A treaty being worked out this month at the United Nations could possibly make the Second Amendment the focus of international legal scrutiny.
Throughout the rest of this month, U.N. officials will continue international talks to work out the final language to be included in a so-called Arms Trade Treaty. The global agreement, that is supposedly an effort to fight international “terrorism,” “insurgency” and “crime syndicates,” has been actively engaged by the Administration of President Barack Obama.
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said of the treaty, “Our goal is clear: a robust and legally binding Arms Trade Treaty that will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence…It is ambitious, but it is achievable.”
The specifics of the treaty have not been revealed, but involving the U.S. in such an agreement could have an impact on millions of Second Amendment-loving Americans by infringing upon their right to bear arms.
The National Rifle Association has been following the development of the Arms treaty for six years, since the George W. Bush Administration opposed a U.N. resolution that would have yielded similar results. NRA Executive President Wayne LaPierre recently addressed the U.N. regarding the issue and promised a fight from American gun owners:
On behalf of those 100 million American gun owners, I am here to announce NRA’s strong opposition to anti-freedom policies that disregard American citizens’ right to self-defense.
No foreign influence has jurisdiction over the freedoms our Founding Fathers guaranteed to us.
We will not stand idly by while international organizations, whether state-based or stateless, attempt to undermine the fundamental liberties that our men and women in uniform have fought so bravely to preserve – and on which our entire American system of government is based.
…On behalf of all NRA members and American gun owners, we are here to announce that we will not tolerate any attack – from any entity or organization whatsoever – on our Constitution or our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
LaPierre and other critics of the treaty contend that the stated purpose of eliminating “terrorism,” “insurgency” and “crime syndicates” focuses on individual ownership of firearms, but does nothing to regulate armed tyrannical governments. This, many people argue, sets the stage for the status quo to achieve world totalitarianism with no chance of rebellion.