Le ''UN Arms Trade Treaty'' conséquence aux Canada?

Bonjour

Depuis quelque temps dans les media Americain on entend beaucoup parler des lois international que l'ONU veut faire sur les armes a feu. Comme a l'habituel ici on en entend pas parler. J'ai fait quelque recherche sur le net et j'ai rien trouver relier aux Canada. Il parle beaucoup des USA et que Obama va le signer (c'est pas une grosse surprise) mais honnetement que Obama le signe ou pas je men fou un peu. Je vit aux Canada et j'aimerait sa savoir ce que Stephen Harper va faire avec sa?????

C'était supposer se finaliser hier (Vendredi le 27 Juillet)

Si quelqun a des nouvelles la dessus par rapport aux Canada et se que sa pourrait vouloir dire sur nos droits en tant que chasseur, tireur sportif ou collectioneur sa serait apprécier dans savoir un peu plus.

Merci

Comme toutes les conneries éructées par cet organisme, ça finit toujours en eau de boudin et ça contribue à des massacres quelque part...
L'ONU a depuis longtemps prouvé son incapacité à faire face à quoi que ce soit.
C'est un organisme inutile et souvent nuisible.
PP.

Au dernière nouvelle harper était contre disant que sa allait contre l'état de droit de chaque nation. La nfa et la cssa ont envoyer des intervenant au coté de la NRA.

NoReGreT a écrit:

appache a écrit:

Au dernière nouvelle harper était contre disant que sa allait contre l'état de droit de chaque nation. La nfa et la cssa ont envoyer des intervenant au coté de la NRA.

FAUX SEULE la NFA etais presente..... tout comme que la NFA etais la seule a deposé une demande en intervention contre l injonction du registre...au Quebec...

je ne sais pas ou tu vas chercher tes info, mes la CSSA etais present.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/03/21/foreign-affairs-arms-trade-treaty.html

Canada - -(Ammoland.com)- Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen and thank you for this opportunity to speak to you on a matter of such great concern for two million Canadians.

My name is Tony Bernardo and I am acting executive director of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association. I have been an executive member of the World Forum on the Future of Sport Shooting Activities since 1997 and have been attending and working at the United Nations since 1998 regarding civilian firearms issues. I have addressed the United Nations assembly four times.

As an association, The CSSA has no objection to the concept of a treaty on conventional weapons. Our concerns relate to the firearms that ordinary Canadians use every day. It is no secret that Canada has one of the most stringent set of controls on the ownership and use of firearms in the world.


Bluntly put, we don’t need any more.

And neither does the United Nations. Not if they are actually trying to do something. The civilian firearms issue is a very important topic to many nations. Moreover, some nations have constitutional protection regarding civilian firearms ownership, protections that prohibit their involvement in any initiative that might undermine those constitutional protections. The issue of civilian firearms is, truthfully, a no-win that should be avoided at all costs if there is to be any hope of a functional treaty.

However, in my conversations with members of delegations from countries less developed than Canada, I am told that civilian firearms are almost never a problem. Most people understand the real issue is the proliferation of exclusively military weapons being illegally sold by countries with less than scrupulous motives. Have there been deaths? Yes, or course, but perhaps not as you might think. 56 million defenceless people have died in genocides in the last 100 years, almost all of them murdered by their own governments.

The inclusion of civilian firearms, called “small arms” at the UN, into the former Firearms Protocol, vitually caused the collapse of the entire UN process and left that project in a state of utter failure. In fact, one of the few things that ever came from the Firearms Protocol were the Canadian Firearms Marking Regulations, an unmitigated disaster at best. For those that are unfamiliar with the Marking regulations, permit me a brief explanation.

The UN marking regulations were passed into law in 2004 and as is typical of those days, Firearms importers were never consulted prior to the regulations being introduced. The Chretien, Martin and Harper governments have successively delayed the implementation since then. Why is an obvious question?

Members of the Canadian firearms industry conducted an exhaustive study and concluded the marking requirement was impossible to comply with. An international study reached the same conclusion. Participants in this represent Browning, Remington, Beretta, Sako, Savage Arms, Tikka, Uberti, Norinco, Ruger, Glock, Smith & Wesson, Heckler & Koch, and several others.


These respectable and reputable companies flatly stated that if this was implemented in Canada, they would simply close their Canadian operations, devastating a legitimate billion dollar industry and putting thousands of Canadians on the unemployment rolls.

These are the consequences of domestic legislation being developed by international forums with little or no understanding of the ramifications of their undertakings. An initiative, started to theoretically ease violence in the world desperate regions, instead causes unemployment and financial hardship in peace-loving Canada.

