Biden aims to sign UN global gun registration treaty

[SgtHal75]

Ummm...I took that this morning specifically for my post to show my level of readiness for this f***ery.

That could be the 1st evah NES dick pic

 

[76Too]

That could be the 1st evah NES dick pic

I’ve been called worse

 

[Fixxah]

Now that’s a statue that has
To come down!!

Melt it down to make some guns.

 

[Dadstoys]

Whatever.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.

This. Ratification is the only thing that matters. Even then, it would be suspect as the Constitution supersede properly ratified treaties.

We're unconcerned.

 

[Christian]

Sign it, don't sign it. I don't care.

Won't change a thing for me either way.

 

[safetyfirst2125]

Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.

Oh I’m sure they’ve got big plans post rigged-2022 election

 

[silversquirrel]

Ill sign up right after the talibans register all their shiny new sequential serial numbered M4s

 

[dlarge]

Dude seriously. How about the UN rolls into truly dangerous countries and starts taking their guns away...

 

[Reptile]

Good.

This aught to speed things up a little bit.

I’m getting tired of sitting around with my dick in my hands waiting for the other shoe to drop.

View attachment 519285

Tell me about it!!!!

 

[T-Unit]

Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.

What does it matter if it's approved in the senate? The Congress is NEVER going to impeach Biden, impeachment is a concept from the 18th Century created by men who didn't think that political parties would exist. Don't bank on the 25th Amendment either, Kamala would never use it for something like a UN arms treaty.

So what other option is left? "WE'LL SUE 'EM! SCOTUS WILL SAVE US!" you say, but really, what power does SCOTUS really have to stop a rogue President? The Supreme Court doesn't have the power to remove a President, they could rule the arms treaty unconstitutional, but who enforces that? Oh, the President, the guy who signed it without senate approval!

I'll cut the bullshit for a minute: what Biden wants to do, he's going to be able to do. They've spent the past 8 months purging the military, they will continue to purge it over time because they intend to use the military to enforce gun control.

Buckle up.

 

[AHM]

What does it matter if it's approved in the senate? ...

Treaty Clause

​

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur...​

 

[T-Unit]

Treaty Clause

​

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur...​

And who and what army is going to enforce that part of the Constitution?

 

[ridleyman]

Joe Biden: enema of the people

 

[Rob Boudrie]

This aught to speed things up a little bit.

Google "define aught" and "define ought"

 

[76Too]

Google "define aught" and "define ought"

Never picture you for a spelling Nazi?!?!

Sorry...so much 30 aught 6, I forgot ought was even a word. I’ll figure it out eventually.

 

[Howland]

Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.

They'll do it the same way Obama got his deal with Iran through.

The Constitution requires that treaties need ratification of Senate by a supermajority of two thirds. Obama did not have that. What Congress did instead is pass a statute authorizing the President (limited to the current President in the current case of Iran) to negotiate an agreement that is called anything but a Treaty and implement it without the 2/3 consent, and require two thirds of the Senate to negate it if they don't agree. This literally pretends to turn the meaning upside down.

RINOs did that! They wanted to let him get his agreement but wash their own hands of any responsibility.

The Constitution explicitly declares any Treaty to be superior to federal or state laws. SCOTUS has never ruled on whether any Treaty can be ratified that contained provisions in conflict with the Constitution. Given the "Lack of Standing" excuse they use to avoid tackling controversial issues which may upset the other branches, I have zero confidence that the plain language of 2A wouldn't become even more of a dead letter than it already is. It would be the mechanism to drive the final nail into the coffin.

 

[MassPete]

Good.

This aught to speed things up a little bit.

I’m getting tired of sitting around with my dick in my hands waiting for the other shoe to drop.

View attachment 519285

The tin foil is supposed to go on your head. Your big head..

 

[ThePreBanMan]

They'll do it the same way Obama got his deal with Iran through.

The Constitution requires that treaties need ratification of Senate by a supermajority of two thirds. Obama did not have that. What Congress did instead is pass a statute authorizing the President (limited to the current President in the current case of Iran) to negotiate an agreement that is called anything but a Treaty and implement it without the 2/3 consent, and require two thirds of the Senate to negate it if they don't agree. This literally pretends to turn the meaning upside down.

RINOs did that! They wanted to let him get his agreement but wash their own hands of any responsibility.

The Constitution explicitly declares any Treaty to be superior to federal or state laws. SCOTUS has never ruled on whether any Treaty can be ratified that contained provisions in conflict with the Constitution. Given the "Lack of Standing" excuse they use to avoid tackling controversial issues which may upset the other branches, I have zero confidence that the plain language of 2A wouldn't become even more of a dead letter than it already is. It would be the mechanism to drive the final nail into the coffin.

That approach is useless as the next President can just walk away from the agreement... Just like Trump did.

 

[Howland]

That approach is useless as the next President can just walk away from the agreement... Just like Trump did.

True enough in theory, but we have already seen the last free and fair election and the mullahs kept the pallets of cash anyway. And how many judges have ruled that DACA implemented by Obama EOs contrary to actual laws could not be ended by a subsequent President but building a wall in carrying out a duty to faithfully execute those same laws can be ended?

Long ago we entered the realm of outcome based jurisprudence that doesn't even pretend to follow the law. Oh, remember all those record breaking numbers of federal judicial appointments Trump made? Those records have fallen with the active assistance of Sen. Lindsey Grahamnesty, (RINO-SC).

 

[AHM]

And who and what army is going to enforce that part of the Constitution?

The same one that ensures the Paris Climate Accords don't mean sh¡t in the United States
because the Senate never ratified that treaty either.

They'll do it the same way Obama got his deal with Iran through.

The Constitution requires that treaties need ratification of Senate by a supermajority of two thirds. Obama did not have that. What Congress did instead is pass a statute authorizing the President (limited to the current President in the current case of Iran) to negotiate an agreement ...

That's the same Congress that has passed
all that other Federal gun control legislation since 2007?

Passed because all the Donks in battleground and red states
want to lose their seats in the next election?

 

[omega42]

Tell me about it!!!!

View attachment 519544

Those tactical Birkenstocks in the background should be on ... with black socks.

 

[AHM]

Those tactical Birkenstocks in the background should be on ... with black socks.

Spoiler: You need this