« Next on Senate agenda? 'Pedophile Protection Act' | Main | Snipers' Dream - Million Dollar Shot »
May 05, 2009
Obama Pushes Anti-Gun Treaty
Obama supports an international treaty creating sweeping gun control efforts.
As Lou Dobbs notes here, Obama is in favor of the ratifying CIFTA, the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms. On its face, the treaty sounds reasonable because it would “prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials”. However, upon reading the bill we discover the following:
Stressing the need, in peace processes and post-conflict situations, to achieve effective control of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials in order to prevent their entry into the illicit market.
Obama has promised Mexican President Felipe Calderon that he would urge the Senate to take up CIFTA. He is doing this under the cover of the drug cartel violence in Mexico. Obama and Calderon quoted a statistic echoed by the corporate media that 90% of the weapons seized in Mexican raids were purchased from U.S. gun shops and a reason why the U.S. needs to ratify this treaty. In fact, this is a lie — only a mere 17% of guns found at Mexico crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.
CIFTA would bury the Second Amendment under “pertinent resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly.” It would criminalize ammunition reloading (defined as explosives manufacture) and gun assembly (including firearm kits and presumably breaking down weapons for cleaning or transport).
Language contained in the CIFTA treaty insists it respects “the principles of sovereignty, nonintervention, and the juridical equality of states.” Not mentioned is the fact the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has a superior rank to national laws. If the CIFTA treaty is ratified without exception, it would kill U.S. sovereignty and lead the way to destroying the Second Amendment.
It should be noted that only the Senate needs to ratify the treaty. Article II, section 2, of the Constitution states that the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.”
The United States was one of the first signatories to CIFTA in November, 1997. The Convention was transmitted to the Senate in June 1998 and to this day awaits the Senate’s advice and consent. 29 of the 34 OAS member states have ratified CIFTA. Only the US, Canada, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica and St. Vincent & Grenadines have yet to do so.
.
.
Treaty Endangers Second Amendment and U.S. Sovereignty
On April 16, 2009, President Obama emerged from a meeting with Mexico’s President Calderón to announce his support for the “Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Firearms” treaty (CIFTA): an international gun control treaty signed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 but never ratified by the U.S. Senate.
Unlike Clinton, Obama has no plans to let the treaty languish without ratification. Thus he promised to push the treaty through the Senate quickly as a means of curtailing the border violence and arms trafficking in Mexico’s current drug wars. Yet the text of CIFTA indicates that the treaty would do very little to curtail violence in Mexico, unless creating a national gun registry in the United States is something that will cut crime south of the border.
For example, the preamble of the treaty describes “the urgent need for all states, and especially those states that produce, export, and import arms, to take the necessary measures to prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms.” To accomplish this, the preamble calls for the “exchange of information” and “effective control of firearms [and] ammunition” between nations that sign treaty.
The “exchange of information” implies that our government would not simply have a gun registry that is nationally accessible, but internationally accessible as well.
When I contacted Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, about this aspect of the treaty, he said, “It would clear the way for imposing a national gun registry [and] would overturn the current prohibition on keeping centralized firearms records by the federal government.”
But this isn’t even the scariest part of the CIFTA. Once you get past the preamble, you see that another goal of the treaty is to ensure a special “marking" on “firearms…at the time of manufacturing.” Article VI of the treaty explicitly states that the purpose behind “marking” the weapon is to make “tracing the firearms” back to the store or firearm dealer who first sold the weapon easier (even if the dealer sold the weapon legally to someone who passed the NICS background check in the United States).
Lest we underestimate the danger of this aspect of treaty, note that Article XIII of the treaty calls for signatories to make available to other signatories the names of “authorized producers, dealers, importers, exporters, and, whenever possible, carriers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.” In other words, even though your local gun-store owner sells his weapons legally by following all federal guidelines, any gun he sells that is taken across a border illegally could result in a knock on his door by international investigators. Making matters even worse, Article XIX of the treaty provides for “extradition” of those in violation of CIFTA.
Pratt was especially leery of this aspect of the treaty, saying: “Our government has [already] been doing all it can to reduce the number of firearms dealers [in this country]. CIFTA would make dealers vulnerable to extradition to such paradigms of due process as [exist in] Mexico.”
When HUMAN EVENTS contacted U.S Senators John Cornyn (R-Texas) and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) to get their views on the treaty, they were both emphatic on their commitment to defend the Second Amendment and U.S. sovereignty in matters relating to guns and gun ownership.
Cornyn said he was “concerned that the inter-American arms trafficking treaty may lead to infringement of our Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms [without providing any] solution to…the problems occurring along the U.S.-Mexico border.” He said he “will vigorously oppose the ratification of any treaty that impinges on the constitutional rights of the American people affirmed by the Supreme Court last year.”
While Inhofe believes “violence in Mexico is no doubt expanding and must be firmly addressed,” he rejected the idea of addressing it though “a treaty that may be used to impose further restrictions on law-abiding citizens of the United States.” Inhofe also shared Pratt’s concern over what this treaty would mean for lawful firearms dealers in the United States. According to Inhofe: “CIFTA…is not aimed at the criminals. It is aimed at U.S. manufacturers who sell firearms legally to American citizens.”
Like Cornyn, Inhofe made it clear that he could “not support the ratification of CIFTA or any international treaty that places limitations on our constitutional rights.” He believes “our national sovereignty must be respected and…will not allow another country or international body to dictate our gun polices.”
So what does all this mean for freedom loving Americans? It means we need to be grateful for the work Cornyn and Inhofe (and others) are doing. But it also means we need to do our duty as informed citizens and act.
