Sen. Moran & 44 Senators Tell Obama Administration – Second Amendment Rights Not Negotiable
WASHINGTON, D.C. –-(Ammoland.com)- U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-KS) today led 44 senators in expressing grave concern about the dangers posed to Second Amendment rights by the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty.
The 45 senators notified President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton of their intent to oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding American gun owners.
This is enough to block the treaty from Senate passage, as treaties submitted to the U.S. Senate require approval of two-thirds of Senators present to be ratified.
“Our country’s sovereignty and the rights of American citizens must not be infringed upon by the United Nations,” Sen. Moran said. “Today, the Senate sends a powerful message to the Obama Administration: an Arms Trade Treaty that does not protect ownership of civilian firearms will fail in the Senate. Our firearm freedoms are not negotiable.”
In the letter, the senators wrote: “As the treaty process continues, we strongly encourage your Administration to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership. These freedoms are not negotiable, and we will oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition and related items.”
From the NRA. “As we have for the past 15 years, the NRA will fight to stop a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty that infringes on the Constitutional rights of American gun owners,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action.
“This letter sends a clear message to the international bureaucrats who want to eliminate our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms. Clearly, a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty that includes civilian arms within its scope is not supported by the American people or their elected U.S. Senators. Sen. Moran is a true champion of our freedom. We are grateful for his leadership and his tenacious efforts on this issue, as well as the 44 other senators who agree with the NRA’s refusal to compromise on our constitutional freedoms.”
In October of 2009 at the U.N. General Assembly, the Obama Administration reversed the previous Administration’s position and voted for the U.S. to participate in negotiating the Arms Trade Treaty, purportedly to establish “common international standards for the import, export, and transfer of conventional arms.” Preparatory committee meetings are now underway in anticipation of a conference in 2012 to finalize the treaty. A treaty draft has not yet been produced.
The letter was signed by U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH), John Barrasso (R-WY), Roy Blunt (R-MO), John Boozman (R-AR), Scott Brown (R-MA), Richard Burr (R-NC), Dan Coats (R-IN), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Susan Collins (R-ME), Bob Corker (R-TN), John Cornyn (R-TX), Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Jim DeMint (R-SC), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Dean Heller (R-NV), John Hoeven (R-ND), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Mike Johanns (R-NE), Ron Johnson (R-WI), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Mike Lee (R-UT), John McCain (R-AZ), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Jerry Moran (R-KS), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Rand Paul (R-KY), Rob Portman (R-OH), Jim Risch (R-ID), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), John Thune (R-SD), Pat Toomey (R-PA), David Vitter (R-LA), and Roger Wicker (R-MS).
The full text of the signed letter is below and the PDF version can be found here:
July 22, 2011
President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
2201 C St., NW
Washington, D.C. 20520
Dear President Obama and Secretary Clinton:
As defenders of the right of Americans to keep and bear arms, we write to express our grave concern about the dangers posed by the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty. Our country’s sovereignty and the constitutional protection of these individual freedoms must not be infringed.
In October of 2009 at the U.N. General Assembly, your administration voted for the U.S. to participate in negotiating this treaty. Preparatory committee meetings are now underway in anticipation of a conference in 2012 to finalize the treaty. Based on the process to date, we are concerned that the Arms Trade Treaty poses dangers to rights protected under the Second Amendment for the following reasons.
First, while the 2009 resolution on the treaty acknowledged the existence of “national constitutional protections on private ownership,” it placed the existence of these protections in the context of “the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership,” implying that constitutional protections must be interpreted in the context of the broader power of the state to regulate. We are concerned both by the implications of the 2009 resolution and by the hostility to private firearms ownership manifested by similar resolutions in previous years—such as the 2008 resolution, which called for the “highest possible standards” of control.
Second, your Administration agreed to participate in the negotiation only if it “operates under the rule of consensus decision-making.” Given that the 2008 resolution on the treaty was adopted almost unanimously—with only the U.S. and Zimbabwe in opposition—it seems clear that there is a near-consensus on the requirement for the “highest possible standards,” which will inevitably put severe pressure on the United States to compromise on important issues.
Third, U.N. member states regularly argue that no treaty controlling the transfer of arms internationally can be effective without controls on transfers inside member states. Any treaty resulting from the Arms Trade Treaty process that seeks in any way to regulate the domestic manufacture, assembly, possession, transfer, or purchase of firearms, ammunition, and related items would be completely unacceptable to us.
