Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 120

Thread: Congressmen Urge the UN to Trample the US Constitution

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432

    Exclamation Congressmen Urge the UN to Trample the US Constitution

    "Today begins the most important 26-day period for our Second Amendment freedoms in recent history.

    Specifically, the U.N. wants to implement international gun registration requirements, bans on commonly owned firearms, tracking and registration of ammunition purchases, and create a new U.N. gun control bureaucracy.

    a group of anti-gun members of the U.S. House of Representatives, led by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), went so far as to circulate a letter last week to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, in which they “strongly urge the United States to take a leadership role in pushing for a strong, verifiable Arms Trade Treaty.”

    Read More;http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/02/co...-constitution/

    The UN's View of a *FREE* Society Attachment 8758

  2. #2
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,249
    Quote Originally Posted by scott58dh View Post
    "Today begins the most important 26-day period for our Second Amendment freedoms in recent history.

    Specifically, the U.N. wants to implement international gun registration requirements, bans on commonly owned firearms, tracking and registration of ammunition purchases, and create a new U.N. gun control bureaucracy.

    a group of anti-gun members of the U.S. House of Representatives, led by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), went so far as to circulate a letter last week to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, in which they “strongly urge the United States to take a leadership role in pushing for a strong, verifiable Arms Trade Treaty.”

    Read More;http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/02/co...-constitution/

    The UN's View of a *FREE* Society Attachment 8758
    This has been talked about here before, and I believe it was debunked as false. I believe that the treaty has to do with arms dealing across international borders. It doesnt have anything to do with our 2A.
    The only terrorists I see nowadays are at the Capital.


    The statements made in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of OCDO or its members.

  3. #3
    Regular Member moonie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    High Point NC
    Posts
    253
    This has been going around the internet for years, when will this zombie die?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234
    Zombies cant die - they are already dead... have to shoot em in the head to stop em
    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  5. #5
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,167
    Quote Originally Posted by batousaii View Post
    zombies cant die - they are already dead... Have to shoot em in the head to stop em
    easy

  6. #6
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    This has been circling the internet for years because they have been working on this treaty for years. The reason it hasn't went anywhere is because the Bush administration wanted nothing to do with it, but of course Obama is trying to get the senate to ratify this treaty. Obama will not succeed because nearly 40 senators have already expressed their dissaproval, and a 2/3 vote is required to ratify. This could be a severe attack on what types of firearms we can obtain and also lead to total registration, especially since this administration believes the UN and international law are of greater importance than congress and the United States Constitution. We are living in troubling times and I suggest everyone research information such as this to discover whether it is indeed a threat or some hysteria B.S. This could absolutely be a threat, so let's hope the senate keeps their word and protects our 2A rights.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "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."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432

    Exclamation Do the Math, it adds up to Something Fishy goin' on

    Ditto to KYGlockster !! Issues such as this are not resolved overnight.

    Just read the article(s), do some research & decide for yourself.

    If it's worth the effort to discuss the issue, either in this forum between ourselves, &/OR with Senators/Representatives, then fine.

    If not,,, then I guess we'll just keep moving on as though nothing like this has or ever will take place again.

    Timing is everything, and I believe that sometime ,,,soon,,, our time will just run out, then *WE* can say, "Why didn't anyone care enough to do something about this?"

    All I know is that *THE KNOTTED GUN* keeps popping up it's ugly head, enough so that it seems to get some random attention from MSM (not that *THEY* are always the most reliable source.)

    However, the UN has been attempting to get ***USa*** under the *EU Banner* for quite some time now & this is ONE issue (2nd Amnd.) that should not (& will not) be taken half-heartedly.

