I hear some say it wont affect us, I hear other say the Senate will never authorize it and some say we are doomed.
Is there a concise easy to understand summary of what this treaty is all about?
What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare
That being said, the current treaty has not been written yet. It is still being worked on. IIRC the conference will run from July 2-27.
Any treaty will need the approval of 2/3rds of the senate, and no treaty can override the Constitution For The United States.
The treaty is something to keep an eye on and if you are concerned you may wish to contact your senators, and inform them you are against any such treaty. IMO it is not something to spend a whole lot of time on, and doing so may distract one from other issues.
A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801
The deal is that no matter how much of a distraction this non-issue is, no matter how impossible it is to affect us, no matter what facts are presented... Panicky bed wetters will claim the UN is going to ban US privately-owned guns.
The issue is a dog and pony show, an easy distraction to try and control your votes. It's also complete and utter bullsh-t, as it has _repeatedly_ been shown that treaties do not override the constitution.
"If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex
Links here @ OC.o. & etc.
Last edited by scott58dh; 07-13-2012 at 08:59 PM.
Some of us may have seen this video before, some of us saw similar reports on TV, and some of us may have actually experienced the Katrina gun-grab. There are probably also some who are unaware of the unlawful actions taken by Louisiana National Guard and local and volunteer LEO's from around the nation. This video may be a preview of U.N. "Coming Attractions" if, by some quirk of fate, their SATT is adopted and enforced in the extreme...
I'm not saying it will happen, but I'm not saying it's impossible either. Certainly one would think American "officials" violating our Constitution is much less likely than blue helmeted international U.N. thugs violating our Constitution, but Americans did just that.
Apparently there were also a few "Oath Keepers" involved who refused to follow those orders. The U.N. has no regard for any country's sovereignty, why should we think they would treat us any differently than the folks in New Orleans were treated? Just sayin'. Pax...
The state Senators are receiving the gun-rights pressure. Colorado Senator Bennet responded IMMEDIATELY to my e-mail on the subject of this U.N. Small Arms Treaty with a presentation on all of the PRO-2A bills he has supported. Well, I guess we will see..... won't we.
Any Senator who votes to ratify this treaty will be signing up for unemployment benefits after the next election.
Senator Udall says he will get back to me soon.
Senators are not going to be able to claim 2A support - and vote to ratify this B.S. treaty at the same time.
"Extremism ALWAYS brings about its own destruction " ( Sir Edmund Burke)
This is something I thought we all should see and hear. It's a somewhat different "take" on F&F and it's possible relationship to the UN's Small Arms Trade Treaty...
It was obvious that F&F was planned as justification for an assault on our RKBA by our government, what was less obvious (to me, anyway) was how it could have been designed to also further reinforce the Obama administration's support for the UN's SATT. Care to share your thoughts after watching this? Pax...
Last edited by Gil223; 07-16-2012 at 11:07 AM.
Other than the standard, almost obligatory plea ("send us money") of all organizations, this may be worth a couple of minutes of our listening time. Here's what GA Representative Broun and the NAGR believe the UN SATT is all about...
IIRC, the original treaty, which started circulating before Obama came to office (Bush refused to hear anything of it), it was to regulate the commercial selling and trading between countries and small arms. The treaty has gone through several transformations, including the individual regulation of firearms (however, it didn't fly very far).
Not putting words in the international intelligentsia, their initial goal will be to start away from the individual regulate and settle in at the commercial view...then slowly change/modify/adapt the law to strangle the individual with guns (figuratively only)....i.e. reducing the firearms sold/transported to each country for personal use; all along only allowing enough trade for police/military needs. I know several are thinking they can't override the Constitution; however, regulating commerce is the little camel nose under the tent.
Will this happen overnight? Nope. But those in the UN have no desire for the US except for its demise. So they will continue to whatever they can to gain control. The UN is about controlling ALL countries, at that is their appearance!
Of course, all this is just my $.02.
"I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
The keys to the golden bank are held by Senators who're elected at age 56 and older. One term and they're set for life.
Here's an interesting article that everybody might like to see. It's short and to the point. http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/07/...sitting-ducks/ Pax...
I'm not sure who the author is talking about when he mentions "us." Can't be the OCDO crowd, as most of "us" are armed, and we're most certainly not sitting ducks.
I like this article better. It's positive, not defeatist.
I'm interested in what other folks have to say, even if I disagree with what they say. Sun-Tzu had two very insightful things to say about tactics: "Know your enemy" and, "Keep your friends close... and your enemies closer." They still apply today.The Second Amendment isn’t much use if (1) law-abiding, sane, and moral people don’t carry a weapon, (2) public businesses don’t allow citizens to exercise their rights by allowing them to carry their weapon into their establishment, and (3) people aren’t trained on how to use a weapon in high-pressure situations.
