U.N Small Arms Treaty

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by FLY, Mar 7, 2011.

  1. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Forgive me if this has been covered, but I couldn't find it anywhere. The Obama administration, through Hillary, has been pushing the U.N. to finish a bill, ( U.N. Small Arms Treaty ), on banning semi-auto weapons and making mandatory registration of all other guns. This bill is being moved along so as to be up for signing by 2012, before any new elections can interfere. It is my understanding that after the U.S. signs the bill it has to be ratified by 2/3s of the Senate and it will be the law of the land. OPINIONS? / OTHER INFO?
     
  2. mapleleafer8

    mapleleafer8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    10,349
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Omg Omg Go To Your Respective Walmarts And Arm Yourselves

    Dey're Taking Are Guns Eway
     
  3. mapleleafer8

    mapleleafer8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    10,349
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Fly, let me ask you, do you think all guns should be registered?
     
  4. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If they're registered dey knose whe ta finds um when they want to pick them up!
     
  5. mapleleafer8

    mapleleafer8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    10,349
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    so, are you against it or not?
     
  6. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That would be a yes.
     
  7. devilsadvocate

    devilsadvocate New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    688
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    the senators who vote for that bill will be essentially voting themselves out of office, and I think they realize that.
     
  8. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Unfortunately that didn't seem to bother them when they voted on ObamaCare. Aside from all the other evils of registration, I'm sure if they got their way there would be a registration fee on each gun which would rise each year until you couldn't afford them anymore. Maybe that's the plan...
     
  9. zuiu

    zuiu New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Voting on this would be political suicide.
     
  10. devilsadvocate

    devilsadvocate New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    688
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Obamacare is a different topic. I really do not think that there are that many who have an agenda.
     
  11. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ayuh,... This is just another attempt by the Liberal Progressives to do an endrun around Our Constitution...

    Nothing more,...
    Nothing less....
     
  12. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Feb 2, 2011
    Last Friday, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) sent a letter to the ATF stating that his office had "received numerous allegations that the ATF sanctioned the sale of hundreds of assault weapons to suspected straw purchasers, who then allegedly transported these weapons throughout the Southwest border area and into Mexico."


    Could this have been the prelude to the , " You never want a serious crisis to go to waste", scenario, where the solution would have been the passage of the U.N. small arms treaty? Blame gun-dealers on the border of selling assault weapons to drug dealers, get the anti-gun crowd worked up and finally introduce the bill to the public as the solution???
     
    Akula and (deleted member) like this.
  13. zuiu

    zuiu New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/gunwalker_goes_primetime.html

    I think it was an ATF op gone full-retard.
     
  14. Silverhair

    Silverhair New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The U N Small Arms Treaty is still being hammered out. It isn't about our civilian guns but about the international small arms trade and is supposed to make it more difficult terrorists and insurgents to get guns. It would have no effect inside the U.S. as our Constitution trumps any and all treaties. Further 50 Senators have an NRA rating of "A" so that would kill any type of restriction on civilian ownership of guns.
     
  15. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Feb 16 20011, According to Rand Paul;


    Kentucky’s newly elected Senator Rand Paul has pleased conservatives with his calls for fiscal and constitutional conservatism, ranging from abolishing the Department of Education and all foreign aid to proposing substantial cuts to the federal budget. Now Paul has joined the crusade to end Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s efforts to work with the United Nations to pass a new “Small Arms Treaty.”
    In an email to his supporters, Paul explains, “Disguised as an ‘International Arms Control Treaty’ to fight against ‘terrorism,’ ‘insurgency’ and ‘international crime syndicates,’ the UN’s Small Arms Treaty is in fact a massive, global gun control scheme.”

    According to Paul, if ratified, the UN “Small Arms Treaty” would force the United States to enact stricter licensing requirements, confiscate and destroy “unauthorized” firearms, ban the trade, sale, and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons, and create an international gun registry.
     
  16. Panzerkampfwagen

    Panzerkampfwagen New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2010
    Messages:
    11,570
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Signing a treaty and making a law are TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS.

    Countries sign treaties all the time, get their photo taken, talk about how great the treaty is and then ignore it after all the PR is gained. That's how treaties work.
     
  17. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0

    The Clinton's have been working on banning so called assault weapons since Bill was in office and for a time they were successful in banning certain guns that could take high capacity clips. I hope your right, but I just don't trust this crowd and looking for back doors to bypass the constitution is exactly what they do best. Why would U.S. Senators be showing concern over it at this juncture if it was so unimportant??
     
  18. devilsadvocate

    devilsadvocate New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    688
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    hype. To create a news story about something, to create a buzz.
     
  19. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ayuh,... I suggest you do some lookin' around, 'n bring yerself up to speed,...
    As your very Wrong in your assumptions...
     
  20. Silverhair

    Silverhair New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Constitution still trumps all treaties.
     
  21. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    And since When have the progressive liberals cared about what the Constitution says,..??
     
  22. Danct

    Danct New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This myth has been circulating for some time and was a chain e-mail as well, getting anti-controllers all atwitter.

    The actual treaty provisions support individual country's sovereignty.
    UN General Assembly Resolution A/C.1/64/L.38/Rev.1, Oct. 28: …Acknowledging also the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership, exclusively within their territory…
    Another provision acknowledges that countries have a right to arms for "self-defence and security needs and in order to participate in peace support operations."


    All one need do is look it up at Factcheck to see it's all a charade intended to stir up fear and loathing.
     
  23. prometeus

    prometeus Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    7,684
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are you saying that you have a monopoly on what it actually says?
     
  24. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This was in the Factcheck link you provided;

    Statement by John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,​


    Bolton, Nov. 6: The administration is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt – as was the case back over a decade ago – that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control. After the treaty is approved and it comes into force, you will find out that it … requires the Congress to adopt some measure that restricts ownership of firearms. The administration knows it cannot obtain this kind of legislation purely in a domestic context. … They will use an international agreement as an excuse to get domestically what they couldn’t otherwise.
     
  25. FLY

    FLY New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2011
    Messages:
    711
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    between the lines Joseph Farah Obama's 'civilian national security force'
    Posted: July 15, 2008
    1:00 am Eastern

    2011

    With all the reporters covering the major presidential candidates, it amazes me no one ever seems to ask the right questions.

    For several days now, WND has been hounding Barack Obama's campaign about a statement he made July 2 in Colorado Springs – a statement that blew my mind, one that has had me scratching my head ever since.

    In talking about his plans to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps and the size of the nation's military services, he made this rather shocking (and chilling) pledge: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."





    Question; What would he need this for????
     

Share This Page