    Remember, A RIGHT NOT EXERCISED IS A RIGHT LOST !

    peace&rkba4ever!
    Last edited by scott58dh; 07-03-2012 at 11:18 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Motofixxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Somewhere over the Rainbow
    Posts
    970
    I think this vid fits here appropriately:

    Click Here for New to WI Open Carry Legal References and Informational Videos--- FAQ's http://Tinyurl.com/OpenCarry-WI

    The Armed Badger A WI site dedicated to Concealed Carry in WI

    "To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." -- George Mason, Speech of June 14, 1788

    http://Tinyurl.com/New-To-Guns to DL useful Info

  9. #9
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    If I got a nickel for every UN thread started...
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  10. #10
    Regular Member readyfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Virginia beach, VA ,USA
    Posts
    27
    Yeah you know just like commie care would never pass.Don't sleep on this guys they are coming for our guns they have everything else.......It may have been BS years ago and never passable.It is certainly passable now with corrupt courts and Presidents who wipe away the Constitution with a pen swipe.....
    ~The path to enlightenment is often filled with the bodies of the ignorant~

  11. #11
    Regular Member tomrkba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    128
    Treaties are not self-actuating. Congress would still need to pass laws to implement it.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Motofixxer View Post
    I think this vid fits here appropriately:

    Awesome Video !!!! Thanks for the info!!

    Locked & Loaded & Ready for Bear !!Attachment 8770

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432
    United Nations Small Arms (Gun Confiscation) Treaty to be Ratified by the US Senate in 2012; from Lou Dobbs.

    Old video but relevant info about the UN issue & our Constitution.

    link;;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8FzkVRh7Ck

  14. #14
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Here's a sample of the UN rationale, taken directly from their web page - "UN Office of Disarmament Affairs" - with my comments added in blue:
    Taking their toll, violating rights

    The majority of conflict deaths are caused by the use of small arms, and civilian populations bear the brunt of armed conflict more than ever. Also, small arms are the dominant tools of criminal violence. The rate of firearms-related homicides in post-conflict societies often outnumbers battlefield deaths. Perhaps that's because the only small arms are then held by tyrannical dictatorships, who then take retribution upon those who opposed them.
    These weapons are also linked to the increasing number of killings of UN employees and peacekeepers, as well as workers from humanitarian and non-governmental organizations. Refer to previous comment. Tyrants and dictators don't want any organization or person giving humanitarian aid (and hope) to those they have enslaved. But... it helps their worldwide image if they grudgingly allow these people to enter the country, and then maintain a highly deniable distance from the "rebel groups" that dispatch those workers. The workers from "humanitarian and NGOs" are all volunteers who chose to jeopardize their lives in the service of others. The consequences of those choices are frequently unpleasant.
    Small arms facilitate a vast spectrum of human rights violations, including killing, maiming, rape and other forms of sexual violence, enforced disappearance, torture, and forced recruitment of children by armed groups. More human rights abuses are committed with small arms than with any other weapon. The "armed groups" are generally thugs sent by the ruling class, or by self-proclaimed "warlords", to intimidate the people and discourage disagreement with those in charge. Small arms are used to commit "human rights abuses" because they are cheaper than buying each thug his own tank. Believe it or not, there are many people running 3rd world countries, who see committing human rights abuses as a perk of their position of power.
    Furthermore, where the use of armed violence becomes a means for resolving grievances and conflicts, legal and peaceful dispute resolution suffers and the rule of law cannot be upheld. Most of the areas in which these activities occur are 3rd world countries - where armed retribution is almost accepted as traditional, and has been going on for hundreds of years. As for the "rule of law"... the "laws" are designed to oppress the people, and as a rule, the "societies" are always about 0.5º from anarchism anyway.
    The UN's entire philosophical statement is viewable at: http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/

    The UN seems to view world violence through "rose-colored glasses". The gangs, organized crime syndicates and assorted other criminals (individuals and small associated groups) will continue to possess, buy, sell, barter and steal firearms, and the unarmed civilians will still "bear the brunt of armed conflict more than ever". The criminal element will NEVER obligingly surrender their weapons! Our current administration is NOT a great defender of RKBA, so don't the surprised if you wake up some morning to find a large number of heavily-armed government agents at your door, declaring "We're here at the direction of POTUS, who, IAW UN Resolution XXXX demands you surrender your illegally possessed firearms for destruction, or redistribution to UN Forces for use in defending your country against you." We are currently in the smoke phase, And have been for several years. Just remember the old saying, "Where there's smoke..." Just my thoughts. Pax...

