Skip to comments.Obama To Sign Anti-Second Amendment U.N. Anti-Gun Treaty
Posted on 07/10/2012 1:47:25 PM PDT by no-llmd
The United Nations is putting the finishing touches on an Arms Trade Treaty that transcends borders and may even trample our Constitutional right to bear arms. Every indication is that the president will sign it.
Like the New Start and Law of the Sea treaties before it, as well as the Kyoto Protocol and Agenda 21, the Arms Trade Treaty being finalized at the U.N. this month is one of those feel-good, can't-we-all-get-along pieces of parchment whose net effect is to accomplish little except to eat away at American sovereignty and freedom.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
None dare call it treason.....
This is treason. Can we impeach him NOW???????
He (it) can sign whatever he (it) wants.
I don’t give a fat, slimy, smelly Obama about the UN and they can shove themselves up Obama’s ........
Ah, the UN...you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.
All treaties must be approved by the Senate with a 60% super majority vote or the treaties are meaningless, just like the Kyoto treaty which Bill Clinton signed.
UN = Unpunished Nazis
They can sign whatever they want. They will never get 2/3 of Senate to vote for it. Even in super-liberal states gun grabbing is not tolerated
People who support Gun Control only want to keep guns away from white folks
Did anyone else hear about the recent St. Louis urban army exercise? Can anyone confirm that it was called “Operation: Better Not Fight Back, Whitey”?
This could end very badly for America and the peace and stability of our country and our God-given liberties. This is a genuine line in the sand for many - and for good reason. It was a line in the sand many years ago for those at Lexington and Concord, too...
Also, there is a process to amend the Constitution which requires far more support than the treaty approval process. As such, not treaty, no matter what it says can legally transcend the protections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
This could very well make a revolution a reality.
Guns don’t kill people. People infected with AIDS and who have unprotected sex kill people.
Good. You sign it, Obamugabe.
2/3 of the Senate has to approve the treaty, and that isn’t going to happen.
What WILL happen is that gun groups like the NRA and the Second Amendment Sisters will rally millions of people to vote against you and your party, exposing you accurately as a gun grabbing fascist.
Thanks, Obamugabe. You’re signing not just a treaty, but a “surrender” document for your Demon Rat party.
Just about everything Zero has done for 3 1/2 years has been ultra vires: beyond the scope or in excess of his legal power or authority.
Only three more full months and we’re shed of this douche bag.
I do believe he’s just getting started.
What with November coming and he’s running short on fund-raising.
Maybe I’m wrong.
Want to bet? It is quite possible.
All the Dems need is 34 votes for it if the Dems sneak an unexpected vote in with a bare quorum in attendence some unexpected time when the GOP isn't paying attention - which is most of the time. All they need is a quorum (50+1) on the floor and a quick vote (even a voice vote might do). They easily have enough votes for that. They could secretly set an ambush vote up ahead of time to catch the solmnolent GOP unawares.
Do you put it past them? It sounds just like how they would do it. Do you think McConnell or anybody else on our side is paying attention? All of a sudden, it will be done and over - and legal.
Consider becoming a monthly donor.
It's easy, and with enough participants
we could eliminate FReepathons.
I think a super majority is 2/3 of the Senate. I also think any Senator who approves this better be afraid of going back to their home state.
So, was the operation called
“Better Not Fight Back, Whitey”
“Whitey Don’t Fight Back”
I wasn’t clear on what I’d heard.
Not so. To ratify a treaty, the Constitution requires 2/3 approval by the full Senate -- i.e., 67 votes.
In the event of a “gun grab” and subsequent civil war, there will not be adequate resources in Mordor to enforce martial law.
Take a look at your collection. H&K? Glock? Sig? FN? Taurus? Steyr? ...? all foreign. Ditto a lot of what you feed them: Wolf? surplus?
Methinks they're willing to put up with the "FMCDH!" holdouts, so long as they can't restock, repair, or resupply. War of attrition.
For congresscritters NOT to impeach 0 should be considered an act of treason.
The republicans are gifting this to Obama... A Marxist is a marxist and anti american actions are normal..What the republicans are doing i treason because they pretend to be the party that upholds liberty...
>Ah, the UN...you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.<
This is the same UN that is totally quiet about the well-armed Swiss and Yemeni.
For purely political reasons, the UN is singling out the US because this anti-American organization knows damn well who is in the WH. They should have tried that sh*t with Reagan.
Defund the bastards.
I hear you and concur.
I believe the language is ‘2/3 of those present’ though...
The only positive thing I can see regarding cut off of foreign supplies is that it may stimulate production at a local level in the free states.
This from a President who is covering up his own authorized illegal gun sales to narcoterrorists.
Lying Marxist BASTARD manchild.
Yep. 2/3 those present.
I believe treaties must be ratified by a 2/3 majority in the Senate. Obama can sign ‘til his head falls off, and it still is not a binding treaty.
Just as the world’s worst human rights violators sat on and often chaired the U.N. Human Rights Council, Iran, arms supplier extraordinaire to America’s enemies, was elected on Saturday to a top position on the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York. It began July 2 and extends through July 27.
This came right after the same U.N. found Iran guilty of illegally transferring guns and bombs to the murderous Syrian regime of Bashar Assad, currently slaughtering thousands of its own citizens as an impotent U.N. joins the U.S. administration in standing around and watching.
Oh UN. You so fun .... I mean, scary.
You nailed it.
The Constitution says 2/3rds of senators present.
I used to think that way too, until Roberts upheld ObamaCare as constitutional ...
Thank you for mentioning that little gem.
If King Barack tries to enforce this, we will find out where the loyalties of our military and police lie: with the Constitution and the Republic, or with the King.
Part of me dreads such a thing; but another part of me thinks it will be better to have the truth out in the open for all to see.
Can’t wait, let’s get it started. 1,000 more rounds coming in this week. Over 500 rounds in loaded mags will be on standby. That’s just one firearm.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
I wouldn’t want that bet. The unfortunate reality is, however, 2/3 of Senators present. That said, I doubt it will happen and hope it won’t because I’m too old and tired to get involved in any more wars. Trite current tagline still holds.
Gritty is correct. There is a big difference between 2/3 of the full membership of the senate and 2/3 of the senators present. The US Constitution specifically says in Article II that only 2/3 of the senators present are necessary to ratify a treaty:
He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...
This means that 67 votes are not required to ratify a treaty unless the full senate is present at the vote. The minimum quorum of senators necessary to do business is 51 senators and therefore, the minimum number of senators necessary to ratify a treaty is 34 senators while 67 senators is the largest possible number of senators needed to ratify a treaty.
I stand corrected.
>> Not so. To ratify a treaty, the Constitution requires 2/3 approval by the full Senate — i.e., 67 votes.
I’m under the impression a number of RINOs in the Senate are amenable to this charade.
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.