The UN Small Arms Treaty This page was last modified: December 28 2014 11:36:36.

Download PDF: UN Small Arms Treaty

There is no reasonable doubt that the UN Small Arms Treaty does violate the U S Constitution, and President Obama is absolutely wrong to sign it.

This is not a complex argument. The 2nd Amendment says: "the right of the people" - not men, or militia members; "to keep and bear" - not just to own; "arms" - not only hunting or self-defense guns; and "shall not be infringed".

The last phrase is key. If you want to restrict gun ownership, amend the Constitution to allow it; as written, there are no restrictions.

A key point to be made here is the export/import application to the 2nd Amendment. Restricting exports doesn't infringe on our rights to gun ownership, it restricts the rights of non-Americans, those in other countries. But restricting imports does infringe.

Reasons to be concerned about the UN Small Arms Treaty:

Article 2 states:

Article 3 regulates the export of ammunition.

Article 4 regulates the export of parts.

Article 5 states:

UN Small Arms Treaty conclusion:

The UN Small Arms Treaty is not an honest attempt to create world peace. If it applied only to larger military weapons, such as planes, warships, tanks, etc, we could reasonably give the United Nations the benefit of the doubt. But with the vague wording, as well as the inclusion of "small arms and light weapons", and specific encouragement to "apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms", and, finally, the exemption for arms that "remain under that State Party's ownership", the only reasonable conclusion is the creation of a Police State. This Treaty restricts civilian arms sales while exempting government sales, and consolidating all control under the United Nations Secretariat.

This is a fairly transparent attempt at consolidation of power under the UN, vs individual national sovereignty.

The UN Small Arms Treaty website.