    P.S. There's also an excellent (but very lengthy) explanation of "The Militia of The Several States" (2A) at: http://www.jaegerresearchinstitute.o...es/militia.htm (written by Edwin Vieira, Jr., who holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School)
    (Vieira has been a practicing attorney for over thirty-six years, specializing in cases that raise issues of constitutional law.)
    Last edited by Gil223; 07-04-2012 at 08:21 PM. Reason: close parens
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    Here's a sample of the UN rationale, taken directly from their web page - "UN Office of Disarmament Affairs" - with my comments added in blue:
    The UN's entire philosophical statement is viewable at: http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/

    The UN seems to view world violence through "rose-colored glasses". The gangs, organized crime syndicates and assorted other criminals - individuals and small associated groups) will continue to possess, buy, sell, barter and steal firearms, and the unarmed civilians will still "bear the brunt of armed conflict more than ever". They will NEVER obligingly surrender their weapons! Our current administration is NOT a great defender of RKBA, so don't the surprised if you wake up some morning to find a large number of heavily-armed government agents at your door, declaring "We're here at the direction of POTUS, who, IAW UN Resolution XXXX demands you surrender your illegally possessed firearms for destruction, or redistribution to UN Forces for use in defending your country against you." We are currently in the smoke phase, And have been for several years. Just remember the old saying, "Where there's smoke..." Just my thoughts. Pax...

    P.S. There's also an excellent (but very lengthy) explanation of "The Militia of The Several States" (2A) at: http://www.jaegerresearchinstitute.o...es/militia.htm (written by Edwin Vieira, Jr., who holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School)
    He has been a practicing attorney for over thirty-six years, specializing in cases that raise issues of constitutional law.)
    Thanx Gil223 !

    This is a Very interesting exerpt from "The Militia of The Several States",,, provided by Gil223,,,

    "For example, assume that Congress enacts a purported statute which bans the transportation, receipt, sale, barter, gift, transfer, or possession in interstate commerce of all handguns by private individuals. "Surely a clear-cut violation of the Second Amendment!" you say. Not so, as any $500-an-hour "gun-control" shyster attorney can easily demonstrate in the contemporary kangaroo courts:

    Criminals use "concealable handguns" to commit violent crimes.

    The government has a "compelling interest" in reducing the incidence of all crimes, including those committed with "concealable handguns".

    Because all handguns are more or less "concealable", all handguns are "concealable handguns".

    Criminals obtain handguns in the markets, white or black, which operate through or affect interstate commerce.

    If all these markets were absolutely denuded of handguns, criminals could not obtain them, and then could not use them to commit crimes.

    If interstate commerce were absolutely denuded of handguns, there would be none in the markets. The only way to remove all handguns from interstate commerce is to prohibit them absolutely.

    Therefore, the "least-restrictive means" to serve the "compelling interest" is to outlaw transportation, receipt, et cetera of all handguns in interstate commerce.
    And,

    Inasmuch as the Second Amendment protects only the right of common individuals to possess "sporting" firearms (the Amendment's "well regulated Militia" phrase being irrelevant), the government's "compelling interest" in banning all firearms outweighs any individual's personal interest in possessing any firearm, because the suppression of crime is undoubtedly more important than the pursuit of a mere hobby. Q.E.D.

    Thus the Second Amendment is rendered (or proves itself) impotent."

    “GOD GUNS & GUTS MADE AMERICA FREE, LET'S FIGHT TO KEEP ALL THREE !”

    LINK;http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1760005/posts

    The National Rifle Association and the Right to Bear Arms
    by John G. Mitchell

    peace&rkba4ever!
    Last edited by scott58dh; 07-04-2012 at 08:27 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by scott58dh View Post
    Inasmuch as the Second Amendment protects only the right of common individuals to possess "sporting" firearms (the Amendment's "well regulated Militia" phrase being irrelevant), the government's "compelling interest" in banning all firearms outweighs any individual's personal interest in possessing any firearm, because the suppression of crime is undoubtedly more important than the pursuit of a mere hobby. Q.E.D.

    Thus the Second Amendment is rendered (or proves itself) impotent."
    No matter how many times I read 2A, I seem to consistently miss the part that restricts us to "sporting firearms". This is especially disconcerting inasmuch as there were no designated "sporting firearms" at the time the Constitution (including the BoR) was ratified. The firearms that were used to put food on the table (with the notable exceptions of canons and volley guns) were the very same firearms used to repel the Brits during the American Revolution and also the War Between the States (same exceptions, plus the Gatling gun). Firearms were multitasking before there was such a thing as multitasking! "Keep and bear arms" seems all-inclusive to me. Pax...

