August 30, 2013
In a development that would limit our sovereignty and the rights of American citizens, the Obama administration has announced it will sign the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty once it has been translated into all official U.N. languages.
Even though the treaty would not have been ratified by the Senate, the government would consider itself obliged not to violate the treaty’s object and purpose. This despite the fact that the treaty simply won’t work at controlling the weapons trade.
In a recent report, Heritage Foundation expert Ted Bromund lists the top 10 reasons why we should avoid this dangerous position and not sign the ATT.
Why is signing so dangerous? Among other things, because it will limit our freedoms. Bromund explains:
The ATT is already intermingled with other U.N. institutions, several of which the U.S. has long been skeptical about on Second Amendment grounds, including the Programme of Action on Small Arms and the International Small Arms Control Standards. As a recent statement by the U.N. Secretary General put it, the U.N. sees a “synergistic relationship” between the ATT and these other institutions and expects the ATT “to lend strong impetus” to their implementation.The coming years are likely to see an incremental, interpretive convergence between the ATT and these institutions in ways that will be difficult to monitor, much less control.
Do you think the U.S. should have signed the ATT?