In response to:

Will the Arms Trade Treaty Suppress Second Amendment Rights?

John1052 Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 10:01 AM
Yes, all treaties must not only be ratified by Congress, it takes a 2/3 majority to ratify them. This will never happen, so stop crying wolf.
David70 Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 8:14 AM
That would be the Senate, the House does not vote on treaties.
justme16 Wrote: Nov 14, 2012 12:08 PM
And, if it is NEVER brought to the floor for a vote, then the TREATY is automatically invoked until such time as it is voted down. That is the rest of the story. Ergo, this bogus (ILLEGAL) treaty and law will take effect simply because as with other things oh such as say the legal requirement to pass a budget, the Senate will simply NOT vote on it because it will never be brought to the floor for a vote. GAME OVER. The only way this can take effect is if the dumbed down masses bow down the the imperial power of the goverment. In my case I envoke Charlton Heston's ideology "FROM MY COLD DEAD FINGERS".
bhirsh Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 12:20 PM
Yes, this, exactly. It is pro forma. It will be applied as if it had been ratified, and it will take many court actions filed piecemeal to obstruct it at all, presuming the courts would be amenable to interfere with the "political question". That (and standing) seems to be the courts' escape hatch when they don't want to be forced to rule on issues with which they are politically sympathetic.

Not good. Best to avoid it altogether.

The first round of UN Arms Trade Treaty talks may have fallen apart at the month-long conference held in NYC this past July, but as Ted Bromund over at Heritage noted at the time, “Now that the concept of the ATT has been invented, it cannot be uninvented. There are too many countries and too many left-wing nongovernmental organizations that want a treaty.” He was right and as Katie reported last week, it didn’t take very long to initiate another attempt. One question she raised in her post deserves more attention: “Is the argument from the U.N. that...