Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: UN Gun Ban on the Move

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    UN Gun Ban on the Move

    Note: The search function kept returning spurious results, so please just merge this with the thread(s) I know are already out there.

    Recent Letter from Dudley Brown. The requests for money have been removed. All that's left is the interesting, if not alarming, information:

    President Obama and his anti-gun pals will do virtually ANYTHING to set the stage for passage of the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” -- including putting innocent American lives at risk.

    In fact, speaking on the ATF’s recent “Gunwalker” scandal, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton stated that President Obama’s ATF agents stood by silently while Mexican drug cartels illegally smuggled hundreds of rifles across the border to . . .

    . . . provide a foundation for their argument [on] why the United States will have to enter into, in short order, the United Nations-negotiated arms trade treaty.

    One of those guns was likely used in the MURDER of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry -- an unfortunate “pawn” in President Obama’s GLOBAL war on our guns, as the Tuscon Citizen and other media outlets report.

    You see, the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” is ultimately designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

    So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

    If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate, the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” would almost certainly FORCE the U.S. to:

    *** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding Americans cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

    *** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL “unauthorized” civilian firearms (all firearms owned by governments are excluded, of course);

    *** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons including shotguns and other firearms commonly used for hunting;

    *** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION.

    Worse, once this fight kicks off, you and I won’t have much time to react.

    Please understand just how important this fight is -- and how important it is that you and I fight back NOW while we still can.

    The truth is, unless you and I can succeed in FORCING Senators to pledge their opposition to the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” now, there could be no stopping this freight train once it gets to D.C.

    President Obama is willing to do virtually ANYTHING to see the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” ratified -- including putting the lives of innocent Americans at risk.
    If you disagree that they're working behind the scenes to do this, fine - you're entitled to your opinion. Mine is that the threat is real, and knowing the serious opposition public efforts would face, they're trying to slide this one under the radar.

    Here's what you can do:

    1. WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE! No, seriously - take 5 minutes, click on the dang link, and fire off a message saying if he supports the gun ban he'll be on the street immediately after the next election.

    2. Stop poo-pooing this as a conspiracy theory. Our forum is rife with news articles detailing, very precisely, certain people's efforts to rid the U.S. of firearms. If you believe these people are incapable of picking up the phone and working together with the UN, you're sadly mistaken.
    Last edited by since9; 08-25-2011 at 07:11 PM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Conspiracy theory? no

    Useless effort to bother opposing? yes

    And if someone is concerned they should call their SENATOR. Representatives don't get a say in the issue.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  3. #3
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Note: The search function kept returning spurious results, so please just merge this with the thread(s) I know are already out there.

    Recent Letter from Dudley Brown. The requests for money have been removed. All that's left is the interesting, if not alarming, information:



    If you disagree that they're working behind the scenes to do this, fine - you're entitled to your opinion. Mine is that the threat is real, and knowing the serious opposition public efforts would face, they're trying to slide this one under the radar.

    Here's what you can do:

    1. WRITE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE! No, seriously - take 5 minutes, click on the dang link, and fire off a message saying if he supports the gun ban he'll be on the street immediately after the next election.

    2. Stop poo-pooing this as a conspiracy theory. Our forum is rife with news articles detailing, very precisely, certain people's efforts to rid the U.S. of firearms. If you believe these people are incapable of picking up the phone and working together with the UN, you're sadly mistaken.

    DUDE! stop wasting your time on this! do some RESEARCH on the constitution and how our nation works...first of all- 67 senators will NOT approve this treaty. and second, if they do, it will do nothing to harm our rights here in the US. a treaty can NOT override the federal constitution!!!


    this is just something to get your blood boiling...focus your attention on something else!

    (especially when you tell us to contact our representatives- when it's not them who will have a say in the matter.....)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  4. #4
    Regular Member hammer6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,169
    worst case scenario- the MILLIONS of gun owners in this GREAT country gather together and pull a "libya" and retake this country from the socialist/communist/marxist/statists!
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    doubt is a distraction from reality. fear is acknowledging doubt as reality.

    it's time to tap in to a higher reality; the one you were made for.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    DUDE! stop wasting your time on this! do some RESEARCH on the constitution and how our nation works...first of all- 67 senators will NOT approve this treaty. and second, if they do, it will do nothing to harm our rights here in the US. a treaty can NOT override the federal constitution!!!


    this is just something to get your blood boiling...focus your attention on something else!

