UN fire arm treaty

[thefamcnaj]

The following three minute video discusses the UN's firearm treaty and how Obama will likely send it to the senate seeking the 2/3rd's vote. I know this has been going on for a few years now but do you guys think this will gain traction and severely limit our 2A rights? Do you guys think this will die in the senate?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQpilgKOAQM

 

[RBid]

I am not content to hope that it dies in the Senate.

I have written both of Oregon's Senators about it, and requested that they vote against ratifying it, should it make it that far.

 

[thefamcnaj]

I'll be writing my senator as well. It is a scary to think what it would be like should this pass. I don't know a lot about politics, are there enough anti's in the senate for this to have a chance?

 

[Rail Driver]

I think the real question is "What effect will the ratification of this treaty have on our RKBA". I've heard a lot of sensationalist talking on both sides of the fence, but not a lot of meat regarding what is in the treaty.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

You should absolutely make your views known to your Senators. Having said that, the Clinton administration signed the CIFTA treaty, which is as bad, if not worse than several of the UN ATT proposals. If the Senate wanted to ratify such a treaty, they could have already and the Obama Administration named ratification of the CIFTA treaty as one of its top 20 priorities in 2009, when the Dems held large numbers in the Senate. I think the lack of any attempt to even vote on ratification says a lot about the chances of a new UN treaty.

 

[RatDrall]

I'm pretty sure that even if the President signs it and the Senate ratifies the treaty, it is still invalid if it contradicts the Constitution?

 

[RX-178]

At this point in the Senate, it's not even an RKBA issue. There's plenty of anti-gun Democrat senators that have pledged to oppose ratification if the treaty in any way effects changes within the US domestic market.

The vast majority of Senators take the issue of Sovereignty very seriously, regardless of their political leanings.

 

[One_Jackal]

The treaty would impede international travel for hunters and competitive shooters. It would require registration of firearms and regulation of munitions. A bunch of stuff a debt strapped government can't afford to do. A veto of this treaty is a win for all senators.

When you write your senator we must give him/her reasons other than the second amendment to veto this treaty. All politicians have heard it before. Tell them we can not afford this treaty and we don't have the resources to enforce it. We already have a bunch of laws regulating firearms and munitions. I am sure other more creative members of this forum can think of other reasons to vote against this treaty.

 

[Hacker15E]

The treaty would impede international travel for hunters and competitive shooters. It would require registration of firearms and regulation of munitions.

The treaty hasn't even been completely written yet, much less even voted on by the UN.

Nobody knows what's going to be in the treaty yet.

 

[Sam1911]

Hey, another UN gun ban thread! Cool. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=666643