UN Gun Control Treaty - What's the scoop?

[soonercruiser]

I've been getting some disturbing and crazy e-mail lately about a pending UN vote, and the U.S. signing an international treaty on gun control. Anybody got any solid info?

[Curly Bill]

I heard the tail-end of Dick Morris talking about it tonight, and I mean only like the last 25 seconds or so. I think it's the ol: Obammy can't pass actual gun control through congress, so he's trying to do it through international treaty, which over time would come to apply within the US borders as well as outside. Backdoor gun control if you will.

[Curly Bill]

...and the vote is pretty soon I think??? Like maybe next week...

[diverdog]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.

[olevetonahill]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.
Keep telling yerself that slick . I really dont trust the Gov. as much as you do it seems.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/07/26/democrats-oppose-obama-un-gun-control-treaty

[Midtowner]

As I tried to explain to Sapp, they can't impose unconstitutional obligations on us by treaty. That said, double digits worth of Dem Senators are opposed to this and they haven't even seen the final draft yet, so no one knows what's actually in the treaty.

It's a little too early to be adjusting those tinfoil hats.

[olevetonahill]

As I tried to explain to Sapp, they can't impose unconstitutional obligations on us by treaty. That said, double digits worth of Dem Senators are opposed to this and they haven't even seen the final draft yet, so no one knows what's actually in the treaty.

It's a little too early to be adjusting those tinfoil hats.
Being vigilant is not akin to wearing a tin foil hat

[Midtowner]

Being vigilant is not akin to wearing a tin foil hat

You can't know what you're against until the treaty is written. If it is, for example, a treaty to stop selling weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, that'd be fine. If it says that no one in the U.S. can have a gun, then that'd be illegal and unenforceable and the Senate wouldn't ratify it anyhow.

Being vigilant is not akin to being easily led around by the nose by conspiracy theorists.

[olevetonahill]

[QUOTE=Midtowner;3487849]You can't know what you're against until the treaty is written. If it is, for example, a treaty to stop selling weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, that'd be fine. If it says that no one in the U.S. can have a gun, then that'd be illegal and unenforceable and the Senate wouldn't ratify it anyhow.

Do you really think every one is a total idiot?
Im saying being vigilant is not being a total ****in idiot that you lefties seem to try to lump all Conservatives as.

If you dont think that some on the Far left are not out to ban all private weapon ownership then You sir are the idiot.

Note I said "SOME" not all
The very fact thaat this keeps coming up is troublesome to my mind.

Do I think the UN will all of a sudden Gain some miraculous power and come confiscate all My weapons? Hell no.
But I will say and stand behind the fact that some of those on the far left so badly want all guns gone that they will stop at nothing to accomplish that goal.
They Keep chippin away at our individual rights and soon we wont have any

[dwarthog]

The article being linked too is almost 1 year old. I believe this one has already had a fork put in it.

[olevetonahill]

The article being linked too is almost 1 year old. I believe this one has already had a fork put in it.

That was just the 1st one I ran across. never heard of the bunch either .

[East Coast Bias]

You can't know what you're against until the treaty is written. If it is, for example, a treaty to stop selling weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, that'd be fine. If it says that no one in the U.S. can have a gun, then that'd be illegal and unenforceable and the Senate wouldn't ratify it anyhow.

Being vigilant is not akin to being easily led around by the nose by conspiracy theorists.
These guys don't have to wait for anything to know what they are against.Pretty much anything that can somehow be tied to the Obama administration or references the word "gun" is off the table as part of the liberal agenda.
Also since when are we bound by International treaties? I recall Texas executing a Mexican citizen last year in clear defiance of an International treaty we signed?

[olevetonahill]

These guys don't have to wait for anything to know what they are against.Pretty much anything that can somehow be tied to the Obama administration or references the word "gun" is off the table as part of the liberal agenda.
Also since when are we bound by International treaties? I recall Texas executing a Mexican citizen last year in clear defiance of an International treaty we signed?

Meh.

[cleller]

The UN Arms Trade Treaty:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

Its some global arms trading deal. On its face not aimed at anything to do with commoners like us.

For the opposed, you could mention that a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.

