I told you so....

[cmdrdredd]

I do not have a comment on the articles, but the "They're REALLY serious" comment had me laughing for a few minutes this morning, thank you!

"We Take The Internet Seriously! No, I mean it!"

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[dustinfox]

At least someone gets it.... and just like the "Assault Weapon Ban" we all thought it could not would not happen here and if not for the NRA helping to put a time limit on it we would still be stuck with that POS legislation....

Sheldon, I brought this subject up a few months ago shortly after joining the forum. I brought it up NOT as a "call to arms," or because I thought the treaty would be ratified, or because we were in immediate danger of losing our guns. I brought it up simply because it concerns me that the Obama administration is even willing to discuss such things. I was called a fool and an idiot for being concerned that we have an anti-gun administration.

We have a president and a congress that will lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want. They are a "Chicago style" mob who will do anything to further their progressive agenda. The folks in here can "gufaw" and laugh at me all they want, but I for one will remain alert to what goes on in Washington. If they think that ALL of us are asleep, they just may try to pull something.

[DPro.40]

Here's some additional reading on the subject:

International Gun Ban Treaty? | FactCheck.org

http://italy.usembassy.gov/pdf/other/RS22108.pdf

I think, however, we need to stay away from the "it can't happen here" belief even though the chances are near zero. Other countries thought the same thing and look what happened to them.

+1.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg. Socialism or gun grabbing. They both go hand in hand. Don't fall asleep people. We haven't seen the last of Obama's back room deals. It's not above this crew to ignore political process for the end game. With Obama in power, I wouldn't assume anything. Who's to say what backroom deal he is working on now. Why did he pick a Supreme nominee that cant be verified? He still has a lot of time in office. Again, just my opinion.

[dustinfox]

+1.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg. Socialism or gun grabbing. They both go hand in hand. Don't fall asleep people. We haven't seen the last of Obama's back room deals. It's not above this crew to ignore political process for the end game. With Obama in power, I wouldn't assume anything. Who's to say what backroom deal he is working on now. Why did he pick a Supreme nominee that cant be verified? He still has a lot of time in office. Again, just my opinion.

Look what happened with the health care bill. I thought it was dead. Then suddenly they use some kind of sneaky budgetary trick to pass legislation that changes America the way we know it. In spite of what the people wanted!

At this point, I wouldn't count on congress, the constitution, OR the courts to protect our 2nd amendment rights. Like Pelosi said, they will just "pole vault" over those obstacles.

It is no longer necessary to protect the constitution, or even know what it says. They don't read the laws... Not the ones they are passing in Washington, or the ones they want to challenge as discriminatory.

[sam51]

would be more concerned about who is pulling obamas strings? than this treaty, for the time being, george soros is the $$ behind IANSA and has made no secret about his hatred for America, the guns and capitalism.

[dustinfox]

Well it seems that GOA is one of us paranoid fools who are concerned over UN gun treaty talks.

http://gunowners.org/op05042010ep.htm

[Sheldon J]

Sheldon, I brought this subject up a few months ago shortly after joining the forum. I brought it up NOT as a "call to arms," or because I thought the treaty would be ratified, or because we were in immediate danger of losing our guns. I brought it up simply because it concerns me that the Obama administration is even willing to discuss such things. I was called a fool and an idiot for being concerned that we have an anti-gun administration.

We have a president and a congress that will lie, cheat, and steal to get what they want. They are a "Chicago style" mob who will do anything to further their progressive agenda. The folks in here can "gufaw" and laugh at me all they want, but I for one will remain alert to what goes on in Washington. If they think that ALL of us are asleep, they just may try to pull something.

Precisely N like I said someone gets it.....

[Alchemist77]

[QUOTE=ep1953;1593681]Not to pick a nit here but if I'm not mistaken it the Senate that ratifies treaties. While I think it unlikely that the Senate would ratify such a treaty I don't rule out the possibility.
.....QUOTE]

Aren't there a few treaties that some of the Clinton administration kronies signed on our behalf (sending Hillary here and there to speak on our behalf even though she wasn't in elected office), and which were not ratified by congress, but which led to environmental legislation etc.? Don't forget also that the president wields significant authority via executive order as well. Fighting it up through the supreme court would take a while, and Obama may very well have a good chance to stack the court with liberals like his most recent nomination. A party (or well-funded ideological liberal wing) that controls the white house, congress, the supreme court, as well as our ambasadors to the UN etc. can do alot of things that the general population doesn't want....

Alchemist77