Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The U.N. is coming for your guns(7/27/2012) Obama admin pushing for global arms control
Washington Times ^ | 7/5/2012 | Washington times

Posted on 07/09/2012 12:11:28 PM PDT by mikelets456

The United Nations is deliberating over a treaty that will place comprehensive limits on the international weapons trade. The language of the draft agreement is so expansive it wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market as well. If American jurists continue to be enamored by the popular trend to consider international precedence when making U.S. rulings, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye.

This week, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” The scope of the proposed treaty is vast. It covers tanks, military vehicles, aircraft (including drones), ships, submarines, missiles and ammunition. It seeks to regulate arms import, export, transfer, brokering, manufacture under foreign license and technology transfer. The proposed global regulation instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 2012; armstradetreaty; att; banglist; comeandtakeit; criminal; democrats; donttreadonme; guncontrol; gungrabbers; guns; liberalfascism; obama; treason; tyranny; un; waronliberty; youwillnotdisarmus

1 posted on 07/09/2012 12:11:42 PM PDT by mikelets456
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

Good thing it is established precedent that treaties do not supercede the constitution when in direct conflict of the constitution. I don’t even think Roberts could find a way around that one.


2 posted on 07/09/2012 12:16:32 PM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
I don’t even think Roberts could find a way around that one.

Don't worry. Roberts will make it a tax and it will be ok... /sarcasm

3 posted on 07/09/2012 12:18:40 PM PDT by justice14 ("stand up defend or lay down and die")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
...wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market...

Is that because liberal judges are too stupid or read? Or that they're corrupt?

4 posted on 07/09/2012 12:18:40 PM PDT by GOPJ (Speak truth to lies - to ignorance. Speak honesty to corruption . Stand-up to liberal elite liars..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

And this is why we have Fast and Furious: to garner support for treaties like this.....


5 posted on 07/09/2012 12:19:15 PM PDT by Tzimisce (THIS SUCKS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
...wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market...

Is that because liberal judges are too stupid to read? Or that they're corrupt?

6 posted on 07/09/2012 12:19:15 PM PDT by GOPJ (Speak truth to lies - to ignorance. Speak honesty to corruption . Stand-up to liberal elite liars..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

Unfortunately, Roberts found a way to REDEFINE what a tax is.


7 posted on 07/09/2012 12:19:41 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts


8 posted on 07/09/2012 12:21:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (In honor of my late father, GunnerySgt/Commo Chief, USMC 1943-65)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

I would rather have a constitutional amendment that specifically states that all treaties are subject to the Constitution. Precedent is far to easily overturned by activist judges.


9 posted on 07/09/2012 12:23:17 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Agreed. I’d actually like an amendment banning treaties altogether.


10 posted on 07/09/2012 12:27:51 PM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
If American jurists continue to be enamored by the popular trend to consider international precedence when making U.S. rulings

There are a number of FReepers who feel that way too. They got on my case during the runup to ObamaTAX.

Now that the Dread Pirate Roberts has made his ruling, they've largely shut up. Funny how that works...

11 posted on 07/09/2012 12:31:30 PM PDT by Old Sarge (We are now officially over the precipice, we just havent struck the ground yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Is that because liberal judges are too stupid or read? Or that they're corrupt?... or maybe both?
12 posted on 07/09/2012 12:32:36 PM PDT by ArmyTeach (Our liberties, we prize and our rights we will maintain ... USS Iowa BB 61)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
"I would rather have a constitutional amendment that specifically states that all treaties are subject to the Constitution. Precedent is far to easily overturned by activist judges."

No need to because the Constitution is not subject to subordination to the UN or any other nation regardless of the whims of the UN, Zero, or Hillary. They cannot circumvent the Bill of Rights even though they imply they can. I'll stand by that statement.

13 posted on 07/09/2012 12:42:14 PM PDT by Old Badger (Don't bother me! I still like Palin because she will tell like it is! (Newt too!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: All

Please Help To Keep The
"Conservative News and Views"
on FR coming by "Clicking Here"!!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


14 posted on 07/09/2012 12:45:59 PM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

,,,,,,,, from my cold dead fingers maybe . . .


15 posted on 07/09/2012 12:55:10 PM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Is that because liberal judges are too stupid or read? Or that they're corrupt?

Those things aren't necessarily mutually-exclusive.

16 posted on 07/09/2012 12:57:08 PM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
Doesn't matter any more if it's legal or constitutional ... All you need is a Dem Senate to approve the treaty and Obama will sign it. If it is legally challenged, then it goes to the Roberts Supreme Court where it will be fixed up to become legal and constitutional.

THE ONLY HOPE LEFT IS TO TAKE EVERY GOVERNMENT OFFICE THERE IS, FROM DOG CATCHER TO PRESIDENT, AWAY FROM THE DEMOCRATS. Then pass a law making the Democrat Party ILLEGAL!

17 posted on 07/09/2012 1:06:02 PM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag (Boiling tea makes it stronger. I'm a Tea Party Patriot...and I AM BOILING!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

Molan Labe!


18 posted on 07/09/2012 1:10:57 PM PDT by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia. 2016 starts today! Walker, Issa, Rubio,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Badger
the Constitution is not subject to subordination to the UN or any other nation regardless of the whims of the UN, Zero, or Hillary. They cannot circumvent the Bill of Rights even though they imply they can. I'll stand by that statement.

I'm with you -this is huffing and puffing on the part of mean spirited, but stupid - liberals. They wish they could impose the international crap on us - but they can't...

19 posted on 07/09/2012 1:21:11 PM PDT by GOPJ (Speak truth to lies - to ignorance. Speak honesty to corruption . Stand-up to liberal elite liars..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

Don’t think even the stupids in the Senate would ratify that one, and not live in serious fear.