When President Obama asks the Senate to ratify CIFTA, we must call our Senators and implore them to oppose it.
.
Wild Thing's comment.........
Obama and the Democrats are pushing many different programs through as fast as they can in the hopes the people will be overwhelmed and can’t react to all of them.
Obama is an Enemy of the Republic.
I contacted both Senators. The GOP Sen. lists a category in the pull down menu for the email section, “GUNS” while the Democrat has “Gun Control”. Tells you something doesn't it!
Senators of the 111th Congress
Here is what I sent via their Web Mail:
"PLEASE VOTE AGAINST:
“Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Firearms” treaty (CIFTA): an international gun control treaty signed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 but never ratified by the U.S. Senate.
It would impinge upon the 2 nd Amendment.
Thanks"
Posted by Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 05:50 AM
Comments
The press and obama have been using this bogus fact of 90% of illegal firearms come from the U.S. to Mexico, so has Calderon. So this is their strawman argument that it is the fault of the United States. This is the premise that the Soutpiel puppet will use to push this gun banning bill through the Senate. Actually, as said, in the article, treaty, only must be ratified.
Obama promised he would not ban guns, but he did not promise to take a circuitous route around the problem to achieve every liberal's dream of banning guns to law abiding citizens. This way he can blame 'Big Gun' manufactureers and corporate greed for selling our little brown neighbors so many guns. Ergo, it's our fault.
This accomplishes another goal of moving closer to Globalism, and slicing another cord holding the United States to sovereignty.
This should be the 'straw', once people find out what has happened. In Pennsylvania a lot of Gun owners signed on to Obamas promise 'Not to restrict guns. But here it is in all its sordid glory. In one stroke of the pen the Soutpiel puppet will wipe out the Second Amendment and put anoter tradidtional American industry in the scrap heap.
However, there is a light at the end of the Tunnel. Democrats like Dingle and Webb are big gun advocates and a few other democrats. So this may not be a slam dunk for the 'SP' this may not get approved. There are NRA supporting Democrats in the Senate.
Posted by: Mark at May 5, 2009 07:54 AM
He has to get this through so his little goon squads have a reason to come into your home, mess you up, take your guns and your kids away for the public "good." Why people cannot see that past the end of their nose is unbelievable. Our very rights have already been infringed upon! What will they do when you can't say "The President is an idiot." without being thrown in prison? Will no one wake up until it is too late? Then they'll blame us for not making them aware it was happening, even though we tried to warn them.
Posted by: Lynn at May 5, 2009 08:09 AM
Obama, the muslim, is anti gun. He wants to use this treaty for extreme gun control of law abiding citizens. If he can push this treaty he doesn't have to worry about a fight in the House. This treaty is an end around to nullify the Second Amendment. It will also attack our sovereignty. The OAS and eventually the UN will control private gun rights.
I guess Obama would like all of the US to be like his Chicago. Citizens are not allowed to have guns. Only criminals are armed. So much of Chicago is in anarchy with more murders than in Iraq.
I hope this treaty push is the end of Obam's stampede of socialism. Too many Americans are gun owners and this will be a hell of a fight. I know my Senator Cornyn will fight this treaty. I am unsure of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson. She voted once before against the Second Amendment and literaly caught hell for it. She wants to be governor of Texas. If she votes in favor of this treaty her political career is over.
Posted by: TomR at May 5, 2009 12:13 PM
Ammo is getting harder and harder to find. My usual internet sources of 45 ACP had dried up. None of them had any to sell last night. Someone estimated over 6 billions rounds of ammo has been bought up by private citizens in the past 6 months. Ammo manufactures are working overtime to try to keep up with demand but aren't able to.
Posted by: BobF at May 5, 2009 05:12 PM
I not only read this as a threat to our Sovereignty and the Second Amendment. I also read this as a possible coming collapse of the u.n. and the international communist movement. Remember True communism knows nothing of boundaries or national sovereignties. Think about it, why are there so many commies in the u.n.? An empire is most dangerous when it's collapsing. Anyway I digress, They'll be in for one hell of a fight. Tom you're right I wouldn't trust Senator Hutchinson with my Second Amendment Rights if the safety of my Guns depended on it. Oh, wait, they do. I'd trust Max Baucus (who's a democrat) more than hutchinson, weird huh?
Posted by: JohnE PFC U.S. Army at May 5, 2009 06:08 PM
Mark, thank you so much, that is very
good news.
"there is a light at the end of the
Tunnel. Democrats like Dingle and Webb
are big gun advocates and a few other
democrats. So this may not be a slam dunk
for the 'SP' this may not get approved.
There are NRA supporting Democrats in the Senate."
Posted by: Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 06:24 PM
Lynn, exactly, I can really see that
happening too. They will complain and
then say why didn't you keep after me
about what he was like! There is only
so much we can do to convince people.
Posted by: Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 06:27 PM
Tom, thanks for sharing about that and
the information. I was shocked too when
Hutchinson did that. She has said some
things this year and last year on some
talk shows too that had me rolling my
eyes. She never used to be like that.
You have some others there that really
are awesome,
Posted by: Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 06:36 PM
BobF., Wow that is a lot, thanks for
sharing about that.
Posted by: Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 06:41 PM
JohnE PFC U.S. Army, from the beginning of
the UN it had a rule so to speak that it
would always have to have a communist as
the man in charge. The head honcho guy
could not be anything else. That probably
is one of the things too that has made it
so filled with extreme lefties and American
hating decisions they make.
You are so right about True communism
knows nothing of boundaries or national sovereignties.
Posted by: Wild Thing at May 5, 2009 06:46 PM
