• 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.

Mr. Gleason

BROKENSPROKET

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
imported post

In April, you posted about Hillary and Barak and the Small Arms Treaty.

YOU WERE RIGHT

I saw a news piece with, Lou Dobbs, IDK how old it is, but if Obama, Democrats and Republics in Congress are talking openly about it, it must be true.

For everyone that flamed you, I can only praythat one day the blind shall see.
 
Interceptor_Knight

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

rcawdor57 wrote:
turbojohn41 wrote:
How about a link so we know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...


http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=44687&forum_id=57&highlight=j.gleason
Click to expand...

The text of the OP in that thread is not accurate as nothing was signed. There is not even a treaty to vote on. It does not exist. It is not even scheduled to be negotiated until 2012.

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.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."

"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.
Click to expand...

A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012.
Click to expand...
 
zekester

zekester

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
664
Location
Uvalde, Texas
imported post

A treaty is just that...a Treaty between the heads of state in any country which decides to participate....In the USA....all treatys must be apppoved by both houses of Congress......this was nothing more than a ploy by this administration.....don't worry about it.....If you think back when Woodrow Wilson signed the League of Nations.....it did not happen....congress shot it down.

Z
 
L

langzaiguy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
916
Location
Central KY
imported post

If it's the treaty I'm thinking of, it only has to do with import/export of weapons and not gun control within the US.
 
Shotgun

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

BROKENSPROKET wrote:
turbojohn41 wrote:
How about a link so we know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9X2VbhSH9o

I believe this was just over one year ago.
Click to expand...
It's a different treaty than the one referenced in Mr. Gleason's original post. His post was about the United Nations "Small Arms Treaty", whereas the treaty discussed in the video is the Organization of American States "Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials."

The text of this treaty can be read here (please feel free to point out the language in it that is somehow a threat to 2nd Amendment rights):


http://www.oas.org/juridico/English/treaties/a-63.html



 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

That would be correct and I believe I stated earlier in the other thread that the Treaty has not been signed yet. I guess the whole point I was trying to make it that hte current administration is even condidering it.

If you don't think that the administration would not use this treaty to meet their anti gun agenda. Think again.

Hang on to your seat belts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top