The Next Big Scare
Here is the subject of the next Scare Email that is going to show up in your inbox soon: another proposed UN small arms treaty. According to Larry Bell writing in an Op/Ed for Forbes Magazine, this treaty would
1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
3. 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).
4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
5. 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.
Obviously these terms an unacceptable. Does such a treaty present a threat to our Second Amendment freedoms here in the United States? In my opinion, yes, and no.
Any research will show that the issue of whether treaties trump the US Constitution is divided. Personally, I believe they do not. However, I choose not to have to rely on some future Supreme Court to decide the issue, when to me, the best course of action is to prevent ratification of the treaty by the Senate, and, if possible, its presentation to the Senate in the first place.
Treaties are presented by the President to the Congress, and ratified by two thirds of the Senate. The current Senate is unlikely to vote for such a treaty. Despite the vocal exceptions like Schumer and Feinstein, the majority of the Senate remains pro-Second Amendment. This is logical, because the majority of the American people are pro-Second Amendment, outside of the areas represented by the obvious anti-freedom members.
It is up to us to contact our Senators and make sure they understand what is happening, and we let them know where we stand. I know that both of my Senators in Georgia, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, are staunchly pro-Second Amendment, but I am writing them about this any way.
Despite the fact that the House of Representatives does not vote on treaty ratification, they almost certainly will have their say. I also plan to write my Congressman, Dr. Phil Gingrey. I will report the responses of my representatives here as they arrive.
Of course, the President presents any treaty to the Senate for ratification, so the opportunity is there to affect this, provided the treaty can be delayed until after the next inauguration in January 2013. The need to elect a President that reflects the love of freedom shared by the rest of the country could not be greater.
I believe if we act now and maintain contact with our Senators on this issue, we can hold off this threat. But it won’t be the last. That’s okay. This is part of the “eternal vigilence” that is required of us.