    (especially when you tell us to contact our representatives- when it's not them who will have a say in the matter.....)
    The constitution is not magical. It is no different than any other law. It can be violated. And it is violated, all across the nation.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Tony4310's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Florissant, MO
    Posts
    474
    I wouldn't suggest the U.N. try taking our guns. We have the largest armed civilian military in the world.

    Obama isn't above violating the Constitution when it suits him or his buddies.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    12
    If they attempted to pass this, i could imagine Obama would be chased out the country by a very big militia.
    Last edited by 101st Airborne Combat Vet; 08-26-2011 at 09:29 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by 101st Airborne Combat Vet View Post
    If they attempted to pass this, i could imagine Obama would be chased out the country by a very big militia.
    Agreed!!! I wish the ******* was chased out 3 years ago, But seriously, Obama doesnt give a crap about the constitution, he hasnt and never will. He should have been impeached along time ago.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    DUDE! stop wasting your time on this! do some RESEARCH on the constitution and how our nation works
    I've done "some" research on our Constitution (it's capitalized, by the way) and how our nation works and have discovered we're doomed to failure unless the people who believe in our system of government stand firm, armed, if necessary.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    worst case scenario- the MILLIONS of gun owners in this GREAT country gather together and pull a "libya" and retake this country from the socialist/communist/marxist/statists!
    Yeah, but that's so sensationalist, and so not lasting. There are better, far more lasting ways of restoring the peace without infringing on our Constitutional rights.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Yawn.

    Bears keeping a weather eye out. Does not warrant panic (or threats of armed response) in the least.

    Is about as dangerous as a little yip-yip dog. Of course the dog could be rabid, but freaking out over it before you see signs of infection is a bit of an overreaction.

    Of course, one might insist he is just warning us of the possibility of danger. However, considering that we have been warned 6,235 times already (and have long since had that weather eye out), this thread is a waste of bandwidth.

  12. #12
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,273
    I find it interesting as well as disturbing that the new Libyan authority(supported by Obama) is going about disarming the citizens of Libya. Was this a deal by Obama we might never know, but I find it very strange that the people being armed made the overthrow possible with or without Obama's support. Those arms were the tool to remove a dictator, and Obama wants to take that tool away to ensure that those people have the freedom they deserve.

    Shame on you Obama!

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Most revolutions do not result in an expansion of Liberty. Usually, they merely trade one tyrant for another. The American Revolution (actually, a war of independence) was a rare and shining counterexample. Thank God.

    As far as Libya is concerned, we had no national interest in ousting one dictator, knowing full well that the Libyans would surely get another. Frankly, since Libya posed no threat to us or any of our allies, what happened in Libya should have stayed in Libya.

  14. #14
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    Most revolutions do not result in an expansion of Liberty. Usually, they merely trade one tyrant for another. The American Revolution (actually, a war of independence) was a rare and shining counterexample. Thank God.

    As far as Libya is concerned, we had no national interest in ousting one dictator, knowing full well that the Libyans would surely get another. Frankly, since Libya posed no threat to us or any of our allies, what happened in Libya should have stayed in Libya.
    I agree on this eye, Obama had no business sticking his nose in, let alone thumbing his nose at the congress, and the people of this country. This quap usually comes back to bite us in the arse.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    DUDE! stop wasting your time on this! do some RESEARCH on the constitution and how our nation works...first of all- 67 senators will NOT approve this treaty. and second, if they do, it will do nothing to harm our rights here in the US. a treaty can NOT override the federal constitution!!!
    Dude, do some research. Sentators tend to vote in line with the way their constituents are demanding they vote. Furthermore, regardless of it's direct effects on our country, or lack thereof, the indirect effects of disarming other nations is that down the road they can stand back and say, "See! Libya laid down their arms. So has E, J, P, X, Y, and Z. It's only right we do so as well."

    A stitch in time saves nine. Preventing this measure from passing now will save us hurculanean efforts down the road.

    As for your comment that I need lessons on our Constitution and how our nation works, well, you're not just off-target on that one. You're off-range.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  16. #16
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524
    Quote Originally Posted by hammer6 View Post
    worst case scenario- the MILLIONS of gun owners in this GREAT country gather together and pull a "libya" and retake this country from the socialist/communist/marxist/statists!
    Quote Originally Posted by 101st Airborne Combat Vet
    If they attempted to pass this, i could imagine Obama would be chased out the country by a very big militia.
    Be careful, guys, someone here will drop a dime on you to the FBI.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  17. #17
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbender View Post
    Be careful, guys, someone here will drop a dime on you to the FBI.
    I would be willing to suspect if not the FBI that we are monitored by BATF. Some common sense should prevail in posts considering the current USAG disregard for the constitution.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I would be willing to suspect if not the FBI that we are monitored by BATF. Some common sense should prevail in posts considering the current USAG disregard for the constitution.
    I think a greater threat might be mods or admins via Forum Rule (15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by rodbender View Post
    Be careful, guys, someone here will drop a dime on you to the FBI.
    Good, maybe then the administration will learn what the general public is thinking. Though as since9 pointed out, it might be starting to toe the line of what's acceptable for the forum. But then again they aren't calling for such actions, but rather stating what they think might happen.

