- Joined
- Jan 10, 2009
- Messages
- 42,744
- Reaction score
- 22,569
- Location
- Bonners Ferry ID USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
You left out pieces. Why?
Left out most of the treaty.
You left out pieces. Why?
The U.S. sells arms to terrorist sponsoring nations. If that's the example the world is going to be following then I have no doubt that Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, and Russia have already signed it!The US already meets the requirements for this treaty. It's basically other nations agreeing to our standard practices.
No more so than what is already collected on FFLs.
Which they can do on a simple packing slip. And is already entered into the accounting departments at both ends on sales and inventory. How is the different then what happens already? Those who will not do this are those who are not going to abide to the treaty anyways.
That become a domestic issue then which is outside of the scope of the treaty. The treaty only covers imports and exports. A FFL selling to criminals is a domestic problem, but if words gets back to the supplier that their FFL is playing fast and loose, they would be required to stop selling. However, tracking that weapon becomes a domestic issue and we already cover that. It would be a simple act to simply email the foreign supplier that this FFL has been revoked. I'm pretty sure the Federal government will revoke your FFL if you actively sell firearms to known criminals who you know will commit crimes with them. In a sense, this treaty shouldn't impact us at all as we already have a system to prevent abuse. It will however, bring the rest of the world up to our standards. So what you are in arguing even if you do not know it is that you are saying our standards are lower than the rest of the world's which in some cases is true and in some cases is most definitely not.
But there is also nothing in the language of the bill to require just that either. I don't see why we'd need one when we have the FFL system and the fact that most of the guns in America used in crimes are either stolen or illegally purchased in the first place.
This treaty isn't going to impact America, but it will put a huge crimp in countries where leaders tend to abuse their power via violence. Aka, selling firearms to Mugabe who then gives him to his thugs to kill MDC leaders.
I wonder how many right-wingers having a kneejerk reaction to this treaty have actually read the damned thing.
Which has alot of personal info.
No actually they can't do it with just a packing slip. Remember, their stated end goal is to make sure that guns do not get into the hands of terrorists and those that would harm people. In order to do that they must be able to track each and every single gun. This treaty does not start at the border and end at another border. It has to track those guns to the end buyer.
Yes it only covers imports and exports. That only means that domestic guns will not be targeted. But again, the stated goal is to make sure those guns do not get into terrorists and people that would harm other people hands. And yes, once inside a border it is a domestic issue, they let that countries government track it to the end buyer then by treaty the government collects that info and lets every other country know about it. Not to mention that countries government gets to keep that info.
Actually there is. And I already quoted it in post 13.
Yes it will impact America. Even IF (big IF) you are right in that no registry will happen (knowing power hungry politicians i doubt this) it will effect it via price hikes and companies no longer shipping out guns due to the extra hassle.
Well, except that in July of 2012 the ILA had put out this. Basic Wiki even had it.
Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That's a bald-faced lie. For example, the most recent draft treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the 'end user' of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an 'end user' and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S.....snip~
Course there are those measures for the Treaty.
It must be workable and enforceable. It must:
provide guidelines for the treaty's full, clear implementation;
ensure transparency—including full annual reports of national arms transfers;
have an effective mechanism to monitor compliance;
ensure accountability—with provisions for adjudication, dispute settlement and sanctions;
include a comprehensive framework for international cooperation and assistance.
Then the NGO's decided to add a little more into the mix.
NGOs are also advocating that the Arms Trade Treaty must reinforce existing responsibilities to assist survivors of armed violence, as well as identify new avenues to address suffering and trauma.....snip~
Arms Trade Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Well, except that in July of 2012 the ILA had put out this. Basic Wiki even had it.
You got the text from the final draft that says this?
The ILA did since they were the Attorneys.....all of it is in the formatting of ATT.
Uh, that's not really what you're claiming it is.
Where is the text of the document that says the signing states have to create a registry to track firearms down to end users and share that data with other signatory nations?