Safe Mode: On
OBAMA TOLD TO BACK OFF U.N. GUN TREATY

Lawmakers join general in declaring pact a threat to freedom
Over 100 members of Congress appear to share the concerns of a former Army general who has sounded the alarm over efforts by the Obama Administration to push through the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT.

As WND reported, retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin earlier this year, in a video in which he claimed Obama was leading America down the path of a quiet, Marxist revolution, blasted the ATT, also known as the small arms treaty, saying it would regulate private gun ownership.

“There has been a decree by the administration by the president and the secretary of state saying that our president will sign the United Nations small arms treaty, which is about how we will buy sell and control individual private weapons,” Boykin warned. “That means the United Nations, an international body will decide how you and I as Americans can buy and sell our weapons, how we control those weapons, who is authorized to have those weapons and where they are. This is a dangerous trend.”

Now some 130 lawmakers, consisting of mostly Republicans, but also including Democrats such as Reps. Jason Altmire, Sanford Bishop, Jerry Costello, Danny Davis and Peter DeFazio sent off a letter to the Obama administration opposing the treaty.

The letter states that Congress is concerned the treaty could “pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.”

The letter goes on to declare that the Second Amendment guarantees the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms” and the U.S. has no business supporting a treaty that infringes on the Bill of Rights.

The ATT would specifically require signatories to identify and trace, in “a timely and reliable manner,” illicit small arms and light weapons. The information would be required to be submitted to the United Nations.

The treaty was opposed by the Bush administration, but President Obama’s administration reversed direction on the treaty. U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said the United States would support talks towards ratifying the treaty.

While the treaty is still in a draft stage, the United Nations is beginning a month-long process beginning this week to craft the final details of the treaty.

Supporters say the treaty is necessary to prevent rogue countries from being able to purchase guns from arms dealers. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said concerns about the treaty restricting individual rights are “misplaced” and that he supported its goals.

Critics of the treaty have long maintained that the treaty would lead to mandatory registration of all firearms and every sale; even those between individuals.

The congressional letter also takes issue with the “moral equivalence” of comparing America to totalitarian regimes and calls upon the administration to break consensus and reject the treaty. It goes on to remind the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that “the Constitution gives the power to regulate international commerce to Congress alone.”

This is not the first time Congress has sent letters to the administration opposing the small arms treaty. Last year, Congress sent off a similar letter addressing many of the same concerns. This letter was signed by 12 Democrats who joined 45 Republicans in opposing the treaty.

The letter stated, “The Arms Trade Treaty must not in any way regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sale of firearms or ammunition.”

It went on to state, “The establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”

While that letter was been touted in the mainstream media as an indication that Democrats are now opposing gun control, some pointed out that the letter actually proved the opposite. The Senators stated they support the general concept of the treaty but believe countries such as the U.S. should have “exclusive authority to regulate arms within their own borders.”

Critics point out that this statement indicates that the senators believe firearms registration is acceptable provided it is initiated by individual governments.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obama-told-to-back-off-u-n-gun-treaty/


Added: Jul-8-2012 Occurred On: Jul-8-2012
By: Fine_Just_Fine
In:
World News
Tags: obama, united nations, second amendment
Views: 4090 | Comments: 85 | Votes: 4 | Favorites: 2 | Shared: 5 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Comment of user 'AngryWhiteMan' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @AngryWhiteMan
      oBama and his LIBtard minion overlords are being called out.
      If they steal the election,
      they will not see four more years from the oval office with even a few progressives demanding a trial of impeachment and an early exit.
      His oBama care will steal from the middle class and give to the privilidged WIC class

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (5) | Report

    • @AngryWhiteMan i think bush was the worst dictator

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • Comment of user 'AngryWhiteMan' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @cevelry

      Elaborate instead of posting baseless bullshit.

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (3) | Report

    • @Kafirindareelharb HE/SHE IS JUST TRYING TO STIR SHIT. THROWS INFLAMATORY COMMENTS OUT HERE AND THERE. JUST IGNORE

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • The UN wants to disarm america ?
    why?
    So the gobmit can act like the Chinese did at Tianimin square?
    The UN can go to hell.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (10) | Report

  • I am so sick of the UN and gun grabbing politicians!

    The right to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed... Nuff said!

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (8) | Report

  • This POS is so transparently aimed right at US gun owners. The international arms trade is conducted by NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS not private citizens. This treaty does NOTHING to stop the arms trade. Liberals/Communists know they have no chance as long as American hunters are the world’s largest army. If this treaty is ratified it supersedes the US Constitution, one of Obama’s favorite tricks.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (8) | Report

    • @onepercent No only is it aimed at US gun owners but if Obama had gotten away with "fast and furious", the additional cartel violence created by the massive importation of guns from the USA would have been his reasoning for supporting the treaty. The government is in business to create problems they can remarkably also solve.

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (5) | Report

  • Comment of user 'HeyMaker84' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • Chipping away at our sovereignty, a small piece at a time...

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (6) | Report

    • @ModCon81
      Here is how all of this shit works they tell are going to pass legislation to battle something we can usually agree on. Terrorism, evil regimes (at least we are told they are evil), internet crime, blah blah blah.

      After they pass the legislation we find out how it now affects us.

      Congress recently gave illegal powers to the president to “fight terrorists” and he says he won’t use the powers on American citizens on American soil, however he identified and assassinated America More..

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @Kmanbay To Republicans and Democrats the US constitution is just a piece of paper, nothing more, it has no meaning to them other than to be an inconvenience or used when advantageous.
      If more people would just join and vote Libertarian this would not even be in the news.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @givemeadamnname
      You are right. It is the basis for all they do and they use it when it suits their needs.

