By: Leauxryda
“Our common goal is clear: a robust and legally binding Arms Trade Treaty that will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from the consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence,”…..“It is ambitious, but it is achievable.” UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon
In a mere couple of weeks, (July 27th as being reported), the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama will under all expectations sign the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which many believe will be the end of the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution, as we know it.
This is not new. The UNATT has been in the works for years and on October 14, 2009 in a statement presented by Hillary Clinton and the State Department that it would overturn the position of former President George W. Bush, which opposed a UN Arms Trade Treaty, on the insistence that national controls were better.
Much can be found on the UNATT (except on main stream media sources) and while the specifics of the treaty are still in formulation and terms have yet to be made public, a majority of the content already exists. Likely to pass the UN and legitimate concerns that our Senate, under the pledged push of the Senate by Hillary Clinton, would ratify, it is likely to force the United States to:
1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.
This plan is the real deal!!! Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton has caution gun owners to take this very seriously and stated that the U.N. “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there is no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”
It’s not enough that Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has owned this push for international gun control for years; President Obama has a dismal record on gun rights. His appointment of form Seattle Mayor, Greg Nickels as an alternate U.S. representative to the U.N. and Andrew Traver to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (Traver is a staunch advocate in termination of civilian ownership of “assault rifles”). As Illinois state senator, Obama aggressively advocated the expansion of gun control laws, including voted against legislation giving gun owner’s affirmative defense when firearms would be used in the defense of themselves and their family against home invaders and burglars. It also bears mentioning Obama served on a 10-member board of directors of the anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago, 1998-2001. The Joyce Foundation during that time contributed $18,326,180 in grants to anti-2nd Amendment organizations. And let’s not forget the appointment of Obama’s anti-gun nominee SCOTUS Sonia Sotomayor…yes, the Senate confirmation put her there, but it was definitely under the pressure of Obama.
So don’t believe for one moment that because Obama says very little about our 2nd Amendment rights and gun ownership, he’s an advocate on our behalf. He isn’t, and it is easy to conclude that gun control efforts by this administration via the UNATT are ripe for this anti-Constitutional government to take advantage of its citizen’s rights based on international laws and treaties.
Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) said in a recent speech for the Heritage Foundation in June of this year, “I believe there is a threat to include civilian firearms within its scope….. And the arms trade treaty, if that’s true, could restrict the lawful private ownership of firearms in the United States.” Sen. Moran and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) are leading the effort in the Senate to ensure the treaty doesn’t infringe on an American’s 2nd Amendment rights. Both have spearheaded letters to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, signed by 45 Republicans and 13 Democrats in opposition restrictions on civilian firearm ownership. Noted during his speech to the Heritage, Moran acknowledged the treaty would be acceptable if it: explicitly recognizes the legitimacy of hunting, sport shooting, and other lawful activities related to the private ownership of firearms and related materials; explicitly excludes small arms, light weapons and related materials that are legal for private ownership; doesn’t contain any open-ended obligations that could imply any need to impose domestic controls on any of these items; and explicitly states that any assertion of the right of sovereign states to individual or collective self-defense does not prejudice the inherent right of personal self-defense.
As reported in The Hill, 130 lawmakers sent the President a letter expressing their opposition to a pending arms trade treaty should it impede gun rights and U.S. sovereignty in any way. “The UN’s actions to date indicate that the ATT [United Nations Arms Trade Treaty] is likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy, and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights,” reads the letter, which was spearheaded by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.). “The U.S. must establish firm red lines for the ATT and state unequivocally that it will oppose the ATT if it infringes on our rights or threatens our ability to defend our interests.”
But let’s talk about these “firm red lines”…..
According to the U.S. State Department, the “firm red lines” that cannot be crossed are:
The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be upheld.
- There will be no restrictions on civilian possession or trade of firearms otherwise permitted by law or protected by the U.S. Constitution.
- There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.
- The U.S. will oppose provisions inconsistent with existing U.S. law or that would unduly interfere with our ability to import, export, or transfer arms in support of our national security and foreign policy interests.
