"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." — Thomas Jefferson
Is the United Nations gunning for Americans’ second Amendment rights?
In an op-ed for Forbes, University of Houston professor Larry Bell rails against the U.N.’s “Small Arms Treaty.” Bell claims that the international body is passing the measure off as an effort intended to combat terrorists and insurgents. He says the measure has a very different purpose:
Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty”…you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to to own and bear arms.
Bell claims that this international treaty, from the Obama administration’s perspective, is an opportunity to increase domestic gun control. If implemented, he believes it will enforce rougher licensing requirements, more red tape, create an “international gun registry,“ ”confiscate and destroy all ‘unauthorized’ civilian firearms’” and severely impede Americans’ right to bear arms.
Bell explains that this plan is very real and that the U.S. has already joined 152 other countries in to endorse a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will lead to a 2012 conference. It is during this meeting that plans to enact these international new controls will take place. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said she will encourage the Senate to ratify he resolution as well. You can read more about Bell’s thoughts on this important subject here.
What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail?
While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:
Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.
The treaty is aimed at fighting terrorism, insurgency and international crime syndicates but “you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms,” Bell writes.
While noting the terms have yet to be made public, Bell argues the measure could force the United States to enact tougher licensing requirements, confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms, ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons, and create an “international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.”
“Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners to take this initiative seriously, stating that the U.N. ‘is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control,’” Bell wrote.
Although professing to support the Second Amendment during her presidential election bid, Hillary Clinton is not generally known as a gun rights enthusiast. She has been a long-time activist for federal firearms licensing and registration, and a vigorous opponent of state Right-to-Carry laws. As a New York senator she ranked among the National Rifle Association’s worst “F”-rated gun banners who voted to support the sort of gunpoint disarmament that marked New Orleans’ rogue police actions against law-abiding gun owners in the anarchistic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
President Obama’s record on citizen gun rights doesn’t reflect much advocacy either. Consider for example his appointment of anti-gun rights former Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels as an alternate U.S. representative to the U.N., and his choice of Andrew Traver who has worked to terminate civilian ownership of so-called “assault rifles” (another prejudicially meaningless gun term) to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Then, in a move unprecedented in American history, the Obama administration quietly banned the re-importation and sale of 850,000 collectable antique U.S.-manufactured M1 Garand and Carbine rifles that were left in South Korea following the Korean War. Developed in the 1930s, the venerable M1 Garand carried the U.S. through World War II, seeing action in every major battle.
As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama was an aggressive advocate for expanding gun control laws, and even voted against legislation giving gun owners an affirmative defense when they use firearms to defend themselves and their families against home invaders and burglars. He also served on a 10-member board of directors of the radically activist anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago during a period between 1998-2001 when it contributed $18,326,183 in grants to anti-Second Amendment organizations.
If someone breaks into your home when you are there, which would you prefer to have close at hand: 1) a telephone to call 911, or 2) a loaded gun of respectable caliber? That’s a pretty easy question for me to answer. I am a long-time NRA member. While in respect to my wife I do not own a gun, but would have no qualms about having one at my side. I learned to shoot at the tender age of 15 and I am not fearful of using a gun in self-defense.
I am a member of a WWII reenactment group that honors the men of the 101st airborne division. These reenactors carry M-1 Grand Rifles, Thompson tommy guns, Colt 45 pistols and even a browning .30 caliber machine gun. All of them are fitted out to fire blank rounds. They also can, if needed, fire live rounds. These weapons are protected under legislation as “historic” just as the muskets used by the Civil War reenactors. Obama’s decision not to import the 850,000 M-1s was a slap in the face to every reenactor and gun collector in this country. Just because he is whip and cannot shot or throw a baseball does give him an excuse to institute this ban.
Several years ago I had a conversation with a deputy sheriff who is the liaison with our local neighborhood watch committee. I asked him a direct question about owning a hand gun or shotgun. His reply surprised me a little when he said “While I can’t advise you one way or the other whether to own a personal defense weapon I can tell you that I own one and would use it. It takes a minimum of 15 minutes for us to respond to a 911 call in your neighborhood and by that time you could be dead. You have a Second amendment right to own a gun and I would never criticize you for exercising that right.”
Bell concludes, “Now, more than ever, it’s imperative to stick by our guns in demanding that all Constitutional rights be preserved. If not, we will surely lose both.” This is just another example of our President surrounding our rights to an international body that has never done anything to protect the rights of the individual. Remember, that without the Second Amendment there will be no First Amendment.