What does an international treaty have to do with the 2A?

This is a discussion on What does an international treaty have to do with the 2A? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Hopyard Do you all really have such little faith in the judgement of (is it 2/3 or 3/4?) of the Senate? It ...

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 83

Thread: What does an international treaty have to do with the 2A?

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array automatic slim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The western edge of The Confederacy
    Posts
    2,198

    Trust the senate???..........

    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Do you all really have such little faith in the judgement of (is it 2/3 or 3/4?) of the Senate?

    It sure sounds as if some here do not actually support or wish to preserve our constitution.
    There are indeed some on here that don't support the constitution. They are always praising the virtues of socialism and heaping accolades on subversive organizations like tha ACLU. Personally I think they are moles hired by Sarah Brady.
    As for trusting the senate, do you mean the same senate that gave us the AWB, the same senate that gave us the GCA '68, the same senate that gave us NFA '34? Gee, with a record like that, why wouldn't I trust the senate?
    "First gallant South Carolina nobly made the stand."
    Edge of Darkness

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Member Array Rivers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    436
    Odd that the Ten Commandments are also a list of negatives. Maybe someone had the concept that if what we should not do was defined, it would be left to each man's intelligence, uniqueness and creativity to live well.

  4. #18
    Member Array torgo1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by ExSoldier View Post
    The bottom line is that if the President signs a treaty with the UN outlawing all private possession of any firearm and the SENATE ratifies it,
    The current president, supposedly a super liberal fascist Nazi secret Muslim zombie Manchurian candidate, can't even manage to get his own party to get a pro-gun amendment stripped off of a credit reform bill. Let me pull up my database of, "Threats to Second Amendment Rights." Hmm, where to rank this.... Ok, I think I'll put it at 489,230, right behind, "Development of personal force fields makes all weapons obsolete," and right ahead of, "We lose the Great War against the Squid People."

    There is only one other event that could happen before all the really horrible stuff and that is a matter of vast discussion among the various denominations of the church. Your views on this are your own and I respect them, but I believe in the RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH. If you have questions go to:
    In the history of the world, hundreds, if not thousands of religions, cults, and individuals have predicted end times scenarios. They share one thing in common. Every single one of them was wrong.

    Your views are your own and I respect your right to have them. Hell, I'll fight for your right to have them. But I will not respect the views themselves because they are fairy tales. As unlikely as UN treaties are, at least they are in the realm of reality. This forum should be about discussing serious threats to our rights, not wild speculation based on fundamentalist dogma that isn't even subscribed to by most Christians, never mind most religious people.

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,781

    Exclamation Wait....

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivers View Post
    Odd that the Ten Commandments are also a list of negatives. Maybe someone had the concept that if what we should not do was defined, it would be left to each man's intelligence, uniqueness and creativity to live well.
    You cannot equate the Ten Commandments with the Bill of Rights.

    The BOR isn't a list of what we CAN do. It's a list of what the GOVERNMENT CANNOT DO TO THE PEOPLE! It is a RESTRAINT on Government that the President and his party and his cabinet do not subscribe to or feel it applies in any way to them, individually or as a group.

    The Founding Father's had a name for folks like this: TYRANT. They had a solution too: An armed populace (Federalist #46).
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  6. #20
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    9,956
    "We have now been using such a fiat system totally since 1932 when Roosevelt outlawed possession of private stocks of gold bullion."

    Exsoldier;

    While your take on worthless money is reasonable we did have a metallic based currency later than Roosevelt's prohibition against holding gold in 1932. Our coinage was 90 percent silver until 1965 and the silver certificate was legal tender and exchangeable for silver until 1968.

  7. #21
    Ex Member Array PNUT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    913
    Quote Originally Posted by torgo1968 View Post
    The current president, supposedly a super liberal fascist Nazi secret Muslim zombie Manchurian candidate, can't even manage to get his own party to get a pro-gun amendment stripped off of a credit reform bill. Let me pull up my database of, "Threats to Second Amendment Rights." Hmm, where to rank this.... Ok, I think I'll put it at 489,230, right behind, "Development of personal force fields makes all weapons obsolete," and right ahead of, "We lose the Great War against the Squid People."



