Obama told to back off U.N. gun treaty

[Guest No Ammo]

This is a must read

http://www.wnd.com/2...u-n-gun-treaty/

Edited July 5, 2012 by No Ammo

[Guest 6.8 AR]

He doesn't, nor does Hillary care one bit what any

congressman or individual thinks about that treaty.

The only thing saving us on that and LOST are the

numbers in the senate, and that's just barely since

Fools like Alexander would probably vote in favor

of.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ThePunisher]

And there are still people that own guns and believe in the 2nd that will vote for the re-election of the commie.

[E4 No More]

World Nut Daily is a must read? No thanks.

[Volzfan]

[daddyo]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/robert-farago/obama-will-sign-u-n-gun-control-treaty-on-july-27-if-hes-stupid/

[Guest uofmeet]

he tried to sell me something, so he lost all credibility with me.

[E4 No More]

I agree that even the dummycrat senators would not ratify the treaty knowing that it's political suicide.

[Chucktshoes]

I agree that even the dummycrat senators would not ratify the treaty knowing that it's political suicide.

I'd venture to say that it is a little more literal than political suicide. A vote for ratification of this treaty will mark you as a valid target in the eyes of certain folks.

[mikegideon]

Doesn't ratification take 2/3 of the senate? That won't happen. Obama has to know that. Bet he's just throwing a bone to his libtard supporters.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

He'd give anything to get that treaty ratified. Yep. 2/3rds.

[mikegideon]

He'd give anything to get that treaty ratified. Yep. 2/3rds.

Don't doubt that. Just saying, he has to know it won't happen.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think it's too low a threshold for a treaty to

only need 2/3rd of the senate to pass. It should

be 100%, since a treaty overrides the legislative

process of duly elected Americans. Hard to undo

a ratified treaty and it injects foreign legal principles

into our legal system. That is for any treaty like

LOST or the weapons treaties or the like.

A treaty for two countries to affect trade or

weapons to protect each others sovereign

territory by means of preventing proliferation

may be okay with the lower threshold, but

not something to affect the inner workings

in our country. I wish that could be changed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest ThePunisher]

Read an article from Drudge Report today that George Soros is promoting UN control over gun ownership. These commie Libs will not rest till they get your guns. Obama has been sneaky quiet about it, but you can bet the farm that he wants your guns. About 90 million gun owners, and they will have to pry the guns from 50 million dead fingers. That's my guess of how many will stand up to these commies.

[Chucktshoes]

3%

[stick1]

Soros has been at this for years NRA made it public on him years ago, Soros only backs canadates that are anti-gun

[Worriedman]

3%

Or less...

[Guest ThePunisher]

Wow, Chuckshoes and Worriedman, y'all don't have much faith in gun owners defending the 2nd, and their freedoms from government tyranny. Has our country become a bunch of wusses that just don't care anymore?

[Chucktshoes]

Google the "doctrine of the 3%". 3% of the gun owning population is likely all we would get, but hopefully all we would need. We aren't talking about showing up for a rally somewhere or writing a strongly worded letter to your congresscitter. This is the subject of armed rebellion, how many people do you think are honestly prepared engage in civil war?

Edited July 9, 2012 by Chucktshoes

[monkeylizard]

Has our country become a bunch of wusses that just don't care anymore?

Yes.

Edited July 9, 2012 by monkeylizard

[TMF]

Wow, Chuckshoes and Worriedman, y'all don't have much faith in gun owners defending the 2nd, and their freedoms from government tyranny. Has our country become a bunch of wusses that just don't care anymore?

I take part in revolution everytime I go to the polls. The guns will stay silent until I start to see blue helmets or zombies... or zombies in blue helmets.

[Guest ThePunisher]

I take part in revolution everytime I go to the polls. The guns will stay silent until I start to see blue helmets or zombies... or zombies in blue helmets.

The 2008 revolution didn't turn out very well for freedom loving people. The real revolution will start at the polls in November to remove the current zombies from the WH, or the threat of blue helmets will become closer to reality. Glad to know we can count on you.

Edited July 9, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Oh Shoot]

....This is the subject of armed rebellion, how many people do you think are honestly prepared engage in civil war?

The only way there could be a civil war is if the military/guard splits in half to form the sides.

If you could actually even unite 3% of all adult citizenry, it could only be an underground guerrilla movement. More likely that there will be military coup than a "war". More likely than even that is total social breakdown, but anarchy is not civil war either.

- OS

[Chucktshoes]

Regardless of the nature the conflict takes, if you have a contingent of the population fighting against the government and it is hot enough to destabilize the government or the society at large, you have a state of civil war.

Keep in mind also that currently the .mil makes up only about 8/10 of 1% of the population. How many would turn on the .gov if things go hot? Some, not all but enough, take that oath sworn to the constitution VERY seriously. So 3% of even just gun owners is a dangerously large number to those that are working to usurp our liberty.

[gun sane]

I got an email from TN Senator Bob Corker about this issue. After all the usual flag waving, "I stand for your constitutional rights" chatter, he includes this:

As you may know, the U.N. passed a resolution stating intentions to begin negotiating an international agreement surrounding the import, export and transfer of conventional arms. These negotiations will conclude with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty in 2012.

At this time there is no treaty pending before the United States Senate as the negotiations are ongoing. That said, I will continue to closely monitor the negotiations over the next year, and I can assure you, I will not vote for a measure that infringes upon U.S. sovereignty or a person's right to keep and bear arms. For this reason, I along with several of my colleagues in the Senate, sent a letter to President Obama expressing strong support for the constitutional protections of civilian gun ownership, and stating intentions to oppose any treaty that is presented to the Senate which in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms and ammunition.

Well, not for nuthin', Bob, but these lying rascals who want to take our firearms aren't advertising that it's a gun grab. They say they just want to control international arms transfers to protect us, but they'll grab the rest once they're inside the tent. I want a representative who nips tyrannical assaults on our freedoms in the bud, not just "closely monitors them." You think you might get off your honorable duff and walk over to the House side for some man lessons from these bulldogs, Bob?

By the way....he's pretty presumptuous saying that he'll monitor anything over the next year, seeing that he's up for re-election this year.