# Dorgan and 13 Dems Wanted US to Okay UN Gun Resolution



## BobHAJ (Sep 12, 2004)

A Gang of 14 Dems Wanted US to Okay UN Gun Resolution

Fourteen United States Senators, all Democrats, unsuccessfully asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for an affirmative vote on a United Nations (UN) resolution that may ultimately bring an international treaty to control small arms.

But their request went unheeded, and the United States was the only country voting against the non-binding resolution, which was approved 153-1 with 24 abstentions, according to Associated Press.

However, disclosure of the appeal gave gun rights activists a small hint of what may be on the horizon, now that Democrats have taken control of Congress for the first time in a dozen years. The new Congress begins in a few days, with left wing Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) taking over as Speaker of the House.

According to Amnesty International, the 14 senators who signed the letter, sent to Secretary Rice from the office of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) were: fellow Californian Barbara Boxer; Patrick Leahy and Jim Jeffords of Vermont; John Kerry from Massachusetts; Carl Levin of Michigan; Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey; Daniel Akaka from Hawaii; Dick Durbin of Illinois; *Byron Dorgan from North Dakota*; Barbara Mikulski of Maryland; Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico; Tom Harkin from Iowa, and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin.

All are consistent anti-gunners, even though Feingold said two years ago he had changed his opinion about the effectiveness of a ban on so-called assault weapons when that legislation came up for renewal.

Under the resolution, the UN secretary general will solicit the opinions of the General Assembly on the feasibility of an international treaty. Such an agreement would set standards for import and export of small arms, but Richard Grenell, a spokesman for the US delegation, said that such a standard "would be so far below what we are already required to do under US law that we had to vote against it in order to maintain our higher standards."

The resolution also asks the secretary-general to submit a report to the 2007 General Assembly, which convenes in September, AP reported. Reportedly, small arms commerce is a $4 billion annual industry, and about 25% of that involves illegal gun trafficking. These small arms reportedly are involved in 60 to 90% of fatalities in conflicts around the world every year, the AP story Press said.

Last year, American gun rights activists flooded the UN headquarters in New York with telephone calls and e-mails, angry about any attempt to pass a resolution that might ultimately affect the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. Activists have long feared that international treaties would be written in such a way as to nullify the individual right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment.

Gun rights organizations, including the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation, as well as firearms trade groups such as the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute have taken a keen interest in international gun control initiatives over the past few years.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Actually my guns are already registered in order to hunt in Canada.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

This post should perhaps be called "Backstabbed In DC". I ounce called Dorgan's office about a firearms related bill. The receptionist that answered started arguing with me. I told her I called to give my opinion, not to get hers, and that politicians are supposed to be our servants, not the other way around. Any politician who thinks otherwise should not be in office. I always blamed this encounter on the receptionist only, but now I see I was wrong.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Well............. from the way the new Democrat controlled House has bypassed all House procedures and rights of the congress on this first 100 hours agenda they are promoting, it is going to be a rough year for freedom. I think we can all get ready for the attempt of a lot of San Francisco values to be shoved down our throats. I sure had high hopes it wouldn't be that way, but&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Ken,
All your guns???????????? How about your rifles?????????????


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I think we can all get ready for the attempt of a lot of San Francisco values to be shoved down our throats.


No pun intended ???????????

If the news is correct you are right without a doubt. What really irritates me is the republicans are so pansy they can't act like winners when they do win, and democrats don't act like loosers when they do loose. When they do win they are absolutely overbearing. If Bush doesn't get that veto pen going I am going to be really ticked. If he doesn't I will loose significant respect for him.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

zogman said:


> Ken,
> All your guns???????????? How about your rifles?????????????


Only shotguns....but I could register my rifle if I wanted to since I have a PAL license.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Those of you who don't mind registering your freedom when it comes to second amendment, would you mind registering for the freedom of the first amendment.? I know this is a hyperbole, but indulge me for a moment. If republicans were in power and you had to register your mouth would you feel ok about that? After all some things that some people don't like come out of liberal and conservative mouths. My point is that it is ok to register for a privilege, but do you think it is ok to register for rights? Which ones, and which ones. The rights guaranteed by the first amendment, second amendment, which ones?

If you think the second amendment is different your already brain washed.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

> No pun intended ???????????


 :lol: Guess I'm really getting slow. It took 4 hours before that one sunk in.


----------



## BigDDL (Sep 29, 2004)

I'm hoping everyone emails Mr. Dorgan expressing their concern. For your convenience here is the email address. Be sure to include your name and address so he understands that it is ND residents complaining

[email protected] <[email protected]>


----------



## indsport (Aug 29, 2003)

Plainsman, laughed so hard I almost broke my mouse. The old logic problem, Everyone has a mouth (just look at this forum), but not everyone has a gun. It would take a lot more to register every mouth than to register every gun.

KenW also right. By argument, strict second amendment types should not hunt in Canada since they would not register their guns. Whats that? I will register my guns with Canada but not the US?

But then again, every child declared on income tax returns now has to have a social security number at birth, so all of you getting child exemptions on the 1040 already had to register your kid. Whats that? you don't mind registering your children but balk at registering your guns? Which is more important?

Okay, enough of this, my tongue is trying to push out of my cheek so don't turn on the flame throwers.


----------



## Dak (Feb 28, 2005)

Indsport...the mouth registration = SSN.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

8)


----------