  20. #20
    Regular Member ARADCOM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    317

    Thumbs down Obama?

    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I find it interesting as well as disturbing that the new Libyan authority(supported by Obama) is going about disarming the citizens of Libya. Was this a deal by Obama we might never know, but I find it very strange that the people being armed made the overthrow possible with or without Obama's support. Those arms were the tool to remove a dictator, and Obama wants to take that tool away to ensure that those people have the freedom they deserve.

    Shame on you Obama!
    I find it interesting as well as disturbing that people are such friggin' racists that they lay the blame for everything on our current President. He's disarming the Libyans? Come back to reality, man!

    What you should really be pissed about is that he made hurricane Irene appear and wreak havoc on the east coast as part of his plan to...? You can fill in the blanks, 'cuz I'm pretty sure you know the reason.
    Last edited by ARADCOM; 08-31-2011 at 10:14 AM. Reason: corrected spelling of rascists ;-)

  21. #21
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by ARADCOM View Post
    I find it interesting as well as disturbing that people are such friggin' racists that they lay the blame for everything on our current President. He's disarming the Libyans? Come back to reality, man!

    What you should really be pissed about is that he made hurricane Irene appear and wreak havoc on the east coast as part of his plan to...? You can fill in the blanks, 'cuz I'm pretty sure you know the reason.
    Next time before labeling someone a racist you might want to see what the race of the person is. Otherwise just simply tacking on the race card to a post that does not mention race would make that person the racist.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by ARADCOM View Post
    I find it interesting as well as disturbing that people are such friggin' racists that they lay the blame for everything on our current President. He's disarming the Libyans? Come back to reality, man!

    What you should really be pissed about is that he made hurricane Irene appear and wreak havoc on the east coast as part of his plan to...? You can fill in the blanks, 'cuz I'm pretty sure you know the reason.
    It's typically the true racists that see racism everywhere. Just because the president is black doesn't mean it's racist to blame him for things (regardless of if it's truely his fault or not). He isn't being blamed because of his skin color (which would be racist); he's being blamed because he is the president, people don't like his policies, and a large part of it is his fault. But his skin tone has nothing to do with it.

  23. #23
    Regular Member thedrewcifur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    westerville, oh
    Posts
    21
    we should put great effort into stopping this treaty but should we fail remember... there are more legal gun owners in america than un stormtroopers... and many gun owners have served in the us military (thank you for your service, btw), are cops, are hunters, or target shooters. we aren't a bunch of yahoos. i think we will be fine though.

  24. #24
    Regular Member ARADCOM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    NW Washington, Washington, USA
    Posts
    317

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    Next time before labeling someone a racist you might want to see what the race of the person is. Otherwise just simply tacking on the race card to a post that does not mention race would make that person the racist.
    Oh, you thought I meant YOU. So sorry! And yes, I've met Black racists.

    But perhaps you'd be so kind as to tell me what you were thinking when you laid the blame for disarming Libyans on him? Because he's a Democrat maybe?

    I mean I know he's the leader of the free world and all, but disarming the Libyans just seems like it's a wee bit out of his control. Aside from the fact that all I see on TV seems to show the Libyans aren't lacking for arms.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,797
    Quote Originally Posted by ARADCOM View Post
    Oh, you thought I meant YOU. So sorry! And yes, I've met Black racists.

    But perhaps you'd be so kind as to tell me what you were thinking when you laid the blame for disarming Libyans on him? Because he's a Democrat maybe?

    I mean I know he's the leader of the free world and all, but disarming the Libyans just seems like it's a wee bit out of his control. Aside from the fact that all I see on TV seems to show the Libyans aren't lacking for arms.
    Because last I heard his administration has pushed for the Libyans to be disarmed by the new government? And since he is in charge of the administration that means that he is responsible for the actions of his administration; regardless of if he personally directed them or not.
    Last edited by Aknazer; 08-31-2011 at 10:57 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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