• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. signs treaty to regulate global arms trading

Deuce said:
The US already meets the requirements for this treaty. It's basically other nations agreeing to our standard practices.
Click to expand...
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!;)
 
obvious Child said:
No more so than what is already collected on FFLs.
Click to expand...

Which has alot of personal info.

obvious Child said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

obvious Child said:
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 It would be a simple act to simply email the foreign supplier that this FFL has been revoked.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.
Click to expand...

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.

obvious Child said:
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.
Click to expand...

Actually there is. And I already quoted it in post 13.

obvious Child said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Deuce said:
I wonder how many right-wingers having a kneejerk reaction to this treaty have actually read the damned thing.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many left-wingers having a kneejerk reation to this treaty actually think it will stop the illegal sale and use of arms by those determined to do so? Probably the same left-wingers who believe that drug laws should be eliminated because too many people are breaking the drug laws and filling up the nation's jails.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Which has alot of personal info.
Click to expand...

If you're okay with the FFL, this doesn't change much.

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.
Click to expand...

You're projecting here, rather than looking at how it will likely work. Stopping sales to dealers who are shady does the same thing without tracking individual firearms. And yes, they can do it via packing slip. Exporter sales X guns to FFL firearm shop. That shop then enters the data of the weapons into its accounting system. When sales are made, that weapons is tied to the original dealer who has recorded the serials. If that weapon is used in a crime, it gets traced back to the dealer. If that dealer is found to have a large number of sales to criminals, they get shut down, especially if they knew the weapons would get used. No FFL, no imports. The system works. Honestly, this is way easier and way cheaper to do and achieves the same goal. We already register weapons as it is in America. I don't see why we need a national registry if we can simply use existing registrations as well as tying them back to original place of purchase. I think you're reaching for the worst rather than reaching for what is likely to happen. Could we get a national registry tracking every firearm? Yes. That's possible. Would it be easier to just do what we do now and achieve the same goals? Yes.

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.
Click to expand...

Where did you get the part about sharing such information with other countries?

Actually there is. And I already quoted it in post 13.
Click to expand...

That's a control list. Not a registry. Again, a control list of shady dealers you can't sell to =/= national firearms registry.

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.
Click to expand...

What do you mean extra hassle? Pull up a list of denied buyers, if they're not on it, you're good to export.
 
MMC said:
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
Click to expand...


I notice how this kinda shut the Left wing "please daddy please save us we're scared daddy we're scared" crowd pretty much up...Good show..
 
obvious Child said:
You got the text from the final draft that says this?
Click to expand...

The ILA did since they were the Attorneys.....all of it is in the formatting of ATT. These are some of the links some lead to PDFS.

On 2 April 2013, the General Assembly adopted the landmark Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), regulating the international trade in conventional arms, from small arms to battle tanks, combat aircraft and warships. The treaty will foster peace and security by putting a stop to destabilizing arms flows to conflict regions. 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.

General Assembly Resolutions
• The Arms Trade Treaty (2013) — A/RES/67/234 B
• The Arms Trade Treaty (2012) — A/RES/67/234 A
• The Arms Trade Treaty (2011) — A/C.1/66/L.50
• The Arms Trade Treaty (2009) — A/RES/64/48
• Towards an Arms Trade Treaty (2008) — A/RES/63/240
• Towards an Arms Trade Treaty (2006) — A/RES/61/89


Article 16.3 of the ATT indicates that a voluntary trust fund is to be established by States Parties for that purpose.

In anticipation, the United Nations, in close cooperation with a growing number of States, has launched a trust facility to kick-start advocacy, universalisation and implementation of the ATT. Learn more about the United Nations Trust Facility Supporting Cooperation on Arms Regulation (UNSCAR).

The Arms Trade Treaty - UN Office for Disarmament Affairs

Since the passage only 7 have ratified.
 
MMC said:
The ILA did since they were the Attorneys.....all of it is in the formatting of ATT.
Click to expand...

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?
 
obvious Child said:
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?
Click to expand...

Yes it was.....And I did say the attorneys, that would be the ILA. I gave you the links to the site.....I wasn't going to go thru their PDF files to pull it out. But even Basic Wiki has it up.


"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~

Arms Trade Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom