UN Arms Treaty (MERGED) - Page 5

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; Originally Posted by ericb327 Yeah, everybody buy more ammo. It's not gone up in price high enough. .556 Ammo has only gone up .20 cents ...

Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 286
Like Tree149Likes

Thread: UN Arms Treaty (MERGED)

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by ericb327 View Post
    Yeah, everybody buy more ammo. It's not gone up in price high enough. .556 Ammo has only gone up .20 cents a round!
    Staying pretty steady here. Maybe you're just not buying from the right place? I know a lot of people are complaining about it, but I just don't see it. I can buy Tula .223 for >$5 a box, and nowhere around me can keep it in stock. Been that way since last November and it hasn't gone up a cent. I've been paying $10.99 a box for 9mm since I bought my 9mm. Same with .45. I'm paying $44.99 for a box of 100.


  2. #62
    Member Array ares338's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NE Texas
    Posts
    49
    This garbage has been going on for as long as I remember. In any case no one will take my guns without somewhat of a struggle. I was born and raised in a free society and that is the way I'll leave this earth. The US out of the UN and the UN out of the US.
    Spidey2011, W9HDG and sigmanluke like this.

  3. #63
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,574
    It you don't think the Senate, as it sits now, could pass this Treaty, then you are wrong.

    Read this - or at least skim it and read the second half.

    Skinning Cats: Legal Means to Disarm the Second Amendment
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

  4. #64
    Ex Member Array F350's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rocky Mountain High in Colorado
    Posts
    1,706
    I really don't give a rat's @ what the treaty says.... I oppose ALL treaties with the UN!!!!
    MisterAvis likes this.

  5. #65
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    It you don't think the Senate, as it sits now, could pass this Treaty, then you are wrong.

    Read this - or at least skim it and read the second half.

    Skinning Cats: Legal Means to Disarm the Second Amendment
    SCOTUS has ruled that Treties do not overide the Constitution. Reid vs Covert 1957

    Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate. According to the decision, "this Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty," although the case itself was with regard to an executive agreement, not a "treaty" in the U.S. legal sense, and the agreement itself has never been ruled unconstitutional

  6. #66
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    SCOTUS has ruled that Treties do not overide the Constitution. Reid vs Covert 1957
    But would they rule the same way now if it DID get passed by the Senate? I doubt it. Seems SCOTUS is about useless in this day and age.

  7. #67
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Spidey2011 View Post
    But would they rule the same way now if it DID get passed by the Senate? I doubt it. Seems SCOTUS is about useless in this day and age.
    That I agree with

  8. #68
    Distinguished Member Array Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,330
    47% of American households have at least 1 gun as of a study in 2011.

    There are around 149 million households in the US. That means around 70 million households have guns (legally).

    There is about 1.5 million people in the US military and about 1 million reserve and about 800,000 LEOs.

    Some of you worry too much.
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK

  9. #69
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by Burns View Post
    47% of American households have at least 1 gun as of a study in 2011.

    There are around 149 million households in the US. That means around 70 million households have guns (legally).

    There is about 1.5 million people in the US military and about 1 million reserve and about 800,000 LEOs.

    Some of you worry too much.
    That's exactly what I AM worried about. Not only do they have the ability to pass this, they have the ability to enforce it. I just hope that we have a good majority of Oath Keepers if it comes to that.

  10. #70
    Senior Member Array Cokeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    973
    Obama was voted in as president.
    Glock 23 - CZ 452 ZKM Special
    Walther P22 - LMT STD 16
    Mossberg 500A - Kahr P380
    Henry H001Y - Winchester 12
    Smith & Wesson M&P Shield
    Mossberg 500B - Marlin 336Y

  11. #71
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by Cokeman View Post
    Obama was voted in as president.
    Yup. One bad decision can screw up a country. He's living proof of that.

  12. #72
    VIP Member
    Array ANGLICO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    I'm the guy next door that is polite, but does not tell you crap.
    Posts
    3,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Burns View Post
    47% of American households have at least 1 gun as of a study in 2011.

    There are around 149 million households in the US. That means around 70 million households have guns (legally).

    There is about 1.5 million people in the US military and about 1 million reserve and about 800,000 LEOs.

    Some of you worry too much.
    You are hiding behind the false security of numbers of firearms owned, and ignoring some more important facts.

    At lease 30% to 70% of those households who own firearms will not have either the basic knowledge, will or network to organize and resist in any meaningful capacity = won't even try to (other than many 'lone wolf' resistance atttempts that would end up with 20 LEO/Military standing around a dead gun owner).

    Even though the number of potential Gov (Local to Fed) people is much lower, they are expedentially more organized, have lines of communications, near unlimited lines of supply, have planned, and can mass as needed. The lone firearms owner cannot.

    Add the element of the house next door, that does not own a firearm (or actually despises them) will cooperate with those trying to take them = turn you in, provide intellegence or access.

    Possibly during WWII, when the country was largely galvanized against some specific external enemies, your 'pie in the sky' trust in the number of firearms on US soil would have been valid, and then, only because the local, state and federal authorities would still have provided the basic amount of organization, communications and supplies to make each individual weapon owner a more effective part of a bigger team/organization.

    Study history to understand. Start with examples of MOUNT and Counter-Insergency to appreciated that a whole dog pile of lone individuls do not equal a much smaller, more organized and diciplined fighting force.

    Granted, it would be ugly, regardless. But today, it is a losing proposition for you to defend your stance behind just the number of firearms that are in the US. So, you have a semi-auto rifle, they have helos, drones and machine guns, all based on mobility and the ability to mass.

