Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: LEGAL WAY AROUND THE 2ND AMENDMENT

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    I haven't had a chance to see if this is legit or a bunch of crap. I just copied an email someone sent to me. Hopefully its just a bunch of BS...

    While you were watching the oil spill, the New York failed terrorist
    bombing and other critical crises, Hillary Clinton signed the small arms
    treaty with the UN.


    OBAMA FINDS LEGAL WAY AROUND THE 2ND AMENDMENT
    AND USES IT. IF THIS PASSES, THERE could BE WAR

    On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a
    Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States.

    On Wednesday, the Obama administration took its first major step in a plan
    to ban all firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends
    to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens
    through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By
    signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration
    can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process
    in Congress.

    Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens
    will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These
    are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as
    the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael
    Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban
    and confiscation of all firearms. The Obama administration is attempting
    to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage
    to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened.

    Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend
    to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun
    control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary
    Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun
    control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth?

    What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in
    the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that
    the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and
    ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up
    another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits
    any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another
    morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens
    to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and
    destruction center or face imprisonment. This has happened in other
    countries, past and present!
    THIS IS NOT A JOKE NOR A FALSE WARNING.
    As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama
    administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control. Read
    the Article U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and
    said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as
    long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every
    nation a veto. The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S.
    State Department, overturns the position of former President George W.
    Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that
    national controls were better.


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Prescott Valley, AZ
    Posts
    200

    Post imported post

    Remember, there is a difference between signing a treaty and having it ratified by the Senate.

    That is where the major battle would take place.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    35

    Post imported post

    It seems this was first reported by Reuters in October, 2009.

    Both of the below sites has info and commentsregarding it.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/polit...59E0Q920091015

    http://www.sodahead.com/fun/obama-ta...s/blog-189011/

    (The SodaHead article refers to the Reuters one.)

    I don't doubt that this allis still a works-in-the-making, however.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Hollowpoint38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    A sandwich made of knuckles, Hoover, Alabama
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    How many people do you think would turn their weapons in? It would be a violation of massive proportion and the SECOND American Revolution would begin. Trust me, Obama can sign whatever "treaty" he wants and it won't fly. Chill out and don't worry about.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona, U.S.
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    COME KNOCK ON IT.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    I read the post, read the comments, then scrolled up to reply. When i got to the top, i saw something that caught my eye.... the word "armedman" now i'm a bit weary to post... Legitimate post? or a troll post... you decide.

  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stanislaus County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,586

    Post imported post

    Pistol-Packing-Preacher-in-PV wrote:
    Remember, there is a difference between signing a treaty and having it ratified by the Senate.

    That is where the major battle would take place.
    Further, a treaty can't supersede the bill of rights. It will take a 2/3 majority vote, or an reversal of interpretation by the US Supreme Court, to nullify the 2nd Amendment.

    I still believe we need to keep this on the radar, but when it comes down to physically taking guns from the law-abiding, I'm not any more worried after reading this.
    Participant in the Free State Project - "Liberty in Our Lifetime" - www.freestateproject.org
    Supporter of the CalGuns Foundation - http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
    Supporter of the Madison Society - www.madison-society.org


    Don't Tread On Me.

  8. #8
    Regular Member mFonz77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Sierra Vista, AZ
    Posts
    265

    Post imported post

    Old news, and plenty of case law. The Supreme court has already recognized that the Constitution supersedes any treaty.

    "This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

    "The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent." - Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267
    My location says I am from Sierra Vista, AZ which is where I live now but I actually lived in MO for 26 years! So please stop telling me I don't know what I'm talking about when I post in the Missouri forum!

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877

    Post imported post

    "How many people do you think would turn their weapons in?" -- Hollowpoint38

    LOTS of people would. The majority. Most Americans are so blindly 'law-abiding' they are scared to death of becoming 'outlaws' (criminals) if they refused. Unfortunately, that's one of the downsides to being so 'aw-abiding" -- even obeying bad/illegal laws -- and why I can't apply 'law-abiding'in that sense to myself.

    Plus, most people are so timid, they would not actively resist any door-to-door visits made to confiscate any firearms on the premises, just passively turn them over.

