- Threat Watch
- Warrior Tools
- Body Armor
- Long Guns
- Accuracy International
- Desert Tactical Arms
- Kel-Tec Long Guns
- Mosin Nagant
- Rock River Arms
- Ruger Long Guns
- Sabre Defense
- SIG Sauer
- Smith & Wesson Long Guns
- Wilson Combat
Posts Tagged treaty
From America’s First Freedom:
With his time in office quickly winding down, President Barack Obama gave America’s law-abiding gun owners one last poke in the eye on Friday by sending the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to the U.S. Senate for consideration.
We’ve been reporting on the Arms Trade Treaty for years (see two examples, here and here, for some background on its dangers). John Kerry signed the ATT on behalf of the Obama administration back in 2013, and it took effect in 2014. But 67 U.S. senators must vote for its ratification—a tall order to fill with the Senate’s current pro-gun landscape.
From Washington Free Beacon:
Iranian cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Ali Movahedi Kermani, who was handpicked by the Islamic Republic’s supreme leader to deliver the prayers, delivered a message of hostility toward the United States in the first official remarks since a final nuclear deal was signed between Iran and world powers in Vienna last week.
Canada on the other hand refused to sign the arms trade treaty.
Making Sense of the START Debate is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By George Friedman
Last week, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which had been signed in April. The Russian legislature still has to provide final approval of the treaty, but it is likely to do so, and therefore a New START is set to go into force. That leaves two questions to discuss. First, what exactly have the two sides agreed to and, second, what does it mean? Let’s begin with the first.
The original START was signed July 31, 1991, and reductions were completed in 2001. The treaty put a cap on the number of nuclear warheads that could be deployed. In addition to limiting the number of land- and submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and strategic bombers, it capped the number of warheads that were available to launch at 6,000. The fact that this is a staggering number of nuclear weapons should give you some idea of the staggering number in existence prior to START. START I lapsed in 2009, and the new treaty is essentially designed to reinstate it.
It is important to remember that Ronald Reagan first proposed START. His initial proposal focused on reducing the number of ICBMs. Given that the Soviets did not have an effective intercontinental bomber force and the United States had a massive B-52 force and follow-on bombers in the works, the treaty he proposed would have decreased the Soviet quantitative advantage in missile-based systems without meaningfully reducing the U.S. advantage in bombers. The Soviets, of course, objected, and a more balanced treaty emerged.
What is striking is that START was signed just before the Soviet Union collapsed and implemented long after it was gone. It derived from the political realities that existed during the early 1980s. One of the things the signers of both the original START and the New START have ignored is that nuclear weapons by themselves are not the issue. The issue is the geopolitical relationship between the two powers. The number of weapons may affect budgetary considerations and theoretical targeting metrics, but the danger of nuclear war does not derive from the number of weapons but from the political relationship between nations. Read the rest of this entry »
The Obama Administration just announced they would be working with the United Nations to pass a new “Small Arms Treaty.”
The UN’s “Small Arms Treaty” is nothing more than a massive GLOBAL gun control scheme, designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms from law-abiding citizens; and
The new treaty will likely be designed to force national governments to enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding citizens cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to buy a firearm legally; and
The United Nation’s “Small Arms Treaty” would also likely ban the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons; and
The ratification of this treaty would also likely create an international gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
If this concerns you, you can see a video with more details and sign a petition here:
“You know why there’s a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one.”
Wayne LaPierre’s The Global War on Your Guns takes you inside the U.N. plan to destroy the Bill of Rights by attacking the one right that makes any right possible, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
LaPierre’s well-researched chapters outline the threat itself, how the U.N. works, and the phalanx of international forces determined to eliminate the basic human right of self-preservation through elimination of all private firearm ownership.
In The Global War on Your Guns you will learn:
- How a 1997 land mine treaty molded the U.N.’s new strategy
- How the U.N. funnels your tax dollars to anti-gun member nations
- Why the U.S. domestic gun-ban crowd is investing big in the U.N.
- What U.N. disarmament has done to once-free peoples of the world
- How extreme U.N. gun laws can be enforced on Americans-even without a new treaty
LaPierre exposes the labyrinth of international connections and cash flow that have moved this chilling threat from blueprint to binding treaty. At center stage, LaPierre spotlights global billionaires like George Soros and a colossal coalition of domestic and worldwide gun-ban and animal-rights groups.