The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 25, 2010, 11:50 AM   #1
NightSight
Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Westminster, CO
Posts: 74
Initiative 42 - Colorado & UN Small Arms Treaty

I want to get opinions on the proposed UN Small Arms Treaty and how to stop it.

In Colorado, a group has started circulating petitions to get Initiative 42 on the ballot this November. The Initiative reads:

Quote:
The people of Colorado declare and request that all elected public officials in the state, including all state legislators, governor, attorney general, secretary of state, United States Representatives and United States Senators, oppose by all means available to them as elected officials the adoption or ratification of any United Nations treaty or other binding international agreement which impairs, restricts or regulates the right to keep and bear arms protected by section 13 of this Bill of Rights.
Now, I understand that this may not be legally binding, but it sends a strong political message about where the people of Colorado stand on this issue.

What do you all think??
__________________
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July; democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan
NightSight is offline  
Old March 25, 2010, 12:13 PM   #2
carguychris
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 5,375
Strong statement, yes, but as law, IMHO it's blatantly unconstitutional under Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution.
Quote:
Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

<snip snip second paragraph omitted>

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
(Emphasis mine)

By denying individual states the power to enter into treaties, agreements, or compacts with foreign powers, Section 10 implicitly gives this power to Congress alone, thereby denying a state government the power to unilaterally disobey such an instrument.

Several states may have recently passed self-exemptions from firearms-related interstate commerce restrictions, but the constitutionality of these laws is dependent on judicial interpretations of the Commerce Clause in Article 1, Section 8. IMHO Section 10 is far more cut-and-dried, making this proposed law plainly unconstitutional.

While supporting states' rights is commendable, support for clearly unconstitutional state laws IMHO is not, because it will leave gun-rights supporters vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy when we point to the Constitution to support our cause.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Old March 25, 2010, 01:12 PM   #3
NightSight
Member
 
Join Date: July 6, 2009
Location: Westminster, CO
Posts: 74
I see what you are saying; however, the intent of the bill is to declare and request that elected officials of Colorado do whatever in their power to oppose this treaty.
Quote:
oppose by all means available to them as elected officials
The Initiative does not state implicitly or explicitly that Colorado shall deem itself exempt from any binding treaty lawfully executed.

I do not believe that this Initiative violate the 10th amemdement to the United State Consitution. I believe that it does just what it says; it requests that Colorado elected officials oppose the UN Small Arms Treaty.
__________________
"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July; democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan
NightSight is offline  
Old March 25, 2010, 01:37 PM   #4
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
 
Join Date: April 26, 2002
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,649
Quote:
What do you all think?
Taxachussets, maybe; Colorado, no.
__________________
No tyrant should ever be allowed to die of natural causes.
Standing Wolf is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06346 seconds with 7 queries