As for, if you think about it in "the big picture", he's right that most of the general population is unarmed . Statistically, the average gun owner owns 7 firearms, and there are enough privately-owned firearms in the country to supply roughly 300,000,000 people. If that stat is close to accurate it means that a small minority (folks like us) of 4,285,714 are armed. Would we share those arms with friends/family if the need arose? I can't speak for anybody but me... and I damn sure would!It mentions, "Nut jobs, Islamic extremists, and people with grudges know that most of us are unarmed. We’re sitting ducks."
Last edited by Gil223; 07-22-2012 at 12:42 AM.
Sorry about my confusion - I wasn't aware you were the one who posted the article.
About half of U.S. households have firearms, although there are as many firearms in the U.S. as there are motor vehicles. Given the rate of accidental deaths due to firearms is about 1,100 annually while the vehicular rate is about 32,000 annually, one can state with statistical accuracy, that motor vehicles are approximately 30 times more likely to be the cause of an accidental death than a firearm.As for , if you think about it in "the big picture", he's right that most of the general population is unarmed . Statistically, the average gun owner owns 7 firearms, and there are enough privately-owned firearms in the country to supply roughly 300,000,000 people. If that stat is close to accurate it means that a small minority (folks like us) of 4,285,714 are armed. Would we share those arms with friends/family if the need arose? I can't speak for anybody but me... and I damn sure would!
Having said that, while the "average" gun owner owns 7 firearms, that's a misnomer, as it's a single-tailed curve, not a bell curve. Half the people in the U.S. do not own a firearm. Many people own a single firearm. Some own two or three. A small minority own many firearms. Mathematically it works out to 7 per owner, but the median is 2.
Thanks for the nod on the article!
PS: A little bit more about RYOC: I created the forums for the express purpose not merely of just talking about issues like these, but for formulating organized responses, sort of skimming the best ideas off the top of a sea of ideas, and presenting them to the powers that be in a manner that would be impossible for them to ignore. It's my goal to avoid becoming another WND, but rather, to toss aside rhetoric and get all sides to sit down and hammer out the crux of the issues, down to brass tacks.
I need all the help I can get in terms of getting the forums off the ground! It'll take perhaps a couple hundred seed posts, say about twenty in each of its twelve forums, to get it moving. As those are going in I'll ramp up the SEO effort to attract new members. Any help you and others might provide would be most welcome!
If you don't watch this video and then forward this link to everybody on your email list, they may be taken by surprise. This is the plan - in black and white - the UN has been working toward for decades - world domination!A bit lengthy (21 mins), but highly informative. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyfkQ...yer_embedded#! If that didn't get your attention, you must be brain dead. Pax...UN gun grab follows U.S. State Department Plan
Here's an extract of something I just received from Gun Owners of America:
The GOA seems to see a danger in this treaty that many Americans either don't recognize as a danger, or they are totally unaware of the ATT and the unstated devastating potential of such a "treaty". If the Obama administration signs onto it, this treaty will be a continual threat to our security and our sovereignty.This week, the UN is putting the final touches on a treaty that could affect every single gun owner in the country. From what we know of the treaty so far, we could see:
* A ban on certain semi-automatic firearms (e.g., the Clinton gun ban);
* Registration of gun owners (and, thanks to the unconstitutional instant check, the framework for such registration actually exists in the United States, unlike many of the countries that are negotiating the treaty);
* The mandatory destruction of surplus or confiscated firearms, and;
* Mandatory micro-stamping of ammunition.
These are just the points on which there doesn’t seem to be any disagreement among the nations at the UN.
As you can imagine, if nations like Iran, Cuba and North Korea have an opportunity to impact U.S. gun laws (as they do through a seat at the ATT negotiating table), they will take it!
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has let the gun grabbers at the UN know that President Obama is ready to sign the treaty as soon as the UN finishes up its work. That "work" is scheduled to be completed this Friday, July 27, 2012.
Contact your Senators to demand they OPPOSE the Global Gun Ban!
As with any treaty, it does require ratification by 2/3 of the senators present at the time it is presented for ratification. (We'll learn who the Senatorial cowards are at that time... they'll be recognized by their absence from the Senate Floor.) Pax...
Sorry, but such a treaty would have no LEGAL effect on the average gun owning American.
It's sad that people don't read the current laws and fail to understand what is legally required and what is not.
The insta-check program/form 4473 does not legally apply in the 50 states. I have shown that to be the case more than once.
Socialist Security is a great example of ignorant people taking action. The whole of the Socialist Security program was created under a treaty with socialist countries and has no LEGAL AFFECT within the 50 states of the union nor does it have any legal affect on citizens who live and work within the 50 states of the union.
In short this treaty will only affect us if we allow the uneducated and ill-informed to misapply the law like what is being done with Socialist Security.
Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)