    Red Dawn was a great movie, but with today's age of drones, sensors, signal intellegence and Low Earth Orbit assets, what was hollywood in the 1980's might as well as been the 16th Century compared to the technology and fighting force intragration of today.

    Did you see the current Administration Executive Order on Consolidation of all Communications (local to federal) for during times of crisis? Who's crisis, I might question?

    Edit Add: I see you are from Montana, and assume live somewhat rural. It will be much easier for them to roll up resistance in the open country or mountains (using modern assessets) as you cannot mass effectivly, and when you do, one hellfire will take care of that. The people who are in more urban areas, and cities will be a lot harder to flush out.
    oneshot and Crowman like this.
    Socialism Kills! Time proven, with a very large body count! We are a Constitutional Republic....... not a Democracy, get it correct!

    Don't be mistaken for a Gecko45: http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

    Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14qTdp-Dd30

    ANGLICO Images

  13. #73
    Distinguished Member Array Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,330
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    You are hiding behind the false security of numbers of firearms owned, and ignoring some more important facts.

    At lease 30% to 50% of those households who own firearms will not have the will to organize and resist in any organized capacity = won't even try to (other than many 'lone wolf' resistance atttempts that would end up with 20 LEO/Military standing around a dead gun owner.

    Even though the number of potential Gov (Local to Fed) people is much lower, they are expedentially more organized, have lines of communications, near unlimited lines of supply, have planned, and can mass as needed. The lone firearms owner cannot.

    Add the element of the house next door, that does not own a firearm (or actually despises them) will cooperate with those trying to take them = turn you in, provide intellegence or access.

    Possibly during WWII, when the country was largely galvanized against some specific external enemies, your 'pie in the sky' trust in the number of firearms on US soil would have been valid, and then, only because the local, state and federal authorities would still have provided the basic amount of organization, communications and supplies to make each individual weapon owner a more effective part of a bigger team/organization.

    Study history to understand. Start with examples of MOUNT and Counter-Insergency to appreciated that a whole dog pile of lone individuls do not equal a much smaller, more organized and diciplined fighting force.

    Granted, it would be ugly, regardless. But today, it is a losing proposition for you to defend your stance behind just the number of firearms that are in the US.
    I never said I wouldn't cooperate if anything happened, I also never said nothing could happen, I simply said some people worry too much. It's amazing the conclusions people jump to.
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable- JFK

  14. #74
    Senior Member Array Spidey2011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    887
    Quote Originally Posted by ANGLICO View Post
    You are hiding behind the false security of numbers of firearms owned, and ignoring some more important facts.

    At lease 30% to 70% of those households who own firearms will not have either the basic knowledge, will or network to organize and resist in any meaningful capacity = won't even try to (other than many 'lone wolf' resistance atttempts that would end up with 20 LEO/Military standing around a dead gun owner).

    Even though the number of potential Gov (Local to Fed) people is much lower, they are expedentially more organized, have lines of communications, near unlimited lines of supply, have planned, and can mass as needed. The lone firearms owner cannot.

    Add the element of the house next door, that does not own a firearm (or actually despises them) will cooperate with those trying to take them = turn you in, provide intellegence or access.

    Possibly during WWII, when the country was largely galvanized against some specific external enemies, your 'pie in the sky' trust in the number of firearms on US soil would have been valid, and then, only because the local, state and federal authorities would still have provided the basic amount of organization, communications and supplies to make each individual weapon owner a more effective part of a bigger team/organization.

    Study history to understand. Start with examples of MOUNT and Counter-Insergency to appreciated that a whole dog pile of lone individuls do not equal a much smaller, more organized and diciplined fighting force.

    Granted, it would be ugly, regardless. But today, it is a losing proposition for you to defend your stance behind just the number of firearms that are in the US. So, you have a semi-auto rifle, they have helos, drones and machine guns, all based on mobility and the ability to mass.

    Red Dawn was a great movie, but with today's age of drones, sensors, signal intellegence and Low Earth Orbit assets, what was hollywood in the 1980's might as well as been the 16th Century compared to the technology and fighting force intragration of today.

    Did you see the current Administration Executive Order on Consolidation of all Communications (local to federal) for during times of crisis? Who's crisis, I might question?

    Edit Add: I see you are from Montana, and assume live somewhat rural. It will be much easier for them to roll up resistance in the open country or mountains (using modern assessets) as you cannot mass effectivly, and when you do, one hellfire will take care of that. The people who are in more urban areas, and cities will be a lot harder to flush out.
    Burns is from WI. I'm the one from MT. lol. And you are correct, I live in a VERY rural area that is exactly 12 miles from the middle of nowhere. My county officials are also fairly anti-gun, but the LEO's are VERY untrained and unorganized. Heck, the under sheriff made a comment last week about not being able to force the Sheriff to come to work. Seems that no one has seen him in official capacity for a few weeks. I could go on and on about the uselessness of the officers in my area, but that's a conversation for another thread.

    I don't plan on sticking around here too long if this actually goes through. I'll relocate my family's gun collection to a more friendly area.

  15. #75
    Member Array MisterAvis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bible Belt
    Posts
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    I know which way I hope the November election goes, so this is never an issue.
    I wish it was that easy. Obama 2.0: Obamney Edition is nothing I'm willing to bet my unalienable rights on.
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined." -Obligatory Founding Father Quote

Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... 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.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors