The fight over gun control is not just about guns. It is about the protection of the standard of the Constitution, and whether there is indeed a process that guides this country and protects our individual liberties and national sovereignty.
Over the past couple of years, the United Nations has worked toward a “Small Arms Treaty.” Many denied the very existence of this project. We were told our worries were delusions: “Oh, no, no, these rumors have been flying for three years and nothing has happened. It's just a paranoid myth. Doesn’t exist.”
But then as the document came to public light, the story changed. We were told, “This is about curbing international illegal trade, not individual ownership.” We are also assured “This is just about tanks and rockets and such."
The bait and switch of the process and the vague wording of the document tell a different story. The conference did happen, of course, despite initial denials. The text was finally released, and nestled among the list of tanks, helicopters, and missile launchers were “small arms and light weapons.”
Mixed in with the assurances of sovereignty WAS acknowledgement of a country’s right to defense, but there is no protection of the individual’s right.
There’s international sharing of records. There's a mandate to control “illicit weapons,” while it never clarifies what illicit means, what its future definition will be, who defines its meaning.
If the treaty is so innocent, why the subterfuge? For a moment, a year ago, we heard good news: the treaty didn’t pass. News outlets reported the conference disbanded, and those following the issue with concern celebrated. Three weeks later, a small notice, only minusculey reported, let us know the treaty has been ratified after all.
We at Loyal9.org are concerned. We are concerned by the threat to the right of gun ownership. We are concerned that the trampling of the Bill of Rights undercuts its ability to protect us on any issue. We are concerned by the secretive process that obviously intentionally undermines transparency and protection.
We should be comforted by the fact it still needs ratification by the senate, and that the Constitution should still trump international treaty. But it’s hard to find hope in the stewardship of the senate when in the past months they have passed bills to limit the right to assemble to protest; to empower the IRS to blacklist travelers; that mandates trackers in all vehicles; that allows CIA to collect ALL electronic communication.
Secretary of State John Kerry has said that the president will sign his endorsement of the treaty in the next week or so. The next step is the senate ratification vote. Send your letter -- whether on your own or through the Loyal9.org members' action mechanism -- demanding your senator vote against it and pass the word onto your friends in this desperate fight for the soul of our country.
The hour is grave because of what we have forgotten.
And now there are two (er, three?). Did it matter which? After watching the debates, it seems being AGAINST Liberty is now a campaign technique. And the winners are . . . (not the Bill of Rights).
Target date is 2030
Take a failed issue. Give it a righteous new name. Get people begging for government salvation. Ram the details through in secrecy. Paranoid indeed.
A must read: on the surface it is about the people who work behind the scenes for Trump. More deeply, it is an expose on the way the world really works. How are we brought to believe what we believe?
FIA acquired emails document favorable treatment for favorable treatment
How do banks keep fees high and rates they pay low despite "Competition"? They're all owned by the same people.