Moran: 2nd Amendment Rights not Negotiable

U.S. Senator Jerry Moran hasmoran introduced a concurrent resolution co-sponsored by 28 of his Senate colleagues which outlines specific criteria that must be met for a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to be ratified by the U.S. Senate and recognized as customary international law. On Monday, March 18, 2013, the Obama Administration will continue its reversal of the policies of both President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush and engage in a new round of negotiations of the U.N. ATT in New York. The companion resolution was introduced today in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA).

“We must avoid a situation where the Administration, due to its continued willingness to negotiate, feels pressured to sign a treaty that violates our constitutional rights,” Sen. Moran said. “It is now clear that Congress must reiterate its concerns with the latest draft of the treaty, and I am pleased to be leading this effort once again with Congressman Kelly.”

The current ATT treaty text undermines the Constitutional freedoms of American gun owners and does not exempt civilian firearms from its scope or recognize the inherent right to self-defense. If the ATT is supposed to be concerned only with the international trade in conventional weapons, Sen. Moran believes it needs to exempt domestic, civilian firearm ownership and use from its scope, as governed by national laws and constitutions.

Additionally, a near-universal treaty like the ATT will reward dictatorships with privileges that should be reserved for sovereign democracies. Because the U.N. includes every nation in the world, it is not a suitable instrument for negotiating substantive treaties on a subject as profoundly divisive as control over the means of national defense.

“If the ATT could work, it would not be necessary,” Sen. Moran said. “There is no reason to believe the ATT will succeed where past U.N. Security Council Arms Embargoes have failed. Smothering the world with law will not affect nations who choose not to respect the treaty, or are too ill-governed to enforce it.”

  • Matthew

    The right to bear arms is an individual right, and it cannot be granted by the US government.

    The founders did not trust the newly created government with that right and purposely omitted it from the enumerated rights. But the People were not satisfied, and they got together all across our nation and voted on an amendment to be added that would bar ALL types of Arms laws – It was voted on, passed, and the amendment was added to the Constitution itself.

    Laws that regulate arms cannot be made, they were forbidden and ARE forbidden. We forbade them.

    These politicians think that the right is a privilege to be doled out and banned at will, on any whim, and to any degree, and that is not true. A RIGHT is a legal, ethical, and moral title or claim to the possession of property and/or authority – and we possess the only authority to regulate guns, and that is on an individual basis. That authority is not granted to the state, and can not be granted to the state unless the people are polled, and 3/4 of the Citizens of the United States agree to grant that right, and what those limits are.

    ALL laws, from the city made laws to the federal laws that regulate guns and arms in general are illegitimate. What that means is that they are moot, and have no foundation in law. Even the cases from the Supreme Court are moot because the court was never granted jurisdiction over this right. The right belongs to the people, and not to the government.

    A few days ago, I saw a video on Youtube where a city council was taking comments before they passed a gun ban. I saw men and women who already posses a right stand in front of a podium and plead with a dozen government officers to be allowed to keep the right. It made me sick. The right does not belong to the government to take away, and all laws they make are invalid.

    A Right is defined as…

    The standard of permitted or forbidden action within a certain sphere; The Legal Ethical and Moral Title or claim to the possession of property or authority; That which we have a personal obligation; The title to something properly possessed by a person; What one may properly claim, one’s due.

    A Title is defined as…

    To Designate by a certain name – to describe, term, style, name, and call and action, or property.

    A privilege is defined as…

    A special right granted to a person or people which otherwise would be disallowed or illegal.

    We own the right. We own the name of the right. We own the right to exercise that right by the terms we set. We own the entire sphere of arms rights. We own the sole authority of the right. We own the obligation to regulate ourselves of face the penalties of our actions. It is our due, and it is ours, lock, stock and barrel.

    It is not a privilege to be banned, regulated, and limited. Any politician who agrees to limits on this right have committed a crime against the people of the United States, and have violated their oath of office to abide the Constitution – INCLUDING the limits imposed on the government and it’s agents by us, the People.

    The right is an individual right, individual to me, and individual to you. We both, collectively and separately have the responsibility of our own actions – and if we violate the law with our right to bear arms, then we individually should stand for those crimes. That is the burden we bear for keeping this right to ourselves, and the responsibility we bear for those who violate the trust placed in them by the People and by our founders. While you may punish people who have violated the laws, you may never punish someone before they commit a crime simply because they might.