CIFTA Treaty Could Ban Reloading And More


PDA






TimM
November 6, 2009, 06:55 PM
Hi all,

(I did a forum search and nothing came up so if this has been previously discussed I apologize)

I went to my Senators website today to right my weekly letter and on the form page one of the preselected letter topics was; CIFTA Treaty Could Ban Reloading And More. I really didn't know what this was so I googled it and found a GOA page outlining the issue.

Please right and/or call your representatives to oppose this treaty.

http://gunowners.org/fs0901.htm

Here is an excerpt from the link above:

We have seen, as recently as the April 15 New York Times, how battles with the Mexican drug cartels have been fanned into an issue which is being used to justify the passage of every major gun control initiative in modern American history.

We see how these “slippery slope” findings are actually implemented when we look at the definitions:

“Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of firearms [or] ammunition... without a license...”

Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.” Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit manufacturing.” And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition of “illicit manufacturing.”

If you enjoyed reading about "CIFTA Treaty Could Ban Reloading And More" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hso
November 6, 2009, 07:15 PM
We're going to need some more details for a good plan. What do you suggest other than to contact your congress critter?

TimM
November 6, 2009, 10:51 PM
Hmmm, I do not intend for this to become political but seeing as how it involves legislation it is tied together.

I have have been closely watching what has been going on the past few months in Washington, I think things are changing and the recent elections in NJ and VA are proof of that. People are starting to raise there voices and politicians are starting to listen. There is another election coming up next year and I think they realize we are watching and for the first time in a long time some of them are starting to listen. Whether it is their conscience or fear of losing their jobs I don't know.

If we overwhelm our reps with calls and letters I think that they will have no choice to listen or face the consequences.

I can post a sample letter for members to cut and paste or copy if you wish. I can also post a link for people that don't know who there representatives are. Would this help?

wilkersk
December 13, 2009, 12:04 AM
I've posted several times to a thread on another gun forum about the Arms Trade Treaty. This is similiar to CIFTA, but it is the one being pushed through the UN.

I've been labeled a Tinfoil-hat wearing gun nut because I simply stated that we should all be concerned about any treaty that (1)gives foriegn entities access to information on private gun sales and permits. (2) limits the ability of democractic states to support the fight for freedom by oppressed people. (3) provides a checklist for forieng dictators and oppresive regimes to use in obtaining legitimacy for their own purchases of small arms and conventional weapons used in the violent suppression of political activism.

That being said, I would caution anyone from buying into the fearmongering being perpetrated by the gunshow hawkers and soapbox commentators who have a vested interest in keeping the current frenzy in the gun and ammo markets going as long as possible.

Toward that interest, I'd like to post the following link. Please read make sure you read through this and get to the conclusion. Don't just read the excerpted quote from Rev. Baldwin:

http://www.moaablogs.org/battleofthebilge/2009/05/guncontrol/

hso
December 13, 2009, 01:23 AM
Since no one wants to post anything like a plan I guess moving this to Activism Discussion is the first step before moving it to the trash. Let's hope someone can come up with some sort of discussion of the elements of a plan of action.

TimM
December 13, 2009, 10:05 AM
hso,

If you want to move this to the trash by all means use your feudal power to do so.

Why is calling, writing and bugging the hell out of your representatives not activism? When is the last time you took the time to speak to your reps and held their feet to the fire? Are you one of those that think voicing opinions to our elected officials does no good? If that is so... you are wrong. We are a Republic and it our duty to exercise our right to free speech and try and change what we do not like.

Awareness is the first step to change. This board is now aware of the issue and if the members do not want to take my route to try and change this... is that a reason to say that there is no plan of action. Either you are part of the solution or part of the problem!

Do whatever you want to do with this thread. Personally I am as disgusted with your attitude as I am with the attitudes of those in Washington.

TexasRifleman
December 13, 2009, 10:20 AM
why is calling, writing and bugging the hell out of your representatives not activism?

I think the problem is that this treaty is one of THOUSANDS of things we should be calling, writing, and bugging the hell out of our representatives about.

What happens though when you do that is that the elected officials can't get an idea of what priority we the voters place on things.

So, the point of ORGANIZED activism vs just calling and complaining, is that we as a group take that job of prioritizing on ourselves.

So, is this treaty a more important fight than other things currently going on in DC?

If so then we need an organized campaign and that takes info;

Are some politicians in a better position than others to block this?
If so, who?
Do we have ALL of the information?

For that last one I can tell you that the link you published doesn't. The article says that Obama wants to sign this treaty.

That treaty has ALREADY been signed by the US, it was signed by President Clinton.

It has not been RATIFIED by the US. Already working with bad information. That can hurt. If you write an elected official and you have the facts wrong, your letter has a good chance of going in the trash.

The reality is that we're not gonna win them all, we have to choose the ones that appear to have the most danger in them and fight those first.
Obama made this speech months ago and the Senate has taken no move to ratify the treaty. If that's the case is it REALLY at the top of our worry list?
What are the chances that the Senate WILL ratify this? When was the last time it was even brought up?

I don't mean to pick on GOA here, NRA does it too: This kind of article, with the inflammatory language and not even all the facts, does wonders as far as getting people worked up and sending money to GOA, NRA, whoever, but it doesn't give much real info to be used to fight the problem.

Note this from the article, give me a break. This is NOT helping things "Does anyone want to risk sweltering in a Mexican jail at the mercy of the Obama administration?" GOA needs to turn the fact knob up and the fear knob down. Don't get me wrong, like I say NRA does it too. We have to be smart enough to see through this stuff to get to the facts.

So, posting a link to an article that may not even have all the facts right then saying "Go Get Em" isn't really activism. There needs to be a little more organization than that for it to be effective.

Many of us have been watching this treaty thing for a very long time now. To me the main question right now is "What is the chance of this being ratified?"

hso
December 13, 2009, 11:02 AM
The most effective way to address a problem is some sort of coordinated effort.

That requires some minimum planning. It doesn't have to be a complex plan with national, regional and local coordinators. A simple example of writing/talking points with a contact list is a start. An example letter with a list of the specific critical politicians is a bit better. Not too complex, but focused enough to give folks a chance to combine their effort.

No one gets very far having a bunch of people pushing on just any point on a boulder, but if everyone puts their backs into the right point on the thing you can make it go almost anywhere you need.

If you enjoyed reading about "CIFTA Treaty Could Ban Reloading And More" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!