    called united nations will enforce a world wide registery. I think Adolf used a registery to disarm enemies of the state…(mainly Jews).

  33. avatarcrazymedic says:

    Thank God, the small arms treaty is DOA in the U.S. Senate, their are enough Senators to prevent this from passing! they have stated such and informed Hillary and Obama of same!
    Government is not eloquence, it is not reason, It is force! and like fire it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful Master

    • avatars says:

      i wqnder if thats true they all were in favor of national defense bill that took away a big chunk of the bill of rights i dont trust any of them except Ron paul and his son vote RON PAUL 2012 our last hope

  34. avatarmike peck says:

    exactly! if the author of this article thinks the treaty amounts to nothing, hes smoking crack, true the details are not out yet, and why is that? ill tell you why cuz they dont want us to see it before it has a chance to be approved…id bet my life that “international gun registry” is in the treaty, and worse..we need to raize(recycle) the UN building in new york and kick those bums out of our country..i dont even own a gun, but i dont want anyone tellin me i cant, especially a foriegner…..

    • this “author” either is being paid to spread propaganda, is an ignorant moron, or he has another vested interest in seeing us disarmed. Any way round it doesnt matter as we will NEVER give our weapons up. Youll have to kill me to get mine and if you try you may not survive either. And yes itll start cival war and open season on politicians, leos, and nwo shills such as the author. These people need to serriously think about what they are doing as if they do NOT win they will ALL have huge X’s on their backs, painted by their own dumbarse selves. At least wed have an easy time finding them all ;)

  35. avatarAn Ordinary Person says:

    If you would like a true life scenario of the difference banning all guns can make in a country’s violent crime rate, google violent crime US vs UK. In the last several years the UK has banned virtually all gun ownership by its citizens. The VIOLENT crime rate, not talking about burglaries here, VIOLENT crime rate is multiple times higher than it is in the USA, some estimates say nearly 10x as high. Gun control/confiscation is fantastic if you’re the kind of person that likes watching your wife getting raped and family murdered. The high-ranking politicians and the rich and famous who are so outspoken for gun control know they will still have armed government protection and bodyguards just like they do now. They just don’t want You to have armed protection. Local police, you say? Sure, I appreciate them, but the reality is, when seconds count, they’re “only minutes away.”

    • also, if you dont count to leo them you sol as well. I am a cannabis patient forced by the state to grow my own medicine in my backyard. I had people trying to jump my fence every single night from 3 months. I met with the police chief and they flat out refused to stakeout my yard and catch them. 2 days later I read in the paper of an 87 year old grandmother that had someone trying to breakinto her garage. They staked it out and caught them. Discrimination at its wosrt and now my family aand myself are armed and carry everywhere as its plainly clear if you dont fit their picture of whats right you dont get their service. Total corruption.

  36. avatarMilVetAndconcernedCivy says:

    Simply put in the constitution our rights are unalienable, This means noone can take them away not even those politicians against guns. According to the constitution it may be necessary from time to time to stand up for our rights, although this is a polite way of restating the passage in the constitution we all know what it states. At any point enough rights are pulled that we are guaranteed, it is certain that in times the people no longer are safe and the rights stripped the people will forcefully try to take back what is promised them. Simply put, take the rights the country was founded on and the country will fall into disarray as civil war will inevitably break out. I will not give up my rights that I earned, i would sooner leave the country than hand over my rights.

    • avatarGiantslayer says:

      The majority of people in this country (gun owners included) are unwilling to stand up for what is right. Look what they have done to our schools by taking out prayer, personal bible reading/carry. People don’t sing the National Anthem or care when it is sung improperly. Most people today are just slugs when it comes to having any ideals. It takes too much thought and effort to have any kind of REAL values. Look at our families. Devorce is more prevalent than marriage. PEOPLE ARE JUST PLAIN LAZZYYYYY! We’ve become…BART AND HOMER SIMPSONS !!!!!

