Kerry to sign UN arms trade treaty

knitepoetknitepoet Senior MemberPosts: 18,738 Senior Member
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/us-un-assembly-kerry-treaty-idUSBRE98N0RG20130924?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
(Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, in a move that puts the Obama administration at odds with the powerful American gun lobby, will sign the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty regulating the $70 billion international conventional arms business, diplomats said on Tuesday.

A senior State Department official said President Barack Obama's administration would notify the U.S. Senate on Tuesday and Kerry would sign the treaty on Wednesday on the sidelines of the annual U.N. General Assembly in New York.

Obama gave a speech to the assembly on Tuesday that focused on Syria, Iran and other Middle East hot spots.

The arms treaty, which requires ratification by the Senate and has been attacked by America's pro-gun National Rifle Association, would help Western countries press to curtail Russian arms sales to Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad's government has been accused of widespread abuses in more than two years of civil war.

Amnesty International Secretary General Salil Shetty called Kerry's decision "a milestone towards ending the flow of conventional arms that fuel atrocities and abuse."

The United States and 86 other signatory nations "must implement the treaty and bring to an end the supply of weapons to countries where they would be used to commit or facilitate genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes or other serious human rights violations," Shetty said in a statement.

President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria, whose country has been repeatedly attacked by a cross-border Islamic jihadist militant group called Boko Haram, told the United Nations such rebellions are "sustained by unfettered access by non-state actors to illicit smart arms and light weapons."

"For us in Africa these are the weapons of mass destruction," he said.

The U.N. General Assembly adopted the treaty on April 2 by a vote of 154 for, including the United States, three against, and 23 abstentions. The no votes were cast by Iran, North Korea and Syria, U.N. records showed.

WAY TO PRESSURE RUSSIA ON SYRIA

The NRA, which has opposed the treaty from the start, called the April vote a sad day for the United States, the world's No. 1 arms exporter.

Among the NRA's arguments against the treaty are that it undermines American sovereignty and disregards the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizens the right to bear arms.

The senior State Department official rejected the NRA's characterization of the treaty, saying the pact's target is "illicit trade in conventional weapons that benefits terrorists and rogue agents."

"The treaty recognizes and protects the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess and use arms for legitimate purposes," said the official.

"It merely helps other countries create and enforce the kind of strict national export controls the United States has had in place for decades, which haven't diminished one iota the ability of Americans to enjoy their rights under our Constitution."

The U.N. Office for Disarmament Affairs has said the treaty would not "interfere with the domestic arms trade and the way a country regulates civilian possession."

"It will prevent human rights abusers and violators of the law of war from being supplied with arms. And it will help keep warlords, pirates, and gangs from acquiring these deadly tools," the U.N. office said on its website.

Frank Januzzi, deputy executive director of Amnesty International USA, called the move "a very significant win for 20 years of human rights activism" by his organization and by Oxfam International, a confederation of groups focused on poverty and injustice.

Januzzi said the treaty could be applied to the conflict in Syria, making arm sales to the government illegal under international law. Russia, Syria's main arms supplier, and China abstained in the April U.N. vote and have not signed the pact.

"This will increase the pressure on Russia to sign. It will increase the pressure on China as well," he said in a telephone interview.
Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


Replies

  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,957 Senior Member
    Sometimes I wish I was a dog as big as a Clydesdale with a bladder control problem and Kerry was a fire hydrant.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • Big Al1Big Al1 Senior Member Posts: 7,027 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Sometimes I wish I was a dog as big as a Clydesdale with a bladder control problem and Kerry was a fire hydrant.

    You'd still have to wait in line!!
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,957 Senior Member
    Big Al1 wrote: »
    You'd still have to wait in line!!

    Nope! If I were a dog as big as a Clydesdale, I'd push everyone else out of the way and camp out at the fire hydrant! :rotflmao:
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • ace7644ace7644 Member Posts: 55 Member
    Big deal, wont be ratified by congress by a long shot. Next feel good legislation please.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,111 Senior Member
    Dead in the water...they need 67 votes in the Senate to ratify.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,626 Senior Member
    Dead in the water...they need 67 votes in the Senate to ratify.

    Sixty-seven votes? The totalitarian-progressives aren't worried. They know that sooner or later the Democrats will once again have an invincible two-thirds majority, and now that the treaty has been signed, they have all the time in the world. While a treaty may take years to achieve ratification, it is highly unlikely even a GOP administration would go so far as to renounce it. This treaty will eventually become law, the Democrats know it, and they're willing to wait. Remember, you cannot be a Democrat, and still claim to be an American. The two are precisely incompatible.
  • LerchessLerchess Senior Member Posts: 550 Senior Member
    Dead in the water...they need 67 votes in the Senate to ratify.

