Quote:
KyJim, if all it took was a treaty, then why hasn't CIFTA been ratified? It's already signed.
Thallub is correct, IMO.
|
Obviously, it would have to be ratified before taking effect. I'm not saying it's going to happen. We have to keep on top of such things so that it doesn't happen. The antis have launched a broad, but subtle approach. They tried an EPA reg. They've championed two treaties which include provisions for arms control. They have successfully, for the time being, increased tracking of multiple long arm purchases in some states.
Arguably, a great deal of these actions would not violate the 2A as it stands today. Yet, when a bunch of restrictions are added together, it can cause a significant crimp in the ability to own and shoot firearms.