ShareThis Page
Editorials

U.N. Watch: Gun treaty still D.O.A.

| Sunday, Oct. 2, 2016, 6:33 p.m.

Hope springs eternal among gun-grabbing interests that the Obama administration somehow will get the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty through the Senate.

At the Second Conference of State Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty in August, the U.S. representative said America still wants to ratify the accord, signed by Secretary of State John Kerry in 2013, The Daily Signal reports. But the treaty, which critics say could provide the rationalization for a national gun registry, has met stiff opposition. After Mr. Kerry signed it, 50 senators penned a letter to President Obama opposing the pact as being “vague and easily politicized.”

Since then nothing has changed.

Oh, Mexico's secretary of foreign affairs told the U.N. gathering that “more than 70 percent” of the guns used to commit crimes in Mexico are tied to U.S. buyers or distributors. Even if so, that doesn't warrant the treaty's ratification when there are existing U.S. laws to address that specific complaint.

Namely, the Gun Control Act of 1968 along with the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 give the executive branch control over the shipment of weapons in and out of the U.S., notes Ted Bromund, a senior research fellow with The Heritage Foundation.

The U.N. Arms Trade Treaty remains today what it was three years ago — a nonstarter. And eventually, as Mr. Bromund points out, “The gun controllers will lose interest and find another toy.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me