As many of you may know, Representative Paul Ryan and Senator Patty Murray recently worked out a deal on a government budget for the next two years. They are calling it the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, and it is being trumpeted as a wonderful compromise. Obviously, in a compromise, neither party gets everything they want. Some things are necessarily sacrificed in order to reach an agreement with the opposition. With that being said, there are a few principles that must never be sacrificed or compromised for the sake of a temporary agreement. The 2nd Amendment is one of those things.
In seeking a compromise with the Democrats over a budget deal, it would appear that Rep. Ryan willingly sacrificed a number of Deficit Neutral Reserve Funds. These Deficit Neutral Reserve Funds are basically principled stands for public consumption that are added into budget deals and Concurrent Resolutions, or CR’s. They hold no actual funds, rather they serve as placeholders for future legislation, and give said legislation something of a jumpstart in the procedural process, provided this future legislation does not add significantly to the deficit, i.e. is “paid for” by tax increases or expense cutting. In the temporary CR that was passed in mid-October to end the government shutdown, there were 84 such Reserve Funds staking out principles, ideals and future plans. The budget deal worked out between Ryan and Murray trimmed that number down to 58 Reserve Funds in Subtitle B, Section 114, Parts (c) and (d).
Two of the Deficit Neutral Reserve Funds that were cancelled in the deal dealt with the 2nd Amendment, and their cancellation could place our gun rights at risk. Located in House Con Res 25, Title III, Section 382 established a Deficit Neutral Reserve Fund to ensure that the United States will not negotiate or support treaties that violate American’s 2nd Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States. Section 384 established a Deficit Neutral Reserve Fund to uphold 2nd Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. Both of these principled stands that explicitly protect our natural right to keep and bear arms from foreign interference were sacrificed for the sake of a temporary budget deal. The door has been opened for the Obama administration or some of his agencies to begin implementation of aspects of the UN Arms Trade Treaty, with a false claim that nothing directly prohibits them from doing so.
Many would argue that the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty is nothing to worry about. That is not the case, as I detail here, showing how it subjugates the sovereignty of Americans to international bureaucracy and seeks to overrule our 2nd Amendment. They will say that it can never be adopted or implemented, and point to the supremacy clause of the Constitution, located in Article 6, Section 2, which trumps all treaties. In theory I would agree, but the reality is this current administration and bureaucracy shows little or no regard to the Constitution in numerous other matters. So, why would anyone expect them to obey their Constitutional limitations in this particular instance?
Our 2nd Amendment right is always at risk. Those who seek to limit our access to firearms and ammunition or to disarm us will never stop in their attempts at gun control. We must remain ever vigilant of their assault on our rights.
If you liked this article, please let me know by commenting or sharing. Check out some of my other articles in the suggested links. You can click the subscribe button to receive an email alert whenever new articles are published. I can also be found on Facebook and Freepatriot.org. Thank you for reading.