Privacy   |    Financial   |    Current Events   |    Self Defense   |    Miscellaneous   |    Letters To Editor   |    About Off The Grid News   |    Off The Grid Videos   |    Weekly Radio Show

This Sneaky UN Gun Treaty Could Abolish Your Second Amendment Rights

Image source: patdollard.com

Image source: patdollard.com

A controversial new international treaty would create a global equivalent of the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and, critics say, violate the Second Amendment.

Not surprisingly, the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which is supported by the Obama administration and went into effect on December 24, has generated plenty of opposition. It has yet to be ratified by the Senate.

“This treaty threatens individual firearm ownership with an invasive registration scheme,” said Chris W. Cox, the executive director of the Institute for Legislative Action at the National Rifle Association (NRA).

Supporters of the treaty say it is designed to keep military-style weapons out of the hands of warlords and terrorists. But the NRA says it also covers small arms and light weapons such as pistols and rifles.

“Treaty advocates seek to incorporate the ATT into other U.N. activities that are explicitly designed to promote civilian gun control,” Theodore R. Bromund, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, alleged.

The NRA says the treaty “urges recordkeeping of end users, directing importing countries to provide information to an exporting country regarding arms transfers, including ‘end use or end user documentation’ for a ‘minimum of ten years.’”

Ultimate Tactical Self-Defense And Hunting Weapon That Doesn’t Require A Firearms License!

“Data kept on the end users of imported firearms is a de-facto registry of law-abiding firearms owners, which is a violation of federal law,” the NRA said. “Even worse, the ATT could be construed to require such a registry to be made available to foreign governments.”

The treaty is unlikely to have any immediate effect on Americans even though Secretary of State John Kerry signed it on Sept. 25, 2013. The New Republic reported that 50 senators from both parties are on record opposing it. That number will probably increase when Republicans take over the Senate this month. A super-majority of votes – 67 – are needed to ratify treaties.

What the ATT Supposedly Would Do

The ATT has been signed by 130 countries and ratified by 61 after being adopted by the UN General Assembly, 154-3.

The treaty supposedly would:

  • Require all nations to adopt tough standards to make it illegal to sell weapons to organizations or nations that violate human rights or break international law. The US already has such standards in place.
  • Set up an ATT Secretariat run by the UN which would enforce the treaty. The Secretariat would function as a sort of global ATF. Critics such as Bromund think this body could be a threat to US sovereignty. “Such a Secretariat, among other activities, would be authorized to conduct on-site inspections inside member nations, potentially including the U.S. This is unacceptable,” Bromund wrote in a recent issue brief. “The U.S. should oppose all but the most minimal Secretariat.”
  • Require national governments to track all arms shipments and sales and report that information to the ATT Secretariat.
  • Require signatory nations to attend a congress of nations that will set up the Secretariat. Bromund is concerned about the congress because it will set policy by a majority vote, and the US would have only one vote in the body

But even if the US doesn’t ratify it, there are fears it will still be enforced within the US.

“Treaty advocates are beginning to claim that once the ATT enters into force, it will be international law” Bromund wrote. “By this, they imply that it will be binding on the U.S., regardless of the fact that the Senate has not ratified it.”

Four of the world’s largest manufacturers and exporters of arms — China, India, Pakistan and Russia — have refused to sign it.

Do you believe this treaty is a threat to Second Amendment rights? Share your thoughts in the section below:

Get $600 worth of survival blueprints … free!

Ammunition report

© Copyright Off The Grid News

19 comments

  1. The UN can kiss my a$$!

  2. The United States has been and should remain an independent, self governing nation. Giving control to anything other than its people is treasonous. The President took an oath to protect and serve…what a joke…and what about our nation’s laws???something about faithfully execute if I’m not mistaken. Nothing there about changing them or not enforcing them. america is in real trouble. Still some of our citizens don’t get it. I’ve been screaming for three years and making very little headway. It amazes me how our own people have no sense of patriotism. What happened?

    • The people of this Country have grown soft and pathetic. There will be a few [3%] who will fight back and expect to be very bloody.