- The international arms trade is a legitimate commercial activity, and otherwise lawful commercial trade in arms must not be unduly hindered.
- There will be no requirement for reporting on or marking and tracing of ammunition or explosives.
- There will be no lowering of current international standards.
- Existing nonproliferation and export control regimes must not be undermined.
- The ATT negotiations must have consensus decision making to allow us to protect U.S. equities.
- There will be no mandate for an international body to enforce an ATT.
Sounds good doesn’t it? On the surface, this shows teeth and a willingness of our country’s government to maintain its sovereignty. But let’s get real here. These are statements made by the Obama administration. And since when should we trust anything coming from these guys? The promise of the most transparent administration in the history of our country? Yea, right!
Keep in mind though, that despite lines drawn, the U.S. is part of a 193 member state committee and is a principle organ of the UNSC. And recently the governments of the UK, France, Germany and Sweden all released a joint position this week which states, “We believe that an arms trade treaty should cover all types of conventional weapons, notably including small arms and light weapons, all types of munitions, and related technologies.” Remember, participating nations have veto power, and these red lines submitted by the United States could be scrapped from consideration on its behalf by a multitude of what would be considered, allied nations.
There is a multitude of sources one can read and learn what’s ahead in the coming weeks. What IS the main focus for We as Americans is the realization that our 2nd Amendment rights are close to becoming altered on behalf of an international law, over our own Constitution! Sure, there are members of the House and Senate who believe our Constitution must be upheld over international law. BUT, there are others who believe different, DESPITE their sworn oath. But are we to take that chance and sort-of “pass the treaty, so we can see what’s in it first”? Keep in mind readers, the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution), establishes laws made pursuant to the US Constitution, (“shall be the supreme law of the land”), and allows treaties enacted by Congress to supersede the Bill of Rights. Most people are unaware of this, and it is the key to its success or failure. And all this while, your tax dollars were used to lobby against our Constitutional rights via the United Nations.
Thomas Jefferson eloquently stated in his “Commonplace Book,” from 1774-1776, “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
I beg you to act on this as this is THE one freedom that should it fall, the 1st Amendment (which is already heavily under attack), will follow immediately afterwards. Tweet this, text this, email this, Facebook this, comment on this through blogs and news sites…….whatever it takes, get the word out NOW…..time is seriously short America! A great tool, compliments of the NRA to contact your Senators can be found here: http://www.capwiz.com/nra/dbq/officials/. You may also contact your Senators by phone at (202) 224-3121.
Sources:
http://www.dickmorris.com/obamas-secret-gun-control-plan-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/
(and numerous others……)
All he has to do is BS enough Dumocrats because…….
Republicans can't stop him.
If you are not a Tea Party member / supporter,……
you are part of the problem.
If this comes to pass, we might as well get on with it….
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION 2.0…..
F*ckin A….
Yessir!
Reporting for duty….SIR….
You know they didn't call it, The Petition of Independence.
We need to show that hag, Hillary, what a real freakin reset button looks like.
If the obamites think this is gonna fly, they will be sorely mistaken.
Instead of 450 million rounds of ammo, they should have ordered a couple of million body bags for the so-called enforcers of this illegal action. They are going to need them.
We'll give them their shovel-ready jobs….
If I remember my history correctly, the grave diggers after largecivil war battles were paid fairly well for their services. I readthey received over a dollar a body interred. Figure 5-6 or more a dayand they made far, far more than the men they buried.Like they say, “once you get past the smell, you have got it licked”.A man with a back hoe will be able to make a small fortune.
Individual graves would be too good for these vermin…..
I swear to God – nothing pisses me off more than One Worlder Communists.
They make my friggin' blood boil.
Offing Communists is like eating potato chips…
Once you get started….
I'd prefer to reference sunflower seeds……..keeps both hands available for other tasks……
I chew gum, myself…..
and I don't bother taking names….
I'd like to toss about 500,000 of 'em in those FEMA plastic coffins.
