Published – Idaho State Journal, 07/15/12
“All countries of the world are coming together in New York
to negotiate what is seen as the most important initiative ever regarding
conventional arms regulation within the United Nations,” according to the
United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (UNODA). They’re working on a new
treaty throughout the month that will provide a framework for regulating,
controlling, registering, and tracking all conventional small firearms in the
world. If signed by our president, it could be the most direct and overt effort
to annul the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, for treaties
take supremacy over the Constitution, per Article VI.
In 2006, the UN passed a resolution, “Towards an Arms Trade
Treaty,” with a stated objective of establishing “common international
standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” The rationale
was that terrorism and gang violence could be thwarted by establishing
international standards regulating small-arms proliferation.
The Bush administration did not support the 2006 resolution,
maintaining that each nation is best in a position to monitor and regulate arms
sales rather than a one-size-fits-all approach assumed by the UN. But in 2009, Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton indicated the U.S. was no longer opposed to such an
arms treaty, and in 2010, President Obama reversed the Bush administration
objection to the earlier version.
Timing of this incarnation of a small arms treaty has been
accelerated by the UN in hopes it can be signed by our current president and
ratified by the senate before the November election, which could significantly
alter the outlook for U.S. participation.
The UNODA has published a document titled, “Disarmament: A
Basic Guide,” which lays out for the public the concerns regarding small arms.
On page 68, we read, “Counting such weapons is difficult, as the majority are
owned by civilians.
The trade in small arms is not well regulated and is the
least transparent of all weapons systems. Due to the lack of regulation and
controls, in many countries it is too easy for small arms to slip from the
legal into the illicit market—through theft, leakage, corruption or pilferage.”
On the next page we read, “Ammunition should be a key part of any discussion on
small arms control.”
The UN clearly intends to address legal gun ownership within
member states along with the trade of small arms. One of their many research
and statement pieces on the UNODA website, states unequivocally, that arms have
been "…misused by lawful owners and recommends that arms trade therefore
be regulated in ways that would ... minimize the misuse of legally owned
weapons."
Former UN ambassador John Bolton has affirmed this intent,
and indicates that the UN “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.”
While it’s uncertain what exact terms and provisions will be
included in the new Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), the archive of documents on the UN
Office of Disarmament Affairs website provide ample indications. From their own
documents, it’s clear that they want to accomplish the following, as published
by Forbes Online last week:
“1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating
additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership. 2. Confiscate
and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms. 3. Ban the trade, sale and
private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons. 4. Create an international gun
registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation. 5. Control
distribution and availability of ammunition for small arms.”
The outcome, if adopted by the UN General Assembly, and
ratified by the U.S., would result in “Overriding our national sovereignty, and
in the process, provide 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,” according to Forbes.
Not only has the White House indicated support for the ATT,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has vowed to push it through the Senate for
ratification. Until now, the administration’s attempts to diminish 2nd
Amendment rights to bear arms have been under the radar, except when botched,
as in the Fast and Furious gun walking incident which can only be logically
explained away as an effort to create a crisis that they would capitalize on to
this end.
We've seen all too many times how the Obama administration bypasses
congress and implements its agenda through executive orders. Don’t be surprised
if the White House attempts to circumvent the Senate’s ratification of the
treaty altogether, and declares the ATT “in effect” by Executive Order. After
all, constitutional limitations on government, and our constitutional rights, are
only valid if honored and upheld, something this administration fails at when
it conflicts with their agenda.
AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is
President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in
Pocatello, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political
Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial
Board. He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.