• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Congressmen Urge the UN to Trample the US Constitution

ComradeV

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
428
Location
Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
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.
 

hjmoosejaw

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
406
Location
N.W. Pa.
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.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
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:

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
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... :banghead::banghead::banghead:
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
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... :banghead:
 

scott58dh

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
425
Location
why?
Agenda 21/wikipedia

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... :banghead:

Political opposition in the United States,

In the United States, some Tea Party linked activists view Agenda 21 as a conspiracy by the United Nations to deprive individuals of property rights.

Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21.

Nationally, in 2012 the Republican National Committee (RNC) drafted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, calling it "a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control."

The language for this resolution, and others introduced in various state houses around the country, was drafted by the John Birch Society as a "model resolution" to oppose Agenda 21.

Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
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.

Never said or implied that he won't sign it... only that by doing so he would be violating his oath of office and therefore would be performing a treasonous act. I am not naive at all about this or any elected or appointed official as I believe all of them must remain in our vigilant sights lest they rip the very fibers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights from under us. I have little trust with any of them... yes some more than others, but I prefer my approach in these regards.

Obama cannot legally enter into any treaty or agreement which violates the supreme law of the land or his oath of office. We all know that this is the way it was designed, not how it generally happens. What we miss in all of this as a nation is the fact that those who DO carry out such violations are never prosecuted. Were we to try, find guilty, and execute a few of them, a message would be sent that they are not to mess around with OUR contract.
 

nobama

New member
Joined
Mar 19, 2009
Messages
756
Location
, ,
Never said or implied that he won't sign it... only that by doing so he would be violating his oath of office and therefore would be performing a treasonous act. I am not naive at all about this or any elected or appointed official as I believe all of them must remain in our vigilant sights lest they rip the very fibers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights from under us. I have little trust with any of them... yes some more than others, but I prefer my approach in these regards.

Obama cannot legally enter into any treaty or agreement which violates the supreme law of the land or his oath of office. We all know that this is the way it was designed, not how it generally happens. What we miss in all of this as a nation is the fact that those who DO carry out such violations are never prosecuted. Were we to try, find guilty, and execute a few of them, a message would be sent that they are not to mess around with OUR contract.

I agree 100%
 

carolina guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,737
Location
Concord, NC
Not sure it really matters if the treaty is signed.

1) The Constitution will still be the "supreme law of the land" and a treaty cannot be elevated above the Constitution -- ergo, 2A will still stand.

2) Those in charge will do as they please regardless. (potentially cancelling out the 2A as usual)
 

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
1) The Constitution will still be the "supreme law of the land" and a treaty cannot be elevated above the Constitution -- ergo, 2A will still stand.

2) Those in charge will do as they please regardless. (potentially cancelling out the 2A as usual)

I would like to say that number two will not happen, but with this terrorist we have in the oval office, you never know.

Again, I believe that treaty to involve only international arms deals. I may end up with egg on my face, but thats MHO.

However, if the end game of that treaty is to rid us of our guns, expect civil war. All of these people that say that our country is too civilized to go to war, and we would be better off talking our problems out, I have news for you.....Thats what got us here in the first place. We have allowed our politicians to strip us of our rights for long enough.

Enough Talk. Time to take a stand.
 

carolina guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,737
Location
Concord, NC
I would like to say that number two will not happen, but with this terrorist we have in the oval office, you never know.

Again, I believe that treaty to involve only international arms deals. I may end up with egg on my face, but thats MHO.

However, if the end game of that treaty is to rid us of our guns, expect civil war. All of these people that say that our country is too civilized to go to war, and we would be better off talking our problems out, I have news for you.....Thats what got us here in the first place. We have allowed our politicians to strip us of our rights for long enough.

Enough Talk. Time to take a stand.

At minimum, it is time for people (and states) to do what the founder's envisioned...if you know a law is unconstitutional:

ignore it...do not obey...it doesn't exist. For some reason, we have (as a nation) come to believe that the courts are the final arbiters of what is constitutional and what isn't.

The Federal courts have an inherent conflict of interest...they are funded by the Legislature (and fines), supplied by the Executive Branch (via police) after being appointed by the Executive and approved by the Legislature.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
Political opposition in the United States,

In the United States, some Tea Party linked activists view Agenda 21 as a conspiracy by the United Nations to deprive individuals of property rights.