Can we strap them together, and put sails on it? It might end up in Venezuela so Obama can spend 'quality time' with Chavez after all.
Nice…
The recent revelation that Iran will be part of the 15 membership bureau to oversee the UNATT defies all logic that flies in the face of any humanitarian claim the UN can make. UN watch executive director Hillel Neuer says it perfectly: “Right after a UN Security Council report found Iran guilty of illegally transferring guns and bombs to Syria, which is now murdering thousands of its own people, it defies logic, morality and common sense for the UN to now elect this same regime to a global post regulating the transfer of guns and bombs. … This is like choosing Bernie Madoff to police fraud on the stock market. And the U.N.’s scandalous choice of Iran is exactly why we fear that Syria’s declared bid for a U.N. Human Rights Council seat is not impossible.”
Our 2nd Amendment can be nullified via treaty under the observations of Iran, Kenya, Egypt, Mexico, etc…….
Really??? This is seriously messed up business……
The 2nd Amendment is the keystone….
Remove that and the whole thing collapses….
Truer words were never spoken.
The Second Amendment is there to protect the First Amendment.
Without the Second your speech will be controlled.
The 2nd Amendment enables everything else in the Constitution. Period. It's the peoples' teeth against tyranny. Without the 2nd Amendment, we're screwed.
Its the teeth for sure but our freedom is a threelegged stool
right to bear arms
right to speak our minds
the right to property
The Royalist can't stand it.
I completely agree, but the 2nd ensures all the others. Without it, without those teeth, there is literally nothing standing in the way of naked tyranny.
It all depends on whether you give up your guns or whether you fight.
And that's something I've been wrestling with for some time now. Do I start a gunfight with the sheriff on my lawn with my young kid in the house? Do I lay down my life right then and there? Because even if I win the gunfight, my life, the life of my son are forever changed on that day.
To properly stand up to a door to door gun-grab there needs to be a large group of citizens willing to run to each other's defense. Is that even feasable?
Your life will change, if you submit….
and so will his….
Understood, but talking on a blog about duking it out with LE is one thing, actually doing it is something else entirely.
Yes, it is…..
Just remember that freedom is much harder to regain than it is to take away….
We need to remember the tactics the colonists used. They didn't stand in formation and shoot at the enemy. They crouched in the ditches and picked them off one by one.
Get some large diameter pipe and seal up your real hardware and bury it some place. When they come for your guns, hand them over and smile.
One key people need to look beyond is, should this treaty be signed and registration of all guns goes into effect, anyone having a gun(s) that is either not registered (depending on state), not on their name (as in a sales receipt-again depending on state), or the like, will have to have them registered through the government (which answers based on international treaty protocols)……otherwise, ownership of said gun(s) (regardless of state) without registering would be a federal offense…..
State laws for gun ownership will be nullified……
Just register your guns in Mexico with the Justice Department.
That's a thought…….
They'll lose the paperwork and probably give you free ammo. That's why I mentioned it.
Excellent point……and extra ammo is always good!!!
Makes me want to puke
All the criminals will be first in line I am sure.
I will march as best I can (I am still pretty nimble) but until then I will not confront an armed authority with any weapon.
Here in Texas there are a network of county, ranch and farm roads. The feds may patrol the interstates, the U.S. highways and the larger state highways and have checkpoints but they cannot control all the roads all the time.
Guess where I will scatter bury my weapons? I will just pick em up on my way home away from home.
Of all those things that are uncertain…..what you speak of here and what Hank mentioned is a heavy weight on many minds…..
Everybody has different circumstances. I am just a golfer that has a couple of guns. At my age it might make more sense to retrieve them on my way out even if I put them in more capable hands.
Its hard to figure what might happen but despite the post the other day from the warrior, a furtive glance to my golf bag might just give me the opportunity to get my 380 out of my back pocket. I don't care who you are, you will not want to mess with a pissed off old man with a gun.
My only training is to shoot first and often.
Saying goes……old men are more dangerous. They're too old to fight so they're likely to deliver a bullet rather than a punch……
I am not above cheatin' neither.
LOL!!
All is fair in love and war!!!
Same goes for small women. Can't tell ya how many times in my life that two-legged critters think I'm harmless. Idiots.
Yes ma'am!!! Nothing sexier than a woman holding an AR with 30 round clip, extra mags and a .45 holstered on her thigh with a drop-leg rig…..
well……that or a woman on a Harley…..
You're making me dizzy…
The blood is leaving my brain…
I'm not touching that one Uncle!!!
Sorry, just lost it for a minute….
I understand…….
I shaped one heck of a strong imagination as a kid….followed me into adulthood……of course, my youth had a hand in it…..
I'm not touching it either!
Heh……I tend to carry something a tad smaller……element of surprise and all. How the heck did you know that I grew-up on Harley's? My bro still does the annual cross-country trips with the Harley club he hangs with. He's on one right now.
It's a "sense", I guess……
Women and guns and Harley's just go hand in hand……a natural fit….
Well, duh…..yeah, it's just connect the dots! : )
We'll have plenty of advance warning…
and I'll already be in the weeds…
I can't help but think about Louisiana's SB-303, labled as potentially one of the most staunch state laws regarding gun ownership in favor of the citizen…..if this treaty passes, that bill would mean nothing……hell, it wouldn't end up on the ballot as planned for the November elections……
Yes, everything will change….
10-4
It is Deuse…..and that's why gun owners should be up in arms (pardon the pun) over this entire treaty issue……even non-owners should be up in arms…….
People don't realize if this is ratified, it becomes law……2nd amendment be damned!!! We are surrendering our Constitution to world government rule……
This is unacceptable……
I read a piece this morning that made the point – our right to bear arms (defense against tyranny) is a God-given right. It supercedes and is merely codified in the Constitution. We've got it, even without the Constitution.
It is our God given right……but it'll never hold substance when those who don't believe are in power…..as they believe themselves to be god….
Those who hold it as a natural right find the concept to have substance.
I was just talking to an associate and he thinks that they are deliberately trying to piss us off…..
There's nothing a Malthusian likes more than a civil war…..
I'd have to agree with your friend…..and I'm sure you share the same sentiment…..
They've been pushing for a fight for quite some time now……as of late with reckless abandon……
I don't even believe it qualifies to say "they should be careful what they're trying to promote"…..fact is, they don't care….they want something to happen…….everything is currently poised to respond to it…..
Cool heads need to prevail….
I've been taking my anger out at the gym and range. In fact, today, I just put a piece of equipment back in survice that I had to get repaired….
I totally agree bro…..and frankly, while we joke around and make statements as we do so often, the reality is none of us want conflict….especially of the potential nature we speak of…..
And it's obvious who the real hot-heads are anyway……problem is, most folks won't be able to look away as they have in the past……
These cretins have been emboldened by the highest authority in the land……
There's a lot to be said for being so badass that no one wants to start anything….
Common sense says the quiet ones are the ones to worry about the most…..
I've done more with a look than a word…..
I know that much!!!
Going back to topic, we need to avoid a civil war, as they are driven by retribution, and thus are long brutal and ugly….
I dont see a civil war. Again depending on the circumstances, there will be a lot of victims in the urban areas from general unrest, rioting and gang warfare. The gov will crack down and eventually some Sons of Liberty will make a ruckus and I believe the nation will reset. The libs only have rhetoric on their side and they will come off whiny and pathetic. Social order will be restored. I agree with you that retribution will rear its head. I am not sure how I stand on that. Put 'em in a carnival or something.
As we've likely read and discussed more often than we'd like, the likely would be the populace demanding government intervention in situations such as unrest, rioting, etc. And that becomes a double-edge sword……
As our government loves nothing more than its citizens begging for their help…..
They love anything that will have them get in a line….
I watched a video a civilian posted that showed TSA agents setting up a stage area at a train station……
What was most appauling was how everyone being searched was either laughing or indifferent…..