[olevetonahill]

The UN Arms Trade Treaty:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

Its some global arms trading deal. On its face not aimed at anything to do with commoners like us.

For the opposed, you could mention that a journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.

Give em an inch and they will take a mile.

[Midtowner]

So basically, gun manufacturers don't want to be not allowed to sell weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, so they 're mobilizing teh dum to scare Congressmen who are well acquainted with the power of teh dum.

Makes sense that cruiser would start a dumbass thread like this one.

[KantoSooner]

You could also look at it this way:

US small arms manufacturers have been faced with increasingly effective competition from Glock, Beretta and others. Knowing that the European countries will likely force their makers to comply and that the cnances of the US ratifying are next to nil, the arms makers here quietly fund and lobby for this treaty internationally while working against it here. If successful, their Euro competition is out of the game and all they need worry about is the Russians, the Chinese and the Brazilians. Nice way to take your two high end competitors out of the market.

Or that's one way to look at it.

[diverdog]

Again it is a fundraising tool for the NRA. I must have gotten a half dozen fundraising calls from them on this subject.

All organizations do it. Scare the bejezus out of your membership and the money flows.

[dwarthog]

Some of the countries feedback/comments on this proposal make for interesting reading. This deal has been in the pipe for a while it looks like.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/docs/report_of_the_SG_2007.html

From China:


China believes that legitimate arms trade plays a part in national security,
defence needs and economic interests of each country. In 1996, the United Nations
Disarmament Commission worked out a set of guidelines for international arms
transfer covering its scope, principles, ways and institutional arrangements (see
A/51/42, annex I, entitled “Guidelines for international arms transfers in the context
of General Assembly resolution 46/36 H of 6 December 1991”). Today, these
guidelines are still of profound and practical guiding significance to all States. The
necessity to negotiate a specific treaty to re-establish common guidelines for arms
trade, and the relation between the treaty and the existing conventional arms transfer
principles and mechanisms at the international, regional, subregional and national
levels, need to be further discussed in a comprehensive and cautious way by the
international community on the basis of universal participation.

From Israel:


Regarding the arms trade treaty initiative, Israel remains to be convinced that
an arms trade treaty could indeed provide a commonly agreed standard that would
enhance the level of care exercised by States in the sale or transfer of arms. Our
questions stem from the nature of this initiative, which aims simultaneously at a
legally binding instrument and at a universal process. It may prove very difficult to
adopt an agreed legally binding standard that would, on the one hand, reflect
responsible and robust norms and, on the other hand, be agreeable to States with
varying levels of control of arms. An agreement that would reflect a very low
common denominator may be counterproductive to the goals set out in the arms
trade treaty initiative.

Islamic Republic of Iran :


10. At present, there is no universally agreed definition for the concept of
“international transfer of conventional arms” and “the items” that should be covered
by such definition. Attempts to develop an all-encompassing definition for
“international arms transfers” have proved to be challenging since such definition
gives rise to various questions, including the question of entities involved in the
international transfer of conventional arms, the issue of dual-use equipment, which
has been the subject of continuous contention, and the difficulty of transfers of
technical knowledge and services.


Finally, you can register the transferring those battle ships/tanks etc. using this form.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Register/DOCS/Forms/Standard%20form%20E.doc

Small arms, anti-tank missiles transfers can be documented using this form...

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Register/DOCS/Forms/SALW%20reporting%20form%20E.doc

[Bourbon St Sooner]

If the Kyoto Protocol has shown us anything, it's that multi-lateral treaties are written to be ignored.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.
Not the way the UN sees it... I would not consider it moot. THey wants to tax Billionaires and the carbons....

[TheHumanAlphabet]

You can't know what you're against until the treaty is written. If it is, for example, a treaty to stop selling weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, that'd be fine. If it says that no one in the U.S. can have a gun, then that'd be illegal and unenforceable and the Senate wouldn't ratify it anyhow.

Being vigilant is not akin to being easily led around by the nose by conspiracy theorists.

Screw that. Just ask Pelosi, and we got are *** handed to us with O'Bummeracre... Wait to the tax increase start rolling in in earnest next year...Not just the limits on the FSA and what you can buy, the increase in the dividend tax rate and the capital gains tax rate alone should have alarm bells ringing...

