Proposed U.N. Treaty, A Second Amendment Threat

[Lambo]

I seriously believe that we have already been & continue to be victimized by a secret compliance with this non-sense! Take Import Bans & Restrictions for 2!
Now that there being so overt about it one has to wonder if it isn't already a done deal!
~Lambo

Senate Considering Treaty That Could Affect Gun Rights
-- Ask your Senators to support the "Second Amendment Protection" Amendment

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.

[Shawn.L]

I actually just logged on to the site to post this very same thing. I will stop preaching to the choir here and go write my senator now.

from rejectlost.org

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.o...%20version.pdf

[Agent Smith]

Here's the typical reply I got from Specter:

Dear Mr. XXXXX :

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the Law of the Sea Convention .

I appreciate your taking the time to bring your views on this important matter to my attention. As a United States Senator, it is essential that I be kept fully informed on the issues of concern to my constituents. Be assured that I will keep your thoughts on national sovereignty in mind when the Senate considers this or related issues during the 110 th Congress.

The concerns of my constituents are of great importance to me, and I rely on you and other Pennsylvanians to inform me of your views. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact my office or visit my website at http://specter.senate.gov. Thank you again for writing.


Sincerely,

Arlen Specter