UN Arms Trade Treaty

[Surtr]

One thing is for sure, it won't be enforced at all by the US at all, thanks to NRA lobbying efforts and a brain dead congress. Apparently, there is too much money to made selling arms to genocidal regimes, war lords, drug cartels, pirates and terrorists.

In all reality, the US will probably play a very substantial role in regulating the trafficking of illegal arms to unauthorized groups, but the world is a big place, and criminals make a living getting around regulations and international law.

 

[Morrigi]

Which text in the treaty will keep weapons from "the good guys"?

Which text in the U.S. Constitution allows the government to spy on everything and everyone, violently disperse peaceful protests, take legally owned weapons from law-abiding citizens, hold prisoners without trial, kick down the doors of private citizens in the middle of the night, or allow us to invade other countries without a Declaration of War?

None of them.

Yet many of these inalienable rights of the people and much of the other text that makes up the document that is our supreme law of the land are violated and outright desecrated by our public servants.

If our own Constitution is treated this way, then why would a foreign law not be twisted and perverted into any number of things that were not intended by its creators? We've even got the U.K. on board with us these days.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Which text in the U.S. Constitution allows the government to spy on everything and everyone, violently disperse peaceful protests, take legally owned weapons from law-abiding citizens, hold prisoners without trial, kick down the doors of private citizens in the middle of the night, or allow us to invade other countries without a Declaration of War?
None of them.
Yet many of these inalienable rights of the people and much of the other text that makes up the document that is our supreme law of the land are violated and outright desecrated by our public servants.
If our own Constitution is treated this way, then why would a foreign law not be twisted and perverted into any number of things that were not intended by its creators? We've even got the U.K. on board with us these days.

Textual evidence?
We don't need no stinking textual evidence!

Everything I say is as I say. My post is my cite[SUP]®[/SUP]!

 

[Kal'Stang]

Textual evidence?
We don't need no stinking textual evidence!

Everything I say is as I say. My post is my cite[SUP]®[/SUP]!

Sarcasm aside...the man has a point. Care to address it?

 

[Hdreamz]

Nice to see a cool and calm head in possession of automatic weapons....

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Sarcasm aside...the man has a point. Care to address it?

The point being that he's free to fear the treaty for any reason whatsoever because his fears are not grounded in the text of the treaty?

 

[MACS-24]

The point being that he's free to fear the treaty for any reason whatsoever because his fears are not grounded in the text of the treaty?

"According to experts familiar with this process, the mere act of signing the treaty — a responsibility that would fall to Secretary of State John Kerry — would “obligate” the U.S. government as a signatory not to act “contrary to” its terms. Those “terms” are, to quote Ross Perot, the “devil in the detail” — found not only within the four corners of the document itself, but in companion, foundational documents on which it is based."
Read more: BARR: The U.N. comes after America’s guns

 

[Simon W. Moon]

"According to experts familiar with this process, the mere act of signing the treaty — a responsibility that would fall to Secretary of State John Kerry — would “obligate” the U.S. government as a signatory not to act “contrary to” its terms. Those “terms” are, to quote Ross Perot, the “devil in the detail” — found not only within the four corners of the document itself, but in companion, foundational documents on which it is based."
Read more: BARR: The U.N. comes after America’s guns

Your interpretation of this:

QUOTE=Morrigi
"Which text in the U.S. Constitution allows the government to spy on everything and everyone, violently disperse peaceful protests, take legally owned weapons from law-abiding citizens, hold prisoners without trial, kick down the doors of private citizens in the middle of the night, or allow us to invade other countries without a Declaration of War?
None of them.
Yet many of these inalienable rights of the people and much of the other text that makes up the document that is our supreme law of the land are violated and outright desecrated by our public servants.
If our own Constitution is treated this way, then why would a foreign law not be twisted and perverted into any number of things that were not intended by its creators? We've even got the U.K. on board with us these days."​

Is that Morrigi is saying that there are other documents which spell out the details of "keeping the weapons from the god guys?"

If so, can you point out where in what ever text the details for keeping the weapons from the good guys are?
And if the details are located in a document which we have already endorsed somehow, aren't we already seeing the effects of that document w/o regard to whether or not the treaty currently under discussion is ratified or signed?

 

[MACS-24]

Your interpretation of this:

QUOTE=Morrigi
"Which text in the U.S. Constitution allows the government to spy on everything and everyone, violently disperse peaceful protests, take legally owned weapons from law-abiding citizens, hold prisoners without trial, kick down the doors of private citizens in the middle of the night, or allow us to invade other countries without a Declaration of War?
None of them.
Yet many of these inalienable rights of the people and much of the other text that makes up the document that is our supreme law of the land are violated and outright desecrated by our public servants.
If our own Constitution is treated this way, then why would a foreign law not be twisted and perverted into any number of things that were not intended by its creators? We've even got the U.K. on board with us these days."​

Is that Morrigi is saying that there are other documents which spell out the details of "keeping the weapons from the god guys?"

If so, can you point out where in what ever text the details for keeping the weapons from the good guys are?
And if the details are located in a document which we have already endorsed somehow, aren't we already seeing the effects of that document w/o regard to whether or not the treaty currently under discussion is ratified or signed?

Re-read #32, it's plain as day.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re-read #32, it's plain as day.

Can you point out where in what ever text the "companion, foundational documents on which [the treaty] is based" the details for keeping the weapons from the good guys are?

And if the details are located in a document which we have already endorsed somehow, aren't we already seeing the effects of that document w/o regard to whether or not the treaty currently under discussion is ratified or signed?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

"According to experts familiar with this process, the mere act of signing the treaty — a responsibility that would fall to Secretary of State John Kerry — would “obligate” the U.S. government as a signatory not to act “contrary to” its terms. Those “terms” are, to quote Ross Perot, the “devil in the detail” — found not only within the four corners of the document itself, but in companion, foundational documents on which it is based."
Read more: BARR: The U.N. comes after America’s guns

It sure would be handy if Mr Barr were to let us know who the "experts familiar with this process" are. Then we could check for ourselves. Afaik, it's always been that treaties need to be ratified.
Why is "obligate" in quotes? Is it different than plain old obligate?

Ratification of the Treaty of Paris


Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official Text
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;​

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

Article 21
Signature, Ratification, Acceptance, Approval or Accession

2. This Treaty is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by each signatory
State.​

UN Treaty Section - Treaty Handbook - Chapter 3

PARTICIPATING IN MULTILATERAL TREATIES
.3.2 Ratification

Most multilateral treaties expressly provide for States to express their consent to be bound by signature subject to ratification, acceptance or approval.

Providing for signature subject to ratification allows States time to seek approval for the treaty at the domestic level and to enact any legislation necessary to implement the treaty domestically, prior to undertaking the legal obligations under the treaty at the international level. Once a State has ratified a treaty at the international level, it must give effect to the treaty domestically. This is the responsibility of the State. Generally, there is no time limit within which a State is requested to ratify a treaty which it has signed. Upon ratification, the State becomes legally bound under the treaty.​