[Midtowner]

Screw that. Just ask Pelosi, and we got are *** handed to us with O'Bummeracre... Wait to the tax increase start rolling in in earnest next year...

Are = our, right?

O'Bummeracre... is that like blackacre? Are you trying to make a property law point?

Hitting the bottle a bit early? I suppose it's noon somewhere.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Nah, just dyslexia in typing...

[Jerk]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.

I agree. Treaties have to be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate.

[SanJoaquinSooner]

I just can't tell where y'all stand on this gun issue: Do U.S. gun dealers have a constitutional right to sell guns to Mexican drug cartels?

[SicEmBaylor]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.
Actually, IIRC, The Supreme Court upholds international treaties as if they were constitutional law.

Having said that, no way this gets ratified in the US Senate. Not a chance in hell.

[KantoSooner]

Yeah, worrying about this is about like worrying about the Intl Court of Criminal Justice. We're not submitting to that jurisdiction and there is zippo the UN or anyone else can do about it.
We control, broadly speaking, what the UN does. Yes, it does some annoying stuff, but its mostly on the order of a dad letting the kids run riot in the basement while he goes back upstairs to have a drink with the adults. This is because, a) we set the damn thing up and we had diplomats in the 1940's who were very civilized and nice and educated and absolutely committed to putting their thumbs on the scale; and, b) because we still pay the bills.

Don't worry about 'World Government' coming to get you. It's not happening.

[soonercruiser]

The UN has no authority over the US and our laws. So the point is pretty much moot. Mostly it is an NRA fundraising tool and nothing more.

What! The UN treaty is a NRA fund raising trick????
What ya smokin today Diver?

[soonercruiser]

[QUOTE=Midtowner;3487849]You can't know what you're against until the treaty is written. If it is, for example, a treaty to stop selling weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, that'd be fine. If it says that no one in the U.S. can have a gun, then that'd be illegal and unenforceable and the Senate wouldn't ratify it anyhow.

Do you really think every one is a total idiot?
Im saying being vigilant is not being a total ****in idiot that you lefties seem to try to lump all Conservatives as.

If you dont think that some on the Far left are not out to ban all private weapon ownership then You sir are the idiot.

Note I said "SOME" not all
The very fact thaat this keeps coming up is troublesome to my mind.

Do I think the UN will all of a sudden Gain some miraculous power and come confiscate all My weapons? Hell no.
But I will say and stand behind the fact that some of those on the far left so badly want all guns gone that they will stop at nothing to accomplish that goal.
They Keep chippin away at our individual rights and soon we wont have any

Cheers to this post!!!!!
The hard Left might even be soooooo "sick" on this that they might concoct some kind of gun running scheme to get a lot of Mexicans and Americans killed, so that they can use the public outrage to further "grow" the living Constitution.

[Midtowner]

[QUOTE=olevetonahill;3487851]

Cheers to this post!!!!!
The hard Left might even be soooooo "sick" on this that they might concoct some kind of gun running scheme to get a lot of Mexicans and Americans killed, so that they can use the public outrage to further "grow" the living Constitution.

Okay?

Again, this is a dumbass thread, you still don't apparently know what is being discussed. Drink moar.

[soonercruiser]

So basically, gun manufacturers don't want to be not allowed to sell weapons to countries with spotty human rights records, so they 're mobilizing teh dum to scare Congressmen who are well acquainted with the power of teh dum.

Makes sense that cruiser would start a dumbass thread like this one.

So! It makes no sense to a lawyer like Midtowner that rather than just throw something against the wall like his "ilk" does, that I ask the question as to what this is circulating e-mail is about???
fiffy!
Nothing to fear from the truth Mid!
Unless you're a crooked lawyer or Communist!

[soonercruiser]

Some of the countries feedback/comments on this proposal make for interesting reading. This deal has been in the pipe for a while it looks like.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/ArmsTradeTreaty/docs/report_of_the_SG_2007.html

From China:



From Israel:



Islamic Republic of Iran :



Finally, you can register the transferring those battle ships/tanks etc. using this form.

