Home » Uncategorized » Re-Election Misery – Our Newest UN Treaty

Re-Election Misery – Our Newest UN Treaty



Re-Election Misery – Our Newest UN Treaty

Dateline: Oklahoma City, the local NBC News affiliate ran the report that “sporting goods stores in the Sooner state are seeing a spike in gun sales following President Barack Obama’s re-election.” Not so unusual as gun sales have boomed under President Obama. The entire industry is said to be up 86% in 2012 alone (never mind 2008 through 2011).

The News Agency Reuters reports that within hours of his securing his re-election, President Obama ordered the U.S. United Nations delegation to vote in favor of a UN proposal to fast track an international gun control treaty. Excitement spread around the gun control world and a press release was issued early Wednesday morning from the United Nations General Assembly’s First Committee proclaiming the good news – A new round of treaty talks were scheduled for March 18-28 at the UN headquarters in New York City.

The treaty is billed as an effort to create worldwide, strong, and effective arms trade policies. Sounding good on the surface, proponents claim that it is important to keep weapons out of ‘conflict areas’. An odd stance for an administration that has been so eager to offer guns to Mexican drug cartels as well as the Syrian Arab Spring movement.

A draft text of the treaty as submitted by the Conference’s president on July 26th would retain the right of the UN delegations to include additional proposals restricting the internal trade of firearms within specific countries. (Read that sentence again, as it allows this worldwide body to decide how firearms are traded, who can own them and who can manufacture them). A measure that was approved by a recorded vote of 157 in favor to 0 against, with 18 abstentions. Not even the United States opposed the convening of a “Final United Nations Conference” for the establishment of a treaty imposing worldwide gun control regulations.

This past July, 51 senators on both sides of the isle sent a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton encouraging them to “not only to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership, but to ensure — if necessary, by breaking consensus at the July conference — that the treaty will explicitly recognize the legitimacy of lawful activities associated with firearms, including but not limited to the right of self defence.” The call went unheeded.

One might ask how important the President’s approval of this treaty is. After all, we all learn in high school social studies that treaties must be approved by the Senate regardless of the President’s commitment. Further study in today’s modern US government demonstrates that this is both true and false dependent upon the scope and venue the treaty is presented. This is an example of a treaty whereby the President commits the country, without Senatorial approval, is enacted via government regulation and may be challenged and defeated in the judiciary.

The Law, under past precedent, allows a single man to incorporate a Constitution re-defining measure without the input of Congress subordinating your rights to the whims of a foreign entity.

See more legislative reviews and gun reviews on at Facebook / YankeeTactical and coming soon at http://www.Yankeetactical.com


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: