Fairfax, Va –-(Ammoland.com)- Yesterday, four members of the U.S. Senate sent a letter to President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and the United Nations with the clear message that the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty will not be ratified.
Earlier this year, the U.N. adopted and President Obama directed Secretary Kerry to sign this treaty, which does not exclude civilian arms from its scope and therefore directly threatens the Second Amendment.
“This letter sends a clear message to President Obama and Secretary Kerry that the Arms Trade Treaty will not receive the 67 votes in the U.S. Senate necessary for ratification,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action.
“On behalf of our 5 million members, the NRA would like to thank those who signed this letter for their principled stand in defending the Second Amendment freedoms of all law-abiding Americans against this attempt by the U.N. to undermine American sovereignty.”
Sens. Jon Tester (D-MT), Max Baucus (D-MT), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), and Joe Donnelly (D-IN) sent a letter to President Barack Obama saying, “because of unaddressed concerns that this Treaty’s obligations could undermine our nation’s sovereignty and the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans, we would oppose the Treaty if it were to come before the U.S. Senate.”
This joins the bipartisan effort of 50 fellow Senators and 181 members of the U.S. House who sent letters to the President stating their opposition to the ATT earlier this month.
About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org
The partisan Congress passed Obamacare. Obama then stepped in and executed directives that waived the law for a favored few. He decided to whom the law would apply and when. Nothing in the law or the Constitution that gives him any authority to do so, so one would think that would make his directives null and void but the government is acting as though he has that authority. If he can decide to whom a law does not apply, then he can as easily decide to whom a non-law does appply. Congress has rendered itself irrelevent in failing to hold… Read more »