Chris Cox, Director of the NRA-ILA, was interviewed by Ginny Simone of NRA News on the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty. One very important point that he made was that a treaty doesn’t go away at the end of a session of Congress if it isn’t ratified. It stays out there forever and a succeeding Senate could ratify it years after it was first submitted. That is what makes the Arms Trade Treaty so dangerous to our gun rights and freedoms.
Julianne Versnel’s final report from the UN’s Third Preparatory Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty is below. Thank god someone is keeping an eye on this.
Amb. John Bolton and the Bush State Department told these folks to pound sand. Those times are past and the Obama Administration thinks the ATT is just hunky-dory. Given that the treaty will be ready in the next couple of years, it isn’t too soon to start writing your Senators about this treaty. Like all treaties, the Arms Trade Treaty must be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate to go in effect in the United States. Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen.
FINAL REPORT on the Third Preparatory Committee (Prep Comm) meeting for the Arms Trade Treaty that ended on July 15, 2011.
By Julianne Versnel, Second Amendment Foundation Director of Operations
With the Chairman’s Draft Paper distributed on July 14, 2011, it is apparent that small arms and ammunition will be included in the ATT final draft that will be hammered out at the month-long negotiating conference in July 2012. Small arms and ammunition have been the focus of much of the discussions by the delegates. While this was expected from many less developed states, the vehement and strident comments suggesting the scope of the proposed ATT be broadened by Australia, Sweden, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Ireland and Norway were somewhat surprising.
This meeting had over 375 requests for registrations by NGOs and other interested parties. This was not an open meeting and specific permission had to be received so that registration could even be made. This is an unprecedented number.
A member of the UN staff asked me on the first day of the meeting why there were so many people who wanted to attend this conference. The First and Second Prep Comms meetings had had about 100 and 125 NGOs in attendance respectively. As the week progressed, the answer to the question became obvious. This conference is about firearms and ammunition. Just as this is an emotional issue that elicits strong feelings from Americans, so it is in the rest of the world.
The great majority of those attending were from organizations that deal almost exclusively with small arms. On July 14, 2011, NGOs were allocated one hour to make statements. Control Arms, a Survivors’ Declaration and IANSA spoke and were followed by remarks by the National Rifle Association, World Forum for the Future of Sports Shooting Activities and Defense Small Arms Advisory Committee. There was no presentation that discussed any part of the scope of the treaty beyond firearms and ammunition.
The fourth and final Prep Comm is to take place in mid February 2012. While this has been described as a technical conference, there is little likelihood that there will actually be further discussion for expanding the scope and reach of the ATT to be presented the following July.
The Second Amendment Foundation remains vigilant in covering the progress of the upcoming United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
Julianne Versnel is the Director of Operations for the Second Amendment Foundation. She, along with Alan Gottlieb, spent all of last week attending the United Nations Third Preparatory Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty. Here is her report on seeing the draft ATT that was released on Thursday, July 14th.
Today, the most recent Chairman’s Draft Paper for the Arms Trade Treaty was distributed. Ambassador Roberto Garcia Moritan authored the outline for the proposed ATT based on consultation, discussion and guidelines decided upon in this and the two previous Preparatory Conference meetings. This document dated 14 July 2011 covers the Scope, Criteria, Implementation and Final Provisions that are expected to be in the ATT presented for discussion in July 2012.
The Preamble under item six, “recognizes the sovereign right of States to determine any regulation of internal transfers of arms and national ownership exclusively within their territory, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership.” This language is a direct response to the serious reservations expressed by the U.S. and other delegations.
Unfortunately after this comes the Scope of the proposed treaty. This includes along with tanks, Artillery Systems, Naval Vessels and Missile Systems–small arms and all ammunition for these small arms.
While acknowledging a constitutional right, the criteria and record keeping requirements proposed in the treaty would necessitate the special marking of all firearms (IV, 1, h) and more critically all ammunition (IV, 1, j). The costs involved in both the physical marketing and recordkeeping are enormous. The proposed document also includes the creation of an Implementation Support Unit (VI, G-1) with yearly reporting and records kept for a minimum of 10 years. (V1, B-1).
Another egregious proposal is the Victim Assistance proposal. (VI, F) This provision is one that has been presented repeatedly at Programme of Action and Conference of Parties meetings. Many African, Southern American, Central American and Caribbean countries have proposed that manufacturers contribute to a fund based on their sales. Alternately they would assess fees on countries based on the value of its arms exports.
As the ATT moves closer to its final form, it is imperative that we realize that the technical requirements and definitions still to be determined are very dangerous. Much of the debate on these will take place in side events that are very often closed to NGOs.
The US already has the most stringent import and export requirements for firearms in the world. While this proposed treaty is supposed to be about conventional weapons, the focus in the discussions is on small arms, the very firearms that our US Constitution guarantees us the right to bear.
The Second Amendment Foundation remains vigilant and will continue monitoring this Arms Trade Treaty. We will not remain silent in our fight to maintain your right to keep and right and bear arms. We cannot trust the very organization that devised and administered the oil for food program in Iraq to respect our Constitutional rights—particularly the right to keep and bear arms.
Wayne LaPierre, Executive VP and CEO, of the NRA addressed the UN’s Preparatory Committee on the Arms Trade Treaty today. His remarks to this group are below. The gist of his remarks were that the NRA will fight tooth and nail any effort to regulate U.S. civilian firearms ownership by the UN. Moreover, he reminded them that treaties must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate and they isn’t going to happen if he can help it.
I’m sure his remarks were received politely but wouldn’t be that popular with the prohibitionist agenda prevalent amongst the less than democratic countries which comprise the majority of the UN’s membership.
United Nations Arms Trade Treaty
Preparatory Committee – 3d Session
New York, July 11-15, 2011
Statement of the National Rifle Association of AmericaMr. Chairman, thank you for this brief opportunity to address the committee. I am Wayne LaPierre and for 20 years now, I have served as Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association of America.
The NRA was founded in 1871, and ever since has staunchly defended the rights of its 4 million members, America’s 80 million law-abiding gun owners, and freedom-loving Americans throughout our country. In 1996, the NRA was recognized as an NGO of the United Nations and, ever since then, has defended the constitutional freedom of Americans in this arena. The
NRA is the largest and most active firearms rights organization in the world and, although some members of this committee may not like what I have to say, I am proud to defend the tens of millions of lawful people NRA represents.This present effort for an Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT, is now in its fifth year. We have closely monitored this process with increasing concern. We’ve reviewed the statements of the countries participating in these meetings. We’ve listened to other NGOs and read their numerous proposals and reports, as well as carefully examined the papers you have produced.
We’ve watched, and read … listened and monitored. Now, we must speak out.
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms in defense of self, family and country is ultimately selfevident and is part of the Bill of Rights to the United States Constitution. Reduced to its core, it is about fundamental individual freedom, human worth, and self-destiny.
We reject the notion that American gun owners must accept any lesser amount of freedom in order to be accepted among the international community. Our Founding Fathers long ago rejected that notion and forged our great nation on the principle of freedom for the individual citizen – not for the government.
Mr. Chairman, those working on this treaty have asked us to trust them … but they’ve proven to be unworthy of that trust.
We are told “Trust us; an ATT will not ban possession of any civilian firearms.” Yet, the proposals and statements presented to date have argued exactly the opposite, and – perhaps most importantly – proposals to ban civilian firearms ownership have not been rejected.
We are told “Trust us; an ATT will not interfere with state domestic regulation of firearms.” Yet, there are constant calls for exactly such measures.
We are told “Trust us; an ATT will only affect the illegal trade in firearms.” But then we’re told that in order to control the illegal trade, all states must control the legal firearms trade.
We are told, “Trust us; an ATT will not require registration of civilian firearms.” Yet, there are numerous calls for record-keeping, and firearms tracking from production to eventual destruction. That’s nothing more than gun registration by a different name.
We are told, “Trust us; an ATT will not create a new international bureaucracy.” Well, that’s exactly what is now being proposed – with a tongue-in-cheek assurance that it will just be a SMALL bureaucracy.
We are told, “Trust us; an ATT will not interfere with the lawful international commerce in civilian firearms.” But a manufacturer of civilian shotguns would have to comply with the same regulatory process as a manufacturer of military attack helicopters.
We are told, “Trust us; an ATT will not interfere with a hunter or sport shooter travelling internationally with firearms.” However, he would have to get a so-called “transit permit” merely to change airports for a connecting flight.
Mr. Chairman, our list of objections extends far beyond the proposals I just mentioned. Unfortunately, my limited time today prevents me from providing greater detail on each of our objections. I can assure you, however, that each is based on American law, as well as the fundamental rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
It is regrettable that proposals affecting civilian firearms ownership are woven throughout the proposed ATT. That being the case, however, there is only one solution to this problem: the complete removal of civilian firearms from the scope of any ATT. I will repeat that point as it is
critical and not subject to negotiation – civilian firearms must not be part of any ATT. On this there can be no compromise, as American gun owners will never surrender their Second Amendment freedom.It is also regrettable to find such intense focus on record-keeping, oversight, inspections, supervision, tracking, tracing, surveillance, marking, documentation, verification, paper trails and data banks, new global agencies and data centers. Nowhere do we find a thought about respecting anyone’s right of self-defense, privacy, property, due process, or observing personal freedoms of any kind.
Mr. Chairman, I ‘d be remiss if I didn’t also discuss the politics of an ATT. For the United States to be a party to an ATT, it must be ratified by a two-thirds vote of the U.S. Senate. Some do not realize that under the U.S. Constitution, the ultimate treaty power is not the President’s power to negotiate and sign treaties; it is the Senate’s power to approve them.
To that end, it’s important for the Preparatory Committee to understand that the proposed ATT is already strongly opposed in the Senate – the very body that must approve it by a two-thirds majority. There is a letter addressed to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton that is
currently being circulated for the signatures of Senators who oppose the ATT. Once complete, this letter will demonstrate that the proposed ATT will not pass the U.S. Senate.So there is extremely strong resistance to the ATT in the United States, even before the treaty is tabled. We are not aware of any precedent for this – rejecting a proposed treaty before it’s even submitted for consideration – but it speaks to the level of opposition. The proposed ATT has become more than just controversial, as the Internet is awash with articles and messages calling for its rejection. And those messages are all based on the same objection – infringement on the constitutional freedom of American gun owners.