    P.S Along those same lines, here's an interesting video:
    Last edited by Gil223; 07-05-2012 at 12:42 AM. Reason: Add video
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Olympia, WA
    Posts
    766

    Dick Morris: US Will Sign Gun Control Treaty on July 27


  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    466
    setting aside the fact that the senate must ratify it to become effective: please obamao, please sign it .. I dare you ... you think you've stepped in **** up to this point? You ain't seen nothing yet cupcake!

  19. #19
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Well hes got two things working against him on this.

    1) It would have to get a 2/3rds vote in the senate.

    2) It would be an illegal act for him to sign such a treaty that countered any part of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights because of the oath of the office of president which he took before entering that office. This would make any attempt for him to sign any treaty which overtly or covertly countermands any part of these two documents not only an illegal act, but one which would be an impeachable offense with a charge of high treason.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Well hes got two things working against him on this.

    1) It would have to get a 2/3rds vote in the senate.

    2) It would be an illegal act for him to sign such a treaty that countered any part of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights because of the oath of the office of president which he took before entering that office. This would make any attempt for him to sign any treaty which overtly or covertly countermands any part of these two documents not only an illegal act, but one which would be an impeachable offense with a charge of high treason.
    He doesnt give a crap about our constitution or the Bill of rights. If he has a chance,he will sign it, if he doesnt sign it,that doesnt mean he doesnt want to, If this ass hat gets elected again, then we are done for as the USA as we know it.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430
    I understand the desire the fight organised crime and reduce violence in the world, but the cost of our liberty is not worth a treaty that will be ignored by at least one major arms dealer(Russia) as well as clandestine small arms factories throughout the world.

    Thus, our surrender or liberty will neither bring us security nor stop violence through out the world.

  22. #22
    Regular Member hjmoosejaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.W. Pa.
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by ComradeV View Post
    I understand the desire the fight organised crime and reduce violence in the world, but the cost of our liberty is not worth a treaty that will be ignored by at least one major arms dealer(Russia) as well as clandestine small arms factories throughout the world.

    Thus, our surrender or liberty will neither bring us security nor stop violence through out the world.
    Really, this guy could care less about the Constitution. We don't need a treaty. We're not trading arms and we already have the 2nd Amendment. Maybe Eric Holder needs to be told not to sell guns to foreigners, but we don't.
    watch your top knot !

  23. #23
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by ComradeV View Post
    I understand the desire the fight organised crime and reduce violence in the world, but the cost of our liberty is not worth a treaty that will be ignored by at least one major arms dealer(Russia) as well as clandestine small arms factories throughout the world.

    And the biggest arms dealer in the Western Hemisphere--the US Government--won't give two hoots about it either.

    The CIA, BATFE, DEA, FBI and their various shell corporations will continue to funnel firearms into the hands of international drug cartels, gangs here in the US and "insurgents" around the world regardless fo what some silly UN Treaty or US law says, just like they have been doing for 100 years...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 07-05-2012 at 09:58 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  24. #24
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker6900 View Post
    This has been talked about here before, and I believe it was debunked as false. I believe that the treaty has to do with arms dealing across international borders. It doesnt have anything to do with our 2A.
    Yes. because restricting the international trade of small arms and ammo would have absolutely NO impact on teh average American gun owner, now would it?

    Taurus (made in Brazil)
    Beretta (Made in Italy)
    Stoeger (Made in Germany)
    Uberti (made in Italy)
    AK Variants (made in China, Romania, Russia, Czech Republic, etc)
    Desert Eagle (made in Israel)
    Benelli (Italy)
    Wolf Ammo (Russia)
    Surplus ammo (Greece, Portugal, Argentina, Russia, China, etc)

    Yeah, you are right. Restricting international trade of small arms and ammo would have absolutely NOTHING to do with the 2A rights of US gun owners...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    For those who're poo-pooing this thread as "yet another...", that's a nice shade of wool blindfold you're wearing... For those who're telling it like it is, keep on keeping on!

    Yes, it's real. So's Agenda 21. But if you want to believe the UN itself and mainstream media instead...
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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