Liberals are once again in an uproar over President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from an abominable international firearms treaty that would have trampled upon personal liberties and civil rights. It also would have subjected law-abiding firearms owners to likely future restrictive measures and bureaucratic control by foreign nations.
Former Secretary of State John Kerry signed the treaty in 2013. A year later and led by a new GOP majority, the Senate voted 53-46 to prevent the US from joining it. Only Democrats voted in favor of the UN treaty, which would have had grave consequences for gun owners in the United States.
The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) was negotiated at the UN headquarters in New York City in 2012 and 2013. Ratified by 101 nations and signed by another 34 that did not ratify it, including the United States, it effectively became international law on Dec. 24, 2014.The ATT seeks to regulate international arms trades, including small arms.
The treaty requires member states to monitor arms exports and ensure they do not violate existing arms embargoes, are not used during the commission of human rights violations, or used during acts of terrorism. While that sounds like an admirable goal, such a treaty creates an incredibly slippery slope that easily could and likely would erode Second Amendment rights in the United States.
One provision requires tracking end users of firearms sales and storing that information for 20 years. After all, if each nation does not track where the arms are sold, how could they know whether or not they wind up used during abuses of human rights or by terrorists? Doing that, though, essentially requires creating and maintaining a national firearms registry, which would violate individual privacy rights.
It also would expose lawful firearms owners to exposure to potential criminal activity by those who would break into homes and steal firearms, among other valuables. Such firearms tracking would make obvious political targets of owners of firearms – especially military-style firearms. After all, the information would be public, and anti-gun liberals certainly would use them to target and shame lawful gun owners.
Current anti-firearms messaging is using children to turn people against guns and blaming lawful gun owners for firearms deaths among America’s youth. The reality, though, is the vast majority of “youth” killed by firearms are older teen gangbangers involved in criminal activity. They mostly are not law-abiding gun owners.
Yet, opposition to semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines is growing, despite factual data showing such firearms seldom are used in criminal acts. Mostly, stolen and illegally trafficked handguns are the implements criminals mostly choose to commit crimes, according to the FBI.
But it is the vast majority of law-abiding owners of these scary looking rifles that anti-gun liberals say are the threat to other people’s freedom and personal liberties.
If the U.S. were to join and ratify the UN arms treaty, it would be subject to current treaty law and future amendments. Those amendments would not require support from the U.S. to impact citizens here. So long as a supermajority of states voted to amend the firearms treaty, those amendments would take effect here.
That could bring on more regulations than a firearms registry, including potential confiscation of firearms. If a terrorist or international criminal obtains an AK-47 or other similar style rifle, somehow, via a U.S. firearms dealer, it could trigger oppressive, knee-jerk firearms laws that erode or downright violate the Second Amendment.
For that matter, the firearm need not even originate in the U.S. for a potentially restrictive international regulation to be imposed. I just takes one bad event to get exploited and used to drum up support for further eroding firearms rights in the only nation that really has them.
The UN claims member states that ratified the treaty would not be required to violate citizen rights to bear arms, including the Second Amendment in the United States. But only gullible gun owners buy such assurances.
The liberal media is claiming President Trump bent to the will of the NRA, but that is not the case. While the NRA certainly opposed the treaty, so do most gun owners, as well as those who support the Bill of Rights.
President Trump was right to withdraw the U.S. from this U.N. Arms Treaty, which reflects the wills of the vast majority of law abiding gun owners.