    In the history of the world, hundreds, if not thousands of religions, cults, and individuals have predicted end times scenarios. They share one thing in common. Every single one of them was wrong.

    Your views are your own and I respect your right to have them. Hell, I'll fight for your right to have them. But I will not respect the views themselves because they are fairy tales. As unlikely as UN treaties are, at least they are in the realm of reality. This forum should be about discussing serious threats to our rights, not wild speculation based on fundamentalist dogma that isn't even subscribed to by most Christians, never mind most religious people.
    Well said.
    It's sad that we have to tread lightly with nonsense, out of respect for religious rights. Crazy is crazy...don't matter whose idea it is. A little critical thinking, reason , and logic goes a long, long way. But why use those tools when we can fantasize that the UN is about to take over our country but we'll get away by flying to an undisclosed location without an airplane...it's much more fun and exciting.

  8. #22
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,781

    Correct...

    Quote Originally Posted by torgo1968 View Post
    The current president, supposedly a super liberal fascist Nazi secret Muslim zombie Manchurian candidate, can't even manage to get his own party to get a pro-gun amendment stripped off of a credit reform bill. Let me pull up my database of, "Threats to Second Amendment Rights." Hmm, where to rank this.... Ok, I think I'll put it at 489,230, right behind, "Development of personal force fields makes all weapons obsolete," and right ahead of, "We lose the Great War against the Squid People."



    In the history of the world, hundreds, if not thousands of religions, cults, and individuals have predicted end times scenarios. They share one thing in common. Every single one of them was wrong.

    Your views are your own and I respect your right to have them. Hell, I'll fight for your right to have them. But I will not respect the views themselves because they are fairy tales. As unlikely as UN treaties are, at least they are in the realm of reality. This forum should be about discussing serious threats to our rights, not wild speculation based on fundamentalist dogma that isn't even subscribed to by most Christians, never mind most religious people.
    You're right, I should NOT have posited the religious prophesy as I did. It's just that MY faith and MY belief in the scenario of what I see happening around me jibe so perfectly that it's almost an overwhelming urge to share the good news of the gospel, but that really SHOULDN'T be done in the constraints of a FORUM like this.

    YOU are perfectly free to dismiss them as fairy tales of course. Let me ask you a question though and I'll do it via a PM.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108
    You know what, regardless of whether or not they ratify such a treaty, they still have to come take all of those guns! And I am willing to bet that more than a few folks will stand up and fight before they allow their weapons to be taken. And those gun battles will be spilled all over our airwaves and the internet as thousands of would-be reporters chronicle our own government kicking down doors in the middle of the night, and spilling civilian blood in our streets.

    With that in mind, just how long do you think it will be before politicians start getting unelected, or worse yet, removed forcefully? That scenario is the last thing a sitting office holder wants, because those victims have a funny way of showing up on opponents' TV commercials and their campaign rallies.....
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  10. #24
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,849
    It's sad that we have to tread lightly with nonsense, out of respect for religious rights.


    Why is this sad? It just respectful. Just because you don't agree or share someones beliefs or opinions doens't mena you have to marginalize them. I firmly believe that the diversity of opinions in this country is part of what makes US great as a nation. I work with a 7th Day Adventist who has some strange ideas about things in my opinion, but I repsect his right to have them and don't find it sad that I tread lightly when countering his point of view, it just good debate/dialog.

  11. #25
    Ex Member Array PNUT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    913
    Quote Originally Posted by shooterX View Post

    Why is this sad? It just respectful. Just because you don't agree or share someones beliefs or opinions doens't mena you have to marginalize them. I firmly believe that the diversity of opinions in this country is part of what makes US great as a nation. I work with a 7th Day Adventist who has some strange ideas about things in my opinion, but I repsect his right to have them and don't find it sad that I tread lightly when countering his point of view, it just good debate/dialog.

    PM sent.
    One of my good friends is a Pastor, we have good debates. I wish that was possible with more people. Too often "respect" means silence, no questioning, no talking.

  12. #26
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,781

    Exclamation But, they're ready for that.... AND it's already been done!

    Quote Originally Posted by edr9x23super View Post
    You know what, regardless of whether or not they ratify such a treaty, they still have to come take all of those guns! And I am willing to bet that more than a few folks will stand up and fight before they allow their weapons to be taken. And those gun battles will be spilled all over our airwaves and the internet as thousands of would-be reporters chronicle our own government kicking down doors in the middle of the night, and spilling civilian blood in our streets.

    With that in mind, just how long do you think it will be before politicians start getting unelected, or worse yet, removed forcefully? That scenario is the last thing a sitting office holder wants, because those victims have a funny way of showing up on opponents' TV commercials and their campaign rallies.....
    Remember KATRINA? The very last people I would ever have thought would allow themselves to be disarmed without a fight were the citizens of New Orleans. All that CAJUN blood and such. They rolled over and showed their collective bellies with but a whimper. That's because the mayor and governor of the state brought in national guard troops from anti gun states like Illinois (who ELSE is from there? Hmmmmm?) to kick in doors and forcibly disarm the people! I saw the clip on CNN of the little old lady who got body slammed by the guard because she held an heirloom from her dead husband by two fingers. It was like an ancient 22.

    I've been a teacher for 20 years and I have seen how this country marches in lockstep when it comes to curriculum. From kindergarten to senior high to college, the antigun agenda has been rammed down their throats NATIONWIDE so that kids are programmed to think that all guns are evil and even the desire to own such a device is evil except for cops and the military. Who populates our military? Kids who've mostly been through that curriculum. Who are the cops? Kids who've been to public school and universities. This has been in force since the liberals started to quietly infiltrate the school systems in the 1960s. They've had almost half a century to get their act together and make it seamless. Even private schools aren't immune to the creeping nature of this pervasive evil.

    Some states have begun to fight back. Resolutions aimed at telling the FEDERAL government not to encroach on the 10th Amendment (States Rights). The various laws stating that weapons made inside a particular state and NEVER taken from the states borders are exempt from Federal Firearms Laws are cute tricks. But won't hold up. The 10th Amendment has been so gutted by various USSC decisions over the last 40 years that it's useless.

    All that it takes is a single or string of disasters to strike and trigger the infamous Executive Orders that have been set up for exactly this contingency and bingo! Overnight police state with no US Constitution.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array Rob72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    OK
    Posts
    3,468
    Quote Originally Posted by edr9x23super View Post
    You know what, regardless of whether or not they ratify such a treaty, they still have to come take all of those guns! ....
    Why? Its so much easier just to let the populace inform on each other. It has worked in every totalitarian society in history.

    Sotomayor's position on State vs. Federal authority is a prime example of how such policy may be made to work. Many regions will voluntarily become "gun free"; those that do not may be isolated and effectively starved/taken off the grid/interstate trucking halted/rail and seaports closed into submission.

    Its how civil wars are made...

  14. #28
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,849
    Quote Originally Posted by PNUT View Post
    PM sent.
    One of my good friends is a Pastor, we have good debates. I wish that was possible with more people.
    I too wish more people were able to have good debates without the anger and hostility that many folks tend to exhibit.

  15. #29
    Senior Moderator
    Array MattInFla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,857
    Treaties are not on an equal footing with the Constitution, and no treaty can abrogate or modify and rights under the Constitution.

    See Reid v. Covert from 1957.

    Matt
    Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
    Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.

  16. #30
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,849
    Quote Originally Posted by MattLarson View Post
    Treaties are not on an equal footing with the Constitution, and no treaty can abrogate or modify and rights under the Constitution.

    See Reid v. Covert from 1957.

    Matt
    Thanks for the information, good to know.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Another Youtube Video On the Doomsday Treaty
    By tkruf in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 30th, 2010, 05:24 PM
  2. gun ban due to UN treaty
    By Tom G in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2010, 03:08 AM
  3. U.N. Gun Ban Treaty
    By ECHOONE in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: January 24th, 2010, 06:04 PM
  4. International Treaty to Ban Handguns?
    By tallgrass in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 18th, 2010, 10:52 PM
  5. CIFTA treaty :the Obama backdoor gun control
    By Horsetrader in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 3rd, 2009, 01:21 PM

Search tags for this page

can 2nd amendment be redacted due to treaty

,

does the international treaty carry the most power?

Click on a term to search for related topics.