Poll: If Obama Imposes the U.N. Gun Ban On America... (55% choose Revolution)

United States of Earth ^ | June 12, 2010 | N/A

[Gilbo_3]

funny thing is, those pissed off dems are so reactionary that theyd lynch em all, well before a conservative got to em...

maybe thats our best course of action, let em kill each other, then we just pick off the survivors...??? 8^}

[Mayhem]

You might want to start now while you can.

[El Gato]

Er, yes, Obama can just enforce a UN gun ban with the stroke of a pen.

He's arrogant enough to try.

[El Gato]

Article VI, read it and stand corrected.

Treaties do not ammend the Constitution. Here is the relevant part of Art. 6. Only those who are grammatically challenged believe that it says they can.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The phrase " any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." means (the Constitution or Laws of any State) not (the Constitution) or (Laws of any State).

It's just saying that the Constitution, which is referred to as "this Constitution" everywhere within itself when the federal Constitution is meant, except in specifying the Presidential Oath, and that says "the Constitution of the United States", is supreme over state constitutions and state laws. Treaties are also supreme over them.

[El Gato]

Should the troubles come to pass, you'll be prepared to defend your opinions

And it they don't, shooting is still a lot of fun. So get armed, trained, and practiced.

[El Gato]

Using their contorted logic they would only need 2/3rds of the votes cast, not 2/3rds of the entire Senate.(Not Constitutional

Actually, it is.

From Art. 2 Section. 2.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur (where He, means the President).

[El Gato]

The best they might do is 62 but they would still fall short and I have my doubts about finding even 50 votes.

50 would be enough if only 75 Senators were present. Could happen, O-dark thirty session they "forget" to tell the "nays" about. (it's 2/3 of those present,not 2/3 +1). Under Art. 1 Sec. 5 it requires a majority to be present or 51 Senators, present to constitute a quorum to do business, in which case as few as 34 votes would do it.

Of course there would be Hell to Pay, and I'd hope many here would be Collecting the payment.

[El Gato]

We do not seek to revolt. We seek a counter revolution. Explosives might be needed, but a nation of rifleman, or just a small fraction of a nation, would take the fight to the real enemies. See FReeper Travis McGee's (Matt Braken) "Enemies" novels.

[El Gato]

Also see Unintended Consequences, a novel by John Ross. It's probably a better illustration of the basic principle.

[archy]

Searched and didn't see this previously posted. Interesting website, on first glance.

The results of the poll were previously published and FReepposted from another website, but I suspect that we'll be seeing it again.

Accordingly: CWII ping

[archy]

Searched and didn't see this previously posted. Interesting website, on first glance.

The results of the poll were previously published and FReepposted from another website, but I suspect that we'll be seeing it again.

Accordingly: CWII ping

[MileHi]

With the recent SCOTUS decisions, this would be a bridge too far. The blowback would be ugly.

[DuncanWaring]

Implementing/imposing is one thing, enforcing is another.

[archy]

With the recent SCOTUS decisions, this would be a bridge too far. The blowback would be ugly.

Indeed. Something similar happened in Finland when the Socialists in power there overreached in 1918.

It lasted for but four months, but after that bloodletting, the Finns had lost about 1% of their nation's population. In comparison, it took us over four years of our own civil warfare battling from 1861 to 1865 to manage around a 2% national casualty rate.

Of course in Finland, only about a fourth of those were what we'd call combat casualties. The rest froze or starved to death in prison camps, were summarily shot or hanged, or were bayonetted by previously unbloodied rookies to give them a little firsthand introduction to their new trade.

Our current population is around 330 million people. You can figure out for yourself what 1% of that would be.

[MileHi]

Our current population is around 330 million people. You can figure out for yourself what 1% of that would be.

Yes I can. A good chunk of the Dems base...

[stephenjohnbanker]

Obama: “ Senate? We no need no steenking Senate!!”

[stevie_d_64]

My hogs need feeding...

BTW, I need to buy some ammo off ya soon...Might need a few boxes of .45/70 too, if you have some...thats my fun gun...hehehe

[mamelukesabre]

A day late and a dollar short.

If you wait until then, you will be SOL!

[mamelukesabre]

They don’t need 2/3. They only need 2/3 of senators PRESENT at the time of the vote.

think about it.

[Vendome]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2555804/posts?page=48#48