In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Alert for all gun owners
TooBig
Member Posts: 28,560 ✭✭✭
Gun Owners of America
E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102,
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
It turns out that Washington might soon be giving an arm of the United Nations jurisdiction over the import, export, and oceanic transport of GUNS and AMMUNITION.
You would think that even Washington politicians would not be so stupid as to give people like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Burma's despotic military junta, the Sudan's genocidal strongmen, or Cuba's Fidel Castro the right to interfere with our Second Amendment rights on American soil, right?
Well, what makes sense to the common person isn't always the reality in Washington.
The Senate Foreign Relations committee will soon be debating the ratification of a treaty that bears the appropriate acronym of LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty). LOST would put the ocean's resources in the hands of the UN's International Seabed Authority -- and yes, that spells trouble for our Second Amendment rights.
First, there are concerns that the International Seabed Authority might close firing ranges based on the bogus argument that runoff from these ranges pollutes the world's oceans.
This battle over lead run-off is one that gun owners have already fought in this country. We shudder to think that we could one day find ourselves fighting this battle at the global level as well!
But, even more frightening, Article 88 of the treaty stipulates that the high seas are "reserved" for peaceful purposes. And this provision would be enforced by the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.
What does this mean? It clearly doesn't mean that the U.S. or any other country is going to shut down its navy. But, on the other hand, it would be foolish to assume that the UN will not eventually try to use this provision to prohibit the oceanic transport of all firearms and ammunition -- except, of course, for guns and ammo bound for murderous dictators.Make no mistake: The United Nations is composed of hoards of heavily-armed genocidal tyrants. And the last thing these people want is for firearms and ammunition to fall into the hands of "peons" like you and me.
And the UN has shown no reluctance to try to strip the U.S. of its sovereignty and interfere with our Second Amendment rights. Just consider the several attempts they have made over the last decade to sucker the United States into a binding treaty that would call for greater gun control restrictions inside our own country.
Peter Leitner, who was the Representative to the Law of the Sea negotiations in Geneva during the 1970s and a key witness at the hearing before the Environment and Public Works Committee, is not only an authority on the LOST treaty, he is concerned about the danger it poses to individual rights.
He says, "The inherent danger in this Treaty is the fact that nothing is set in stone and broad matters of interpretation will be the province of the 'one-nation/one-vote' Assembly. We will have no leverage, veto-power, etc., in that forum." And then there's the term "Peaceful Purposes" in the treaty. Leitner says that this is "one of those extraordinarily vague terms that lend themselves to political manipulation."
If the US can claim that LOST allows US ships to board foreign ships and look for weapons of mass destruction, he argues, "then other nations can interdict cargoes they find offensive as well. I think the [Second Amendment] gun guys have a very legitimate concern!"
Another opponent of this treaty is John Bolton, the former US Ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton almost single-handedly kept the US from signing onto anti-gun treaties sponsored by the UN. Now he is making the rounds on Capitol Hill, reportedly lobbying conservative senators against LOST.
ACTION: Write your senator. Tell him not to vote to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty until the following amendment is adopted:
Article 88 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"Notwithstanding anything in this treaty to the contrary, no action shall be taken under this treaty which would impede the export, transport, or import of small arms and ammunition into the United States for the lawful exercise of Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States."
You can use the pre-written message below and send it as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm (where phone and fax numbers are also available).
Pre-written letter
Dear Senator:
Article 88 of the Law of the Sea Treaty stipulates that the high seas are "reserved" for peaceful purposes.
This clearly doesn't mean that the U.S. or any other country is going to shut down its navy. But, on the other hand, it could mean that the UN will eventually try to use this provision to prohibit the oceanic transport of all firearms and ammunition -- except, of course, for guns and ammo bound for murderous dictators. And enforcement will be in the hands of the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.
The United Nations is composed of hoards of heavily-armed genocidal tyrants. And the last thing these people want is for firearms and ammunition to fall into the hands of "peons" like law-abiding American citizens.
And the UN has shown no reluctance to try to strip the U.S. of its sovereignty and interfere with our Second Amendment rights.
This is on top of concerns which have already been raised that the International Seabed Authority might close firing ranges based on the bogus argument that runoff from these ranges pollutes the world's oceans.
As a result, I would ask you to vote against the Law of the Sea Treaty unless and until the following amendment is adopted:
Article 88 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"Notwithstanding anything in this treaty to the contrary, no action shall be taken under this treaty which would impede the export, transport, or import of small arms and ammunition into the United States for the lawful exercise of Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States."
