Loading 3 Votes - +

UN Arms Treaty Possibly Affecting US Gun Owners

30_article_4138_thumb_handgun

Not long after President Obama was elected, many Americans began a mad scramble to purchase firearms and ammunition with the expectation he was going to crack down hard on the gun control. Thus far, that particular lane of legislation has remained relatively quiet from the White House. An interesting political twist in the foreign policy arena may finally bring that flag to bear. The United Nations is hammering away at the Arms Trade Treaty, a measure designed on its face to control the availability of weapons to crime syndicates and terrorists. However, the small arms covered by the treaty and the notion of a global firearm registry extend bureaucratic implications towards private gun ownership in the United States (if ratified). There are further large scale implications as well in ratifying the treaty such that nation states would be in violation for providing arms and defenses to other countries or factions (such as Taiwan) faced with less than nobly intended foreign neighbors. But by and large, as the world’s preeminent clearinghouse for private firearm ownership, Americans are concerned with how foreign pressure may impact their present legal right to own – especially when Iran is given an important role in policing the practical application of the treaty.

Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:

Thread parent sort order:
Thread verbosity:

UN Treaties have no legal power in any country. Each administration that signs the treaty must implement it in laws in their own country. So, there is no way that this move represents UN control over American citizens Constitutional rights.

If the US congress chooses to ratify the treaty, then it will mean restrictions in the trade of weapons to other countries, and that in my opinion would be a very good thing.

Iran has been active in the discussions leading to this treaty proposal. So what? This is normal. Iran maintains a very high profile in all UN Organisation meetings these days. That is what you do if you are paranoid about the world hating you, or rather that should be : if you are correct about the world hating you. Other UN member nations have become quite adept at handling provocative interventions from Iran, so there is no serious danger of it having an adverse impact on this important treaty.

The only Americans affected will be criminal arms dealers, and they have no Constitutional protection.

The only Americans affected will be criminal arms dealers, and they have no Constitutional protection.

They have as much protection as any other American.

Which, for their criminal activities, is nothing

You are correct in the fact that the treaty itself will have no power and that it’s up to the signatory countries to individually enact laws to enforce its application. The problem lies in enforcement. The supremacy clause of the constitution gives international treaties ratified by the senate the same amount of power as constitutional law. If the treaty is signed and not opposed by at least 34 senators then US lawmakers will have no choice to enact laws based on the recommendations of the treaties advisory panel. We are a nation that respects the treaties we sign. The danger comes from other nations that will sign the treaty but have a historical record of ignoring UN regulations. I understand that this is both an emotionally and partisan charged issue but if you are able to remove yourself from those limitations and view this treaty from a facts based perspective its clearly a bad policy move for the US. The fact that we respect the rule of law clearly works against us in a global perspective. With the signing of this treaty we effectively give a veto to Iran and its benefactors on who we are able to makes arms deals with. The fact that America will have a seat on this panel means little as many of the nations we have typically concerned ourselves with regarding illicit arms trade have little respect for the rule of UN law. Iran, China, North Korea, Bhutan, The Malaysian territories and Syria all have signaled support of this treaty but all have a history of ignoring treaties and accords that they have signed. This is almost never a matter of policy as it is a matter of an inability to enforce at a national level. So whether or not you are afraid of or excited for the prospect of Gun control in America ask yourself first if it is good International policy.

Share & Socialize

What is OmniNerd?

Omninerd_icon Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.

Voting Booth

Your mobile phone is stolen and you're able to GPS track it - you decide to?

14 votes, 6 comments