Posted on 06/07/2011 1:53:18 PM PDT by Scythian
Edited on 06/07/2011 6:03:37 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
It may not come as surprising news to many of you that the United Nations doesn’t approve of our Second Amendment. Not one bit. And they very much hope to do something about it with help from some powerful American friends. Under the guise of a proposed global “Small Arms Treaty” premised to fight “terrorism”, “insurgency” and “international crime syndicates” you can be quite certain that an even more insidious threat is being targeted – our Constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.forbes.com ...
I don’t see the Senate ratifying this piece of sh!t any time soon.
At least it will be easy to ID the invaders. Blue makes a lousy camouflage color.
Everyone was in BDUs/ACUs/duty uniforms, and the French and Italians that were assigned to KFOR had on their blue berets. As the Rangemaster was giving his safety brief, he was quoting the fields of fire and told the French and Italians to look north at a cluster of homes in the treeline.
He told them, "I don't know if you French and EYEtalians have ever heard of the word "redneck", but over younder is a bunch of mean-ass rednecks that are just itchin' to shoot at a UN helmet, so if I were you, I'd remove your blue headgear and put them in your cargo pocket".
Man, when the translator translated that to them, they all looked north and immediately took off their UN berets. For the next hour, whenever they got a chance, I would always find them looking north. LOL!
I don’t have anything! Really! Nothing! 8^)
Yea, they’ll never get close to a 2/3 majority to pass a treaty.
“There will be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
A ratified treaty takes precedence over our current laws, etc.
Well, I’m waiting, come and get ‘em!
Given the Keller and McDonald cases, the SCOTUS would be very likely to strike down the treaty as unconstitutional.
JMHO, of course. Why I copied a real lawyer. What's your take, jagusafr?
to paraphrase Stalin...Just how many divisions does the U.S. have?
Don’t waste your time, or more importantly, your life battling the confiscators. Hunt down the ones who sent them. Then teach then an expensive and enduring lesson.
DARN! Should read "Just how many divisions does the U.N. have?
That's what you get when you are in a hurry and don't proofread!
Every outhouse, hen house, wood house, tree, blade of grass, and down every stretch of road. We will make any invader an supporter of the invasion equally liable and targets.
If you down my tenacity, visit NC and SC. The swamps will be our battlefields.
“A ratified treaty takes precedence over our current laws, etc.”
True. A treaty is definitely, without question, supreme over state and federal laws.
However, the question is as follows: What happens if the terms of a treaty conflict the terms of the Constitution? Obvious to anyone on this forum, the answer is that the Constitution prevails. A Supreme Court case on the matter is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert
“A ratified treaty takes precedence over our current laws, etc.”
No, it does not.
Here’s one site to check out: (There are more)
http://www.uhuh.com/control/contrump.htm
At least it will be easy to ID the invaders. Blue makes a lousy camouflage color.
#############################
It will not be UN troops who enforce this if it passes. It will be SWAT teams and other jack booted thugs like it was in New Orleans after Katrina.
That is absolutely classic!, thanks for sharing....;)
Blue UN helmets make for a target-rich environment!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.