  3. I really need to edit. Meant to say – Buy more “supplies” instead

  4. I’ve read the statistics. 3 percent. All it takes for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing. I don’t know who said that but ‘it smacks of truth.’I agreewith the bloody part. What infuriates me is how the Republicans in office have stood by and let these things happen. This blows my mind. I’m a more or less common citizen. A veteran. I love my country. I’m a Christian. Dave labeled me and my ilk extremists in our own country.heard of Sal Alinsky anyone?

  5. “A controversial new international treaty … the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which is supported by the Obama administration and went into effect on December 24”

    First; it is treason on Obama’s part as he – no US president or any other governmental person no matter what position they occupy – was never given the authority to give a foreign nation or foreign entity any authority over the USA.

    Second:

    Alexander Hamilton: “The only constitutional exception to the power of making treaties is, that it shall not change the Constitution… On natural principles, a treaty, which should manifestly betray or sacrifice primary interests of the state, would be null.”

    Alexander Hamilton: “… a treaty cannot be made which alters the Constitution or which infringes any express exceptions to the power of the Constitution of the United States.”

    James Madison, Father of the US Constitution, said in Federalist 14: “In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any”.

    Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69: “The one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.” 

    John Adams, 2nd US President: “You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe” 

    Just because it was signed does NOT make it lawful and binding here on the American people.

  6. It has not been ratified by the senate, and probably won’t be, at least for the forseable future.
    Does that mean Obama and is cronies won’t try to use it anyway? HE!! NO.
    You can bet he will.

  7. Cal:excellent. Thank you. This man’s been walking on America’s rights since he took office. I’m looking for some sort of false flag event or the acceleration of civil anarchy. All these things would serve him well in his efforts to extend federal over reach.what he’s done to our military is not only disgraceful but dangerous. It’s hard to say what could happen on the world stage as a result of his betrayal and weakness.

  8. Any ideas what to do about the changing demography? There’s the common sense step of closing the border. It’s right in our face yet we can’t get it done. That speaks volumes.
    the Obama administration is encouraging mass invasion by foreign nationals seeking the American dream, just to change the voting base. A power grab, plain and simple.

    • The federal government has the duty of “naturalization”, and who is allowed within Washington DC. It is not those who serve within the federal government constitutionally assigned duty deciding who is allowed within each states borders. Only what tests must be passed in order to become US Citizens.

      RE: immigration – each state can say who is allowed within its borders.

      US Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 4: “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States”

      One of the things I notice about those that comment on Clause 4 is that people say that it gives the federal government authority over “naturalization and immigration”, “naturalization or immigration”, plus “naturalization and/or immigration”.

      They are two different things, though I have noticed that over the years the online dictionaries have started blending them into one.

      Ex: The two references in the Constitution that specifically mention , “naturalization, ” are found in Article I, Section 8 in creating the authority of the Congress, “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” Thus from a Constitutional stand point it is the responsibility of Congress to establish all laws and rules of naturalization or immigration.
      (http://www.redstate.com/diary/Ken_Taylor/2010/04/28/the-constitution-is-the-rule-of-law-on-illegal-immigration/)

      “The second reference is located in the 14th Amendment shown above stating that , “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” are, “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

      The key thought in the 14th Amendment which along with several other provisions established in the Constitution shows that the intent of the Framers was that only citizens of the United States whether born or naturalized are granted the rights and privileges that are available in America.

      While Congress has the Constitutional authority to establish laws of naturalization or immigration they do not have a true Constitutional authority to create blanket legislation that allows non – citizens the rights of born or naturalized Americans. In other words amnesty is technically unconstitutional because it bypasses the laws which are established for immigrants to become American citizens.”

      Vattel, Law of Nations, Book I, Ch. XIX, at §§ 212-217, which was used at the time of the constitutional convention and before:

      § 214: A country may grant to a foreigner the quality of citizen – this is naturalization. In some countries, the sovereign cannot grant to a foreigner all the rights of citizens, such as that of holding public office – this is a regulation of the fundamental law. And in England, merely being born in the country naturalizes the children of a foreigner.

