Obama revives talk of U.N. gun control

Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
3,447
Likes
4,330
Feedback: 29 / 1 / 0
Obama revives talk of U.N. gun control
NRA guests warn international treaty would strip 2nd Amendment rights
Posted: November 14, 2009
7:05 pm Eastern

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116041

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


United Nations headquarters

Gun rights supporters are up in arms over a pair of moves the White House made last month to reverse long-standing U.S. policy and begin negotiating a gun control treaty with the United Nations.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton first announced on Oct. 14 that the U.S. had changed its stance and would support negotiations of an Arms Trade Treaty to regulate international gun trafficking, a measure the Bush administration and, notably, former Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations John Bolton opposed for years.

Two weeks ago, in another reversal of policy, the U.S. joined a nearly unanimous 153-1 U.N. vote to adopt a resolution setting out a timetable on the proposed Arms Trade Treaty, including a U.N. conference to produce a final accord in 2012.

"Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms," Clinton said in a statement. "The United States is prepared to work hard for a strong international standard in this area."

Gun rights advocates, however, are calling the reversal both a dangerous submission of America's Constitution to international governance and an attempt by the Obama administration to sneak into effect private gun control laws it couldn't pass through Congress.

'Shooting Back' tells of lives saved from attackers. Learn the Bible's defense of bearing arms from a man who defended his church from terrorists

Bolton, for example, told Ginny Simone, managing editor of the National Rifle Associations' NRA News and host of the NRA's Daily News program, "The administration is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there's no doubt – as was the case back over a decade ago – that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control."

He continued, "There's never been any doubt when these groups talk about saying they only want to prohibit illicit international trafficking in small arms and light weapons, it begs the whole question of what's legal at what's not legal. And many of the implications of these treaty negotiations are very much in their domestic application. So, whatever the appearance on the surface, there's no doubt that domestic firearm control is right at the top of their agenda."

Brian Wood, disarmament expert for Amnesty International, explained in a Bloomberg report why his organization and others are pushing for the U.S. to join Arms Trade Treaty talks. Wood said the U.S. is the largest conventional arms trader in the world and the unregulated trade of conventional arms "can fuel instability, transnational organized crime and terrorism."

"All countries participate in the conventional arms trade and share responsibility for the 'collateral damage' it produces – widespread death, injuries and human rights abuses," said Rebecca Peters, director of the International Action Network on Small Arms in an Agence France-Presse interview. "Now finally governments have agreed to negotiate legally binding global controls on this deadly trade."

But Bob Barr, a former U.S. representative and presidential candidate of the Libertarian Party explained in a separate interview with the NRA's Simone how a treaty that looks like it's all about fighting international crime will necessarily lead to erosion of Second Amendment gun rights:

"Even though [treaty advocates] all say, 'We are not going to involve domestic laws and the right to keep and bear arms, that won't be affected by all this,' that's nonsense," Barr said. "There's no way that if you buy into something like this and a treaty is passed regulating to ensure that firearms transfers internationally don't fall into the hands of people that the U.N. doesn't like, there's no way that that mechanism will work unless you have some form of national regulation and national tracking."

Bolton not only agrees with Barr's assessment but also sees the treaty as an Obama administration end-around of the Constitution:

"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," he said. "The 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."

Clinton's October statement of support for the treaty negotiations was filed with a caveat that the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty operate under the consensus rule of decision-making, essentially that its provisions be adopted unanimously.

"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the treaty," she stated, "and to avoid loopholes in the treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly."

But Bolton warned gun owners not to think the consensus rule will stop the treaty from passing.

"Consensus at the U.N. is a way of saying unanimity, everybody agrees, but in fact, the U.N. in the last eight years could have been very close to consensus on exactly this kind of treaty but for the Bush administration," Bolton said. "So I don't think her comment about consensus offers Second Amendment supporters any consolation, because absent the Unites States, nobody is really going to put up an objection to this."

Citizens wishing to speak out on the issue can contact the State Department or the National Rifle Association.
 

Agenda 21. Sounds like Plan 9. From Outer Space. Zombies. This is very bad.

