UN Arms Treaty (MERGED)

This is a discussion on UN Arms Treaty (MERGED) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Treaties for the most part are agreements between governments,like suntzu said to take an action or accomplish sometihing .Usually it has very little direct effect ...

Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 286
Like Tree149Likes

Thread: UN Arms Treaty (MERGED)

  1. #166
    Senior Member Array CIBMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    893
    Treaties for the most part are agreements between governments,like suntzu said to take an action or accomplish sometihing .Usually it has very little direct effect on the citizenry of the countries invovled.Maybe i am missing something but where is the language in this treatie that shows it will have a direct effect on us.?
    The easy way is always mined.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #167
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by CIBMike View Post
    Treaties for the most part are agreements between governments,like suntzu said to take an action or accomplish sometihing .Usually it has very little direct effect on the citizenry of the countries invovled.Maybe i am missing something but where is the language in this treatie that shows it will have a direct effect on us.?
    The language is called ...... Violation of our Constitution. So what more are you asking for?
    "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

  4. #168
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,813
    Quote Originally Posted by tangoseal View Post
    The language is called ...... Violation of our Constitution. So what more are you asking for?
    Please cite the exact language...it is still being written

  5. #169
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,813
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    While the subject matter may be comparing apples to oranges the matter of honoring two different treaties that have not been ratified is the same is apples to apples.
    Honoring Salt II only proves that any signed but not ratified treaty might potentially be honored. In effect bypassing the will of the Senate.

    Michael
    The point is every body is getting bent out of shape that this treaty will trump the Constitution and that we will fall under a mandatory mandate by the UN. SALT II was not like that at all. That was my point.

  6. #170
    VIP Member Array paaiyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,071
    Quote Originally Posted by tangoseal View Post
    The language is called ...... Violation of our Constitution. So what more are you asking for?
    OK now that response is just asking for a rebuttal. I'm semi-concerned about this treaty and keeping an eye on it, but really? Do you have any idea at all how absolutely childish that sounded? Grow up and drop the "I'm rubber, you're glue" attitude. And cite your sources. As Suntzu said, I keep hearing people say it's violating the constitution, but I have yet to see a single person quote language from it to prove that point.
    Sig 210, suntzu and CIBMike like this.
    My blog

    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.

  7. #171
    Ex Member Array oldrwizr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Durham, N.C.
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by paaiyan View Post
    OK now that response is just asking for a rebuttal. I'm semi-concerned about this treaty and keeping an eye on it, but really? Do you have any idea at all how absolutely childish that sounded? Grow up and drop the "I'm rubber, you're glue" attitude. And cite your sources. As Suntzu said, I keep hearing people say it's violating the constitution, but I have yet to see a single person quote language from it to prove that point.
    It's the same sheeple who said by the end of Obama's first term guns would be illegal. I don't think he's done a bad job for a Muslim born in Kenya!

  8. #172
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,840
    Fact of the matter is...our liberty is lost one step at a time, in small increments, not so much that you notice, but one day you wake up and have none.

    Make no mistake...this is the first step. It may take years, or even a generation or two, but one the ball starts rolling downhill, it picks up speed.
    Spidey2011 and phreddy like this.
    The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it...- George Orwell

    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  9. #173
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    Beware of beginning of the end predictions. Anyone remember the "assault weapons" ban that was touted to be the beginning of the end? Chuckie Schumer said "wait until you see the rest of the camel". Chuckies camel lost its nose and head when the AWB expired like it was scheduled to. Twenty years ago the Brady bunch was awash in cash. They had unrestricted access to the white house: Now they're having trouble paying their bills and anti-gun organizations are shunned like the plague.

  10. #174
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Fact of the matter is...our liberty is lost one step at a time, in small increments, not so much that you notice, but one day you wake up and have none.

    Make no mistake...this is the first step. It may take years, or even a generation or two, but one the ball starts rolling downhill, it picks up speed.
    But I thought the National Firearms act of 1934 was the first step. Or the Federal Firearms act of 1938? Or was it the Gun Control Act of 1968? Or was it the Brady act?

    I AM SO CONFUSED!

    It seems every time I got solicited to donate money to fight something it was the "first step". Isn't this really more like the 17th step?

    But seriously now, if was accept the premise that the jackbooted storm troopers are just waiting for the green light to kick our doors in and take all of our weapons away, and that the feds don't care about the Constitution and SCOTUS precedents, why do they need a scrap of paper from the U.N. to do their evil deeds? If they are really as evil and diabolical as some would have us believe what was stopping them from kicking our doors in right after Gabby Giffords was shot? Or why didn't they do it before SCOTUS heard Heller and McDonald?
    Sig 210 likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  11. #175
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    But I thought the National Firearms act of 1934 was the first step. Or the Federal Firearms act of 1938? Or was it the Gun Control Act of 1968? Or was it the Brady act?

