• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. signs treaty to regulate global arms trading

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The United States, the world's largest arms dealer, has joined more than 90 other nations in signing a treaty that regulates global arms trading, but there is strong resistance in the Senate, which must ratify it.Secretary of State John Kerry, who signed the Arms Trade Treaty on Wednesday, said it was a "significant step" in keeping the world safe and preventing terrorists and others from obtaining conventional weapons.
The Obama administration's move is seen as critical to the treaty's success. The U.S. was the 91st country to sign, but the treaty will not take effect until 50 nations have ratified it. Only four had ratified the treaty as of Wednesday.
Many of the world's other top arms exporters have yet to sign and opposition in the Senate, backed by the powerful National Rifle Association, means U.S. ratification will be difficult.
"This is about reducing the risks of international transfers of conventional arms that will be used to carry out the world's worst crimes," Kerry said.
He said it would require other countries to put in place the same arms export restrictions that the United States already has in force.
"This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong, and this is about promoting international peace and global security," he said.
Addressing U.S. critics of the treaty, the former senator said fears that it would undermine Americans' constitutional right to keep and bear arms are not grounded in reality.
For one, the treaty does not regulate domestic weapons sales.


Read more @: U.S. signs treaty to regulate global arms trading

Common sense treaty. This is common sense all the lies that have circulated around this to try to stop this makes no sense. We need to ratify this this is common sense for a great cause.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,255
Reaction score
46,679
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Incoming rant about our second amendment right to bear sell arms to protect ourselves warlords.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,219
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Common sense treaty. This is common sense all the lies that have circulated around this to try to stop this makes no sense. We need to ratify this this is common sense for a great cause. [/FONT][/COLOR]

Comman sense x3?

From the republican side:

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., in a letter to President Obama, urged his administration not to take any action to implement the treaty without the consent of the Senate. He claimed the treaty raises "fundamental issues" concerning "individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution."

The National Rifle Association blasted the plan, claiming it would impose an "invasive registration scheme" by requiring importing countries to give exporting countries information on "end users."...

The treaty would require countries that ratify it to establish national regulations to control the transfer of conventional arms and components and to regulate arms brokers, but it will not explicitly control the domestic use of weapons in any country...

Over the summer, 130 members of Congress signed a letter to President Obama and Kerry urging them to reject the measure for this and other reasons...

The treaty also prohibits the export of conventional arms if they could be used in attacks on civilians or civilian buildings such as schools and hospitals.

In addition, the treaty requires countries to take measures to prevent the diversion of conventional weapons to the illicit market. This is among the provisions that gun-rights supporters in Congress are concerned about.
Kerry signs UN arms treaty, senators threaten to block it | Fox News
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist

There is no gun registry: PolitiFact Texas | U.N. treaty is about weapons systems moving between countries
"Nations are required to maintain a "national control system, including a national control list," report exports and imports to the U.N. each year and regulate brokering with measures that "may include requiring brokers to register," but the treaty doesn’t specify how countries must carry out these directions.

Daniel Prins, chief of the Conventional Arms branch of the U.N. Office for Disarmament Affairs, told us by phone that the national control list will be "an enumeration of the types of weapons you will report," starting with the categories in the treaty (warships, combat aircraft, etc.).

Then, each year, nations will report imports and exports in the categories on their lists, Prins said: "35 tanks to Germany," for example."

Basically says you have to report on what guns you imported and exported
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,255
Reaction score
46,679
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The US already meets the requirements for this treaty. It's basically other nations agreeing to our standard practices.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,219
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There is no gun registry: PolitiFact Texas | U.N. treaty is about weapons systems moving between countries
"Nations are required to maintain a "national control system, including a national control list," report exports and imports to the U.N. each year and regulate brokering with measures that "may include requiring brokers to register," but the treaty doesn’t specify how countries must carry out these directions.

It appears to require some kind of registry of weapons imported/exported.

Daniel Prins, chief of the Conventional Arms branch of the U.N. Office for Disarmament Affairs, told us by phone that the national control list will be "an enumeration of the types of weapons you will report," starting with the categories in the treaty (warships, combat aircraft, etc.).

Small arms, etc.

Basically says you have to report on what guns you imported and exported

Probably more than macro data. How can anyone support the macro data without a registry (a record with source data) of all import/export transactions. Does the treaty exclude small business transactions?
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,219
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From my Faux News source above:

The treaty also prohibits the export of conventional arms if they could be used in attacks on civilians or civilian buildings such as schools and hospitals.

What does that mean? That's all weapons, it cannot actually be in the treaty.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,255
Reaction score
46,679
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I wonder how many right-wingers having a kneejerk reaction to this treaty have actually read the damned thing.
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
It appears to require some kind of registry of weapons imported/exported.
Not a national registry of who owns guns in America tho.


Small arms, etc.
Yes ok.

Probably more than macro data. How can anyone support the macro data without a registry (a record with source data) of all import/export transactions. Does the treaty exclude small business transactions?
If your making a registry of guns going in and out of the country that does not hamper down freedom at all. Its simply a registry of how many weapons come in and out of your country not who purchased them etc
 

Surtr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
7,017
Reaction score
2,980
Location
The greatest planet in the world.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Common sense treaty. This is common sense all the lies that have circulated around this to try to stop this makes no sense. We need to ratify this this is common sense for a great cause. [/FONT][/COLOR]
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that makes people suspicious of the treaty, and fight ratification. Telling people it needs to happen, and that it's "common sense" is an ideologue's game. Can you even tell us what this treaty contains? Have you even read the Arms Trade Treaty? Instead of regurgitating party lines, try presenting the actual treaty. It's easy, just google Arms Trade Treaty. The UN page is the third link down. There are some links to the PDF file. It's in several languages, the English portion starts at page 21 (which is blank, just scroll down) and let people decide for themselves, instead of telling them what they need to approve of.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,219
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Not a national registry of who owns guns in America tho.

Well, of who buys guns from other countries. Brazil is to sign, will their companies need to register sales? That would provide American gun owners records to foreign governments. If Brazilian gun manufacturers must create registries from all American importers for the UN, I expect their sales to plummet.

When the Iranian regime signs, I'll worry about the details. For now, no thanks, other countries can have fun and pass gun owner registries around.

If your making a registry of guns going in and out of the country that does not hamper down freedom at all. Its simply a registry of how many weapons come in and out of your country not who purchased them etc

How can one prove how many without any kind of record keeping thus registry.
 
Last edited:

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I wonder how many right-wingers having a kneejerk reaction to this treaty have actually read the damned thing.

Have you read it? Here ya go...

PDF Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty New York, 18-28 March 2013

People should also remember that like all treaties and major laws that these are just general outlines. The actual regulation or "how to" is left up to commities/agencies that are assigned to carry out the objective of those laws/treaties. Much like for example the EPA being able to make the regulation for the things under its charter. And when this treaty uses words like...

"highest possible common international standards for regulating or improving the regulation of the international trade"
"shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list"
"shall provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties."


You can be damn well sure that there will be some kind of registry somewhere.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If your making a registry of guns going in and out of the country that does not hamper down freedom at all. Its simply a registry of how many weapons come in and out of your country not who purchased them etc

Umm...who said that they do not want to hamper freedom? Hell, it was a UK UN representitive that proposed this treaty in the first place. Now....take a look at UK's gun laws....
 

Fishstyx

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
1,527
Reaction score
765
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, of who buys guns from other countries. Brazil is to sign, will their companies need to register sales? That would provide American gun owners records to foreign governments. If Brazilian gun manufacturers must create registries from all American importers for the UN, I expect their sales to plummet.

Thats not exactly how the treaty is written. Its written that countries that are signatory to it, thankfully we'll never be, must create a method to track and trace all small arms imported into their countries. So the federal government would have to create a gun registry for all imported guns.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
133,426
Reaction score
43,219
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Thats not exactly how the treaty is written. Its written that countries that are signatory to it, thankfully we'll never be, must create a method to track and trace all small arms imported into their countries. So the federal government would have to create a gun registry for all imported guns.

If we don't ratify it, we don't create any registries.

No American wants records kept about them by foreign governments and to be given to the UN, especially regarding "end users". Taurus would cease to exist without US import, I don't see Brazil ratifying it. If Euros do it, I see their companies taking a nose dive as well. Who wants to be on the UN list of "end user gun import/export".
 
Last edited:

Fishstyx

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Messages
1,527
Reaction score
765
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If we don't ratify it, we don't create any registries.

No American wants records kept about them by foreign governments and to be given to the UN, especially regarding "end users". Taurus would cease to exist without US import, I don't see Brazil ratifying it. If Euros do it, I see their companies taking a nose dive as well. Who wants to be on the UN list of "end user gun import/export".

I don't see this ever getting ratified. I'd doubt the Democrats could even get a majority vote on this in the Senate right now. It would be economically damaging to most countries that import small arms to the US though, thats a damn good point.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I wonder how many right-wingers having a kneejerk reaction to this treaty have actually read the damned thing.

None. Precisely none. I had this discussion on some right wing new sources that had comments and none of them read it at all. None of them could even cite a single piece of legislation form it that did what they claimed it did.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric that makes people suspicious of the treaty, and fight ratification. Telling people it needs to happen, and that it's "common sense" is an ideologue's game. Can you even tell us what this treaty contains? Have you even read the Arms Trade Treaty? Instead of regurgitating party lines, try presenting the actual treaty. It's easy, just google Arms Trade Treaty. The UN page is the third link down. There are some links to the PDF file. It's in several languages, the English portion starts at page 21 (which is blank, just scroll down) and let people decide for themselves, instead of telling them what they need to approve of.

And where does it scare you?

I think it's good that countries should be restricted from selling a known warlord tanks and small arms that he has a history of using to massacre civilians with. You may think differently.

All the treaty does is essentially require exporters to think about who they're selling stuff to and if there is a good chance that the weapons will be used in a crime, such as that African Warlord who slaughters civilians, they cannot sell it them. That is the summary of the entire treaty. It impacts no domestic trade period. And any exports to countries that already do not raise such flags will not be affected. Selling firearms from Belgium to Atlanta where the dealer you're selling them to has no history at all of criminal behavior or selling to criminals himself will not violate the treaty.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
You can be damn well sure that there will be some kind of registry somewhere.

If the "registry" is just a list of known companies/people you cannot sell to due to criminal reasons, that is HARDLY a national gun registry.

We already have national FFL lists.

The treaty controls the exportation of weapons to questionable parties. A registry of questionable parties is hardly cause for concern.
 

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If the "registry" is just a list of known companies/people you cannot sell to due to criminal reasons, that is HARDLY a national gun registry.

We already have national FFL lists.

The treaty controls the exportation of weapons to questionable parties. A registry of questionable parties is hardly cause for concern.

Big word there...IF. It is broad enough, on purpose judging by the rest of the treaty, that it can and probably will include any bit of information that it can possibly get. Plus they have to keep track of the weapons to the best of their ability so you know those will be registered. Can't exactly make sure that those guns won't get into the "bad guys" hands without keeping track of them now can you? And there is nothing in the language of the bill that prevents collecting a registry of who the end buyer of a gun/s is. That alone makes the whole thing suspect at the very best.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,255
Reaction score
46,679
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Have you read it? Here ya go...

PDF Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty New York, 18-28 March 2013

People should also remember that like all treaties and major laws that these are just general outlines. The actual regulation or "how to" is left up to commities/agencies that are assigned to carry out the objective of those laws/treaties. Much like for example the EPA being able to make the regulation for the things under its charter. And when this treaty uses words like...

"highest possible common international standards for regulating or improving the regulation of the international trade"
"shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list"
"shall provide its national control list to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties."


You can be damn well sure that there will be some kind of registry somewhere.

You left out pieces. Why?
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Big word there...IF. It is broad enough, on purpose judging by the rest of the treaty, that it can and probably will include any bit of information that it can possibly get.

No more so than what is already collected on FFLs.

Plus they have to keep track of the weapons to the best of their ability so you know those will be registered.

Which they can do on a simple packing slip. And is already entered into the accounting departments at both ends on sales and inventory. How is the different then what happens already? Those who will not do this are those who are not going to abide to the treaty anyways.

Can't exactly make sure that those guns won't get into the "bad guys" hands without keeping track of them now can you?

That become a domestic issue then which is outside of the scope of the treaty. The treaty only covers imports and exports. A FFL selling to criminals is a domestic problem, but if words gets back to the supplier that their FFL is playing fast and loose, they would be required to stop selling. However, tracking that weapon becomes a domestic issue and we already cover that. It would be a simple act to simply email the foreign supplier that this FFL has been revoked. I'm pretty sure the Federal government will revoke your FFL if you actively sell firearms to known criminals who you know will commit crimes with them. In a sense, this treaty shouldn't impact us at all as we already have a system to prevent abuse. It will however, bring the rest of the world up to our standards. So what you are in arguing even if you do not know it is that you are saying our standards are lower than the rest of the world's which in some cases is true and in some cases is most definitely not.

And there is nothing in the language of the bill that prevents collecting a registry of who the end buyer of a gun/s is. That alone makes the whole thing suspect at the very best.

But there is also nothing in the language of the bill to require just that either. I don't see why we'd need one when we have the FFL system and the fact that most of the guns in America used in crimes are either stolen or illegally purchased in the first place.

This treaty isn't going to impact America, but it will put a huge crimp in countries where leaders tend to abuse their power via violence. Aka, selling firearms to Mugabe who then gives him to his thugs to kill MDC leaders.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
None. Precisely none. I had this discussion on some right wing new sources that had comments and none of them read it at all. None of them could even cite a single piece of legislation form it that did what they claimed it did.

Well, except that in July of 2012 the ILA had put out this. Basic Wiki even had it.

Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That's a bald-faced lie. For example, the most recent draft treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the 'end user' of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an 'end user' and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S.....snip~

Course there are those measures for the Treaty.

It must be workable and enforceable. It must:

provide guidelines for the treaty's full, clear implementation;
ensure transparency—including full annual reports of national arms transfers;
have an effective mechanism to monitor compliance;
ensure accountability—with provisions for adjudication, dispute settlement and sanctions;
include a comprehensive framework for international cooperation and assistance.

Then the NGO's decided to add a little more into the mix.

NGOs are also advocating that the Arms Trade Treaty must reinforce existing responsibilities to assist survivors of armed violence, as well as identify new avenues to address suffering and trauma.....snip~

Arms Trade Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Top Bottom