I eagerly await your reply.
Sincerely,
****************************
E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102,
Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
It turns out that Washington might soon be giving an arm of the United Nations jurisdiction over the import, export, and oceanic transport of GUNS and AMMUNITION.
You would think that even Washington politicians would not be so stupid as to give people like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Burma's despotic military junta, the Sudan's genocidal strongmen, or Cuba's Fidel Castro the right to interfere with our Second Amendment rights on American soil, right?
Well, what makes sense to the common person isn't always the reality in Washington.
The Senate Foreign Relations committee will soon be debating the ratification of a treaty that bears the appropriate acronym of LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty). LOST would put the ocean's resources in the hands of the UN's International Seabed Authority -- and yes, that spells trouble for our Second Amendment rights.
First, there are concerns that the International Seabed Authority might close firing ranges based on the bogus argument that runoff from these ranges pollutes the world's oceans.
This battle over lead run-off is one that gun owners have already fought in this country. We shudder to think that we could one day find ourselves fighting this battle at the global level as well!
But, even more frightening, Article 88 of the treaty stipulates that the high seas are "reserved" for peaceful purposes. And this provision would be enforced by the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.
What does this mean? It clearly doesn't mean that the U.S. or any other country is going to shut down its navy. But, on the other hand, it would be foolish to assume that the UN will not eventually try to use this provision to prohibit the oceanic transport of all firearms and ammunition -- except, of course, for guns and ammo bound for murderous dictators.Make no mistake: The United Nations is composed of hoards of heavily-armed genocidal tyrants. And the last thing these people want is for firearms and ammunition to fall into the hands of "peons" like you and me.
And the UN has shown no reluctance to try to strip the U.S. of its sovereignty and interfere with our Second Amendment rights. Just consider the several attempts they have made over the last decade to sucker the United States into a binding treaty that would call for greater gun control restrictions inside our own country.
Peter Leitner, who was the Representative to the Law of the Sea negotiations in Geneva during the 1970s and a key witness at the hearing before the Environment and Public Works Committee, is not only an authority on the LOST treaty, he is concerned about the danger it poses to individual rights.
He says, "The inherent danger in this Treaty is the fact that nothing is set in stone and broad matters of interpretation will be the province of the 'one-nation/one-vote' Assembly. We will have no leverage, veto-power, etc., in that forum." And then there's the term "Peaceful Purposes" in the treaty. Leitner says that this is "one of those extraordinarily vague terms that lend themselves to political manipulation."
If the US can claim that LOST allows US ships to board foreign ships and look for weapons of mass destruction, he argues, "then other nations can interdict cargoes they find offensive as well. I think the [Second Amendment] gun guys have a very legitimate concern!"
Another opponent of this treaty is John Bolton, the former US Ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton almost single-handedly kept the US from signing onto anti-gun treaties sponsored by the UN. Now he is making the rounds on Capitol Hill, reportedly lobbying conservative senators against LOST.
ACTION: Write your senator. Tell him not to vote to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty until the following amendment is adopted:
Article 88 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"Notwithstanding anything in this treaty to the contrary, no action shall be taken under this treaty which would impede the export, transport, or import of small arms and ammunition into the United States for the lawful exercise of Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States."
You can use the pre-written message below and send it as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm (where phone and fax numbers are also available).
Pre-written letter
Dear Senator:
Article 88 of the Law of the Sea Treaty stipulates that the high seas are "reserved" for peaceful purposes.
This clearly doesn't mean that the U.S. or any other country is going to shut down its navy. But, on the other hand, it could mean that the UN will eventually try to use this provision to prohibit the oceanic transport of all firearms and ammunition -- except, of course, for guns and ammo bound for murderous dictators. And enforcement will be in the hands of the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.
The United Nations is composed of hoards of heavily-armed genocidal tyrants. And the last thing these people want is for firearms and ammunition to fall into the hands of "peons" like law-abiding American citizens.
And the UN has shown no reluctance to try to strip the U.S. of its sovereignty and interfere with our Second Amendment rights.
This is on top of concerns which have already been raised that the International Seabed Authority might close firing ranges based on the bogus argument that runoff from these ranges pollutes the world's oceans.
As a result, I would ask you to vote against the Law of the Sea Treaty unless and until the following amendment is adopted:
Article 88 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"Notwithstanding anything in this treaty to the contrary, no action shall be taken under this treaty which would impede the export, transport, or import of small arms and ammunition into the United States for the lawful exercise of Second Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States."
I eagerly await your reply.
Sincerely,
****************************
Comments