Your opinions? I'd add links but I'm on my phone. Y'all have to research it yourself if you don't know what it is.
Your opinions? I'd add links but I'm on my phone. Y'all have to research it yourself if you don't know what it is.
I've done some research. Planning a lot more tomorrow. Initially i am thinking its not to worry about...dont get me wrong I despise the UN. But from what I understand the Senate has to ratify a treaty and can overrule potus if that jack wagon signs it. I dont see it affecting us much nor do i see any gun grab coming, it would be a costly mistake.
Again this is my initial look at it...I may have just swung and missed completely.
Let's hope it's nothing to worry about. But the fact is, they want an end result of us not being allowed to have firearms in any means due to their "international treaties".
No, that's not what this current one outlines (to an extent) but that's what the UN wants.
They know that they need to enforce it if they get their ban... Guess what we have more guns than them. They don't have the muscle to enforce it. Them coming here would be an act of war. As for our own gov trying to it would be unconstitutional and they would be dealt with.
We are the three percent. If you do the math we vastly outnumber them and just about any forces they bring to us.
I have written to my Senators regarding this already. Yes, it does need a 2/3rds vote in order to pass when Clinton brings it to them later this month. One said he was not voting for it no matter what it said, the other was willing to read it first and then decide. The one who would consider it wrote this to me:
Thank you for taking the time to contact my office to share your concerns about the prospect of a conventional arms trade treaty. Your input is important to me and I appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.
Please know that the right to own firearms for shooting, hunting, and self-protection is important to me as a Tennessean and as an American. I believe in safeguarding the rights of law-abiding American citizens. I will be a consistent voice for the Second A mendment, and I will fight attempts to weaken those rights that are granted in the Constitution.
As you may know, the U.N. passed a resolution stating intentions to begin negotiating an international agreement surrounding the import, export and transfer of conventional arms. These negotiations will conclude with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty in 2012.
At this time there is no treaty pending before the United States Senate as the negotiations are ongoing . That said, I will continue to closely monitor the negotiations over the next year, and I can assure you, I will not vote for a measure that infringes upon U.S. sovereignty or a person's right to keep and bear arms. For this reason, I along with several of my colleagues in the Senate, sent a letter to President Obama expressing strong support for the constitutional protections of civilian gun ownership, and stating intentions to oppose any treaty that is presented to the Senate which in any way restricts the rights of law-abiding citizens to manufacture, assemble, possess, transfer or purchase firearms and ammunition. In addition, you may be interested in the attached "Policy Points" document to learn more about the steps I have taken to protect our S econd A mendment rights.
Now I do not care for this guy nor does he have the best record for voting in the best interests of Republicans so he can say one thing and vote a different way. I had also asked in my letter to explain his view on the appointment of Iran on the panel for weapons regulation at the U.N. which to me is totally insane and how much I would like to see the U.S. send the U.N. packing. They harm us more than help. He never answered that part of the question. My concern was if the treaty was passed and Iran has any control over weapons regulation it could harm us through the back door.
Oh well. So much for full answers.
Last edited by ladyhk13; 07-15-2012 at 05:50 AM. Reason: put letter in bold
I apologize for nothing...
That had to be Lamar Alexander. That man talks out of both sides of his mouth so much you cant tell which one to listen to. I guess thats the point.
I worry less about such a treaty being signed "this time" than I will next time. With things like fast and furious blowing up in O-dawg's face like it did, there isn't a groundswell of support at this time for restrictions, which F&F was all about to start with. IMHO. The Mexican govt should sue the US govt on behalf of the victims of F&F just on principle alone. Heads should roll when it comes to any infringement of the 2A especially since it has been upheld by the SCOTUS.
The Second Amendment, protecting all the others.
Common sense is so rare these days, it should be re-classified as a super power.
Political issues aside, this is one to keep an eye on.
I don't believe for one second for the tinfoil nonsense that this will result in baby-blue helmets marching down our streets. That is simply a jerk-off fantasy for fat commando-wannabes.
I do however, think people would be wise to keep an eye on this as it could effect the importation of cheep surplus ammo. More importantly from a prep standpoint (if this comes to pass) is what other hair-brained UN treaties can be ratified by the Senate and prevent us from being ready to deal with SHTF events?
Generators are bad because they cause global warming? Having "too much food" storied away isn't fair to the rest of the world and should be spread around? Carbon use taxes that increase the cost of living and reduce how much income can be used to prep?
If you think that come SHTF you are gonna jock up in all your kit and be a death-dealing one man army, you're an idiot - izzyscout
Did you just call me FAT? haha, seriously I don't know what to think anymore. everytime we turn around someone is wanting you to agree on this or sign that. I don't think we can keep on the track we are on as a whole, something will have to give sooner or later.Originally Posted by The Stig
Be ready now, you won't have that chance later.
BP, you would think it was Lamar since he is always flip flopping but his pal Bob Corker was it this time.
I do worry about the UN and it's power over the U.S. and our ability to keep the freedoms we have now not to mention the amount of money we "donate (pay off)" to other countries. We are bound by so many rules that I believe it is contributing to the decline of this nation and Stig you do make a valid point...who WILL be making those decisions about how much of certain items will be allowed to be stored by individuals before it's going to be considered illegal? Are we going to be told that our population is too high (too much CO2) so we will have to cut down on our allowed births all the while we refuse to get control of our illegal immigration which once again puts a strain on our financial system not to mention dilutes the American population? I think that the power of the UN over the US has ramifacations far beyond what we think of on a daily basis but has a huge impact on our quality of living and how we are going to prep for the degradation of this country just as it has in Europe.
I apologize for nothing...
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks