• 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.

UN Treaties and my guns?

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
925
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=22976389&source=GBTV

gogodawgs
The problem with the treaty is that it has the force of a constitutional ammendmant and until the US congress actually votes on it it is still in play and enforcable.


No. A treaty can not, and does not overrule the Constitution For The United States. It is not equal to a constitutional amendment. The constitution always overrules treaties.

And a treaty is absolutely NOT enforceable, unless and until it is signed by the president AND approved by 2/3rds of the senate.

Where on earth did you get the idea that the treaty is valid unless congress votes it down? If it was from your linked video it is either wrong, or you misunderstood something it said.

I am at work and unable to watch the link, and will watch when I get home.
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
http://web.gbtv.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=22976389&source=GBTV

gogodawgs
The problem with the treaty is that it has the force of a constitutional ammendmant and until the US congress actually votes on it it is still in play and enforcable.

FALSE. Please cite. (Even the Glen Beck video you attached does not support your statement)

No. A treaty can not, and does not overrule the Constitution For The United States. It is not equal to a constitutional amendment. The constitution always overrules treaties.

And a treaty is absolutely NOT enforceable, unless and until it is signed by the president AND approved by 2/3rds of the senate.

Where on earth did you get the idea that the treaty is valid unless congress votes it down? If it was from your linked video it is either wrong, or you misunderstood something it said.

I am at work and unable to watch the link, and will watch when I get home.

ETF, correct.

Again, I can not foresee a time where 67 Senators vote in favor of the ATT. If they were to ever.... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
 

pfries

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
182
Location
East Tennessee
The Question remains where did WE lose it

powers granted congress by the constitution

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."


I am still being force to accept and or pay for socialist health care/put up with bands on firearms and the list continues on. The constitution was put in place to limit the power of Federal government and to guarantee they keep state powers within the confines of the constitution. Now who is left holding the bag for the Bill of rights? We are, the bill of rights is not law nor is the constitution, both of these documents are a set of ideals that our laws are written around and we need to be willing to hold our, yes our, government to them. The general populace seems to have forgotten that we are the government; they want to focus on one individual(POTUS) when the problem is much broader.
Two Articles in the Bill Of Rights that seem to get overlooked all too often in my opinion are;

Article 11. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

And

Article12. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

We need to stand for all of it not just the parts that suit us at any given moment. Many things go on in this country that I do not agree with, I do however stand up for and believe that an individual maintains the right to do and say as they please as long as it falls within the scope of things afforded to all, and does not trample my rights in the process.

Rant off for now
Pat
 
Last edited:

Schlepnier

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
420
Location
Yelm, Washington USA
FALSE. Please cite. (Even the Glen Beck video you attached does not support your statement)



ETF, correct.

Again, I can not foresee a time where 67 Senators vote in favor of the ATT. If they were to ever.... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Dick morris former aid to bill clinton and author of the book "screwed" made the comments about the force of the treaty and how it could be enforced.


for more discussion on the topic-
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/real-news-from-the-blaze-is-the-u-n-trying-to-regulate-your-guns/
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
That's why SCOTUS said it was either an illegal mandate under the commerce clause or a legal tax which is an enumerated power. They chose tax so the commerce clause is no longer in play.

If you read the opinions carefully, there is a remark about how the Court didn't decide on the "wisdom" of the act, just the Constitutionality. There is a subtle message there that says the Court won't oppose any efforts by Congress to repeal it. They merely decided that if it was considered a "tax" it was good to go.

Now, since it is a tax, it's one of the largest tax increases in a long time. Everyone wanted to avoid that label because now voters will really wake up and see it for what it is. There are members of congress that are saying "oh $h!t", we're in for it now.


They still changed the meaning of commerce and regulate to make it a "legal" tax. The taxes are supposed to fall within the boundaries of the specifically enumerated powers. Read the arguments against the clause and the "lies" told by the misnamed federalist that assured us it wasn't going to be that way.

It also took the threats of FDR for SCOTUS to start ruling in favor of pretty doing away with the reason for enumerating the powers of the feds. Why even list the powers if they simply can do what they want anyway?
 
Top