      David Ramsay, historian, Founding Father, and member of the Continental Congress who wrote “Dissertation On The Manner Of Acquiring The Character And Privileges Of A Citizen Of The United States”, published in 1789 (right after the ratification of our US Constitution, the year our new Government began):

      Act of the First Congress implements the Principles set forth in Vattel, embraced by our Framers, and enshrined in Art. II, §1, cl. 5, that:

      A “natural born Citizen” is one who is born of parents who are citizens.
      Minor children born here of aliens do not become citizens until their parents are naturalized. Thus, they are not “natural born” citizens.

      Our Framers rejected the anti-republican and feudal notion that mere location of birth within a Country naturalizes the children of a foreigner.

      Illegal aliens are not “subject to the jurisdiction of the US” – they are invaders whose allegiance is to the Country they left. Foreign diplomats stationed here are not “subject to the jurisdiction of the US”. Thus, children born here of these aliens are not US citizens.

      Obama, who is *NOT the US president, but is impersonating one does not have the LAWFUL authority – even if he was legitimate – to give amnesty to illegal immigrants.

      Basically, if one is not a lawful presidential candidate then one cannot be a US president no matter how many votes are received.

      The 2008 Democratic Nominating Committee (DNC) document did not include the normal language stating that Obama was qualified to be a candidate. The 2008 Republican Nominating Committee (RNC) document did, as is normal. This shows that the DNC knew that Obama was not qualified, or why change the form?

      AND

      South Bend, Indiana jury found that Election Fraud put BOTH Obama and Hillary Clinton on the presidential primary ballot in Indiana in the 2008 election.

      That was not the only state 2012 Election Fraud was committed, but it is one of the very few that actually was allowed to go to trial.

      The states have the lawful authority to remove all and any illegals from within their borders.

      Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69: “The one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.” 

      James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution”: “The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”

      The opinion in Mack and Printz v. United States stated, “The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the State and Federal Governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The Federal Government’s power would be augmented immeasurably and impermissibly if it were able to impress into its service–and at no cost to itself–the police officers of the 50 States… Federal control of state officers would also have an effect upon the separation and equilibration of powers between the three branches of the Federal Government itself.”

      James Madison, Federalist 14: “In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any”.

      In Federalist 45 Madison wrote: “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.”

  9. Folks, please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking the U.S. and a handful of allies created the U.N. right after WW2. Idea was to give the crushed and downtrodden countries a voice on the world stage and try to prevent another world war. Perhaps that part has worked, but the rest has been an debacle, they have accomplished nothing. IMHO the U.N. property in NYC should be razed and the land converted to a ‘green-space’ park to honor our veterans and patriots……..

    • “please correct me if I’m wrong…”

      They lied about why the UN was created.

      CreatedUN
      The head of the United States delegation had called a secret meeting with his top aide, Alger Hiss, representing the president of the United States and the Soviet KGB; John Foster Dulles, of the Wall Street law firm of Sullivan and Cromwell, whose mentor, William Nelson Cromwell, had been called a “professional revolutionary” on the floor of Congress; and W. Averill Harriman, plenipotentiary extraordinary, who had spent the last two years in Moscow directing Stalin’s war for survival.
       
      These four men represented the awesome power of the American Republic in world affairs, yet of the four, only Secretary of State Edward Stettinius Jr., had a position authorized by the US Constitution.

      Edward Stettinius Jr. was the son of a J.P. Morgan partner who had been the world’s largest munitions dealer in the First World War. He had been named by J.P. Morgan to oversee all purchases of munitions by both France and England in the United States throughout the war.
       
      John Foster Dulles was also an accomplished warmonger. In 1933, he and his brother Allen had rushed to Cologne to meet with Adolf Hitler and guaranteed him the funds to maintain the Nazi regime. The Dulles brothers were representing their clients, Kuhn Loeb Co., and the Rothschilds.

      Alger Hiss was the golden prince of the communist elite in the united States. When he was chosen as head of the prestigious Carnegie Endowment for International Peace after World War II, his nomination was seconded by John Foster Dulles. Hiss was later sent to prison for perjury for lying about his exploits as a Soviet espionage agent.

      The secret meeting in the Garden Room was in reality the first military strategy session of the United Nations, that meeting was dedicated to the mission of exploding the world’s first atomic weapon on a living population to see what it could do.

