Skip to comments.UN Arms Treaty Could Put U.S. Gun Owners in Foreign Sights, say Critics
Posted on 07/11/2012 6:54:00 PM PDT by EagleUSA
UNITED NATIONS A treaty being hammered out this month at the United Nations -- with Iran playing a key role -- could expose the records of America's gun owners to foreign governments -- and, critics warn, eventually put the Second Amendment on global trial.
International talks in New York are going on throughout July on the final wording of the so-called Arms Trade Treaty, which supporters such as Amnesty International USA say would rein in unregulated weapons that kill an estimated 1,500 people daily around the world. But critics, including the National Rifle Associations Wayne LaPierre, warn the treaty would mark a major step toward the eventual erosion of the U.S. Constitutions Second Amendment gun-ownership rights.
Americans just dont want the UN to be acting as a global nanny with a global permission slip stating whether they can own a gun or not, LaPierre said. It cheapens our rights as American citizens, and weakens our sovereignty, he warned in an exclusive interview with FoxNews.com
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-treaty-could-put-us-gun-owners-in-foreign-sights-say-critics/#ixzz20Mx1sFKV
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
2/3 of the senate will not vote for this treason. They would be hunted down like rabid dogs. They would not want to live in hiding for the rest of their short, treasonous lives.
No matter how much they would LIKE to vote for this treason, their own self-preservation instincts are too strong.
They wear those blue helmets right? They’ve never played Patriot and UN before I guess.
“...2/3 of the senate will not vote for this treason.”
I know, but it just infuriates me when these obvious enemies of our country pull this crap.
COME AND TAKE IT!....motherfeckers
It only takes 2/3 of The Senate present at the time it’s voted on. That’s my understanding.
By the end of the century, people will be hunting Democrats with dogs, -- U.S. Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, in 1993, in Bill Clintons first year in office.
Senator Gramm was a little off on the timing is all.
Yes this (appears) set to be somewhat troublesome for at while if passed.
It must become a constant thing, if passed.
No delays or loopholes. Ever until it gets turned back down.
Now now..be a good dawg (- ;
I paint blue helmets on my targets for practice.... you know, just to keep sharp!
If they called a midnight vote with 2/3 plus one of 50 ‘rats voting, they would be hunted down like dogs. There are not enough ‘rats with a death wish in the senate.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against An Army?
Exactly! This author is a little confused about just who is going to be in whose sights.
” could expose the records of America’s gun owners to foreign governments..”
Who would actually obey the order to disarm? Certainly nobody I know. It would be the proverbial Last Straw for millions.
Well I for one don’t just have a handgun. If ever, ever, some UN troops from the Congo should ever land in the US, they’d wished they were back in the savannah running from lions and tigers and such.
I would not be so certain about that.
If this gets voted in, we need a new procedure, until it gets voted out once again.
No screw ups.
I will repost here what I said in the other thread:
Removal of the right to bear arms via treaty would represent to me, and many others, the Federal Government unilaterally abrogating their compact with the People to have the power that they do.
I do not say this lightly.
A quorum in the Senate is 51. A 2/3 majority vote is only 34 of those 51. Obama has those votes. All he has to do is figure when the other 49 will be out of town, and he’s smart enough to figure that part out. The Senate has done this before.
It infuriates me even more to know that our enemies have their headquarters in our country.
How can a self-respecting America even be a member of this anti-American organization?
From My Cold, Dead Fingers
The Constitution cannot be amended by treaty.
The Supreme Court has ruled on this many times.
IOW, any aspects of the treaty in conflict with the 2nd Amendment or other parts of the Constitution could not be enforced.
Of course, the court might refuse to make such a ruling, but if they decide to ignore the plain language of the Constitution and all precedent it seems unlikely to me they’d need the pretext of a treaty to do so.
When the Kenyan fraud is cast out of the Presidency, he and his minions should be tried for treason!
