Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 3 votes

United Nations Arms Trade Treaty


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1    Drayno

Drayno

    Bounty Hunter

  • Member
  • 3,917 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Neo-Mars

  • States are domed when they are unable to distinguish good men from bad.

    - Antisthenes.

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:50 PM

I found the story through Infowars, but here's a link to the senate's government website.

http://www.foreign.s...2e-159a0292580f

In May 130 members of Congress told Obama and Kerry to refuse signing the treaty.

Some view it as an attempt to subvert the Second Amendment to an international legal basis.

http://www.thenewame...tion-regulation

Quote

Article 11 of conference president Peter Woolcott’s latest draft proposal of the ATT requires state parties to “maintain national records” of the small arms located within their national borders.

Section 3 of Article 11 sets out the data these registries should contain. “Each state party is encouraged to include in those records the quantity, value, model/type” of small arms owned in the nation, as well as the name of the “end user.”

This list will be kept for 10 years, according to another section of Article 11.

The prospect of such a registration being carried out in the United States should offend every American who believes that the right to keep and bear arms is crucial to the defense of all other rights, and that the forced disclosure to the federal government (or any local government acting under the authority of the federal government) of the amount and type of weapons one owns is the first step toward banning of personal ownership of firearms.

It's a bit troublesome that Kerry is disregarding Congress and the Senate.

Very troublesome.. Especially since this treaty encourages registration.

Here is the topic story bellow with the letter of Senator Bob Corker attached in spoilers.

Quote

WASHINGTON – Asserting the Senate’s constitutional role on treaties, U.S. Senator Bob Corker, R-Tenn., ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, in a letter today warned the Obama administration against taking any action to implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty without Senate advice and consent.

“The ATT raises significant legislative and constitutional questions.  Any act to implement this treaty, provisionally or otherwise, before the Congress provides its advice and consent would be fundamentally inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, law, and practice,” said Corker.

Full text of the letter is included below and in the attached document.


Spoiler


We need to pay close attention to this.

Edited by Hatake Kakashi, 25 September 2013 - 04:51 PM.

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II
Posted Image

#2    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 25 September 2013 - 05:29 PM

Quote

...forced disclosure to the federal government (or any local government acting under the authority of the federal government) of the amount and type of weapons one owns is the first step toward banning of personal ownership of firearms


How, except in the fevered mind of the conspiracy theorist, does the latter necessarily follow from the former?

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#3    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 25 September 2013 - 05:29 PM

Does this mean they'll stop sending guns to terrorists and Mexican drug cartels??


#4    Bama13

Bama13

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,886 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Just Southeast of God's country

Posted 25 September 2013 - 05:34 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

[/font][/color][/size]

How, except in the fevered mind of the conspiracy theorist, does the latter necessarily follow from the former?

I believe the thinking goes like this: If they don't know who has guns then they can't confiscate them. If they do know then they can. So it doesn't necessarily follow but it could.

" Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything —you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him" - Robert Heinlein

#5    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 25 September 2013 - 05:38 PM

Good article here:

Quote

As a result, the old requirement not to violate the “object and purpose” of a signed treaty has become a way to evade the need for Senate ratification. And in the case of the Arms Trade Treaty, the problem is even worse. The administration will argue that it already has all the powers it needs to enforce the treaty.
In the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Arms Export Control Act, Congress gave the Executive Branch the power to control both the import and export of firearms – indeed, of weapons of all kinds. This power is virtually unfettered. All the president has to do is to assert that a particular firearm is not suitable for “sporting” purposes and, under the 1968 Act, he can ban its import.
We have recently seen an example of this with the executive actions banning the import of Korean War vintage M1 Garand rifles, which the White House justified as a gun control measure. And since many U.S. gun manufacturers rely on imported parts and components, or financing and insurance from abroad, the Treaty also gives other countries new opportunities to affect the U.S. firearms market.

Link: http://www.foxnews.c...-years-to-come/

Edited by Burt Gummer, 25 September 2013 - 05:39 PM.


#6    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 25 September 2013 - 09:25 PM

View PostBama13, on 25 September 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

I believe the thinking goes like this: If they don't know who has guns then they can't confiscate them. If they do know then they can. So it doesn't necessarily follow but it could.

Yes, but the language used indicates the grabbing of the guns will (not can) follow the registering. Do the people really believe this is what will eventuate, or is this simply another excuse to roll out the partisan rhetoric and have a dig at "the other side" (or, in this case, the 'non-'Mercans') ?

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#7    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 39,704 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 25 September 2013 - 09:28 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

Yes, but the language used indicates the grabbing of the guns will (not can) follow the registering. Do the people really believe this is what will eventuate, or is this simply another excuse to roll out the partisan rhetoric and have a dig at "the other side" (or, in this case, the 'non-'Mercans') ?

I am afraid it is a good exercise in cultivating a paranoia.

It is astonishing when the formerly freest country on earth gets converted into a prison of imaginary limitations. Maybe the dictators are right and man is not supposed to be free :innocent:

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#8    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 25 September 2013 - 09:46 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

Yes, but the language used indicates the grabbing of the guns will (not can) follow the registering. Do the people really believe this is what will eventuate, or is this simply another excuse to roll out the partisan rhetoric and have a dig at "the other side" (or, in this case, the 'non-'Mercans') ?

You might want to see this:



Quote

According to The Washington Post, the Obama administration is considering a “national database” of all firearms in the United States to “track the movement and sale of weapons.” If such a database comes to fruition the database will lead to confiscation.
Last year Canada ended its national long gun registry, a national database of every rifle and shotgun in the country that was supposed to help police track the movement of and sale of weapons. When it was introduced twenty years ago critics said the registration of firearms would eventually lead to confiscation, a criticism dismissed as ridiculous, yet that’s what happened and more right up until its dismantling.
As recently as last winter law abiding gun owners who had complied with the registry were having their rifles confiscated. In late 2011 hundreds if not thousands of people who had legally purchased the Armi Jager AP80, a .22 calibre variant of the AK47, were informed that their rifles had been deemed illegal and must be surrendered .
“You are required by law to return your firearm registration certificates, without delay, either by mail to the address shown in the top left corner of this page or in person to a peace officer or firearms officers. You have 30 days to deliver your firearms to a peace officer, firearms officer of Chief Firearms Officer or to otherwise lawfully dispose of them,” read the letter sent by the Canadian Firearms Centre.
The reason for the need to surrender what had been legal firearms was simply cosmetic, the AP 80 looked too similar to the AK47. There were no interchangeable parts between the two rifles, the rifles used vastly different ammunition, had vastly different uses but they looked the same.

Link: http://www.theblaze....o-confiscation/


Read a History Book, Gun Registration Leads to Gun Confiscation

​Link: http://politicalcraz...un#.UkNX6jAo5oM

Posted Image

Posted Image

Edited by Burt Gummer, 25 September 2013 - 09:47 PM.


#9    Drayno

Drayno

    Bounty Hunter

  • Member
  • 3,917 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Neo-Mars

  • States are domed when they are unable to distinguish good men from bad.

    - Antisthenes.

Posted 25 September 2013 - 10:07 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 09:25 PM, said:

Yes, but the language used indicates the grabbing of the guns will (not can) follow the registering. Do the people really believe this is what will eventuate, or is this simply another excuse to roll out the partisan rhetoric and have a dig at "the other side" (or, in this case, the 'non-'Mercans') ?

It's fair to believe it's a over-hyped belief or paranoia.

However, the language in the Second Amendment expresses absolute seriousness: 'Shall not be infringed'...

Historically speaking, the Second Amendment was put in place in regards to the Framer's detailed understanding of political history.

That paranoia is justified because that same paranoia is historically backed.

If all the bodies of the people killed in the 20th century by government alone were put in a line from head to toe, their bodies would circle the Earth six times.

How many times in history has government gone rogue against its own population?

How are we so infallible? How are we above history? Have we learned nothing?


Now that it's the 21st century and we see what happens with Communism off paper; gun-confiscation, executions of political opponents, I'll be paranoid.

