The Arms Trade Treaty and the Second Amendment: Answering the American Bar Association.

The Arms Trade Treaty and the Second Amendment: Answering the American Bar Association.HT: Heritage.By Ted R. Bromund, Ph.D.

On February 26, the American Bar Association’s Center for Human Rights issued a white paper on the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which concludes that “the proposed ATT is consistent with the Second Amendment.” 

This conclusion neglects important facts about the treaty and the processes surrounding it, which we will explore in this four-part blog series.
The white paper asserts that the Second Amendment does not apply to most weapons within the scope of the ATT (which covers, among other things, combat aircraft), and that the Second Amendment is “generally inapplicable to arms exports.” These contentions are sound, but the more important issue is how the ATT might affect the importation of firearms under the Second Amendment.
The white paper argues that “import restrictions are constitutionally valid,” and we agree: The federal government does have the power to control the entry of goods into the United States. But the draft ATT, in Article 7(2), requires nations signed on to the treaty to “adopt appropriate measures to prevent the diversion of imported conventional arms under the scope of this Treaty to the illicit market or for unauthorized end use.” The Treaty therefore goes beyond import restrictions by requiring signatories to prevent the domestic diversion of imports.
By ignoring this, the white paper also ignores a broad point about the U.S. Unlike most nations, the U.S. has both the Second Amendment and a federal system. The latter fact means that, in some policy areas, it is difficult to draft multilateral treaties that the U.S. can accept, because most nations do not have a federal system.
For example, the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child covers matters that in the U.S. are the responsibility of the states, localities, and families—not the national government, which is one reason no administration has transmitted it to the Senate.
The same is true for the ATT. The draft ATT is built on the assumption that all nations have the same structure, and can therefore implement the treaty in the same way. But in the U.S., the federal government shares responsibility for regulating firearms with the states, in both cases as controlled by the Second Amendment. Thus, the states are partly responsible for preventing firearms from reaching “the illicit market” or “unauthorized end use.”
Further, unlike other countries, our Constitution limits the authority of the federal government to insist that state officials act as its agent for purposes of carrying out federal policy. Thus, the ATT is about more than the control of imports. Worse, it is based on an assumption about the role and powers of national governments that is not true of the federal and Constitutionally limited U.S. system.Read the full story here.

Noted Gun Rights Activist Warns Obama May Skirt Congress and Outlaw Semiautos

Noted Gun Rights Activist Warns Obama May Skirt Congress and Outlaw Semiautos.(IW).By Kurt Nimmo.Second Amendment activist John Snyder writes on his blog today that confidential sources have told him that the Obama administration may attempt to skirt Congress and outlaw semiautomatic firearms and multiple capacity ammunition feeding devices under Title 2 National Firearms Act items under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

“Under this scenario, semiautomatics and high capacity magazines could be acquired only with great difficulty and at great expense by America’s estimated 100 million law-abiding firearms owners,” Snyder explains.
Prior to Obama’s reelection earlier this month, it was rumored that notorious gun-grabber Dianne Feinstein instructed her legal staff to meet with the legal staff over at the BATF to discuss possible legislation outlawing semiautomatic firearms, according to sources cited by The Shooting Wire. The legal staffs reportedly also talked about banning pistol grips and “high-capacity” magazines.
Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, allegedly forwarded information confirming the meeting and its objectives, according to David Codrea.

Snyder writes that congressional Second Amendment supporters are preparing to do battle and defeat any effort by Feinstein to rollback the Second Amendment. In response, the “Obama administration now may order the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to take the classification step. Some gun-grabbers view the designation of Street Sweeper shotguns as Title 2 items during the Clinton administration as precedent for such a move.”
The so-called Street Sweeper was reclassified as a destructive device in 1999 and requires an owner to register it with ATF within 30 days. Failure to do so may result in a $250,000 fine or up to 10 years in prison. Moreover, following the reclassification, the ATF contacted all purchasers of record of the shotguns and told them the weapons are now considered destructive devices and that they must be registered with the government.Read the full story here.

2ND Amendment 'Again' under fire - Lawmakers tell Obama to back off U.N. gun treaty.

2ND Amendment 'Again' under fire - Lawmakers tell Obama to back off U.N. gun treaty.(WND).By Jack Minor.Over 100 members of Congress appear to share the concerns of a former Army general who has sounded the alarm over efforts by the Obama Administration to push through the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT.
As WND reported, retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin earlier this year, in a video in which he claimed Obama was leading America down the path of a quiet, Marxist revolution, blasted the ATT, also known as the small arms treaty, saying it would regulate private gun ownership.

“There has been a decree by the administration by the president and the secretary of state saying that our president will sign the United Nations small arms treaty, which is about how we will buy sell and control individual private weapons,” Boykin warned. 

“That means the United Nations, an international body will decide how you and I as Americans can buy and sell our weapons, how we control those weapons, who is authorized to have those weapons and where they are. This is a dangerous trend.”
Now some 130 lawmakers, consisting of mostly Republicans, but also including Democrats such as Reps. Jason Altmire, Sanford Bishop, Jerry Costello, Danny Davis and Peter DeFazio sent off a letter to the Obama administration opposing the treaty.
The letter states that Congress is concerned the treaty could “pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.”
The letter goes on to declare that the Second Amendment guarantees the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms” and the U.S. has no business supporting a treaty that infringes on the Bill of Rights.

The treaty was opposed by the Bush administration, but President Obama’s administration reversed direction on the treaty. U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said the United States would support talks towards ratifying the treaty.
While the treaty is still in a draft stage, the United Nations is beginning a month-long process beginning this week to craft the final details of the treaty.The congressional letter also takes issue with the “moral equivalence” of comparing America to totalitarian regimes and calls upon the administration to break consensus and reject the treaty. It goes on to remind the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that “the Constitution gives the power to regulate international commerce to Congress alone.”
This is not the first time Congress has sent letters to the administration opposing the small arms treaty. Last year, Congress sent off a similar letter addressing many of the same concerns. This letter was signed by 12 Democrats who joined 45 Republicans in opposing the treaty.
The letter stated, “The Arms Trade Treaty must not in any way regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sale of firearms or ammunition.”
It went on to state, “The establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”Read the full story here.