The U.N. is coming for your guns - Update #402

[NHAtHeart]

After the bullshit they pulled here in New Hampshire, If I was an annual member instead of a fully paid Endowment Member( no I am not turning it in, I paid for it). I would not be renewing my membership.

This is why I didn't renew, I directed my funds to 2A foundation instead.

 

[Terminator03]

After the bullshit they pulled here in New Hampshire, If I was an annual member instead of a fully paid Endowment Member( no I am not turning it in, I paid for it). I would not be renewing my membership.

I hear you, and I'm on that page too! The only reason I still support them is because it is a requirement at my local club, which I love because it's private and only a couple of miles from my home. They require it because of the insurance, which keeps membership costs reasonable. I always just wait for the bonus gifts like $25 gift cards that make it almost free, though.

 

[fubar]

As I recall the NRA wanted nothing to do with Heller v D.C. Only in the last days , when they couldn't ignore it did they sort of get around to acknowledging it " Oh , yeah , uhm ... yes, We sort of think the Second Amendment is important , too."

 

[bullseye]

I didn't renew, even though my club advocates, not requires it. Redirected the funds towards ammo purchase.

 

[Terminator03]

I didn't renew, even though my club advocates, not requires it. Redirected the funds towards ammo purchase.

I would do the same thing except they ask for proof that you have a current membership in good standing, or they will charge you almost as much to open an "associate" membership on your behalf to cover their insurance requirement. Like I said, I just wait for the promotions like gift cards that kind of make it a wash anyway. You can even use those cards to buy ammo, so it's all good.

 

[Dench]

Wanted to share this response I received from Scott Brown on the UN Arms Treaty. I asked him where he stands on the issue and told him I do not support it. This is what I received.

if he said he was in favor of it that would not surprise me. he is not pro 2A. he does the minimum that the (R) stamped on his forehead requires when it comes to guns.

 

[porkpiehat]

if he said he was in favor of it that would not surprise me. he is not pro 2A. he does the minimum that the (R) stamped on his forehead requires when it comes to guns.

looks like he's trying to play both sides of the fence with his non answer.. and then he says..(B)....then in the next sentence he talks about the restrictions he voted for...

I understand your concerns about legislation that could place restrictions on our Second Amendment rights. As a Massachusetts State Senator, I voted in favor of legislation that extended the length of a gun license from four years to six years, expanded eligibility for licenses, and granted a 90-day grace period for expired firearms identification cards. I will continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate to examine any legislation that could impact our right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Dench]

looks like he's trying to play both sides of the fence with his non answer.. and then he says..(B)....then in the next sentence he talks about the restrictions he voted for...

Brown is no good. I don't see how he's any better than any (D) they throw at him. Both Brown and X (D) are going to ruin the country either way.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

Brown is no good. I don't see how he's any better than any (D) they throw at him. Both Brown and X (D) are going to ruin the country either way.

he is a politician of course he is no good, if you took every politician and counted the "good" ones it wouldn't surprise me if you had enough fingers

 

[cb1]

Brown is no good. I don't see how he's any better than any (D) they throw at him. Both Brown and X (D) are going to ruin the country either way.

The only difference between D and R is that they reward different constituences with taxpayer money.

 

[Mr Weebles]

This is why I didn't renew, I directed my funds to 2A foundation instead.

Same here. I went with SAF, Pro Gun NH and GONH.

 

[20 PAWS]

if he said he was in favor of it that would not surprise me. he is not pro 2A. he does the minimum that the (R) stamped on his forehead requires when it comes to guns.

There is no UN ARMS treaty.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/international-gun-ban-treaty/

 

[namedpipes]

There is no UN ARMS treaty.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/international-gun-ban-treaty/

Hey. I dunno myself, but from the article you linked, a couple things stand out:

Posted on December 5, 2009

What is true is that the Obama administration, reversing the line taken by the Bush White House, has voted to support a process that could, in 2012 at the earliest, result in a treaty.

Ignore the issue at your own peril.

 

[Stef]

Ignore the issue at your own peril.

Cry "The Sky Is Falling" when it isn't, at your peril.

 

[namedpipes]

Cry "The Sky Is Falling" when it isn't, at your peril.

I didn't say the sky is falling. I pointed out that the article linked was old.

The "treaty" could be a threat, or it could not be a threat.

 

[Stef]

I wasn't referring to you specifically, but there are plenty others who are doing just that.

 

[mx250man]

As far as I an tell (and I'm not too educated on the matter), what the UN wants means nothing to us in the US. As long as they do what we want, great, if not, we ignore them. So this is nothing more than another ".gov is coming for your guns" thread - the UN is irrelevant.

 

[inerlogic]

[video=youtube_share;vlv434JF8kQ]http://youtu.be/vlv434JF8kQ[/video]

 

[namedpipes]

[video=youtube_share;vlv434JF8kQ]http://youtu.be/vlv434JF8kQ[/video]

How many rounds will it take to melt off the shellac off that Mosin he just had signed?

The video rightly points out a treaty can't affect our actual rights, but it *can* affect what can be imported. Of course, they're doing a fine job of limiting that even without a treaty.

About 50% - 60% of the video was an advertisement to join the NRA...

 

[fubar]

There is no UN ARMS treaty.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/international-gun-ban-treaty/

This non existant treaty is going to be voted on on July 27 2012, - Outdated article. It was written when GWB and John Bolton were around. Later , we had an election and got a new president.

 

[cekim]

This non existant treaty is going to be voted on on July 27 2012, - Outdated article. It was written when GWB and John Bolton were around. Later , we had an election and got a new president.

The campaign to get people to ignore this issue, which included the NRA as recently as a few months ago was unfortunately effective.

 

[cekim]

How many rounds will it take to melt off the shellac off that Mosin he just had signed?

The video rightly points out a treaty can't affect our actual rights, but it *can* affect what can be imported. Of course, they're doing a fine job of limiting that even without a treaty.

About 50% - 60% of the video was an advertisement to join the NRA...

It can also impact what can be manufactured domestically and how the government controls and tracks this.

Unfortunately, the courts have long taken the position that commercial activity, despite being the activity of the same free people protected by the BoR is not itself deserving of she same protections. The freedom of expression (or 4A) of a firearms manufacture is not something the courts care about trampling.

As a practical matter, they can stop most manufacture and sales tomorrow with very little new legislation if the courts, congress or the president provide them cover to write these new regs.

Witness MA's abuse of the regulatory power to stop sales, importation and transfer.

 

[mx250man]

This non existant treaty is going to be voted on on July 27 2012, - Outdated article. It was written when GWB and John Bolton were around. Later , we had an election and got a new president.

While outdated, it was written after the election and discusses the new president's policies.

Here is some more up-to-date info I haven't seen posted:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

 

[Reptile]

Here is a good history lesson on the U.N. and how they worked to take away out right in the past.
Also, explains how Fast and Furious undermines public sentiment for the Second Amendment to help pass the treaty.

July 14, 2012:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn2ARdR3z0I&feature=player_embedded

 

[CosmicIrony]

It doesn't matter if the treaty passes (it won't be ratified in the Senate, guaranteed), it still doesn't overrule the 2nd Amendment. What this could do, however, is make foreign suppliers less willing to sell to US distributors. But it would not affect Smith & Wesson or Ruger, etc., because they are domestic suppliers. Which is a good reason to keep US-based manufacturing alive.

 

[BOBKATT]

About 50% - 60% of the video was an advertisement to join the NRA...

The irony is that for a New Hampshire resident, the NRA has done far more to destroy one's rights than the UN has.

 

[fubar]

While outdated, it was written after the election and discusses the new president's policies.

Here is some more up-to-date info I haven't seen posted:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

The Wiki article , written by ...whoever ... does not reassure me. The Snopes article was like listening to NPR; It did not address the things we spoke of here : " reasonable restrictions" , turncoat R senators , a white house that finds the Constitution an impediment to it's non-stop power grab. etc.

You do know that Snopes isn't an organization right ? It's a husband & wife team who are Democrat Liberals.

DO I think the UN is about to take my guns away ? No. But they want to , and so does the half of US Government in power right now and about 50% of the voters in this country.

 

[20 PAWS]

You do know that Snopes isn't an organization right ? It's a husband & wife team who are Democrat Liberals.

You do realize that Factcheck.org came to the same realization as Snopes and was used by the previous administration to refute attacks by the Democrats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FactCheck

 

[Horrible]

It doesn't matter if the treaty passes (it won't be ratified in the Senate, guaranteed), it still doesn't overrule the 2nd Amendment. What this could do, however, is make foreign suppliers less willing to sell to US distributors. But it would not affect Smith & Wesson or Ruger, etc., because they are domestic suppliers. Which is a good reason to keep US-based manufacturing alive.

Foreign countries recognize this treaty as valid so long as the POTUS signs. In that sense, ratification by the Senate or lack thereof means nothing to these other UN members.

So, the scenerio you laid out is very possible with foreign suppliers less willing or unable to sell to US distributors.

 

[namedpipes]

The Wiki article , written by ...whoever ... does not reassure me. . . .

I was bored. Here is the deduped list of non-anonymous contributors to the page: (bold is mine based on a purely subjective reaction to the usernames)

Activism1234, Adh geneva, Alnyull1286, AnAnthro, AnomieBOT, Autoerrant, AvocatoBot,
BD2412, Buckshot06, CJLippert, ClueBot NG, Dans, Digitaldiplomacy, Duchamps, EoffreyGey,
ErrantX, Faigl.ladislav, G323, Gene93k, Good Olfactory, Headbomb, JAnDbot, Jayron32, KnutHj,
Kurihaya, Luckas-bot, Miraculouschaos, Nalw2, Nicolas M. Perrault, PeaceLoveHarmony,
Polemarchus, Rajah, RjwilmsiBot, Shiftlefty, SmackBot, Smalljim, Stephcousins, WikitanvirBot,
XLinkBot, Yworo, ZéroBot, hibleyd