The cornerstone of our freedom is the Second Amendment. Neither the United Nations, nor any other foreign influence, has the authority to meddle with the freedoms guaranteed by our Bill of Rights, endowed by our Creator, and due to all humankind.
Therefore, the NRA will fight with all of its strength to oppose any ATT that includes civilian firearms within its scope.
Thank you.
The Third Preparatory Committee Meeting for the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is meeting at the United Nations in New York this week. The Second Amendment Foundation is accredited to the UN as an NGO – Non-Governmental Organization – through its membership on the Executive Committee of the World Forum on the Future of Shooting Sports Activities and has people attending the meeting. I will have more on this meeting later.
The Second Amendment Foundation, represented by Alan Gottlieb and Julianne Versnel, is in attendance at the Third Preparatory Committee Meeting for the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) in New York this week.
These meetings lay the ground work for the final negotiation sessions of the ATT in 2012. SAF’s position is firm – an ATT which in any way affects the constitutional rights of American gun owners is totally unacceptable. Civilian firearms and ammunition must not be within the scope of the United Nation’s Arms Trade Treaty. There is no compromise on this crucial point.
The Second Amendment Foundation has been active for years at the United Nations both its headquarters in New York and Vienna, Austria and elsewhere internationally in response to anti-gun rights initiatives that would restrict our sovereignty. In addition to attending the first two preparatory meetings, SAF was represented at the May meeting of Governmental Experts where marking, tracing and record keeping policies were discussed.
SAF is a Member of the Executive Committee of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities, a recognized Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) at the United Nations. This status allows us to closely monitor the internal UN debate over firearm issues and report back to our members and supporters.
This NGO status has also allowed SAF to take an active role in speaking at the UN, most recently at the Programme of Action to Prevent and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects in 2010.
In addition to its UN and World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities, SAF is a founding member of The International Association for the Protection of Civilian Arms Rights (IAPCAR) which includes scores of national and international organizations, representing tens of millions of firearm and knife owners worldwide.
In March, Alan and Julianne received a commemorative muzzleloading rifle in recognition for their international work protecting the rights of gun owners presented by FISAT (the Italian shooters association), and Chiappa Firearms during the EXA exhibition in Brescia, Italy.
One of the biggest beefs many people have with the mainstream media is in their self-appointed role as “gatekeepers”. In other words, they decide in the words of the New York Times what is “all the news fit to print.”
So imagine my surprise about stumbling across an article on the “South American Conference on Interdiction and Regional Security of Small Arms & Light Weapons”. The article was in the Latin American Herald Tribune out of Caracas, Venezuela. The article published an address by Ann Ganzer, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Threat Reduction, Export Controls, and Negotiations in the Department of State. She is also the Director of Conventional Arms Threat Reduction in the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation. When I see the words “small arms”, “State Department”, and “Latin America” in one story I begin to get nervous.
The conference was August 4-6 in Buenos Aires, Argentina but the one and only report of it seems to have been from this obscure English language paper out of Venezuela. A quick Google search confirms it.
There was not anything really new in the address but it did some indications of what to expect from the Department of State regarding small arms, regional agreements, and treaties.
For example on the Arms Trade Treaty she said:
Another significant U.S. strategic step came in October 2009 when Secretary of State Clinton described a long-standing U.S. commitment to strong international standards on the international arms trade, outlining U.S. conditions for supporting an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). In the words of Secretary Clinton “The United States is committed to actively pursuing a strong and robust treaty that contains the highest possible, legally binding standards for the international transfer of conventional weapons.” We consider the Secretary’s remarks an important first step toward a significant and meaningful international treaty.
The United States looks forward to working with others as we move toward PrepComs in 2011 and 2012, as we prepare for the start of the treaty negotiations in 2012.
On the Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and other Related Materials – CIFTA – she said:
We are continuing consultations with the Senate today and seek prompt ratification. While this is pending, the U.S. is in compliance with the Convention implementing many of its commitments.
Lest we forget, CIFTA is the treaty, if approved, that could force reloaders to get a license to reload ammunition because it would be considered manufacturing. It would probably also mean the end of cover girls in the Dillon Precision Blue Press catalog.
She concluded the speech saying:
I have no doubt the security of the Americas will be significantly and positively impacted if we work together, learn from each other, and share information about interdiction, border security training, and other programs offered by members of the international community. As citizens of responsible states and fellow members of international organizations, it is incumbent upon all of us to do whatever it takes to put an end to the illicit proliferation of small arms and light weapons.
Frankly, I hope this conference ended up as your typical junket with a lot of drinking, partying, and not much really getting done. All I can say is that it is hard to keep up with these under the radar attempts at gun control. It is even harder if the mainstream media doesn’t think we need to know about it.
by