U.N. D Day

[MikeBjerum]

I've lost track and am embarrassed.

When is "D Day" with the United Nations and the Small Arms Treaty?  I read the treaty the other night when I couldn't sleep in flee bag central.  Articles 11 and 12 were the two that bothered me the most:

Article 11 talked about tracing and tracking imports and exports:  The only way to accomplish this would be registration of all sales of imported firearms and ammunition;

Article 12 talks about required individual State legislation:  The treaty forces State members (countries) to pass and use legislation to accomplish the goals of the treaty.

These were the two items I have been looking for and studying to separate the concerns over this treaty from paranoia to true threat level.

I have contacted my representation at all levels, and have received very little response (canned pro-Second Amendment response from good guys, and zip from the others).

Back to original question:

What is the current timeline?  Does anyone know?

[Timothy]

The date is a moving target.  There was a report this morning about moving the date again....

Then there's this...

Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty."

[MikeBjerum]

As I read the treaty I also noted that signing States can leave the treaty after signing as well.  However, it is better to not enter than to fight your way around or out.

[tombogan03884]

I still have not seen any indications that they even have a draft to vote on.
It would also be good to keep in mind that sheep can be oppressed with out consequences.
Wolves, not so much.

[MikeBjerum]

Blue helmets ... blue helmets ... what are blue helmets ...

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

As I read the treaty I also noted that signing States can leave the treaty after signing as well.  However, it is better to not enter than to fight your way around or out.

Either way, they need 67 Senators to ratify it and there is already a list of 51 in opposition if it, in any way, infringes on the Constitution.

[tombogan03884]

Blue helmets ... blue helmets ... what are blue helmets ...

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Paranoid crap to avoid facing the reality that the ones enforcing any UN authority will be your own elected representatives, the cops you shoot with and that National Guardsman you thanked for his service.
Face reality.
Accept the fact that when push comes to shove your only choices will be to submit, or shoot other Americans.
Quit trying to hide from the truth by talking about "Blue Helmets".
In fact, If you have relatives who are cops, or in the military, you may very well end up shooting at them.
Or you can be a good little frenchman.

[MikeBjerum]

We had family members shooting at family members on this soil in the 18th and 19th centuries.  I'd hate to see it happen in the 21st, but if the Tree of Liberty needs watering ...

[twyacht]

The U.S. and Russia refused to sign...just posted.....Kinda makes you go Hmmmm....

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=20194.0

[jnevis]

The U.S. and Russia refused to sign...just posted.....Kinda makes you go Hmmmm....

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=20194.0

There was little chance of the US or Russia signing it really. Think about it, for as anti-gun the current administration is if anything resembling an arms trade treaty was passed they'd lose BILLIONS of dollars and the layoffs in the defense community and all the other sub-contractors would get UGLY.  Russia is in the same boat.  The EU would colapse'with Airbus, EADS, and the like shutting dow.  Difference is that in Europe they don't see it.