  37. avatarbullseye says:

    A NRA lifer, and former all service pistol shooter, I have been warned since the 50s about our need to be vigilant and prepared for the government or its agents wanting to take away our second amendment rights. I look at the Muslim population invading us (INVADING ) and know that this is not an accident, nor am I paranoid about the event. Like I told a fellow shooter here in Texas (we still execute criminals) and a Deputy Sheriff, I pray every night, Lord, send me a burglar. I will not hesitate for one millisecond to perform my duty to my country and the people that I love, by culling out those that wish us harm. And this includes the dupes and idiots that perform chores for the AFT club. What a joke they are! Stand firm, stay informed, don’t panic, load your own, and practice shooting and skirmish skills ; stay in shape, and join and support others who care. The Bad Day of the UN/Obamaites may never happen, but if it does, let’s charge them full price for the effort: that is, liquidate their sorry glutamus Maximuses. Semper Paratus.

  38. How contradicting THIS ARTICLE TRULY IS. In one breath it says the SAT is about getting the rest of the world to catch up with what the USA is already doing and then it discusses a host of additional restrictions it will put on the US
    It is preposterous. What goddamn right does the UN have telling the US or any other country what to do?
    They can go to hell as far as I am concerned.
    “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” what the hell part of that statement is ambiguous?
    Don’t Tread On Me!

  39. avatarJmruth72 says:

    Make no bones about it. If this goes through and our senate approves it, we WILL end up loosing our right to keep and bear arms. That is the long and the short of it. Our government is not out for our best interest. They do what they want and get paid for it. It is time to vote all of them out and start over.

  40. avatarTim Resovsky says:

    I recently wrote my US Senator,Debbie Stabenow, regarding this issue. She assured me she would vote against this treaty if she thought it infringed on our second amendment. But, she also voted for Obamacare and claimed she wrote part of it. I don’t think I can trust her. This issue along with Hilary Clinton have not received much media attention of late.

  41. avatarBob says:

    It is hard to trust any politician. There are so many of them who don’t really care about the rights of individuals (Pelosi) , and don’t even get me started on Obamacare. But now more than ever it is very important to encourage everyone to vote. Not just vote, but make an educated, informed decision. Which is getting difficult to do, I’ll admit. But encourage people to vete for a leader, not a party. My mom votes for Obama ONLY because he’s a “democrat”. I know others who vote for someone just because they are “republican”. Vote for the one who will be the better leader (or at least the lesser evil).

    Bob

  42. avatarmdforseth says:

    Thanks, Robert, for dispelling myths and speaking truth to conspiracy scare-tactics. That Forbes article you reference is extremely irresponsible, and the conspiracy it suggests is laughable. Does anyone in America have any clue as to how many weapons American citizens own, since guns have been manufactured and sold in this country? The number is likely mind-boggling. No law of any sort is going to pass, any time soon, that pries guns from American hands, dead or alive. And God save the poor bastard of any other country who would attack American soil, en masse; they’d be gazing down the barrels of, on average, perhaps two guns per citizen. The sheer number of unregistered firearms alone speaks volumes to the ridiculousness of the Forbes article, and to all claims that somehow Americans are in peril of losing thier coveted guns. I own several — some bought through FFLs, some through private parties — and I’m not the least bit worried. I hunt. I carry (and have a CCL). I understand how difficult it is to repeal an Amendment (the repeal of the 21st was relatively easy, since it granted, not took away, what people already wanted — legal booze) and likewise enforce a repeal that seeks to take something away from 350 million Americans. Such rumors as the Forbes article’s only serve to cause fear and annoyances like panic runs on ammo (thereby driving prices up), and frighten otherwise rational people to voting with a single-issue mentality, while real, and far more important, issues haunt our nation (economy, budget, deficit, etc.). Has anyone considered a potential conspiracy on the part of ammo manufactures to increase sales and drive up prices, through spreading such baseless rumors? From an Occam’s Razor standpoint, that possible conspiracy seems more plausible.

    • Never say Never yes there are many unregistered guns that does not mean laws cannot be passed to take the ones they do know about and that would take millions of guns away from law abiding citizens. Also, it would mean the death of the 2nd Amendment and if you had ammo in your possession you can bet that would make you a felon. There are many ways to snare what they want to catch.

