imported post
http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/15/obama-spurns-gun-control
I like it when the Brady Bunch is irritated.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/15/obama-spurns-gun-control
I like it when the Brady Bunch is irritated.
That, and he's got to be a bit of a pragmatist. Even pelosi doesn't want to touch it with a 10' pole.I wouldn't go so far as to call him pro-gun, but my pre-election prediction of him having bigger things than gun control on his plate seems to be true.
The rate he's going, he's not pro-ANYTHING. Even the health care bill that was more Congress's doing than his doesn't really DO anything. He's too ineffective for everyone's fear of of him. So can people PLEASE stop hoarding ammo so I can make it to the range once in a while???Obama is NOT pro-gun Just because he Doesn't Do Anything with/about/for/against firearms legislation. The White House let legislation expire; was inactive; and has not publicly formulated an opinion on the Chicago case...
They are In Active. Doesn't make them Pro Gun.
I would only consider Obama Pro Gun if his administration introduced Pro Gun legislation; for even if he was to verbally (orally) support the 2A- we all know talk is cheap.
So the whole UN Small Arms Treaty stuff hasn't been debunked? I was under the impression that the circulating rumors and stories were debunked. I would love to know what you know; please inform us all.Obama is anti-gun just like the rest of his liberal agenda. Of course he wants to take away citizens' firearms so that they can't resist the tyranny.
Back in his campaign days, someone asked him if he planned to increase gun control. He said, "No, I don't think we can do that right now."
He intends to disarm us through the UN. He's in the process of forging a treaty with the UN that would allow UN troops into the US to assert their own (non-US) gun control against US citizens. When I was at the last Tea Party Rally, there was a petition going around for a law saying that when that happened, the state of Colorado would not participate.
UN small arms treaty - pending threat? I would say so, but it's not exactly "around the corner." I'm not going to post the entire text here because it's HUGE, but this link will take you to the official UN site: http://www.poa-iss.org/PoA/poahtml.aspx, titled "Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects" It's purported purpose is to eliminate "illicit" trade. Ultimately, who decides if it's illicit or not? (Sounds a lot like MAIG's "purpose" doesn't it?)
But I will post paragraph III.6 from the linked site:
"With a view to facilitating implementation of the Programme of Action, States and international and regional organizations should seriously consider assisting interested States, upon request, in building capacities in areas including the development of appropriate legislation and regulations, law enforcement, tracing and marking, stockpile management and security, destruction of small arms and light weapons and the collection and exchange of information."
That's not the only scary part, but is worth explicit exposure. The bottom line of that paragraph is registration of weapons for the purpose of tracing them--illicit or not.
Yes, any such treaty must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate to be legally binding on the U.S. (read this as "fire Pelosi and allher cronies"), but there is also a feeling that even if not LEGALLY binding, it could be PRACTICALLY binding if sufficient numbers of other nations "toe the line." It also appears that there is significant work that must be done by the UN before this "programme" would evolve into a treaty, but we must remain vigilant nonetheless.
ETA: http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/un-small-arms-treaty-kills-gun-rights/ Several paragraphs highlighted here.