Your point well taken…..
That's why I'll have nothing to do with mass transportation…
Attrition will play a role. The Ruskies of old failed even with the abundance of vodka. The reset will start on the local level and will vary from location to location. Who from Texas would migrate to Michigan? I place all my secular faith in the military. Annapolis, West Point and The Academy will not let us down, not to mention all the R.O.T.C.'s
I don't, as well…
but I know that there are Malthusians in the shadows that would welcome one….
You're correct…..civil wars are never civil…..
It's often a cover for outright murder…..
well researched, well written and spot on…
To all of those reading this- Learn it. Know it. Preach it. The assault on our Freedoms is occurring from ALL angles, and they hoped to keep this one- the most egregious, too- 'under the radar'.
No longer.
Even those who don't like guns can understand the constitutional importance of an armed citizenry. Well done, friend…
Yeah, I'm pretty proud of my nephew…
I've got great support from a wonderful family of friends……
We're all in this together….
WE are lucky to have you Leaux. Thank you for an article which can be forwarded, understood and absorbed with the truth.
Ditto.
Thanks bro……I encourage the "message" above all else……
It sickens me the main stream media's refuse to report this…..not surprising……but definitely sickening…..
There is no doubt our medias are run by communist ideologies and are accessories to the criminal enterprise known as government……
The chickens have all got the pox. Its time to clean out the henhouse.
Indeed Liberty…..and the message needs to be spread out to the masses…..
Frankly, if the U.N. is not one of our state department tools then we don't need it. Move it to Africa and see how long it lasts.
In reality…..the U.S. needs to stop funding it….completely……we pay the most and get nothing from it of substance….even when our troops participate as peace-keepers, they can't be paid for it……
It's done more harm than good….
It's really no more than a meeting place for pedophiles and despots…
All the more reason for the U.S. to refuse to fund it….we already have our own pedophiles and despots to deal with here on our own soil…..we ain't got time for everyone else's……
Yup, they can turn around and go back to those crapholes they came from…
Good article Leauxryda.
I find it interesting that the Anti-Gun Obama is protected by guns. And after having the Communist agenda rammed, slammed and jammed on America for almost four years – the last piece of crap before the election is gun control.
In a sense – these communists know that attempting to take away the rights of Americans to fight back in a militia is the final straw to their take over of America.
It's by no coincidence that this is the final piece to a four year plan.
Thanks Falcon……
Much was learned over the last couple weeks in preparation of the article……
I'll share this as well: An example of Obama’s “transparency”….remember this?
March 30th Obama dropped in on a meeting between Jim and Sarah Brady at the White House during a meeting they had with Jay Carney. Obama was quoted as saying, “I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Barack Obama reportedly told Sarah Brady regarding gun control. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”
Suddenly, this ATT gig makes sense as to what he meant?
http://www.wnd.com/2011/04/292025/
Wiser men, than you or I, saw this coming….
Great point about the timing of this, FALCON.
Ask yourself AZ – if Obama needs to take away your guns – what is his second term all about?
"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
First he orders that the immigration laws will not be faithfully executed, now he chooses not to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. What does it take to impeach this guy?
Would this law be challenged in court in the United States? Hell Yeah. Oh..wait…. the Supreme Court might rule that it is a "tax".
We're screwed.
Remember, he screwed up the oath, the first time he took it…..
So did Roberts. Hmmmmmmmmmm
This should be the death knell for Obama and his entire administration. Anyone that thinks this is a good idea should be branded a traitor to the constitution.
Obama won't surrender it. He's on his knees begging for a muslim friendly power to step up now.
Leauxryda, many, many thanks to you for this outstanding and timely article. Begs the question: Just how many of those Commies are willing to die for THEIR beliefs?
If this comes to pass, we're gonna find out.
Thanks AZ…..it means a lot and I pray this helps spread the word…..
I can't stop emphasizing this important point that as Americans, we cannot allow this to pass. No way, no how…..
I firmly believe the next 3 three months will be a test for us all…..
Really a great job on this story, and your choice of the pic was perfect…
Thanks…..Photoshop has been beddy-beddy-goood to me…..
Leaux,
Good job.
Thank you Cowboy……I appreciate it very much…..
Your post link below with Obama's quote: "This will be my last political campaign no matter what," President Obama said at a campaign event in Cedar Rapids, Iowa today. "I've got nothing else to run for."
THAT, my friend, presents a very scary proposition for America…….every thing this man says contains a verifyable, "read between the lines" message……
I've really grown tired of this mulatto sumbitch.
He's trying many souls these days…..somehow, I can't help but believe he's doing it on purpose……
Maybe we will get lucky.
Maybe we will be able to try him for High Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Maybe we'll get luckier yet.
Maybe the Joint Chiefs will escort him from the White House in shackles.
I share your sentiment…..that word "Maybe", still has me worried…..
A lot rides on that hope…….but, our giving up is not part of the equation…..
Very little happens without a reason…..
Especially when it comes to this administration……
This has all been planned out…
There are no coincidences here….
We need to make this http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/07/10... a reality.
Put him into the category of Ban Ki Moon, Koffi Annan and Boutros Boutros Gali.
Just another irrelevant foreigner, with an exotic sounding name.
"Keep in mind readers, the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution), establishes laws made pursuant to the US Constitution, (“shall be the supreme law of the land”), and allows treaties enacted by Congress to supersede the Bill of Rights."
To my knowledge, the only way to change the Constitution is to amend it. How can the Congress (Senate) ratify a treaty that amends the Constitution of the United States? They can try anything, but whether it will fly is another matter.
Treaties ratified by our Senate trump the Constitution according tho the last time this was discussed. I have not looked it up.
If that is the case, then we might as well not have a Constitution at all. It does make me wonder what the Founders meant by the phrase "shall be the supreme law of the land". I can't imagine they would have intended for a treaty to suborn the rights of the people.
In my research, I did not delve into the deeper portions of how the clause could be countered should such a treaty be signed. My understanding is the Supremacy Clause only applies “IF” the government acts on it in pursuit of constitutional authorized powers. The clause reads:
“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 supreme law of the land which provides state courts to be bound by said law. Federal law would then be applied in conflicting cases between the state and federal and provides that state constitutions to be subordinate to federal law.
Now I submit this as additional content for everyone to consider…..and I realize it may not necessarily answer your specific question. With that, I hope someone with that knowledge would generously chime in…..
I'm with you.
Yes. He will.
"Americans “just don’t 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 from the halls of the UN negotiating chambers."
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-t...
Really? Cheapens ans weakens? How about abrogates and decimates?
Mr. Romney?!
You have just been given a HUGE campaign issue on a silver platter.
Please. Take that silver platter.
And DO something constructive!
Agreed, this is more ammo (no pun) for Romney.
I wonder if his finger has ever been inside a trigger guard…
I doubt it, but I think he understands their importance.
If he doesn't, we're screwed….
Regardless.
He is a politician.
And this is a major emotional issue.
Obama has been hammering the emotional issue of 'fairness' in regards to taxes and income for 4 years…..
Now, Romney is being given a HUGE emotional issue to run with.
This is the type of issue that can truly energize the base if presented correctly.
A very good point Joseph…..thanks!
In my mind, if handled correctly, this could be the type of emotional issue that energizes the base and aligns the support of many independents who are gun owners or simply believers in the right to own and bear.
Typically, in the course of modern American politics….the left has been able to monopolize the emotional issues.
This is a truly rare opportunity.
You're 100% correct and I too hope Romney capitalizes on this opportunity…..
I also believe the "if" and especially the "how" will determine in many minds exactly where he sits on the matter too…..a guy like Romney has to know about this…..and one would hope that someone with the proper influence regarding it has his ear……
This issue trumps the NAACP speech, tenfold…….
Agreed!
The NAACP speech is really a non-starter.