      I dont trust them for #$%#

      • avatarMdforseth says:

        Google “Occam’s Razor,” it may help you understand why the simplest answer to a question (that would be NO for: Is Obama going to repeal the 2nd Amendment? Will anyone owning bullets go to Federal prison? Are Obama & the UN going to take away Americans’ guns?) is usually the correct one. Occam’s Razor postulates that the logistic nightmares alone in carrying out the affirmative to such questions, assuming YES to the above questions, mean that such deliberate, paranoid misinformation is exceedingly unlikely and completely detached from reality.

    • avatarDavid green says:

      350 million Americans?

    • avatarGiantslayer says:

      Don’t forget to subtratct the ones Holder and Obama allowed to be sold to the Mexican Drug Cartels. That should make it a little easier. And do you think for a moment that your grandmother, business man and any other law abiding citizen would hold back if threatened with jail time, fines and or a big burley dude, with a thick Ukrainian accent, kicking in their door… NOT LIKELY.

    • avatarMdforseth says:

      It’s a HOAX, Commander. Step AWAY from the Kool-Aid.
      http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ndrp.asp

      • I didn’t know that Scopes wa the authority on Executive Orders.
        It may or may not be but I sure as hell don’t trust this Admn.

        • Snopes is a husband-wife team in Los Angeles. http://www.snopes.com/info/aboutus.asp

          The Holder comment and the EO are real, sad to say. The Obama admin. has been using sneaky tactics to get their way: using the EPA as a way to get around Congress is a big one. Witness also Obama’s recent plotting with Medvedev while he thought he was off-mic. I think that one constitutes treason, if you ask me.

          Our biggest problem is there are people in power here trying to manipulate the US into a weak position so they can take it over and turn it into a socialist dictatorship with themselves at the top. If they are tired of serving in heaven they think they can rule in hell instead, maybe. But they don’t consider (or maybe this is part of their stratagem) that foreign powers may take advantage of the chaos to pillage us.

          All the more reason to resist any attempt to disarm us.

        • avatarProteus says:

          The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

  43. avatarFrank Dioguardi Sr. says:

    Hillary has always been against gun ownership since the 60’s and all of a sudden she is changing????? Bill is a avid anti -gunner. Obama has stated civilians have no need of firearms because the police are required to protect them. As a Senator he said the constitution should be irrelevant because it is Outdated. I think the cool aid is right here with TTAG. Your article made me very wary. I am thinking about stopping subscribing to TTAG. You’re not really run by that BRADY BUNCH, are you? Say it isn’t so.

  44. avatarJames Dettloff says:

    The threat I see of this treaty being ratified by the Senate is that of precedent. The United States has historically NEVER ratified any international treaties that cause the creation of regulatory laws on It’s own citizens, or even the citizens of other soveriegn states, since fundamentally the U.S stands against any state or international organization regulating the private lives of the law-abiding populace. For that matter, the U.S. has very rarely ratified treaties governing what we can and can’t use in warfare or produce for that purpose, like the landmine treaty for instance, when in practice we follow a stricter production, sale/distrobution, & usage requirement than most of the ratifying nations do. No foriegn body should EVER have the power to enact laws and regulations upon the United States and her citizens. The American constituency doesn’t have a voting power in the UN therefore it is illegal for the UN to govern anything within U.S. borders.

    • avatarcol_temp says:

      Amen. Very well put.

      Get the UN out of the US and the US out of the UN.

    • avatarProteus says:

      James, for all the reasons you stated, and more, this paranoia is totally unwarranted. The US congress is not about to give up our sovereignty even in the HIGHLY unlikely event that a sitting President might attempt it. The very thought is totally ludicrous!

      • avatarJake says:

        I have not been hit by car running through traffic yet, I might as well live in the street because it’ll never happen! It may very well not happen. I think it is very likely to not happen no matter whether George W Obama or Barackney is the poison of the term. But the simple fact that it’s even enough a part of the discourse that it seems like ANYTHING of possibility should be disturbing; because whilst the buildup is slow and gradual the final coup de grace is generally very quick, decisive, and extraordinarily brutal. The real chance of being in a just so situation and winding up having a successful DGU is so low, if this is even close is it not worth worrying about at least enough to head it off completely in the same manner you carry a gun, to be prepared just in case? I agree it seems a preposterous notion, but those animals (politicians of every genetic/party flavor) do things every day that seem pretty friggin’ preposterous.