      When they want something else it is an inconvenient hindrance, so they go ahead and break it.

      Then we have to move through the courts in order fix what they broke, but while we wait for the courts they are destroying people and lives.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • This makes perfect sense for Obama. He spent a lot of time and money arming Mexican drug cartels, the last thing he needs is U.S. citizens along the border killing his customers in self defense.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (5) | Report

  • The U.N. has no problem taking our tax money, not doing their job, and interfering in our politics.

    Why the hell should these assholes dictate what happens in our country? Our sovereignty needs to be protected.

    Tell the U.N. to fuck off.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (5) | Report

    • @cswartz It's not the UN, since the UN get's it's money primarily from the US. It's elements with the US itself that are chomping at the bit and frothing at the mouth.
      It's Americans that like to tell other Americans how to live.
      This one falls squarely on the left but I've seen enough bone headed Repugnants that have no problem telling others what they can smoke and cat smoke etc.
      Just leave people to themselves, if they want to own machine guns that's there business. If everybody's packing ain More..

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • What a fucking mistake of a president. Obama is a fucking clueless asshole Marxist. Enough said.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (5) | Report

  • Comment of user 'Americanalltheway' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Boykin

    if this religious nutjob influences your opinions, you are an idiot.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • @guykirb Liberalism is the world's most destructive religion. Worse than Mooslimes.

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (4) | Report

    • @onepercent

      care to explain? you should try to actually develop an argument to what you say, instead of just making generalized statements

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (-3) | Report

    • @guykirb

      Don't you believe that if Obama could take away all privately owned firearms tomorrow, he would?

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @pachaKamaq
      1st of all no I dont think he would. 2nd of all, I really wouldnt care. the 2nd amendment was written at a time when we lived in a wild-west environment, and assault rifles and handguns didnt exist. guns today kill way more many innocent people than they save.

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @guykirb
      1. The 2nd amendment was created in a time when civilians had access to firearms of the same and better quality than the Army,this included hand cranked machine guns and artillery and so they should be able to maintain the same status today excluding perhaps air-air missiles, nukes etc.
      2. The freedom of press was created at a time before phones, tv, the internet and the radio your logic could be used to say that should be removed as well.
      3. The wild west environment only existed in t More..

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • 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 (a More..

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • @onepercent Never happen, could you imaging the Poice going house to house trying to confiscate private guns ?
      That's a recipe for disaster for both the gun owner and the police.
      There would be dead cops allover the place and gun owners on the Lamb.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @givemeadamnname

      Not if martial law is declared first. Don't think that'll happen? Then I'm sorry to say that you along with many others have a rude awakening coming.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @vexus Even if that happens the military is the least likely to go along with disarming the public.
      And you would still have resistance, people would shoot it out and lose but none the less.
      The American population is armed to the teeth and is the least likely to hand over any guns.
      It would mean civil war.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'NeRdALeRt' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • before you know it "madbama" the muji favourit mouthpeice will be incorporating sharia law into the statute books..thats why he wants to remove the American right to hold or own private weapons...

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I do agree that there needs to be tighter regulation for international sale of MILITARY hardware.

    But there's no reason to apply strict standards to the civilian market. All that will do is drive up the cost of firearms for hunters and shooting enthusiasts. Also, it will likely make certain firearms unavailable for purchase because the manufacturer is in a country somebody in the UN doesn't like.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @jum_runky
      They want the people to submit to a one ruler government if the UN is for it

      I'm against it.

      I don't even own a fire arm but will fight for my neighbors right to keep his

      Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

      (3) | Report

  • Obama wants war period..maybe so he can be president for ever. Either he know what he is doing or just lost...

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • This scumbag is EVIL! I think if he manages to win he will get knocked off this time around..

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Setting up the logic to be used to convince americans to bend over and swallow hard. By the way Ben Dover's a$$ must really be hurting lately.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • As the threat of seizing the rights of Citizens of these United States &
    Empowering the illegals that have broken laws to break into this Nation is a crime committed by the Federal Government;
    As the Federal Government submits the the Laws imposed on it and its people; the greatest crime of all; I am not sure if that would be called Treason or Greater.

    We have seen that the elected will do for their buddies States side in; banking, real estate, green energy, and at whos cost it will come. More..

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • I think this might fall under subversion and treason. If he does he needs to be impeached before the elections.

    Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @big_tex I wish you good luck with that one.
      Congress can take care of this and if need be the supreme court can hear arguments regarding it.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @big_tex He will & he wont. How many times has Odumbo done things like this before without approval of Congress or the people for that matter. And yet the man is still in office when he shouldve been dumped out long ago.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @vexus Depressing isn't it. Think about what that is showing us.

      Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user '32oz' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • holy shit so retarded, yes more gun registration, so people can buy guns legally and then when some crackhead steals the gun he will have to fill out section 9 of the firearms form and leave it with the owner of the gun or he can mail his form to the police...

    are you fucking serious?

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Even if this pathetic POS don't sell American freedoms to the UN,he'll make getting Ammo so dificult he might as well sell us out.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • In the US, you can legally make your own firearms without a serial number, without a license as long as there is no intent on selling it. Only a few states have actually banned this. Many gun control laws seem to exclude these firearms (laws such as registration, serial numbers etc dont have text to include home made firearms).

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said concerns about the treaty restricting individual rights are “misplaced” and that he supported its goals.
    YEAH SURE "MISPLACED". UNTIL SOMEONE'S "INTERPRETATION" OF THE TREATY FROM THE U.N. AND OR OUR OWN COUNTRY STRIPS AWAY OUR GUNS.

    Posted Jul-8-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • way to cement losing re-election. you gun-grabbing POS..

    Posted Jul-9-2012 By 

    (0) | Report