    I truly hope you are right. A year ago I would have said the same thing, but now its just hard to predict anything from these clowns.

    I still want to know exactly how this will affect us.
  • JLDickmonJLDickmon Senior Member Posts: 1,726 Senior Member
    they were discussing this on Fox..
    the Demmy they interviewed lipped off and raged, "this will not affect guns with a legitimate sporting purpose"
    and yet another jackhammer that thinks "sporting purpose" is what HE says it is..

    good God, no wonder I have a migraine this evening..
    Never laugh at your wife's choices.
    You are one of them.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,832 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Sixty-seven votes? The totalitarian-progressives aren't worried. They know that sooner or later the Democrats will once again have an invincible two-thirds majority, and now that the treaty has been signed, they have all the time in the world. While a treaty may take years to achieve ratification, it is highly unlikely even a GOP administration would go so far as to renounce it. This treaty will eventually become law, the Democrats know it, and they're willing to wait. Remember, you cannot be a Democrat, and still claim to be an American. The two are precisely incompatible.

    Horselips believe it or not there are some dummycraps with a brain. Some are democrat for the same reason some Republs are Repubs. They preach what their voting constituents (the people that vote them in office) want to hear and usually vote the way those people want them to. Also, many of the democrats from southern and Midwestern states run from such legislation because their constituents, though democrat, are pro gun. And all that would need to happen to really kill this is for someone to bring a case to the Supreme Court. Alito and Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Roberts would shoot it down if it affected the 2nd amendment rights of U.S. Citizens. And this to me is the real reason or most important reason we need to vote in a conservative. We need to maintain a conservative majority on this court above all else.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,832 Senior Member
    JLDickmon wrote: »
    they were discussing this on Fox..
    the Demmy they interviewed lipped off and raged, "this will not affect guns with a legitimate sporting purpose"
    and yet another jackhammer that thinks "sporting purpose" is what HE says it is..

    good God, no wonder I have a migraine this evening..

    They say things like this because they know that the low information sect will believe it. People like us know that "A legitimate sporting purpose" Misses the point of the second amendment by a mile. They know this, but want to change it. It will be one more giant step toward a dictatorship.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,617 Senior Member
    I wonder how different things might have been if they had jailed Kerry for lying to Congress, whenever they had the chance, forty years ago. Hell, he would probably still have been able to get elected to the Senate in Kennedy-controlled Massachusetts...it would have took some of the heat off Teddy for drowning his party girl.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,584 Senior Member
    Dead in the water...they need 67 votes in the Senate to ratify.
    We will be treated to another toddler tantrum followed by more useless executive actions.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,832 Senior Member
    sgtrock21 wrote: »
    We will be treated to another toddler tantrum followed by more useless executive actions.

    That's for sure. I get tired of his tirades against conservatives. He sounds a lot like Harry Reid. Jimmy Carter, though a political idiot and even Bill Clinton were better men than this. Clinton would seem to take it in stride but then he used his head and came back with more surprises, LOL!!! He may have had NO Morals, but he did have a brain.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,832 Senior Member
    But then again all three of those clowns could have been like Ronald Reagan and got it right in the first place.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,626 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    Horselips believe it or not there are some dummycraps with a brain.

    Yeah, right. A dummycrap with a brain? I'll believe that when I see a duck and a lizard selling insurance, a talking camel, or a pig driving a convertible.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,832 Senior Member
    Well, now that you mention it, I did see a Pig flying in an airplane and another one driving a convertible the other day on a Geico Commercial....:roll2:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • 2manyhobbies2manyhobbies Member Posts: 49 Member
    His violation to his oath of office, "to defend and uphold the Constitution of these United States of America" in so signing a foreign document that is designed to circumvent our Bill of Rights is considered an ACT OF TREASON..

    If Obama also signs (which he will bet on it) is likewise considered AN ACT OF TREASON!!!
    ace7644 wrote: »
    Big deal, wont be ratified by congress by a long shot. Next feel good legislation please.

    Once signed by Kerry and Obama in the future since this will never die or simply go away, when your kids are older, some new anti gun nut-job brings it up yet again and they get their votes. Do you really want that???
    Hillery in 2016, think about it...
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.