    I AM SO CONFUSED!

    It seems every time I got solicited to donate money to fight something it was the "first step". Isn't this really more like the 17th step?

    But seriously now, if was accept the premise that the jackbooted storm troopers are just waiting for the green light to kick our doors in and take all of our weapons away, and that the feds don't care about the Constitution and SCOTUS precedents, why do they need a scrap of paper from the U.N. to do their evil deeds? If they are really as evil and diabolical as some would have us believe what was stopping them from kicking our doors in right after Gabby Giffords was shot? Or why didn't they do it before SCOTUS heard Heller and McDonald?
    Are you saying that these laws were not in fact all steps in the same direction? Or are you saying that they had no effect on the freedom of honest law abiding American citizens? Bought my first firearm in grade school with my paper route money. Can kids still do that or has that freedom been lost? That the 1984 gun bill did not artificially drive up the costs of machine guns to the point where most of us can no longer afford them?

    Isn't this really more like the 17th step?
    Its fine with you that we have taken seventeen steps away from freedom? That with each step we have left freedom farther behind?

    Michael
    HotGuns likes this.

  12. #176
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    Are you saying that these laws were not in fact all steps in the same direction? Or are you saying that they had no effect on the freedom of honest law abiding American citizens? Bought my first firearm in grade school with my paper route money. Can kids still do that or has that freedom been lost? That the 1984 gun bill did not artificially drive up the costs of machine guns to the point where most of us can no longer afford them?
    No, the NRA, GOA, and various members of this forum appear to be saying that. Because if this is the first step all of those other laws by definition could not have been steps in that direction could they? If they were, this could not be the first could it? Can't have it both ways.

    Its fine with you that we have taken seventeen steps away from freedom? That with each step we have left freedom farther behind?

    Michael
    When did I ever say that?
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  13. #177
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    No, the NRA, GOA, and various members of this forum appear to be saying that. Because if this is the first step all of those other laws by definition could not have been steps in that direction could they? If they were, this could not be the first could it? Can't have it both ways.


    When did I ever say that?
    Okay, I misunderstood your point. I read your post to mean that this was what you believed.

    Michael

  14. #178
    Ex Member Array F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High in Colorado
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by paaiyan View Post
    OK now that response is just asking for a rebuttal. I'm semi-concerned about this treaty and keeping an eye on it, but really? Do you have any idea at all how absolutely childish that sounded? Grow up and drop the "I'm rubber, you're glue" attitude. And cite your sources. As Suntzu said, I keep hearing people say it's violating the constitution, but I have yet to see a single person quote language from it to prove that point.
    I was watching John Bolton on one of the Sunday news shows....HE sees grave danger in this treaty, said the anti-second amendment types are still working on language to insert, at the very least it will require registration of private firearms in any signatory country. Personally I'll take Bolton's opinion over anyone on any board.
    phreddy and HotGuns like this.

  15. #179
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    The idea that these gradual attempts will ever work is ludicrous. These little attempts are like thinking that a fifteen foot boat piloted by a handful of illiterate teens could board and take over a huge oil tanker on the open ocean.
    No wait, thats not a good example. I'll get back to you on this.

    Michael

  16. #180
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,813
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Fact of the matter is...our liberty is lost one step at a time, in small increments, not so much that you notice, but one day you wake up and have none.

    Make no mistake...this is the first step. It may take years, or even a generation or two, but one the ball starts rolling downhill, it picks up speed.
    Exactly what step are you referring to? The thing has not been written, has not been voted on by the UN, has not been signed by the POTUS, has not been ratified by the Senate, has not had any US person affected yet, has not had one law changed or stepped on, has not affected how the COnstitution is interpreted, has not been challenged before Federal Courts and SCOTUS...so just what step are you talking about.
    Folks have been talking about this and that for years. For you to try to say this is a first step that might not see fruition for generations is like making any prediction....you may be right and you may be wrong. But times and attitudes do change. From womans rights to slavery. We love to qoute the Constitution and founding founders when we want but we forget that the COnstitution was not close to being perfect. Do not mistake this for me saying the 2nd amendment should go away. In fact, I want to see an Amendment to the COnstitution to clarify any issues the courts have with it..and yes, they do have trouble with it. We can say it is black and white and there is no ambiguity but unfortuantely folks on this forum do no sit on SCOTUS.

Page 12 of 20 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast

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

ammo prices rising because of treaty
,
did clinton sign the att
,
did hilary sign small arms treaty
,
did hillary clinton sign a treaty july 27
,
did hillary clinton sign the small arms treaty with the un
,

did hillary clinton sign the un small arms treaty

,
freedom from war
,

freedom from war snopes

,
politifact small arms treaty
,

un at&t treaty

,
un small arms treaty forum
,
would reid v. covert deny the small arms treaty
Click on a term to search for related topics.