SpaceZombiesPlan9-thumb-330x220-26569.jpg
 
Citizens wishing to speak out on the issue can contact the State Department or the National Rifle Association.

Here is me speaking out on this: Come f#%king get 'em, B#tch. You're gonna die.
 
They'll just grab you when you're unawares. Or you'll come home and find the house ransacked and all your hardware gone.

Time to start digging holes.

I'm always awares. And is it not possible that not all of my hardware, if I do indeed own any hardware, which I very well may not, is not stored in my home? But, rather, legally stored elsewhere?

The bottom line is this: We have to obide by laws. The Feds have to obide by the BOR. They step out of line, so do we. They stay in line, so do we. Its a dance. Who is willing to play for keeps?
 
I'm always awares. And is it not possible that not all of my hardware, if I do indeed own any hardware, which I very well may not, is not stored in my home? But, rather, legally stored elsewhere?

The bottom line is this: We have to obide by laws. The Feds have to obide by the BOR. They step out of line, so do we. They stay in line, so do we. Its a dance. Who is willing to play for keeps?

It's called ''the hustle'' and ''we'' aint' leading![angry]
 
Is that working in the commonwealth?
We'll see... I haven't seen anyone try until recently...

I have seen a lot more of it recently... Too soon to judge the results...

The first data point will be the proposed regs on shooting events... Devoid took a lot more flak from that than he expected. Still have not seen the response...

The bottom line is that there are only two tools available for this job: pen or sword. I think we have an ethical obligation to drain the ink and run out of paper first... We have only recently begun to apply a fraction of the pressure from "our side" that the political machine sees every day from the socialists...

I have no romantic delusions of "plan B"... I don't want to go down that road, it won't be "fun". It won't be "fast". In the end, it may fail as well... It comes with its own Pandora's box...
 
I might be opening a can of worms here, but,,,
aside from politcal activisim and voting, what else is there?

You are opening a can of worms. And, this is neither the time, nor the place. With respect for Derek, and the mods, that is. However, there is always more that can be done. If what you are doing isn't working, why do it? American history is truly amazing and inspiring. I haven't come across anythying like it. Our forefathers were very successful against tremendous odds in securing their own freedoms. The spirit of America that they created still echoes though the years. We only need to listen closely to hear the truth, and to hear what is required of us to be successful in preserving what it is that they managed to create.
 
We'll see... I haven't seen anyone try until recently...

I have seen a lot more of it recently... Too soon to judge the results...

The first data point will be the proposed regs on shooting events... Devoid took a lot more flak from that than he expected. Still have not seen the response...

The bottom line is that there are only two tools available for this job: pen or sword. I think we have an ethical obligation to drain the ink and run out of paper first... We have only recently begun to apply a fraction of the pressure from "our side" that the political machine sees every day from the socialists...

I have no romantic delusions of "plan B"... I don't want to go down that road, it won't be "fun". It won't be "fast". In the end, it may fail as well...

I should say that you are very wise, but I wouldn't realize how much of a compliment that may be, because I fear that I may not be.

But, I do agree that Democracy must be upheld and preserved as a means of Justice in our society. We are not barbarians, and are not at the point where we need to be.

And, you are right. The end will fail. But it may or may not preserve the means. And then it becomes a matter of priority, and what it is all worth to the individual to preserve the state.
 
You are opening a can of worms. And, this is neither the time, nor the place. With respect for Derek, and the mods, that is. However, there is always more that can be done. If what you are doing isn't working, why do it?
Agreed, but what we have been doing is NOTHING. Other than complaining...

So, now we move straight from armchair politicians to armchair commandos waiting for someone else to fix it or tell us when to march...

There is a middle step that many are skipping here...

That's to look at how the socialists have accomplished this invasion... You don't have to join them to learn from their success...

I am not guaranteeing that the political route will succeed, but we are a far cry from putting the personal, individual effort into it that the socialists have...
 
Agreed, but what we have been doing is NOTHING. Other than complaining...

So, now we move straight from armchair politicians to armchair commandos waiting for someone else to fix it or tell us when to march...

