Missouri Congressman Exposes Dangers of UN Arms Treaty

The New American – by Joe Wolverton, II, J.D.

With every new report of a madman opening fire on innocent people, President Obama takes advantage of the tragedy to redouble his efforts to disarm the civilian population of the United States.

One of his chief weapons in the war against the Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms that it protects is the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).The New American has covered the creation of the ATT since the time of its proposal.  

For now, there are a few courageous federal lawmakers willing to openly oppose the Obama administration’s assault on firearms.

The latest member of Congress to come out against the globalist’s gun grab is Representative Jason Smith (R-Mo., shown). In an op-ed published by the Democrat News (Park Hills, Missouri), Smith identifies the ATT for what it is: a direct threat to the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Smith writes:

When I was sworn into office to represent Missouri’s Eighth Congressional District in the House of Representatives, I took an oath to uphold the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The federal government should not compromise the ability of decent Americans to own a gun for protection or sport. Recently, Secretary of State John Kerry signed the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty on behalf of the Obama Administration. The treaty clearly violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

True to his word, Smith has joined a coalition of 180 members of Congress in sending a letter to President Obama expressing their opposition to the implementation of the provisions of the Arms Trade Treaty.

Later in the article, Smith explains the meaning of the letter’s message:

This letter makes it absolutely clear to President Obama and his administration that the House of Representatives will not support legislation to give this dangerous treaty the legs it needs to take effect. I will also oppose any efforts by the Obama Administration to implement or enforce the Arms Trade Treaty through executive action. The liberty of the American people and the independence of the United States are far too sacred to ever be sacrificed to a dysfunctional global institution like the United Nations.

The letter signed by Smith and his co-authors was penned by his colleague Representative Mike Kelly (R-Penn.).

The language and spirit of Kelly’s letter also served as inspiration for a provision in the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2014 that imposes a one-year ban on the use of federal funds for the implementation of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) by the State Department.

Kelly has long been a dedicated opponent of the global gun grab. After the bill was passed out of committee, Kelly issued the following statement regarding the funding ban and the ATT:

I am thrilled to see the House once again take action to stop the ATT from ever shackling our liberty at home or our indispensable leadership abroad. This treaty remains as much a threat to American freedom and sovereignty as ever. Even as the Obama administration shamefully pledges to eventually sign the ATT, the American people deserve assurance that their Second Amendment rights will not be allowed to be endangered by unaccountable international bureaucrats at any time. As events on the global stage continue to grow more dangerous and unpredictable, our nation must never permit any entity to undermine our status as the world’s greatest defender of peace and freedom, or the alliances which ensure both. It is my sincere hope that President Obama and Secretary Kerry will respect the will of the American people as represented by Congress and abandon their support for this harmful and needless treaty.

On the Senate side, the balance between those lawmakers who oppose ratification of the ATT and those who support it is close.

For now, 50 senators are standing together to protect the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment and have taken pen in hand, as well, to let the president know how they feel about his plan to rob their constituents of one of their most basic rights.

In a letter addressed to President Barack Obama, the senators enumerated six reasons the president should refuse to present the ATT to the Senate for ratification. Among the objections raised by the senatorial signatories is the ambiguity of the treaty, as well as the grant to “foreign sources of authority” the power to “impose judgment or control on the U.S.”

For many months now, Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) has been the driving force behind the legislature’s opposition to the Arms Trade Treaty. In a statement accompanying the letter, Moran attacked the president’s plan to subvert the bipartisan will of the Congress.

The Administration’s recent signing of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty was a direct dismissal of the bipartisan Senate majority that rejects this treaty.

Throughout this process it has been disturbing to watch the Administration reverse U.S. policies, abandon its own ‘red line’ negotiation principles, admit publicly the treaty’s dangerous ambiguity, and hastily review the final treaty text.

Today I join my colleagues in upholding the fundamental individual rights of Americans by reiterating our rejection of the ATT. The Senate will overwhelmingly oppose ratification, and will not be bound by the treaty.

The ATT is so offensive to the preservation of the right to keep and bear arms, it is an understatement to call it unconstitutional. AsThe New American has reported, several provisions of this treaty significantly diminish the scope of this basic right.

First, the Arms Trade Treaty grants a monopoly over all weaponry in the hands of the very entity (government) responsible for over 300 million murders in the 20th century.

Furthermore, the treaty leaves private citizens powerless to oppose future slaughters.

An irrefutable fact of armed violence unaddressed by the UN in its gun grab is that all the murders committed by all the serial killers in history don’t amount to a fraction of the brutal killings committed by “authorized state parties” using the very weapons over which they will exercise absolute control under the terms of the Arms Trade Treaty.

Article 2 of the treaty defines the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions. The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by this section of the Arms Trade Treaty.

Article 3 places the “ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2” within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.

Article 4 rounds out the regulations, also placing all “parts and components” of weapons within the scheme.

Perhaps the most immediate threat to the rights of gun owners in the Arms Trade Treaty is found in Article 5. Under the title of “General Implementation,” Article 5 mandates that all countries participating in the treaty “shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list.”

This list should “apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms.”

Article 12 adds to the record-keeping requirement, mandating that the list include “the quantity, value, model/type, authorized international transfers of conventional arms,” as well as the identity of the “end users” of these items.

In very clear terms, ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty by the United States would require that the U.S. government force gun owners to add their names to the national registry. Citizens would be required to report the amount and type of all firearms and ammunition they possess.

Section 4 of Article 12 of the treaty requires that the list be kept for at least 10 years.

Although the White House has not announced when the president will sign the document, Secretary Kerry said that in the United States “we look forward to signing it [the Arms Trade Treaty] as soon as the process of conforming the official translations is completed satisfactorily.”

Finally, the agreement demands that national governments take “appropriate measures” to enforce the terms of the treaty, including civilian disarmament. If these countries can’t get this done on their own, however, Article 16 provides for UN assistance, specifically including help with the enforcement of “stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes.”

In fact, a “voluntary trust fund” will be established to assist those countries that need help from UN peacekeepers or other regional forces to disarm their citizens.

While it is not remarkable that Barack Obama supports the seizure of guns and ammunition from law-abiding Americans, the fact that only half of the United States Senate has come out in defense of the Second Amendment is noteworthy and should be remembered by citizens who understand that a disarmed population is a slave population.

Photo of Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.): AP Images

 

Joe A. Wolverton, II, J.D. is a correspondent for The New American and travels frequently nationwide speaking on topics of nullification, the NDAA, and the surveillance state.  He is the host of The New American Review radio show that is simulcast on YouTube every Monday. Follow him on Twitter @TNAJoeWolverton and he can be reached at jwolverton@thenewamerican.com

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17221-missouri-congressman-exposes-dangers-of-un-arms-treaty