It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => 2nd Amendment/Firearms => Topic started by: BMG on July 09, 2012, 10:24:11 AM
-
LINK (http://www.infowars.com/soros-promotes-un-control-over-gun-ownership/)
George Soros is financing the fight to give the United Nations control of your guns.
Through his Media Matters organization, Soros is dumping pro-UN gun control propaganda into the mainstream media to coincide with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York July 2–27.
LINK (http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/)
What, exactly, does the intended agreement entail?
While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. 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.
Have no doubt that this plan is very real, with strong Obama administration support. In January 2010 the U.S. joined 152 other countries in endorsing a U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution that will establish a 2012 conference to draft a blueprint for enactment. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to push for Senate ratification.
-
You silly Conservatives. Obama is not after your guns. Stop buying into the hype!
We had a war so that foreign powers couldn't tax us, but that is old time stuff. Get with the new progressive future you backwards sloping heads!
(http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/07/forget-obamatax-are-you-ready-for-global-taxes/Hey did you see the new global tax?[/url)
-
If the Senate ratifies this atrocity, then IMO it is game on for full-blown revolt! You cannot deny our God-given rights enshrined by our Founders into the Bill of Rights. These rights CANNOT be taken away by any force on earth without suffering severe consequences.
;)
-
OMG, the Democrat-Media complex keeps pushing this sh*t!
But don't worry, those always stalwart ( ::) ) folks at NRA are on top of it!
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-treaty-could-put-us-gun-owners-in-foreign-sights-say-critics/ (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/07/11/un-arms-treaty-could-put-us-gun-owners-in-foreign-sights-say-critics/)
::saywhat::
-
LINK (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/20/will-obama-sign-the-arms-trade-treaty/)
Kim Holmes of the Heritage Foundation critiqued the extant draft of the treaty in the Washington Times on 11 July, pointing out, essentially, that its language will work to the advantage of whoever has the most popular cause in the UN. Russia and China, for example, could justify all their arms sales under the category of national security, whereas the US could be charged with “keeping conflicts going” by selling arms to Taiwan or Israel (or Japan or the UK, for that matter).
She also makes the case that the mere existence of the treaty, even if the US Senate doesn’t ratify it, will provide a ready slate of off-the-shelf provisions for Congress to incorporate into US law. Other commentators have pointed out that Obama could, in theory, sign the treaty and develop executive-agency enforcement procedures against the US arms industry and American gun-owners, which Congress would have difficulty preventing.
Executive “initiative” has been a common practice of the Obama administration, and in the case of the drilling moratorium, was adhered to in the face of court orders to cease and desist. A great deal of the traditional strength of checks and balances has been undermined during the Obama administration. It is sensible to be concerned about unilateral “enforcement” of the Arms Trade Treaty by the Obama executive. Court challenges might well not be dealt with before the end of Obama’s term.
-
Outright rebellion can certainly occur before the end of Obama's term!
-
Historically it would occur before the election or
rebellion of a different style if he is reelected.
-
I'm not about to sit still for the idea of some UN treaty overruling the Constitution of the United States.
-
Me neither. If ever a clear declaration of war was to be invoked upon free people, removing our inviolable right to carry arms would certainly top the list!
Not on my watch!
-
We've been following this collection of fools up here in Canada also. I gather, nothing happened as they have to agree on the terms, and the players ate so busy figuring out ways to screw each other, the meeting time ran out.. as such, they will meet again in about a year to hoe the same row over and over. Two bright spots, 1 I don't think Bammy will be around to sign anything, and Canada's Prime Minister and party won't even consider listening to a treaty if it has civilian firearms in it, or civilian ammunition. ::hysterical::
-
@robin:
I think they simply let the time expire because they knew they couldn't move the political football. They had been hoping that Obumbles and his communist cronies would have been sitting a bit prettier by this time in the political cycle so that they could spend the political capitol in order to sign the treaty. I'm sure they're sorely disappointed...but wht, there's always next time.
-
There's a run on all the pain killers and muscle relaxants here in Canada since this was announced. All our liberals had spasms in their manginas and needed treatment. ::newyear::