      • avatarGiantslayer says:

        Either you are one of them or you are one of the Germans that looked the other way when Hitler built the ovens.

    • avatarGiantslayer says:

      You’re right…NO foriegn body SHOULD EVER have power over U.S. citizens. As far as creating regulatory laws on a countries own citizens…what do you call Obamacare or Eminent Domain, to name just a few. Besides the constitution only protects us from threats when used properly, and not by this administration (the most corrupt in American history).

  45. avatarJRu says:

    To the creator of this article YOU ARE A LIAR.
    Marines are being trained and have been trained to confiscate guns from American citizens in conjunction with foreign troops. Investigate it yourself there are multiple articles about it. After all that has been going on you would have to be a severly intellectually stunted to trust an admisitration that does nothing but lie.

  46. avatarGiantslayer says:

    Yeah…I believe that like Nancy Pelosi when she said we had to pass the Obamacare before we could know what was in it.

  47. avatarMax Ana says:

    I agree with the guy before me. Your a damn LIAR. These people are trying to disarm and enslave us. Get Obama out now! Romney isn’t much of an alternative but we have got to get this DICTATOR SCUM OUT OF OFFICE!

    “I prefer dangerous freedom to safe enslavement.”- Thomas Jefferson

  48. avatarDrake says:

    This IS a gun grab…
    No semi-automatics of any kind, nothing over 38 cal., and if not turned they take them by force.
    This is a treasonous vote as it should never have been presented.
    I have issued D-Day of 7/27 for all armed citizens and militias.
    I have also requested the start of the arrests of ALL traitors in our government.
    You are presenting Government Propaganda…
    They lie and we pay, this time with our lives.
    No deal.

  49. avatarLee Beniteau says:

    Golly, Gee Bob,

    Your TTAG article has done so much to dispel my concerns about the U.N. Small Arms Treaty that I’ll be able to sleep better tonight.

  50. avatarMelbee says:

    In all of these posts, not ONE person has mentioned UN Agenda 21. How many of you have even heard of it, let alone research it. This is much, much bigger than you think, and it DOES include the eventual disarmament of US citizens. Please wake up. One World Government is coming and it’s going to be through UN Agenda 21, which infiltrates (and already has been for decades) the US at the local level, yes, in your hometown. Please read this .pdf explaining exactly what Agenda 21 is with PROOF that it is real:

    http://www.freedomadvocates.org/images/pdf/The%20Ultimate%20War%20by%20Michael%20Shaw_Part%201-June%202012.pdf

  51. avatarMarauder says:

    Not a lot of comfort in the reassurance that this treaty isn’t a campaign against our 2nd Amendment, because we’ve all heard and experienced the phenomenon we call “mission creep,” and when the camel is completely inside the tent, it’s a different creature than either was initially conceived or promoted to be.

  52. avatarNawlins Native says:

    So if this is “really” about other countries adopting our gun laws…why then would our current laws change? Why then would sooooo many Senators send President Obama a letter about NOT signing the treaty? Just more side talk to devert people from the real mission – to disarm US civilians.

    • avatarMilVetAndconcernedCivy says:

      has anyone read the draft and i am not talking about the previous version i am talking about the version labeled ATT. This only affects manufacturers directly and will affect our cost. It clearly states that “the States” govern their own internal laws while maintaining the export import regulations, this does not limit the type of firearms that can be sold other than where they come from and where they can go outside of the country

  53. avatarHarold L Laird says:

    I find it amazing that a President who would tell the world that the United States was responsible for the troubles they had, also tell the Mexican government that he would stop the sale of weapons to the cartels then turn around and allow the ATF to sell them guns does he really belive the American people are that stupid. He has from the start of his administration tried to blame the law-abiding gun owners for the mass murders in this country. There needs to be more people like those who I have read here to make it known we are not ready to give up our rights just because Obama or Hillary Clinton say we should. If people would think how many gun owners there are in this country then realize that we have the largest free army in the world and five hundred people who own guns use them to keep themselves safe and free. The one who uses a gun wrongly is why the death penalty should be upheld.

