Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading

[DiveGerry]

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/...ertid=13188856

Action Alert
Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading
-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place Suite 102
Springfield VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
Tuesday, April 21, 2009


Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who "wasn't going to take away our guns"?

Well, guess what?

Less than 100 days into his administration, he's never met a gun he didn't hate.

A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn't have the political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that didn't keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun owners.

It's called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title masks a really nasty piece of work.

First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the "illicit" manufacture of firearms, what does that mean?

1. "Illicit manufacturing" of firearms is defined as "assembly of firearms [or] ammunition... without a license...."

Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a kit -- is clearly "illicit manufacturing."

Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be "illicit manufacturing." And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition of "illicit manufacturing."

2. "Firearm" has a similarly questionable definition.

"[A]ny other weapon" is a "firearm," according to the treaty -- and the term "weapon" is nowhere defined.

So, is a BB gun a "firearm"? Probably.

A toy gun? Possibly.

A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.

If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some of the other provisions in the treaty:

* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to adopting "necessary legislative or other measures" to criminalize illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.

Remember that "illicit manufacturing" includes reloading and modifying or assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the basis of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases.

* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized acts should include "association or conspiracy" in connection with said offenses -- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.

* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to "adopt such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention" under a variety of circumstances.

We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico to define offenses "committed in its territory" in a very broad way. And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX of the proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the treaty to demand to extradition of American gun dealers.

Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute through "other means of peaceful settlement."

Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this provision in a pro-gun manner?

* Microstamping. Article VI requires "appropriate markings" on firearms. And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which are not technologically possible or which are possible only at a prohibitively expensive cost.

* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any records, for a "reasonable time," that the government determines to be necessary to trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly repeal portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to require a national registry or database.

ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

Please use the Take Action feature below to send your Senators a pre-written e-mail message.



Take Action

[son of the revolution]

Old news

http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/5...-database.html

http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/5...t-came-up.html

http://forum.pafoa.org/national-11/56304-cifta.html

[autotech6506]

please do a search before you start more fear mongering

[BerksCountyDave]

Two threads started by this guy now along these lines. . . WTF?

[jmiro]

my thoughts exactly............

[Burton]

Probably an ammo dealer.

[Karma8541]

please do a search before you start more fear mongering

To the OP "Google is your Friend" try using it b4 posting. Because i bet ya all your firearms,That whatever you post. Has already been posted a while back. Google will pull up where and im betting it will be on PAFOA..

Semper Fi,

[Mtbkski]

Guys.... No smart remarks needed. Just ignore it and go someplace else. When are you guys going to learn this. The mods can merge or get rid of it if they want to. That isn't your job to be the thread police.

Your smart ass answers do more to keep new people from joining this forum than anything else. Why would you join this forum when you run the fear of posting something and having a bunch of old heads jump down your throat cause it was already posted.

Everyone knows the search feature sucks here. So, quit telling them to use it.

Just don't respond to it. It won't get bumped back to the top. And it will fade away like it should.

[bert]

please do a search before you start more fear mongering

I agree! If it is true, it won't get far even with a Democratic Congress? I'd hope.

[jmiro]

Guys.... No smart remarks needed. Just ignore it and go someplace else. When are you guys going to learn this. The mods can merge or get rid of it if they want to. That isn't your job to be the thread police.

Your smart ass answers do more to keep new people from joining this forum than anything else. Why would you join this forum when you run the fear of posting something and having a bunch of old heads jump down your throat cause it was already posted.

Everyone knows the search feature sucks here. So, quit telling them to use it.

Just don't respond to it. It won't get bumped back to the top. And it will fade away like it should.

I have to disagree and agree. Most behavior is learned by observing others. Thats how I found myself knowing what was expected here. There is quite a bit of policing done in between members rather than mods. Its like the saying "the immates run the prison". Yes the gaurds (in this case the mods) police the place but it is up to the immates (users, members what ever you want to call them to police it by calling people on stuff and demonstrating behavior.

I do agree the search sucks and am not a fan of that oneliner.

I feel that one of the great things about this forum is that the "old heads" do set the expectations and there isnt alot of crap on here. Thats the reason I stick around.

My 2 cent