• 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.

The Washington Times EDITORIAL: 'The U.N. gun grabber', 6:51 p.m., Thursday, May 27, 2010

Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,381
Location
across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsi
imported post

American gun owners might not feel besieged, but they should. This week, the Obama administration announced its support for the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. This international agreement poses real risks for freedom both in the United States and around the world by making it more difficult - if not outright illegal - for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.

More -> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/27/the-un-gun-grabber/

Linked as second from the top here
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/news/nl/disp.asp?d=5/28/2010
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

"This U.N. treaty will lead to more gun control in America. "After the treaty is approved and it comes into force, you will find out that it has this implication or that implication and it requires the Congress to adopt some measure that restricts ownership of firearms," former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John R. Bolton warns. "The [Obama] administration knows it cannot obtain this kind of legislation purely in a domestic context. ... They will use an international agreement as an excuse to get domestically what they couldn't otherwise.""

"This implication or that implication . . . ?" :?

A good indictment has more particulars.

John Bolton never has a good word to say about this administration.

Come on: what is the offending language in the draft treaty? I really want to know.
 

flintlock tom

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
405
Location
San Diego, California, USA
imported post

It was my understanding that the "treaty" was still being drafted and would not be ready until 2012.
And no matter what "implications" it may have, it would still need to be ratified by the Senate.
 
T

TWG2A

Guest
imported post

I hope people start paying attention to this looming nightmare.

PLEASE DO SOME RESEARCH ON THIS. BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE.

I've read the documents, timelines, meeting notes and other pertinent information on this scheme. IT IS A VERY REAL THREAT TO US ALL.

I'm getting tired of screaming. And I'm tired of my fellow Second Amendment "Advocates" calling me names and ridiculing me for bringing it up.

But I'm not going to give up.
 
Top