Fourth, reports from the 2010 Preparatory Meeting make it clear that many U.N. member states aim to craft an extremely broad treaty. A declaration by Mexico and other Central and South American countries, for example, called for the treaty to cover “All types of conventional weapons (regardless of their purpose), including small arms and light weapons, ammunition, components, parts, technology and related materials.” Such a broad treaty would be completely unenforceable, and would pose dangers to all U.S. businesses and individuals involved in any aspect of the firearms industry. At the 2010 Meeting, the U.S. representative twice expressed frustration with the wide-ranging and unrealistic scope of the projected treaty. We are concerned that these cautions will not be heeded, and that the Senate will eventually be called upon to consider a treaty that is so broad it cannot effectively be subject to our advice and consent.
Fifth, and finally, the underlying philosophy of the Arms Trade Treaty is that transfers to and from governments are presumptively legal, while transfers to non-state actors (such as terrorists and criminals) are, at best, problematic. We agree that sales and transfers to criminals and terrorists are unacceptable, but we will oppose any treaty that places the burden of controlling crime and terrorism on law-abiding Americans, instead of where it belongs: on the culpable member states of the United Nations who have failed to take the necessary steps to block trafficking that is already illegal under existing laws and agreements.
As the treaty process continues, we strongly encourage your Administration to uphold our country’s constitutional protections of civilian firearms ownership. These freedoms are not negotiable, and we will oppose ratification of an Arms Trade Treaty presented to the Senate that in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms, ammunition, and related items.
While this attempt was stopped, don't think they won't try again. We must constantly watch them because they have their own agenda to disarm us. Remember this attempt on election day, lets make him a one timer, and let the other liberals go with him.
To respond to the posting of IQmatters. This bill would impact all of Americans. Bad guys, and drug cartels do not purchase their weapons through legal means. The cartels purchase their weapons through international military weapons dealers. Only law abiding citizens buy their guns according to the laws. The “Right to keep and bear arms” is second for a reason. To protect the one that comes first, “Freedom of speech”. Can you name one country that has taken it’s citizens’ right to “keep and bear firearms” away, and those people are still free? I don’t think you will be able… Read more »
History. Heritage. Marksmanship. Civic Involvement.
Project Appleseed is an activity of The Revolutionary War Veterans Association, a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, dedicated to teaching every American our shared heritage and history as well as traditional rifle marksmanship skills. Our volunteer instructors travel across the country teaching those who attend about the difficult choices, the heroic actions, and the sacrifices that the Founders made on behalf of modern Americans, all of whom are their “progeny.”
A few pertinent points to consider. The word ‘rights’ represents a natural status of each person. The primary purpose for the institution of all government under the terms and agreements embodied as a Constitutional Republic form is to ’secure rights’—exactly the same rights a person would naturally have without the existence of any government at all. Most States have provisions in their State Constitutions declaring and enumerating it to be a ’right’ of the Citizens of that State to keep and bear arms. A cursory read of the provisions reveals said ’right’ to be expressed in nearly every manner possible.… Read more »
Don't get you panties in a wad folks. This administration or no other can ever disarm us Americans.
Congress will never ratify this treaty. Even if this were to become law, how many of us are stupid enough to allow a treaty to override the United States Constitution? I am not!
To "IQmatters" (apparently it doesn't matter very much, as yours obviously isn't very high). You better back off on that Barry KoolAid you're drinking; you just might drown in it. Typical of Barry's Chicago trolls, you can't stick to the subject at hand. Actually, you probably don't have a clue what subject is at hand. Two-thirds of your drivel is off subject, and if I were moderator, would not have been posted. As to the subject, Lo-IQmatters, this proposed treaty would negatively impact 100% of America's legal and law-abiding firearms owners, no matter what type of firearm they own, or… Read more »
First, this Bill would not impact 99.9 percent of Americans. Rather those who are buying, selling, trading illegally to primarily drug cartels across the border. How else do people propose we stop the murdering of innocent citizens with the use of American weapons and ammo? Second, the reason the Bill is only signed by 45 GOP Senators is because that is all they needed to make a statement. They do not need Democratic signatures on a letter sent from the Senate minority gang. This close to an election, everything is about getting re-elected, they do exactly these things to make… Read more »
O.K., so ONLY 45 out of 100 are TRUE Americans and have the brains God gave little green apples. So what about the rest? This is a very sad comentary on the state of the senate. The rest of these UN-AMERICANS should hang their heads in Shame
45 R's, 0 D's hummmmmmm.