      Although Truman liked to take full credit for the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, in reality it was done at the advice of:
      – The National Defense Research Committee, consisting of:
      George L. Harrison, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Dr. James B. Conant, president of Harvard, who had spent the First World War developing more effective poison gases, and who in 1942 had been commissioned by Winston Churchill to develop an Anthrax bomb to be used on Germany, which would have killed every living thing in Germany (Conant was unable to perfect the bomb before Germany surrendered).

      The UN is much like the “Patriot Act”, there is nothing patriot about it, it is as unAmerican as anything can get, equal to, if not more so, then the NSA and the TSA, Free Trade Act, CAFTA, NAFTA, the rest of the “alphabet soup”, “Obamacare”, etc.

      It was created by Nazi’s herein the USA, and has as its goal the destruction of the USA and world control which is now relabeled the NWO – same objective, different name.

      • Cal, I stand corrected. I was mining my 1950’s and ’60s public school education, which involved a large dose of propaganda. Had forgotten many of the names you mentioned, but they were real players. Have an acquaintance who is a direct Rothschild descendant, good enough fella, but real funny about money and power. I think he’d steal the pennies off his dead mothers eyes. The U.N. is not our friend and I fully support a demolition project on their complex. Then like I said, create a ‘green space’ park to honor those who have paid a rather large price……

  10. On the UN, I think your correct and On the property, well A green space sounds great…

  11. It’s time to get the U.N. out of the U.S. and end our membership and $upport.
    We are currently contributing most of the money that funds this evil organization.

  12. We continue to hear about this President as being naive or he did not know about something until he read it in the paper. I believe that there are far too many Americans who would agree that he is very smart and his main goal is the total destruction of our country.
    We know that something is wrong, but we’re not sure what course to take! Every executive order that he makes is in violation of our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
    For those of you who voted for this Marxist and anti-American community worker,you must really hate America.
    We’re not so naive to say that America does not have problems that we need to address, but we can make changes to the Republic by following the Constitution of the United states for starters.We do not need a dictator telling us what we will do or not do. Since getting into office it has been his way or the high way.
    There are far too many American patriots who are not willing to throw in the towel.The only question to ask is when will we make a stand for Liberty?
    I continue to love my country,but I do not give a Tinkers Damn about the politicians who were elected to defend the Constitution of the United States, but forget that very oath once they get into office. They certainly do not care what happens to the country as long as they get their 13 pieces of gold.

    It has always baffled me, as to why a certain political party with a majority of members in the House and Senate can not pass legislation that “We the people” support. After reading about the FBI and J.Edgar Hoover, it appears that many elected officials may be persuaded into voting certain ways – No butts about it! Believe it or not!
    So in the year 2525, if man is still alive and woman has survived,you may find that there once was a shining city on the hill called America and she died because we were all too busy sitting down and watching a reality show. Instead of dealing with the problems in a free society we passed that responsibility on to someone who did not care about America or it’s citizens. Our elected officials are helping to dismantle the country without firing a single shot. While we are going around the world fighting wars in other countries, we can not even protect our own borders.
    Congress can not pass a budget, has not created one new job,can not take care of the Veterans or Seniors – those who require medical help.Do we really want politicians touching our health care? They can not run the country and now you want them to play doctor. I don’t think so.
    This President is hell bent on creating more debt,destroying the dollar and provoking as many wars as he can. And along with the willing accomplices in the press, business and the world of Academia ,they give this administration a free pass! From the window I’m looking out America is barely making it on life support This deal with the UN on gun control is just another one of the sleazy back room deals politicians make in the dead of night. History surely will not paint a rosy picture of how you betrayed this Nation and it’s citizens,unless they control every word that is written or spoken. In this story the pen is mightier then the sword. Be prepared,it’s here and TSIHTF. Thanks for letting me speak while there is some small amount of liberty that the community organizer has not issued an executive order to fundamentally change. God help us all!! SP

  13. 3% is the amount of people that fought England in the first place. 3% now is more than there was then, another revolution is about the only way we will get Hitler Jr out of office. I’m thinking there may not be an election in 2016.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*