We have been assured that the position of the Canadian government is that civilian firearms must not be included within the scope of the Arms Trade Treaty and indeed, the language of the pre-amble makes clear the government of Canada’s intention to have civilian firearms regulated domestically, not internationally. Our support for the treaty process and the government of Canada’s participation in this process, remains contingent upon this stated intention being upheld at all levels. Civilian firearms must be regulated donestically, taking into consideration political, constitutional and social factors inherent in each nation’s makeup. In this instance, the one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work at all.

In other words, members of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association are saying that there is no good use for overriding one nation’s rules based on the demands and needs of another UN state’s requirements being applied to all other states, without regard for each parties’ national jurisdiction and legislation. Again, national discretion and jurisdiction should and must prevail. The rules for civilian possession of small arms in one country do not necessarily make sense, nor are they useful in another country.

It must also be stated that we have seen no evidence that this position has changed in any way and we strongly encourage the government to stay the course and protect the rights of Canadian citizens first before attempting to agree with having an international body regulate what is completely within the purview of Canadian national discretion and jurisdiction.

Article two of the UN Charter specifically states that “there is nothing in the charter “authorizing the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state”


Having one set of rules for the use of such items in all countries would be most counterproductive, and presumably unacceptable to the UN principle of national discretion and jurisdiction.

About:
The CSSA is the voice of the sport shooter and firearms enthusiast in Canada. Our national membership supports and promotes Canada’s firearms heritage, traditional target shooting competition, modern action shooting sports, hunting, and archery. We support and sponsor competitions and youth programs that promote these Canadian heritage activities. Website www.cdnshootingsports.org


Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/06/13/cssa-executive-director-speaks-frankly-to-the-un-regarding-the-foolish-arms-trade-treaty/#ixzz242VrcrsB

The office of Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird ordered last-minute changes to Canada's position on an international arms treaty, as well as to its delegation to meetings at United Nations headquarters, CBC News has learned.

According to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, the minister's office ignored advice from the department and ordered civil servants to invite Steve Torino, president of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA), to meetings that ran from July 11-15, 2011, in New York City. The CSSA is an organization that represents thousands of firearms enthusiasts.

The goal of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is to set common standards for the import, export and trade of all conventional weapons in order to prevent illicit or irresponsible transfers of weapons that would fuel conflict, encourage terrorism or organized crime.

The original list of delegates to ATT preparatory meetings included 10 employees from Foreign Affairs and National Defence but not Torino.

Roster changed

In a June 8, 2011, email to colleagues working on the treaty, the head of Canada's delegation, Habib Massoud, said Gordon Cameron from the minister's office gave him notice to expect a last-minute change to the roster — something that had evidently occurred before.

"Like last time, if we are instructed by (the ministers office) to include Mr. Torino on the delegation list we would, of course, do as we are instructed," Massoud wrote. He added that he had informed Cameron that not including Torino was "our best advice."

Ken Epps is with the disarmament group Project Ploughshares in Waterloo, Ont., and has taken part in previous delegations to UN conferences on arms control.

"This is setting a different precedent from what had been the standard procedures prior to that where there had always been a balance on the delegation from the NGO (non-governmental organization) side," he said.

Hélène Laverdière, the NDP's foreign affairs critic and a former diplomat, agreed.

"We can see that what they suggested was thrown aside and politicized, you know, politics replaced good management and that's what we see with this government all the time," she said.

'Minister's prerogative

Chris Day, Baird's director of communications, said that is not true.

"As has always been the case for international meetings, the composition of Canadian delegations to this type of international gathering is the minister's prerogative and responsibility," Day said.

Tony Bernardo, executive director of CSSA, said that "the inclusion of Mr. Torino was in recognition that there is a legitimate sporting arms industry in Canada and Mr. Torino provides valuable input as to the potential impact the actions of the Canadian delegation could have on Canadian citizens."

Subsequent correspondence also shows the minister's office ordered last-minute changes to Canada's long-standing position on the treaty.

Canada did make a significant new proposal at the international conference, to exclude all hunting and sporting weapons from the agreement.

The change attracted heaps of scorn. Countries including Nigeria, Brazil, Australia and Mexico publicly opposed the suggestion.

Epps, who attended last summer's conference on his own, said the newly released documents have "confirmed that the gun lobby in Canada is having a significant impact on Canadian foreign policy."

Canada simply wants a treaty that in addition to establishing international standards for transferring arms, "respects the legal trade in arms, including the legitimate trade or use of hunting and sporting firearms," Day said.

