• Enact internationally agreed licensing requirements for Americans.
• Confiscate and destroy unauthorized firearms of Americans while allowing the US government to keep theirs.
• Ban trade, sale and private ownership of semi-automatic guns.
• Create and mandate an international registry to organize an encompassing gun confiscation in America.

In 2011, the UN’s General Assembly recognized “that disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation are essential”, meaning citizens could no longer own firearms if there were to be peace in the world.

However, the UN sees the armory of governments as an “effective national control”. To ensure the UN is able to take gun rights away from every citizen in every country they have devised this treaty to influence “national legislation, regulations and procures on the transfer of arms, military equipment and dual-use goods and technology” for the maintenance of international peace and security.

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

With the support of NGOs and lobbyists that claim to be supporting human rights, national leaders from Britain, Mexico, France and Germany are pushing for the IACT to ban the sale of any weapons to individuals who are likely to use them for the purpose of causing human rights abuses. In other words, the UN wants to disarm every citizen in every nation so that fighting back is not an option.

Russia, China, Iran, Cuba and Pakistan are opposed to the IACT. The clause for inclusion of components and ammunition need to be taken out of the treaty, say these nations.

The UN has estimated that the global arms trade is responsible for the deaths of300,000 people annually. This is their justification for disarming the world.

Syria is a focus of the talks between delegates, as they see the nation to be a thorn in their side. By blaming Assad, they are asserting that “somehow we have to come away with a treaty that stops regimes like [the Syrian President, Bashar] al-Assad’s from re-arming while they continue to kill their own people,” according to one diplomat.

While the UN supports the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and their violent attempts to remove Assad from power, there is little talk of the conflict of interest. The UN has been very vocal about their desire to assist the regime change in Syria, as the US is arming and training the FSA in camps in Turkey, Assad’s government is criticized as being part of the problem of the international arms trade.

James Brevan, an arms investigator for Conflict Armament Research, says the UNGAT will only be successful if it is fully implemented. All nations must sign on and use the UN as their guide to disarm their citizens. Brevan believes that the UN can control gun ownership in ways that individual nations cannot.

Kate Allen, director of Amnesty International in the UK, says that, “there are more effective controls on the trade in bananas than on the global arms trade.” Allen is admonishing the UN for its relaxed stance on global gun control in the past and forcing the ideal that the UN ensure that “there’s no compromise on this key principle: no weapons should be transferred to governments and people where there is a substantial risk they may be used to commit human rights violations. Anything less would render this treaty woefully inadequate.”

In the US, President Obama has been pushing the US Congress to ratify a version of the IACT called the Small Arms Treaty (SAT).

Forty-four Senators, including Jerry Moran have warned Obama not to continue with his support of SAT.

The Obama administration, in an attempt to appear coy, agreed to sign only if other states agreed to as well. Yet many Senators, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and pro-gun advocates perceive IACT as the first step in international gun control and will not abide by while Obama gives the UN over-reaching power to destroy our 2nd Amendment and our Constitutional Republic.

A final version of SAT, which is based on IACT will be drafted by 2013.

Chris Cox, the NRA’s top lobbyist, explains: “As we have for the past 15 years, the NRA will fight to stop a United Nations Arms Trade Treaty that infringes on the Constitutional rights of American gun owners.” Cox feels that Senators like Moran “sends a clear message to the international bureaucrats who want to eliminate our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms. Clearly, a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty that includes civilian arms within its scope is not supported by the American people or their elected U.S. Senators. Senator Moran is a true champion of our freedom. We are grateful for his leadership and his tenacious efforts on this issue, as well as the 44 other senators who agree with the NRA’s refusal to compromise on our constitutional freedoms.”