I say it over and over…..I know some folks get tired of reading it…..lol….half my family is black….and I PROMISE you….it will be cold day in hell that you can convince any significant number of blacks NOT to vote for Obama. Obama could declare martial law and they would say he is doing the right thing.
Black folks in 2012 can't see past the skin color on the end of their nose.
That said, I think if Romney can effectively highlight the 'sneaky' parts of the treaty….and cogently argue how and why they are a potential threat to our 2d Ammendment….he can really elevate this issue.
I am really hoping Obama signs it on the 27th. I think this could be the issue that crushes him.
If Romney handles it correctly.
BTW….does anyone find it odd that Chicago has become the home to gun violence in the US? I think there is more to it than coincidence.
I can't agree with you on the signing point…..but I understand what you are saying. This doesn't even come close to Obamacare which is an inside our border issue…..signing with the UN on this one, the having it ratified during a lame-duck session of the Senate, nothing would be able to change it……we will no longer have a 2nd Amendment……
An unarmed populace cannot prevent tyranny of a rogue government……elections wouldn't even matter at that point…..in essence, a Romney presidency wouldn't change it…….
I say that I hope he signs it….with my understanding that treaties require a 2/3 (60 vote) majority to pass?
Am I wrong about that?? (I am really not sure now)
Because there is no way in an election year he will get 60 votes. That would mean GOP would have to give him some…..
Don't bet your liberty that they wouldn't….
Progressive RINOs can never be trusted…
I figured you knew about the ratification part…..he could sign it, and the Senate can vote against it……in a perfect world, no Senator would risk their respective careers on it……but we both know this ain't a perfect world and I frankly don't trust a Harry Reid-led Senate……
Believe me Joeseph, I worry both about him signing it and it passing the Senate……I trust virtually nothing out of Washington these days……
That's why I constantly harp on people contacting their Senators now…..only we can make a difference on this one and time is running out. Deuse is right, we can't bet our Liberty on this one based on assumptions. We have to be clear with our respective Senators……every day, all day…..
And yes……2/3 vote or 60 is required…..
….Or at least one executive order apparently.
There are some "retiring" RINO Senators, that Dick Morris believes might go rogue, vote with the Left on this treaty JoS. Morris has turned this subject every which way but loose in his book "Screwed".
In my research for the article, there were several Dhimicratic Senators who spoke in favor of the treaty…..the names however, do escape me at the moment. But to expound on the severity and likelyhood of this treaty becoming a law, I’ll refer to the following link and provide a key quote from it that is very relevant:
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2352/624/Obama_Cli...
It is likely that most advocates and supporters of the Second Amendment know that unless a treaty is ratified by two-thirds of the Senate, it fails to have any legal effect on American citizens. This confidence comes from Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, to wit:
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…
According to Alonso that is a thin reed upon which to rely. In his study he remarks, “The ways in which the rights of private United States gun owners could be infringed are endless.” For example,
The first way is the possibility that the President of the United States signs [a treaty]…. Signature by a United States President would indicate to the international community that the United States intends to abide by the gun control laws, with or without ratification by the Senate. [Emphasis added.]
A second way these gun control laws could affect United States parties is in the event that gun control becomes a customary international law. Even if the United States did not sign on to [a] treaty, if the United States began to abide by [it], the United States may, in effect, be consenting to [that treaty] becoming customary international law. In the eyes of an international court, the United States, by following the treat[y], is consenting to be bound by the treaties in the future.
Kopel agrees that a mere signature by the president would be sufficient to enact such a treaty, regardless of opposition by Congress. Kopel explains: “The United States Supreme Court has cited unratified treaties…as guidance for interpreting United States constitutional provisions.”
What’s especially frightening is the current president’s propensity to sign, arbitrarily and unilaterally, numerous Executive Orders (EOs) to put in place his policies without the necessity of consulting Congress. To date he has issued 128 EOs, the latest concerning deportation of children of illegal immigrants residing in the United States.