Laverdière called Canada's new position an embarrassment.

"Canada, who was at the forefront of many international agreements for arms control, is now the country which is trying to weaken those agreements."

A final meeting to hammer out and ratify the Arms Trade Treaty is due to take place in July 2012.

NoReGreT a écrit:

et j imagine que c est pas vrai non plus que le NFA a posé une action pour l injonction au QC ????

il y en a un paquet qui se font endormir ici,,,,

non, mais cette intervention etais inutile puisqu'il est important de mentionner et de preciser que leur demande a ete fais apres l'audiance et ceci un vice de procedure, cet peut etre toi que te fais endormire.

sheldon clare est un homme.

Surtout d'une personne qui avait le drapeau anarcho communiste, Dernièrement...

Les étudiants sont retourné en classe sa te fait chier la petite révolutions est terminée.

Les briques dans le metro s'est pas assez un ti gun de temps en temps sa serait utile..

Les années 70 sont terminées, s'est plus romantique d'appuyer les commies et autres rapaces

appache a écrit:

Surtout d'une personne qui avait le drapeau anarcho communiste, Dernièrement...

Les étudiants sont retourné en classe sa te fait chier la petite révolutions est terminée.

Les briques dans le metro s'est pas assez un ti gun de temps en temps sa serait utile..

Les années 70 sont terminées, s'est plus romantique d'appuyer les commies et autres rapaces

?????????

Une autre personne qui dénonce mais qui avait le drapeau des anarchiste allié au communiste.. Pour moi même si on oublis les armes que les commies interdisaent.. on comprend le reste.. La révolte des carré rouge s'était eux derrière.

la même gauchiasse qui plus haut nous tombe dessus sur tout.

De ton ancienne image..

ca se change une image mais le slogan du québec est : Je me souviens.

NoReGreT a écrit:

ok mon appache ,,je t es vu la,, tu veux en venir ou avec tes niaiserie ?



la CSSA ne peux pas representer les canadiens, elle est meme pas reconnu ONG


il on du se cacher en arriere des autre.......car il on pas de status,,,,,,ONG

hahaha, tu me fais bien rire, cet tu aux moins ce qui ces passer la bas, la NFA a delivrer leur revendication et non meme pas participer au debas, une belle representation, j'aime mieux l'approche que la CSSA a fais, meme sans avoir le status ONG, ils on ete capable de participer au debat et eux on delivrer le message Canadian sur le sujet des arme a feu. depuis que Dave Tomlinson est deceder l'approche de la NFA est devenue tellement drastique que les gouvernement ne veulent meme pas discuter avec eux, je ne dit pas que la NFA n'est pas une bonne organisation, mes elle ne represent pas ce que je veux, car une aproche sur le niveau sociau doit etre fait avec du tac et de l'inteligence, si tu regarde aux esembler de C-19, la CSSA a marquer les plus grand point.

en passent je t'encouragerai a aller ecouter Canadian Reload Radio Episode, ils on fais un entrevue avec les president des d'eux organisation.

NoReGreT a écrit:

je respecte ton choix,,, reste qu il flirt avec harper,,,,c est la seul facon qu il reussise a se faire voir....... car il sont pas reconnu....

on a vu se que ca fait au QC avec la FQT

un groupe qui represente des gens ne doit pas a couche avec les politiciens,, pas une facon de faire,, car les gouvernement change....

j ai rien a faire des paroles , ca prend des geste , action..

mon opinion..

on peut bien voir ici que tu ne connais rien a ce que tu dit, tu parle d'action, quelle action que la NFA a pris qui a fais avancer les chose??????

et pour le gouvernement tu saurra que la CSSA n'est pas subventionner par le gouvernement et de faire de telle suposition est une insulte enver les membre qui travail benevolement pour que tu gagne du terrain sur les loi qui nous donne tlellement de restriction.

la CSSA a ete demander par le gouvernement pour aller les representer, car ils on compris que Steve et Tony sont des expert en la matiere et ceci nous a permis d'etre entendu a l'ONU , pas comme la NFA qui n'a fais que delivrer leur message au delegue canadian et apres ficher le camps.

et pour ce qui est de l'alliance avec le gouvernement, je peux te dire que les conservateur sont tres bien au courrant que la journer ou il vont trahir l'association il vont perdre leur allier de la communauter des arme a feu.

pour etre capable de gagner du terrain sur le sujet des arme a feu , nous devons devenir des polititien pour gagner du terrain, car la methode drastique ne fonctionne plus dans ce beau pays.