    Sorry, I have no such confidence in most Americans standing up en masse and getting out there in the streets protesting anything, let alone anti-gun laws, no matter how draconian.

    -- John D.
    (formerly of Colorado Springs, CO)

  10. #10
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Hollowpoint38 wrote:
    How many people do you think would turn their weapons in? It would be a violation of massive proportion and the SECOND American Revolution would begin. Trust me, Obama can sign whatever "treaty" he wants and it won't fly. Chill out and don't worry about.
    Have you ever seen a "Gun buy back?"

    This is a very evil process that conditions ordinary citizens to turn in their firearms. Gun buy backs are sheeple conditioning. Don't think it cannot happen here.

    Live free or Die,

    Thundar
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    mrh2008 wrote:
    I read the post, read the comments, then scrolled up to reply. When i got to the top, i saw something that caught my eye.... the word "armedman" now i'm a bit weary to post... Legitimate post? or a troll post... you decide.
    Your continual posts like this are troll posts. Drop it already.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    armedman wrote:
    mrh2008 wrote:
    I read the post, read the comments, then scrolled up to reply. When i got to the top, i saw something that caught my eye.... the word "armedman" now i'm a bit weary to post... Legitimate post? or a troll post... you decide.
    Your continual posts like this are troll posts. Drop it already.
    Hey sir, my "continual posts like this are troll posts." How is that, and what do you mean by "continual"? That was the first time i mentioned troll, and the first time i have had a "troll concern" on this forum... i don't understand... you must have me confused with someone else...

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    mrh2008 wrote:
    armedman wrote:
    mrh2008 wrote:
    I read the post, read the comments, then scrolled up to reply. When i got to the top, i saw something that caught my eye.... the word "armedman" now i'm a bit weary to post... Legitimate post? or a troll post... you decide.
    Your continual posts like this are troll posts. Drop it already.
    Hey sir, my "continual posts like this are troll posts." How is that, and what do you mean by "continual"? That was the first time i mentioned troll, and the first time i have had a "troll concern" on this forum... i don't understand... you must have me confused with someone else...
    First, figure out what a troll post is.
    Now go back and read your posts on the topics I started. Your flinging crap around is trolling.



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post


  15. #15
    Regular Member mFonz77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Sierra Vista, AZ
    Posts
    265

    Post imported post

    This forum has way more bitching than any other gun forum I'm on. For people who are supposed to let logic trump emotion y'all sure can throw a hissy-fit.
    My location says I am from Sierra Vista, AZ which is where I live now but I actually lived in MO for 26 years! So please stop telling me I don't know what I'm talking about when I post in the Missouri forum!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mesa, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post


  17. #17
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Post imported post

    Here is some quick reading on the subject.

    http://www.iansa.org/un/index.htm
    http://www.controlarms.org/en
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  18. #18
    Regular Member MarlboroLts5150's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    407

    Post imported post

    DEBUNKED!!!

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5843





    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the UN Arms Trade Treaty



    Tuesday, May 25, 2010




    [align=left]
    Contrary to a widely circulated e-mail, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has not signed anyUN small arms treaty. She could not have done so, in fact, because no such treaty has yet been negotiated.
    "My dedication to my country's flag rests on my ardent belief in this noblest of causes, equality for all. If my future rests under this earth rather than upon it, I fear not."

    -Leopold Karpeles, US Civil War Medal of Honor Recipient

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    58

    Post imported post

    MarlboroLts5150 wrote:
    DEBUNKED!!!

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5843





    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the UN Arms Trade Treaty



    Tuesday, May 25, 2010



    Contrary to a widely circulated e-mail, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has not signed anyUN small arms treaty. She could not have done so, in fact, because no such treaty has yet been negotiated.
    Cool.. thanks..

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Prescott Valley, AZ
    Posts
    200

    Post imported post

    MarlboroLts5150 wrote:
    DEBUNKED!!!

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5843





    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the UN Arms Trade Treaty



    Tuesday, May 25, 2010



    Contrary to a widely circulated e-mail, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has not signed anyUN small arms treaty. She could not have done so, in fact, because no such treaty has yet been negotiated.
    Not entirely debunked. But not correctly reported, either. The following link gives a very good overview of what's going on:

    http://www.jonchristianryter.com/2010/100524.html

Posting Permissions

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