US Senate stands with NRA - Page 2

US Senate stands with NRA

This is a discussion on US Senate stands with NRA within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by archer51 I'm confused?! The answer to your letter has nothing to do with the UN Arms Treaty. I realize Feinstein is an ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 22 of 22
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: US Senate stands with NRA

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array tubadude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    WV/PA
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    I'm confused?! The answer to your letter has nothing to do with the UN Arms Treaty. I realize Feinstein is an idiot, but I don't think she'd reply with a letter addressing the Gun Runner scandal when asked to vote against the UN Arms Treaty.
    I believe that was the response to an earlier letter in regards to Gun Runner (check the date). Politicians are experts at dodging questions, but I don't think Ol' Feinie is that ignorant.


  2. #17
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,180
    Tubadude is right - for the confusion, archer51, and thanks for asking.

    My point is in reference to a phrase from Sen. Moran's letter signed by forty-five Republican senators - a phrase I quote in today's (Treaty) letter from me to Senator Feinstein. I indicate to her that some UN member states are criminally failing "to take the necessary steps to block trafficking that is already illegal under existing laws and agreements". This is an appeal to enforce the existing law before culpable states agree to a treaty that is redundant at best and a potential threat to 2A.

    To clarify, further, my above post identifies the U.S., as evidenced by its BATF's, Project Gunrunner / Fast and Furious, as one of those criminally failing member states. Finally, I indicate that this conversation with my senator is ongoing and that, if she thought about it, she may identify our country as being culpable in breaking international arms trade law and to start international arms control with our own government.

    Thanks, again, and I hope that I'm being clear enough.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  3. #18
    Distinguished Member Array AZJD1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wichita Falls Tx.
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by retsupt99 View Post
    Well, 51 is all that is needed for now, but the fact that another 49 do not feel that way is troubling. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but numbers can change quickly!
    Absolutely! That 51 could turn into 55!
    Stop whining and go do something that makes a difference!
    If you think that I may be talking to you, then I am.

  4. #19
    VIP Member
    Array Pistology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    South Coast LA Cty
    Posts
    2,180

    Arrow

    From me to Senators [Feinstein and Boxer]:
    Please join the dozen Democratic senators who have expressed concerns about the potential of the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty to infringe on the rights of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms.
    These senators believe that other nations of the world may better adopt and enforce a more rigorous system of arms export controls. The senators urge the president to address their concerns that 1) the Arms Trade Treaty not regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sales of firearms or ammunition, that 2) the treaty signatory countries maintain the exclusive authority to regulate arms within their own borders, that 3) the treaty exclude small arms, light weapons, ammunition or related materials that would make the treaty overly broad and unenforceable, and that 4) the treaty omit any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners.
    The senators' names are:
    Jon tester (D - MT)
    Jeanne Shaheen (D - NH)
    Mark Begich (D - AK)
    Claire McCaskill (D - MO)
    Max Baucus (D - MT)
    Joe Manchin, III (D - WV)
    Mark L. Pryor (D - AR)
    Robert P. Casey, Jr. (D - PA)
    Tom Udall (D - NM)
    Ben Nelson (D - NE)
    Jim Webb (D - VA)
    Mark R. Warner (D - VA)
    Mark Udall (D - CO)

    Please affirm your oath to "Support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic" including wolves in sheeps' clothing - "culpable member states of the United Nations who have failed to take the necessary steps to block trafficking that is already illegal under existing laws and agreements"; to "Bear true faith and allegiance to the same" - including the Second Amendment; to "Well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office" to acheive international cooperation with respect to and not counter to our Constitution.
    Reply from Sen. Feinstein a week ago:
    Thank you for writing to express your concerns about possible ratification of an international treaty aimed at stemming the proliferation of small arms and light weapons worldwide. I appreciate hearing your views on this issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

    I understand you have serious concerns about this proposed treaty. The purpose of the ongoing negotiations is to draft a legally binding treaty on the export, import, and international transfer on conventional weapons. It will not address the personal ownership of guns or gun owners' rights. The actual drafting of the treaty will take place in 2012.

    Please know that I strongly support this process. According to Amnesty International, more than 500,000 people per year are killed with conventional arms, and almost 60% of documented human rights violations have involved the use of small arms and light weapons. Further, the Small Arms Survey estimates that there are more than 875 million firearms in the world today, roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. These numbers help to underscore the fact that a majority of the deaths in conflicts worldwide are small arms-related.
    While we do not necessarily agree on this particular issue, please know that your views are important to me, and I will keep them in mind should the Senate discuss ratification of such a treaty.

    Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to write on matters of importance to you. Should you have any further comments or questions, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.

    Sincerely yours,

    Dianne Feinstein
    United States Senator
    The senator opposes her colleagues specifically on their point (#3, in their letter) that "the treaty exclude small arms, light weapons, ammunition or related materials that would make the treaty overly broad and unenforceable".

    Clearly, she uses the same old gun control rhetoric: criminals use guns. So write laws that say that they can't.
    Americans understood the right of self-preservation as permitting a citizen to repel force by force
    when the intervention of society... may be too late to prevent an injury.
    -Blackstone’s Commentaries 145–146, n. 42 (1803) in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

  5. #20
    Distinguished Member Array Stubborn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tampa Fl
    Posts
    1,530
    Please know that I strongly support this process. According to Amnesty International, more than 500,000 people per year are killed with conventional arms, and almost 60% of documented human rights violations have involved the use of small arms and light weapons. Further, the Small Arms Survey estimates that there are more than 875 million firearms in the world today, roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. These numbers help to underscore the fact that a majority of the deaths in conflicts worldwide are small arms-related.

    While we do not necessarily agree on this particular issue, please know that your views are important to me, and I will keep them in mind should the Senate discuss ratification of such a treaty.


    In other words, I don't care what you think, I will vote on this how I see fit.

    I get the exact same load of crap from "our" democratic Senator Bill Nelson, everytime I write or email concerning gun issues or especailly concerning the last two Supreme court Justice's confirmations. Almost word for word.
    "The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it".
    Thomas Jefferson

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  6. #21
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,340
    No treaty can nullify or over ride the powers of the constitution.
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  7. #22
    Senior Member Array rmilchman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    792
    The treaty may not be able to over ride the constitution, but the treaty can limit or prevent what is imported into the country.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

arms treaty and mark warner
,

concealed carry tom udall

,
does senator mark warner support the arms trade treaty?
,

florida us senators stand on gun control

,

jeanne shaheen on un arms treaty

,

mark pryor un arms treaty

,

mark udall un small arms trety

,
mark warner arms trade treaty
,

mark warner u.n. arms trade treaty

,
mark warner un arms treaty
,

sen. shaheen on arms trade treaty

,

senators against un small arms treaty nra

Click on a term to search for related topics.