Several state and local governments have considered or passed motions and legislation opposing Agenda 21.

Nationally, in 2012 the Republican National Committee (RNC) drafted a resolution opposing Agenda 21, calling it "a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control."

The language for this resolution, and others introduced in various state houses around the country, was drafted by the John Birch Society as a "model resolution" to oppose Agenda 21.

Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21.

The U.N. is full of.... agendas. If anybody doesn't know what "United Nations" Agenda 21 is, I'd recommend that you Google it. In a nutshell, it's socialism... at it's most inclusive and it's worst. That which you consider to be your property becomes a "resource of the State". Do you like it where you live? Too bad... Agenda 21 would give "the State" the power to move you into a "balanced neighborhood". If Agenda 21 is ever imposed, the (UN) government will have full control over your life and how you live it! The U.N. is a power-hungry organization composed primarily (25/192 = 87%) of countries whose form of government is something other than a full Democratic Republic, as is ours. These countries either envy our successes, or resent them, and want to see the USA taken down several notches. Agenda 21 will never stand a better chance of adoption by the USA than it does under the current Obama administration. The UN is not our friend! :mad:

The U.N. should be relocated to someplace more receptive to it's world domination goals... like France, or one of the Islamic nations. Just my thoughts. Pax...
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
No matter how many times I read 2A, I seem to consistently miss the part that restricts us to "sporting firearms". ]

That's because you are reading it at a distance that is too close...read it from 20 feet away, then you'll see it

lol .. when a politician starts talking about "hunting", I tell him I don't need to hear anymore from an idiot.
 

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
Forbes article regarding the UN small arms treaty

From an article in Forbes Magazine concerning the "UN small arms treaty":


"As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama was an aggressive advocate for expanding gun control laws, and even voted against legislation giving gun owners an affirmative defense when they use firearms to defend themselves and their families against home invaders and burglars. He also served on a 10-member board of directors of the radically activist anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago during a period between 1998-2001when it contributed $18,326,183 in grants to anti-Second Amendment organizations."

This is a wonderful article. I recommend everyone take a look.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...ment-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/3/
 

hjmoosejaw

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
406
Location
N.W. Pa.
From an article in Forbes Magazine concerning the "UN small arms treaty":


"As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama was an aggressive advocate for expanding gun control laws, and even voted against legislation giving gun owners an affirmative defense when they use firearms to defend themselves and their families against home invaders and burglars. He also served on a 10-member board of directors of the radically activist anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago during a period between 1998-2001when it contributed $18,326,183 in grants to anti-Second Amendment organizations."

This is a wonderful article. I recommend everyone take a look.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...ment-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/3/

Very good article! People need to take this stuff a little more seriously. They get their foot in the door and just keep taking a little more and a little more. We have to smash their foot as soon as it starts getting in the door!!!
 

scott58dh

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
425
Location
why?
Updated Info on U.N. ATT

"Abstract: The framework on which the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), currently being negotiated, is likely to be based is clear: It will set out criteria that signatories must apply to proposed arms transfers and require them to decide whether the proposed transfer poses a risk under any of those criteria. But these criteria are likely to be ill-defined, and the ATT's "checklist" model differs fundamentally from the "guidance" model that the U.S. currently employs. Worst of all, the ATT will enumerate criteria that will be easy to expand in ways that the U.S. cannot control. If the ATT is to exist, it should be based on a commitment by willing and democratic signatories to develop effective systems of border and export control."

:arrow:;http://www.heritage.org/research/re...iteria-for-transfers-pose-problems-for-the-us
 

scott58dh

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
425
Location
why?
From an article in Forbes Magazine concerning the "UN small arms treaty":


"As an Illinois state senator, Barack Obama was an aggressive advocate for expanding gun control laws, and even voted against legislation giving gun owners an affirmative defense when they use firearms to defend themselves and their families against home invaders and burglars. He also served on a 10-member board of directors of the radically activist anti-gun Joyce Foundation in Chicago during a period between 1998-2001when it contributed $18,326,183 in grants to anti-Second Amendment organizations."

This is a wonderful article. I recommend everyone take a look.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...ment-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/3/


Here's a link to a thread (Congressmen Urge the UN to Trample the US Constitution) here @ OC.o with more info about same issue.

:arrow:;http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...en-Urge-the-UN-to-Trample-the-US-Constitution
 
Top