They took notice of the reaction, or the lack of it when they enacted the airline searches in the name of "security". The election of obama by a majority who rater live as Governmental slaves than free people embolded them further. And the final nail in the coffin was when bamacare was rammed down our throats without us doing anything.At that point in time, they realized that they could do anything they damned well pleased and no one would challenge them.
On November 4, 2008, the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America died of self inflicted wounds. At this point in time it is past a political solution.
The ones they haven't been keeping... because that would be against the law... just like not passing a budget is against the law, and the international gun-trafficking of Fast & Furious fame is against the law.
We all know that our government would never break the law, therefore all the things you hear otherwise must be false.
They will be very sorry if they do that, all of them. That's a statement of fact, not a threat.
FYI, I do not know a single gun owner who would abide by any restrictions. Travis McGee is right, such an act would invalidate our obligations to the feral.gov, and I can see a lot of folks making "machine tools" in their garage or basement...happy switches, supressors, etc. Further, being in Texas I haven't yet met the cop who's suicidally stupid enough to help the ferals out at all. I would hope that the governor and legislature would deputize all citizens and otherwise tell the ferals to fornicate themselves.
Molon Labe, motherphockers!
UN Arms Treaty Would Put UN in U.S. Gun Owners Sights, say Critics. - fixed it.
MOLON LABE; SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!
that needs to be reworded..It will put the UN in the sights of lots of guns....but they are stupid enough to try it...
Yeah, that was some trip! I lost everything including ammo. Gee, I wonder where that all wound up since the river was flowing pretty good that day .... :)
Please remember that it started in earnest with Bush Clinton Bush, Bush I signing the Rio Accord giving the UN permission to eliminate our property rights, and Clinton was the first I heard claiming ‘interdependence’ instead of independence. Bush II echoed ‘interdependence’ with every deed. And now Obama just has to finish what was already started.
If the Republicans bring in Condoleeza Rice as VP then there is no hope the Romney ticket will ever be anything more than a globalist agenda machine. Condi should serve time for her corrupt dealings in the Millennium Challenge Foundation.
The one problem I see, regarding whether or not our Congress would ever vote for such a bill, is that too many foreign countries own our debt. I imagine it would go like the Godfather movies....”one day I will call upon you for a favor...l” and the Chi-Coms will be calling that favor via the U.N.
I know...crazy talk.
Condi gave the commencement speech at Denver University graduation in 1996. It was a loooong speech about the US doing more globally for social justice. She is a major socialist with global agenda ideas. We still have that VHS tape of her speech.
The reason you cite is the exact reason many fear a large national debt held by many. They can use it to squeeze us for cooperation. I would expect it with this treaty.
Agreed. There are theoretical go signals, and I’d bet this would be one of the top 10.
It would be a declaration of war if he tried. Even he is smart enough to know that.
I’d say top 5.
Obama and the Democrats have trashed the Constitution. During Clinton’s term they learned they could ban “assault weapons” with little consequence. They know the vast majority of trash talk about any consequences of banning or severely restricting guns is hot air.
I mean, if penalizing us for doing nothing via the ObamaTax and the complete takeover of health care, the Kelo eminent domain ruling granting sale authority of private lands for government profit, the 16th amendment granting the government the right to take 100% of our incomes, the original firearms ban of 1994, the various gun control acts through the years, the TSA strip searching our wives and daughters, and the fact that gun bans worked all over the planet including the once proud United Kingdom, they’re willing to go for it here.
The Marxists have made great inroads into getting their way. There is only one last little step and that is disarming us standing in their way to total domination. Since they now have the militaries of the world in their loyalty they are feeling rather powerful right now. Their arrogance and stupidity knows no bounds.
If anyone doesn’t see this fight coming, tough sh*t.
It says quite a lot about the Republican party, if they would run a Romney/Condi ticket, doesn’t it.
It also says a lot about our political candidates in general. The best the Dems have is Obama, and the best the pubbies have is Romney. Just great.
You know it. People very, very, VERY close to me will be among the hunters.
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.