Happily paranoid at that.

Edited by Hatake Kakashi, 25 September 2013 - 10:09 PM.

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II
Posted Image

#10    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 25 September 2013 - 11:03 PM

Burt,

Quote

...the Obama administration is considering a “national database” of all firearms in the United States to “track the movement and sale of weapons.” If such a database comes to fruition the database will lead to confiscation.


What The Blaze doesn't tell you, because it wants to stoke the paranoia, is the confiscation will be of the illegal weapons that people mistakenly register. People who unknowingly buy stolen guns, etc.

There is no basis for the claim a national firearms register will lead to the confiscation of all legal privately-owned weapons unless the claimant is paranoid or wishes to promote a theme of paranoia. And if the American public truly believes their Govt will enact confiscation, are actively planning to do so, why the hell are the American public sitting on their backsides posting these views on the internet instead of actually doing something about it?

The rest of your post is a one-eyed view of gun control which ignores the effective gun control enacted in peaceful, democratic nations. It is an excellent example of the American's paranoia (fed by a partisan media) regarding the subject of gun control.

Edited by Leonardo, 25 September 2013 - 11:04 PM.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#11    Drayno

Drayno

    Bounty Hunter

  • Member
  • 3,917 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Neo-Mars

  • States are domed when they are unable to distinguish good men from bad.

    - Antisthenes.

Posted 25 September 2013 - 11:15 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

Burt,

[/font][/color]

What The Blaze doesn't tell you, because it wants to stoke the paranoia, is the confiscation will be of the illegal weapons that people mistakenly register. People who unknowingly buy stolen guns, etc.

There is no basis for the claim a national firearms register will lead to the confiscation of all legal privately-owned weapons unless the claimant is paranoid or wishes to promote a theme of paranoia. And if the American public truly believes their Govt will enact confiscation, are actively planning to do so, why the hell are the American public sitting on their backsides posting these views on the internet instead of actually doing something about it?

The rest of your post is a one-eyed view of gun control which ignores the effective gun control enacted in peaceful, democratic nations. It is an excellent example of the American's paranoia (fed by a partisan media) regarding the subject of gun control.

You mean the effective gun control in the UK where there's a total gun ban, and total crime rates are through the roof?

Yeah, you don't worry about guns, but how many people are robbed and killed by knives? Lots.

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II
Posted Image

#12    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 18,400 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 25 September 2013 - 11:54 PM

View PostHatake Kakashi, on 25 September 2013 - 11:15 PM, said:

You mean the effective gun control in the UK where there's a total gun ban, and total crime rates are through the roof?

Yeah, you don't worry about guns, but how many people are robbed and killed by knives? Lots.

Far less than you think. The figures from the USDoJ from 2009 state that 22% of the violent crimes in the US involved the use of weapons. The UK's ONS (Office of National Statistics) has the percentage of violent crimes involving weapons as 22% of violent crimes, for period 2011-12.

More from the ONS:
  • Violent and sexual crime covers a range of offence types. For example, violence spans minor assaults, such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm through to serious assault and murder. Sexual assault covers offences from indecent exposure to rape. In half of incidents identified by the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) (50%) and offences recorded by the police (56%), the violence resulted in no physical injury to the victim.
  • The 2011/12 CSEW shows that there were 2.1 million violent incidents in England and Wales with 3% of adults victimised. The number of violent incidents has halved from its peak in 1995 when the survey estimated over 4.2 million violent incidents.
  • Focusing on the most serious violence, the number of homicides currently recorded by the police has increased from 1961 to 2002/03, and shown a generally downward trend since. The number currently recorded for 2011/12 (540) is the lowest since 1989 (521).
  • Offences involving the use of firearms peaked later than overall violent crime with 24,094 offences being recorded by the police in 2003/04. Since then the number of such offences has fallen by 60% to 9,555 recorded offences in 2011/12. The current 16% fall between 2010/11 and 2011/12 is the eighth consecutive annual decrease in firearm offences.
source

More from the USDoJ:

"Violent crime includes murder, rape and sexual assault, robbery, and assault."

In 2010 the DoJ recorded 4,935,980 'victimisations' (incidents of violent crime).

source

Note:  The relative violent crime rates in the UK are made using criteria for "violent crime" that would not constitute "violent crime" according to the US DoJ, so making a direct comparison of the respective rates of violent crime is not very meaningful, although estimates suggest there is no significant differences in violent crimes rates between the UK and the US when equivalent crimes are considered.

So, not only is it a lie that UK "violent crime rates are through the roof", but the equal percentages of violent crimes involving weapons between the UK and US suggests that gun-control does not lower the rate of violent crimes involving weapons (criminals just use different weapons), but it does reduce the rate at which those crimes lead to homicide - which is the point of gun-control.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#13    Drayno

Drayno

    Bounty Hunter

  • Member
  • 3,917 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Neo-Mars

  • States are domed when they are unable to distinguish good men from bad.

    - Antisthenes.

Posted 26 September 2013 - 12:07 AM

View PostLeonardo, on 25 September 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

Far less than you think. The figures from the USDoJ from 2009 state that 22% of the violent crimes in the US involved the use of weapons. The UK's ONS (Office of National Statistics) has the percentage of violent crimes involving weapons as 22% of violent crimes, for period 2011-12.

More from the ONS:
  • Violent and sexual crime covers a range of offence types. For example, violence spans minor assaults, such as pushing and shoving that result in no physical harm through to serious assault and murder. Sexual assault covers offences from indecent exposure to rape. In half of incidents identified by the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) (50%) and offences recorded by the police (56%), the violence resulted in no physical injury to the victim.
  • The 2011/12 CSEW shows that there were 2.1 million violent incidents in England and Wales with 3% of adults victimised. The number of violent incidents has halved from its peak in 1995 when the survey estimated over 4.2 million violent incidents.
  • Focusing on the most serious violence, the number of homicides currently recorded by the police has increased from 1961 to 2002/03, and shown a generally downward trend since. The number currently recorded for 2011/12 (540) is the lowest since 1989 (521).
  • Offences involving the use of firearms peaked later than overall violent crime with 24,094 offences being recorded by the police in 2003/04. Since then the number of such offences has fallen by 60% to 9,555 recorded offences in 2011/12. The current 16% fall between 2010/11 and 2011/12 is the eighth consecutive annual decrease in firearm offences.
source

More from the USDoJ:

"Violent crime includes murder, rape and sexual assault, robbery, and assault."

In 2010 the DoJ recorded 4,935,980 'victimisations' (incidents of violent crime).

source

Note:  The relative violent crime rates in the UK are made using criteria for "violent crime" that would not constitute "violent crime" according to the US DoJ, so making a direct comparison of the respective rates of violent crime is not very meaningful, although estimates suggest there is no significant differences in violent crimes rates between the UK and the US when equivalent crimes are considered.

So, not only is it a lie that UK "violent crime rates are through the roof", but the equal percentages of violent crimes involving weapons between the UK and US suggests that gun-control does not lower the rate of violent crimes involving weapons (criminals just use different weapons), but it does reduce the rate at which those crimes lead to homicide - which is the point of gun-control.

Posted Image

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II
Posted Image

#14    lightly

lightly

    metaphysical therapist

  • Member
  • 6,998 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan U.S.A.

  • "The future ain't what it used to be"
    Yogi Berra

Posted 26 September 2013 - 12:21 AM

This registration better not cost me any money.   .. what rifle?

Important:  The above may contain errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and other limitations.

#15    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 15,174 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:28 AM

View PostBurt Gummer, on 25 September 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

    Read a History Book, Gun Registration Leads to Gun Confiscation

​Link: http://politicalcraz...un#.UkNX6jAo5oM
Except in Australia, where we have strict gun control laws, but don't go about confiscating weapons - unless they're criminals.
We routinely buy-back weapons, or have gun (and knife) amnesties at the cop-shops.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

You may think you're cool, but you'll never be as cool as Peter Capaldi with an electric guitar, on a tank, playing the Doctor Who theme.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users