Sadly, both Romney and Obama, serve the same ungrateful bastard master, the world's 6 mega-banks. Resistance IS Victory; V for Victory. Join the peaceful non-violent resistence at: http://www.infowars.com. The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing (Edmund Burke)
Mitt Romney has never been pro-gun or pro 2nd Amendment. His current position is a lie, as his his supposed NRA Life Membership. Mitt Romney is as likely to take your guns as President Obama…….perhaps more likely……..he just might end up with a republican house and senate at his beck and call. We better learn that the republican and democrat parties are a single two headed monster, and apply that knowledge at the voting booth if we are ever to once again call ourselves "free."
Proving who you are when you exercise your right to vote is considered by socialists to be a violation of the voting rights granted to us in the Constitution.
Signing a treaty which empowers the UN to ultimately dictate our right to own guns is not considered a violation of the rights granted to us in the Constitution.
Who decided this?
Ahhh, yes. The Philosopher King once again dictates that which is Right.
He's really the Red Queen in disguise….
The Constitution is the mundane solidification of the natural rights granted to us by our creator.
You mean Barry Soetoro, the Indonesian citizen born out of wedlock, making him not only a bastard but an illegal alien. His REAL father was Frank Marshall, the pornographer-poet, and not the alleged dad from Kenya who does NOT look anything like Prez Barry; just do a search and compare photos of Barry and Frank Marshall and you'll definitely see the remarkable likeness. Quite a revelation.
OBAMA, 2 Wods for you " SUCK IT " !!!
Hi Wee. Time to jack-off?
Don't you just love it when misspelling and bad grammar works out even better than intended?
He changed his post since I responded to him. He was trying to play moby dick with the first one. What a loser.
Glad you locked this one in…. Priceless!
This is absolute TREASON by a dictatorial traitor who, because he is an Illegal Alien, is guilty of Espionage and has total control of all nuclear warheads in control of the USA……This should scare the hell out of every person in the world! When he signs this "Treaty" on the 27th, the awakening to his crimes against humanity and against America will be fully evident and I hope the people will begin to realize what his true agenda is……..AGENDA 21 / GLOBAL GOVERNMENT!
If they take away guns from all of the people worldwide…..WE ALL BECOME SLAVES!
Or DEAD!
If he signs the treaty then he is not fulfilling his oath to uphold the constitution and should be impeached.
Come and get them my bit….chesssssssss!
Everyone needs to go online and look up Alex Jones information wars, And then bring up his you tube site. Watch his documentary the Obama Deception. This will explain exactly who's responsible for all the new power grabbing that is taking away our precious constitutional rights!!!!!!
Treasonous
IF ITS A CIVIL WAR THEY WANT? THEY CAME TO THE WRONG PLACE! A civil war will only last a few days. A civil war in the USA will cause the whole world to fall apart! If they send in the blue helmets they will piled up like cord wood. The true lovers of LIBERTY stand up, there will be a NEW U.S.A No more nannay state and true repsentitive republic, the way our Fore Fathers had in mind! If I must die fighting for my LIBERTY, and 2 nd. admendment I will do it for my children, and the future of the USA.
"GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"
Sgt. Dale,
How do you plan to fight 30,000 drones? Do you really expect the "blue helmets" to come a knocking? Our only chance to win this battle is at the voting booth, and we better learn how to vote soon! A vote for a republican or a democrat is the same thing in the end…..bigger government, less liberty, and assimilation into the NWO. Mitt Romney is not a choice, he is there to ensure that the republicrat establishment maintains its stranglehold on our government regardless of whether it is he that is elected or President Obama.
If push comes to shove, I would expect to fight the 30k drones with 30k+ shoulder-fired misiles stolen from NG armories. I would also expect to attack the blue helmets before they come a knockin'. Blue helmets in my country is an invasion, and Americans know how to deal with invasions … extreme prejudice.
Who do you expect us to vote for, anyway? The Libertarians? NO ONE except a DEM or a Republican will be elected President, this year. Do you expect otherwise? A vote for a Libertarian … or any other thrid-party candidate … is simply a vote for Comrade Zero.