And NO that is not a threat, just an observation so don’t send some fed baboso around for a talk.


20 posted on 07/09/2012 1:24:02 PM PDT by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) Hey Mitt, F-you too pal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

I’m with you -this is huffing and puffing on the part of mean spirited, but stupid - liberals. They wish they could impose the international crap on us - but they can’t...
_____________________________________________________

Really? They have been working on this “takeover” for about 100 years. They are so close... you think think they’ll simply walk away from this now? I think they go through with it, even with less than 2/3 votes they need for a treaty. Clearly treason and the “Declaration of Independence” kicks into affect.


21 posted on 07/09/2012 1:46:15 PM PDT by mikelets456
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

He will, and every GOP senator will find an excuse to vote for it.

And I hope that my sarcasm isn’t true.


22 posted on 07/09/2012 1:48:11 PM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
...wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market...

Well, there is that thorny problem for the gun-grabbers of needing a 2/3rds Senate ratification of such treaty.

23 posted on 07/09/2012 1:56:49 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
When you absolutely, positively have to reach out and touch something powder-blue in color over 6,000 meters away.
24 posted on 07/09/2012 1:58:03 PM PDT by tumblindice (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
He will, and every GOP senator will find an excuse to vote for it.

GOP Senators want to get re-elected, and the gun rights movement is just too potent to disrepect in such a manner.

25 posted on 07/09/2012 1:58:50 PM PDT by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

That does not look like any Barrett I’m familiar with.


26 posted on 07/09/2012 2:05:52 PM PDT by nonsporting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456; GOPJ; Bob
"...it wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market as well."

That's already built into the Arms Treaty in such a way that even Kennedy/Roberts may swing with them and here is why.

First, a link to the text of the treaty: "The Arms Trade Treaty (A/RES/64/48)"

Excerpted below is the section of this Treaty that calls on States{nations} for an implementation:

"Calls upon all States to implement, on a national basis, the relevant recommendations contained in section VII of the report of the Group of Governmental Experts (See A/63/334)."
Next is a link to the text of the referenced report: "Report of the Group of Governmental Experts to examine the feasibility, scope and draft parameters for a comprehensive, legally binding instrument establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms (A/63/334)"

Excerpted below is the only one of three section (27-29) in above referenced "section VII" ("Conclusions and recommendations") dictating the responsibilities and required actions of signatory States:

29. The Group acknowledged the respective responsibilities of exporters and importers. In order to begin improving the current situation, the Group recognized the need for all States to ensure that their national systems and internal controls are at the highest possible standards, and that States in a position to do so could render assistance in this regard, upon request. {Emphasises added.}
How can America agreeing to implement UN requested "internal controls" of our "nation system" of gun regulations not be surrendering American 2nd Amendment rights?

Once signing such a treaty, what should Americans expect if the UN should "request" a tighter "standard" of US "internal controls" on guns and America's elected government officials refuses to comply?

All out LAWFARE, financed by the same leftist front groups (Soros' included) to force compliance through US courts! Note the "supremacy clause" of the Constitution which provides that the “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, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.” {Emphasis added}

27 posted on 07/09/2012 2:08:59 PM PDT by drpix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
Good thing it is established precedent that treaties do not supercede the constitution when in direct conflict of the constitution.

Name one treaty that has been superseded by the Constitution or thrown out by the courts.

28 posted on 07/09/2012 2:18:17 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
I would rather have a constitutional amendment that specifically states that all treaties are subject to the Constitution.

I second that.

29 posted on 07/09/2012 2:19:17 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: drpix; GOPJ
You are one of the very few on this forum who comprehends the grammar of the supremacy clause, Patrick Henry's protestations notwithstanding.

This was truly a very dirty deal.

30 posted on 07/09/2012 2:23:40 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Democrat judges are stupid AND corrupt.

Read up on the Downing Effect to understand Democrats. It explains why dims are willing to assume that everyone else is dumber than they are, and yet buy into socialism without a murmur of doubt.

Personally I'm hoping they actually attempt to ban guns in the United States, under the shield of the UN. The war will be very short and staggeringly bloody, once it is determined that a Final Solution to American Socialism is the only alternative...

31 posted on 07/09/2012 2:31:54 PM PDT by jonascord (Any Democrat = Classic examples of the Downing Effect.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Hmmm....The Barrett M82A3 is a semi-auto, IIRC.

Not quibbling at the sentiment, tho.

OBTW, where’s the bullet riddled blue helmet?

I mean come on, folks, Yamamoto’s nightmare has been achieved, there really could be a rifle behind every blade of grass should TSHTF. Only I’m a bit old fashioned, my M-1 Garand will have to stand in for all the whizzbang stuff at the gun shows.


32 posted on 07/09/2012 2:32:18 PM PDT by elcid1970 (Nuke Mecca now. Death to Islam means freedom for all mankind. Deus vult!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456
Sure, give a NGO international body the world ownership of weapons and the only franchise to boot.

What could possibly go wrong?

33 posted on 07/09/2012 2:32:36 PM PDT by martian622 (The Revolution is being televised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

Something tells me if they tried to take Americans guns away, literally, they’d be starting the war they want so bad.


34 posted on 07/09/2012 4:12:32 PM PDT by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

That’s quite a sales pitch. But the scenario won’t fly in our nation, where vast majorities on both the left and right are now so much in favor of Second Amendment. Firearms are in style.


35 posted on 07/09/2012 5:55:03 PM PDT by familyop ("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nonsporting

It’s a Windrunner by EDM Arms. A takedown .50 that fits into a case not much bigger than a suitcase.


36 posted on 07/09/2012 8:23:01 PM PDT by allblues
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson