U.N. approves first-ever global arms trade treaty

[Metalhead]

Did you send it with your avatar?? That should be enough to soil his diapers.

Nope, but I did use my real name, address and phone number. Not like they don't have it already! lol

 

[Palladin]

Would this restrict Barry from selling F18's to the Syrians?.

Of course not.....

 

[MA_Shooter]

Both houses need to be cleaned...

I'd prefer to raze the building and start over. You can never really get rid of all the cockroaches.

 

[gearjunky13]

Maybe joe biden is on our side "get a shotgun" might be code for it's go time

Ya he is actualy a prisoner and he is speeking in code (remember shotgun is code for lock and load!)

 

[ptrainerchris]

and shoot two off the deck means ......

 

[soloman02]

How will this affect surplus ammo and rifles/pistols? Would this be a way for the UN to stop the flow of all the surplus ammo for the AK's, Mosin's SKS's etc and surplus rifles to the US?

 

[gearjunky13]

and shoot two off the deck means ......

Ah Thats a given, um something about the drones and ahhhh.........dont **** with his wife, she is armed

 

[GhostArcher]

All these threads about the U.N. treaty, just remind me to keep buying ammo.

 

[MichaelJR]

Blue helmet? POP POP POP POP POP

 

[dmnau]

Blue helmet or Red coat, they both stand for the same thing, someone trying to take away my freedom's.

 

[MaverickNH]

“The treaty adopted today will establish a common international standard for the national regulation of the international trade in conventional arms and require all states to develop and implement the kind of systems that the United States already has in place,” Kerry said. “It will help reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes, including terrorism, genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.”

Read more: UN approval of arms trade treaty sets up Obama, Senate showdown - The Hill's Global Affairs
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Check those weasel words: "help reduce the risk".

Not "reduce" - not even "reduce the risk" - but "help reduce the risk". Which means might have the potential to have any useful effect.

Sort of like raffling off a chance to buy a Lotto ticket. The goal ISN'T to impact terrorism, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. It's to control the USA. To bite he hand that feeds the UN and most of the world.

 

[noddaduma]

Agreed again

The Dem party IMHO is not salvageable.....its is the Communist/Statist Party in all but name.

The GOP on the other hand is already in the midst of a battle between big gov progressives (Gregg/Sununu/McConnell/McSame) and Constitution/Freedom wing of the the party (Paul/Cruz/Lee/Amash)

The stunts that were pulled by party leadership progressives last year at the convention are inexcusable.

Yup. Keep in mind the current Republican Party mess started with the neo-cons..... Democrats who voted for Reagan in the 80s and then stuck around because they could get what they wanted easier with an "R" attached to their name.

 

[jpdeal]

Agree with others on the ratification issue; not going to happen soon. No UN Treaty can supercede the Constitution, but acceptance by the General Council is still dangerous, especially since the current Administration supports the piece of garbage.

Even though the ATT will be DOA in the current Senate, it could be ratified ANYTIME in the future. Also, expect to see additional fiat governance (Executive Orders) mandating adherence to the Treaty. My bets are on a national gun registry. This is going to chip away at our 2A rights for decades to come!

One thing I find interesting is the NRA was going mental about this last summer. So far, just crickets from them; not even a mention on the NRA-ILA web site.

 

[Scarecrow]

Sounds like someone needs more range time. Besides you can always shoot them in the leg. Slows everybody down.

Leg/chest is the only option on a moving target 800+meters out, cold barrel. I'd love more range time, as well, but 30-06 is damned expensive these days. I don't need more range time, I need a different gun!

 

[Terminator03]

Leg/chest is the only option on a moving target 800+meters out, cold barrel. I'd love more range time, as well, but 30-06 is damned expensive these days. I don't need more range time, I need a different gun!

Screw having to be so precise with aiming! Just go .50BMG then it won't matter where you hit them.

 

[beaker]

You got that right...

Truth is the DNC and RNC have equal hands in the tyranny and governance through fear in the last 20 years.

Both houses need to be cleaned...

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

 

[snd1t]

Agree with others on the ratification issue; not going to happen soon. No UN Treaty can supercede the Constitution, but acceptance by the General Council is still dangerous, especially since the current Administration supports the piece of garbage.

Even though the ATT will be DOA in the current Senate, it could be ratified ANYTIME in the future. Also, expect to see additional fiat governance (Executive Orders) mandating adherence to the Treaty. My bets are on a national gun registry. This is going to chip away at our 2A rights for decades to come!

One thing I find interesting is the NRA was going mental about this last summer. So far, just crickets from them; not even a mention on the NRA-ILA web site.

If the Senate brings up the treaty and votes it down its done......as in dead.....

I suspect a future POTUS could try to sign it again and send it to the senate AGAIN but this assumes an Exec and Senate that are both overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Anti's and I don't forsee that happening for a while post 2014 given the alarming over-reaches and LIKELY slapdown that Progressives are probably going to see in 2014

 

[andrew]

I am still confused as to how a treaty with a foreign entity can suborn the Constitution. Logically, it is nonsensical.

 

[Terminator03]

It doesn't!! Regardless of what all the organizations that are crying, that "the is falling" say.

Well let's hope you are right on this one. If there is any loophole in the system Oblabla will find it.

 

[bch1988]

I am still confused as to how a treaty with a foreign entity can suborn the Constitution. Logically, it is nonsensical.

Supreme Court case Reid vs covert.

Constitution supersedes int treaties

 

[bullseye]

Screw having to be so precise with aiming! Just go .50BMG then it won't matter where you hit them.

Extends range capabilities also.

 

[vipprimo]

Agree with others on the ratification issue; not going to happen soon. No UN Treaty can supercede the Constitution, but acceptance by the General Council is still dangerous, especially since the current Administration supports the piece of garbage.

Even though the ATT will be DOA in the current Senate, it could be ratified ANYTIME in the future. Also, expect to see additional fiat governance (Executive Orders) mandating adherence to the Treaty. My bets are on a national gun registry. This is going to chip away at our 2A rights for decades to come!

One thing I find interesting is the NRA was going mental about this last summer. So far, just crickets from them; not even a mention on the NRA-ILA web site.

NRA Twitter has been buzzing. It stated that the Senate would pass it.

 

[Baystatesuks]

2/3 vote in Senate (not just a majority vote) is needed to ratify any treaty. See Article 2, Sec. 2, Clause 2 of US Constitution.

If repubs all stick to their guns it is DOA since only 53 dems and 2 independents are in the Senate.

- - - Updated - - -

I am still confused as to how a treaty with a foreign entity can suborn the Constitution. Logically, it is nonsensical.

It can't. But the Senate could still ratify and it would need to be challenged to SCOTUS and held unconstitutional. That would take time and money.

 

[jpdeal]

If the Senate brings up the treaty and votes it down its done......as in dead.....

Not so! The Treaty can be ratified by a 2/3 vote of the Senate at ANYTIME. So, it could potentially rear it's ugly head each and every Senate session until then end of time. The question is how long will there be a pro-gun majority in the Senate?

 

[snd1t]

My bad

You're correct

It doesn't have to be re-submitted BUT a future POTUS may withdraw the treaty ending future consideration.