  54. avatarAndrew Ritter says:

    If, as you say, this parrots current U.S. Law, then what would be the purpose of signing it? If it’s the same as what we already have, then we shouldn’t ratify and sign it and simply leave things the way they are. After all, who can trust politicians and bureaucrats, especially from the America-haters at the U.N. So, we’ll just let the rest of the world sign it, keep our sovereignty, and keep our laws the way we are, thank you.

  55. avatarEdgar Vanderzee says:

    This is all bs. I own a semi automatic rifle. So what, I just dont have to reload as much. “They”, i mean evil swine, are rights stripping. They think guns are what people need to revolt. They are getting worried of lossing control. I, just want to protect my family. I, purchased my Rifle legally from a gun store. Now what, they want me to turn it in? Is the government going to buy my gun from me, i paid for it. They fear revolution. But citizens don’t need guns to revolt. If They enact this form of control. Revolution will come in the form of , bricks, bottles, stones, stabbing, Fires, riots, you name it. People don’t need guns, we have a right to own them.

  56. avatarD.C.Hutchins says:

    United States Constitution Article 6
    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

    Add this to 2 new liberal leaning supreme court justices & you have a perfect storm.

  57. avatartommy says:

    ok look im not going to argue with any one when it comes to my rights. there are four hundred thousand UN troops station in the rocky mountains as we speak. Obama has ordered a hundred and thirty thousand lmtv (light military tactical vehicles) to be built in six months. Plus his rehabilitation camps witch isn’t anything but concentration camps so if he’s doing all this what do you really think he is up to. he being a magician showing one hand wile doing the trick with the other. Yawl better get ready weather you believe it or not.

  58. avatarMark Kirkbride says:

    Mr. Farago – Having spent 3 years of my life in servitude to the UN (paying back a grant ’70-’73) and listening to every single nations other human contributions to said organization bash the US and only talk about how the US needed to be checked and just fork over larger amounts for them to squander in the best traditions of socialism as in Spain, Greece, etc.
    I would just like to bring to your attention the Minority Speakers recent comment that we “won’t really know what is in the Bill till we pass it”, are we the people and you as a learned person willing to chance that again? As a staunch Political Independent I wouldn’t risk even one of my freedoms to the elected Women of San Francisco at this time. Are you serious good sir??

  59. avatarCanadian says:

    IANSA, the UN, Amnesty International, all these groups are pretty much of the same mind on “gun control”. Illicit arms means any guns not owned by the government, period. The Arms Trade Treaty excludes government to government trades and targets all others…. namely the LEGAL trade, ie civilian arms trade.

    Civilians are the target, their guns are illicit. Governments selling guns to rebels, terrorists, or using their own guns to commit genocide, all LEGAL because it is governments with the guns, governments moving the guns, and governments doing the killing.

    Citizens with guns, especially for self defense, are criminals. Any government that permits civilians to own firearms for self defense, guilty of human rights violations. See the Uns Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 3 I think…. the government is to provide protection to its people, as per the “right to life”. To let the people to be armed is to DENY them their right to life because more guns = more death (see their “small arms survey” for this…they correlate guns and gun death to justify all this, the ATT, the Programme of Action to Combat and Eradicate the ILLICIT (civilian) trade in small arms).

    Look into it folks…. it will take you weeks of reading and listening to video of UN footage but its all there.

  60. avatarCanadian says:

    also, as far as you Americans go,

    your president has taken control over all facets of your government, even food distribution, largely via executive orders. Heck even Obama care gives heath care over to the executive branch, and dont forget guns are a “health crisis” he can attack with Obama care funds. TERRORISM- surrender all your rights and freedoms! We are at WAR!!!! A perpetual war that never, ever, ends, ever.

    You are all terrorists living in a “battle zone” now, with no privacy, no rights, and no freedom. Its already gone, you just do not see it yet. Perhaps someday one person will bomb a race in your city and the entire city will be put under martial law with everyone’s doors kicked in looking for one dude hiding in a boat…..sure it is over kill, sure it is to get you all accustomed to your new police state, but hey, dont you feel safe? Its not like your average armed citizen can handle ONE guy with a gun anyway, you need an ARMY with APCS and tanks shutting down your entire city.

    I could go on, but you get my point.

    Freedom is already gone, it is not something you will someday lose.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.