# Gun ban downed



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

I trust that this information will not be deleted as I have removed any reference regarding names of Senators or political party reference.


Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The Statement of Purpose from the bill read:

To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. , and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.

Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.

We have been betrayed by the 46 senators that voted to give your rights
to the U.N.

A list is available via PM if anyone would like a copy.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

Shortdrift said:


> I trust that this information will not be deleted as I have removed any reference regarding names of Senators or political party reference.
> 
> 
> Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
> ...


Can you provide a link to a July 2013 vote or is this a rehash from April ? Since I couldn't find a recent vote I think it must have been top secret....


----------



## Net (Apr 10, 2004)

Thank you shortdrift for pre-editing your post.

You can also find much of what shortdrift posted near the bottom of this article:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

And he scare tactics continue.



The Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with restricting the legal sale or ownership of guns within the United States. The aim of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty is to combat the illicit international trade of arms by "tightening regulation of, and setting international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons" in order to "close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market." The text of the proposed treaty specifically "reaffirms the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory, pursuant to its own legal or constitutional systems," so even if such a treaty came to pass, U.S. rights and laws regarding the sale and ownership of small arms would still apply within the United States. The treaty also contains no provisions for its enforcement and relies upon the voluntary participation of member nations.

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp#mzYvvgHHPbIxzDC6.99


----------



## PapawSmith (Feb 13, 2007)

I believe that this treaty complicates the trade of all small arms and ammunition, and that is it's intent. It would affect all arms, including fine shotguns from Germany, Japan, the U.K., etc., assault rifle imports from Russia, Germany, Israel, Hungary, etc., as well as surplus ammo from all over the world that importers legally currently bring in and distribute to dealers, collectors, and shooters alike throughout the US. I have not read the bill, and neither have any of you, but I tend to believe what the folks that are looking out for my Constitutional rights are saying about this treaty over those that are always trying to find ways to take them away. You can believe who ever you want.


----------



## Bucket Mouth (Aug 13, 2007)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> And he scare tactics continue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sounds like the governments of the world want to A) monopolize the international sales of guns for their dirty selves and B) keep guns out of the hands of the people they stomp on so they can't rise up and stand against them.

I wonder if the U.S. would send itself to jail over Fast & Furious? Funny thought. Why do governments think they are always right when in fact they're always in the wrong?


----------



## JOE W (Jun 4, 2004)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> And he scare tactics continue.
> 
> 
> 
> The Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with restricting the legal sale or ownership of guns within the United States. YEA JUST LIKE THE 1ST AWB!!


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> And he scare tactics continue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't care what your link reads, the UN is garbage and has no right in my country.


----------



## supercanoe (Jun 12, 2006)

If you take the time to research the treaty you would find out that it would have had some very negative and widespread impacts on our rights.


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

supercanoe said:


> If you take the time to research the treaty you would find out that it would have had some very negative and widespread impacts on our rights.


Like what?


----------



## MassillonBuckeye (May 3, 2010)

ezbite said:


> I don't care what your link reads, the UN is garbage and has no right in my country.


It was actually Nets link but ok. I just read it and reposted part of it. If you WERE to read it, you would have also read:



> Updated An item circulated in April 2013 claimed to identify "46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N." in reference to a Senate vote on the U.S. Arms Trade Treaty: WHAT A MESS
> 
> Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
> 
> ...


Lol. Whatever. I'm just tired of all the fear mongering. You guys have everyone whipped up into such a froth I can't even afford to go shoot my guns. Congratulations.


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> Lol. Whatever. I'm just tired of all the fear mongering. You guys have everyone whipped up into such a froth I can't even afford to go shoot my guns. Congratulations.


Way to go Ezbite! You screwed up everything. It's all your fault! Can I borrow some bullets? I can't afford any myself since you whipped everyone into such a froth.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

bobk said:


> Way to go Ezbite! You screwed up everything. It's all your fault! Can I borrow some bullets? I can't afford any myself since you whipped everyone into such a froth.


NO... I'm hoarding all I find, even if I don't own that caliber gun. Call it my little nest egg


----------



## supercanoe (Jun 12, 2006)

It included import bans, tracking, and registration of firearms and ammuntion. That is the short list of it's possible implications, it was pretty scary to think about. I don't believe that anyone on this site has led to your current problems. All firearm owners need to stick together.


----------



## Bucket Mouth (Aug 13, 2007)

MassillonBuckeye said:


> You guys have everyone whipped up into such a froth *I can't even afford to go shoot my guns.*


Sounds like they're just sitting there collecting dust. Wanna sell 'em?:T


----------



## Bucket Mouth (Aug 13, 2007)

supercanoe said:


> It included import bans, tracking, and registration of firearms and ammuntion. That is the short list of it's possible implications, it was pretty scary to think about. I don't believe that anyone on this site has led to your current problems. All firearm owners need to stick together.


If you don't believe in the divine benevolence of the gov't or that everything that they do is pure and true of heart, then you are automatically labelled a fearmonger who is spreading terrible lies. It's funny what names you can be called for not believing the official propaganda.


----------

