U.N. Small Arms Treaty would affect US citizens gun ownership?
I've seen this article discussed in the past and I just saw this link that was dated for today's news, I guess this is still brewing.
I see that this U.N. Small Arms Treaty is still being talked about. I recently read in the news that Obama said something like, "they were working on some gun control measures under the radar". I wonder if this is what he was referring to? I don't think it would hurt at all for everyone to contact their senators.
U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Larry Bell - The Bell Tells for You - Forbes
UN Proposes Small Arms Ban for US
U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms
READ HERE: U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Larry Bell - The Bell Tells for You - Forbes
SAME THING HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA A FEW YEARS BACK!:yup: SOMETHING ABOUT MY COLD DEAD HANDS!:aargh4:
Here we go again.....Tilting at Windmills
This time it’s not “Hillary signed United Nations Gun Ban Treaty”, and then “Obama’s efforts under the radar”. Now this total BS.
All of this under the guise of a UN treaty that will at best make us register all our guns and at worst take them all away.
One thing I’ve learned over the last few years is:
If it sounds too good to be true, it turns out not to be true.
If it sounds to bad to be true, it also turns out not to be true.
Well, first things first. Obama may well be trying to get some sort of UN Gun Control passed under the radar..... Ok.....So What?? That, in itself doesn’t matter a tinker’s damn.
For the professional journalists to go into print, without the needed research is inexcusable.
So, lets explore the known sequence of events followed by the requires sequence of events that need to occur.
Last “Small Arms Conference in the UN was in 2006
United Nations Small Arms Review Conference 2006
The last UN action was a “list of recommendations in 2008.
Nothing has moved since then.
This so called treaty has yet to be put into print for the “Permanent Members” and “Temporary Voting Members” of the UN for THEIR CONSIDERATION.
IF.....repeat......IF, more than when, this ever gets into print and passes in the UN (not gonna happen), then it needs to “Ratified” by the member states/countries. Obama would THEN need to pass it to the Senate for it’s consideration and “Consent” which requires a 2/3 vote of the FULL senate....thats 67 votes.. Then he (Obama) would be the one to “Ratify” the treaty. In any event, if Ratified, Constitutionally, it would be ONLY be legal so long as it did NOT infringe on America citizens rights while they remain within the CONUS. Of course, if not ‘consented to’ by the Senate, ( and who really thinks the votes are there in the Senate) then the treaty cannot be passed. And even if WE (The US) passed it ourselves, if just one other permanent member of the UN voted “NO” then the treaty fails. End of story.
This type of hype journalism really upsets me. We need to be focused on issues that have a potential of happening rather than those that have a snowball chance in hell of ever seeing daylight.