There is a middle step that many are skipping here...

That's to look at how the socialists have accomplished this invasion... You don't have to join them to learn from their success...

I am not guaranteeing that the political route will succeed, but we are a far cry from putting the personal, individual effort into it that the socialists have...

There is nothing that you have said that I disagree with. But, here is what you, and I, and we, all need to come to realize:

Let us create a mock situation that is totally unrelated to the current circumstances. I do not want to adress what is happening politically in this state or country, and everything that I am about to discuss is indeed fictional and unrelated to anything that we've been discussing.

But, when I speak of priority, it is very important to understand the emphasis on the word priority. Because, If a man was determined to secure his freedom, he must be prepared to forfeit everything else. And, when a man concludes that his top priority is indeed freedom, there is no question in his willingness to sacrifice everything else for it.
 
Thanks for posting that, the more that understand this is serious stuff and that it comes from more than one person and It is real the better.

I have been trying to make people understand for years that this stuff some of you call tin foil is real and not BS and will affect your lives and freedom.

Welcome to the light.

I used to think the Agenda 21-ers were a bunch of conspiracy kooks...Used to...[thinking]
 
But, when I speak of priority, it is very important to understand the emphasis on the word priority. Because, If a man was determined to secure his freedom, he must be prepared to forfeit everything else. And, when a man concludes that his top priority is indeed freedom, there is no question in his willingness to sacrifice everything else for it.
Certainly, if we truly believe what is stated in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, then this must be case. If our political opposition doubts our sincerity in this belief than it is in all of our best interest that they be made to understand, through all available peaceful means that we are not bluffing in our belief of freedom and willingness to fight for it if all other peaceful means be exhausted...

Which is precisely why, though I do not feel a need at this point to stand in the street with a rifle over my shoulder, I understand those who do and they are doing more to press the opposition to a peaceful outcome than those who sit comfortably in their chairs complaining about whether they are "making us look bad"...

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice", as they say...

Extremism in response to frustration at the absurdity inherent to our political system (and to our species), is a vice...

Being prepared to answer the call to what they perceive is a bluff is one thing. Refusing to participate in messy political games which define our system and have been with us since the first days (and were in fact expected and embraced by the founders) is another.

Simply put, it is laziness and naive idealism of the same ilk as the absurdity we face from the socialist left and socialist, dogmatic right.
 
Thanks for posting that, the more that understand this is serious stuff and that it comes from more than one person and It is real the better.

I have been trying to make people understand for years that this stuff some of you call tin foil is real and not BS and will affect your lives and freedom.

Welcome to the light.

I used to mock, then became friends with a poster over on Political Crossfire...I lost track of him when he moved to Colorado. He used to get rations of crap for his views on Agenda 21. Even the so-called conservatives were relentless. I started to listen, read, learn. I wish I had saved them, but he posted a few articles - legit - on eminent domain seizures and their relationship to Agenda 21...People need to read that and look not too far in between the lines and really let the implications sink in....
 
Simply put, it is laziness and naive idealism of the same ilk as the absurdity we face from the socialist left and socialist, dogmatic right.
BTW, this is perhaps the root of many of our problems. "Left" as originally defined as "anti-establishment" and "right" as "Pro-establishment" are clearly definitions which no longer have any meaning...

The political "establishment" is uniformly socialist regardless of party. It also overwhelmingly endorses the cult of Environmental Extremism... Clearly "anti-establishment" at this point does not describe Democrats or Republicans...

So, I personally believe we are at or near those rarefied, but not unprecedented moments in political history where the parties significantly reshape their underlying values - even going so far as to embrace many of the opposing principles from earlier times...
 
Bring it.

I have a truck load of friends with more guns than sense and more ammo than restraint.

But yes... The ink well is not yet empty. We've not yet shouted till we're hoarse.

I like to think that part of what we do here on these very forums is exercising our pens.

But, let it be known... If all peaceable methods to retain recognition of our liberty are refused or otherwise ignored, me and mine will take lives give our own lives until they be restored.

I wonder who here would stand with us.
 
Back
Top Bottom