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Register/DOCS/Forms/Standard%20form%20E.doc

Small arms, anti-tank missiles transfers can be documented using this form...

http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Register/DOCS/Forms/SALW%20reporting%20form%20E.doc

Thanks for that info Dwarf!
I'm glad "some" were able to add to the FACTS rather than just do a mindless Alinskyian attack like Midtowner.

In my original post I ask the question "what's the scoop".
That for all the answering posts guys!
And all Midtowner can do is get some poopy scoop from around his yard and throw it at people his disagrees with.
Nice guy!
:torn:

[Midtowner]

I'm a communist??

LOL

You're an idiot and can't show that a) the Senate would ever approve such a treaty and b) that such a treaty could get past the 2nd Amendment.

Of course, you could be like Sap and think that we could sign treaties which could abrogate citizens' rights, but even you aren't that dumb.

[soonercruiser]

I just can't tell where y'all stand on this gun issue: Do U.S. gun dealers have a constitutional right to sell guns to Mexican drug cartels?

Only if they sell through the ATF and DOJ!

[soonercruiser]

[QUOTE=soonercruiser;3488072]

Okay?

Again, this is a dumbass thread, you still don't apparently know what is being discussed. Drink moar.

You can't spell "more"????
:disturbed:

[Midtowner]

[QUOTE=Midtowner;3488074]

You can't spell "more"????
:disturbed:

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/52/Kyle_Moar.jpg

[Jerk]

Yeah, worrying about this is about like worrying about the Intl Court of Criminal Justice. We're not submitting to that jurisdiction and there is zippo the UN or anyone else can do about it.
We control, broadly speaking, what the UN does. Yes, it does some annoying stuff, but its mostly on the order of a dad letting the kids run riot in the basement while he goes back upstairs to have a drink with the adults. This is because, a) we set the damn thing up and we had diplomats in the 1940's who were very civilized and nice and educated and absolutely committed to putting their thumbs on the scale; and, b) because we still pay the bills.

Don't worry about 'World Government' coming to get you. It's not happening.

Like I always say, the UN couldn't even conquer Somalia. What are they going to do against 80,000,000 fat and violent Americans? **** em.

[soonercruiser]

I'm a communist??

LOL

You're an idiot and can't show that a) the Senate would ever approve such a treaty and b) that such a treaty could get past the 2nd Amendment.

Of course, you could be like Sap and think that we could sign treaties which could abrogate citizens' rights, but even you aren't that dumb.

See the post....... I said "unless" you are afraid of the truth.....the whole truth.
Is that what Hillary and Obama intend to sign????
I guess that you are supportive of LW gun control?

[soonercruiser]

[QUOTE=soonercruiser;3488080]

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/52/Kyle_Moar.jpg

So, your nephew can't spell either????
:orange:

[Curly Bill]

LOL

[Jerk]

The real threat to the Second Amendment is that we're only one vote away on the USSC from having an amendment of the Bill of Rights rendered meaningless by the interpretation of a group of leftists weirdos.

[Curly Bill]

The real threat to the Second Amendment is that we're only one vote away on the USSC from having an amendment of the Bill of Rights rendered meaningless by the interpretation of a group of leftists weirdos.

Yup, we need Obammy to lose in November and then Bader Ginsburg to keel over soon thereafter.

edit..keel over once Romney has taken office obviously.

[soonercruiser]

Hey you old farts...
Get to bed!

[olevetonahill]

[QUOTE=soonercruiser;3488080]

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/52/Kyle_Moar.jpg


[QUOTE=Midtowner;3488083]

So, your nephew can't spell either????
:orange:

Nephew?
I thot that was him Talking to his Priest.

[diverdog]

What! The UN treaty is a NRA fund raising trick????
What ya smokin today Diver?

Here;

http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/grassroots-alerts/2012/vol-19,-no-27-07062012.aspx?s=&st=&ps=

If you are so worried about it click the "Donate" button and send them $1000. They will never leave you alone again.

[olevetonahill]

Here;

http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/grassroots-alerts/2012/vol-19,-no-27-07062012.aspx?s=&st=&ps=

If you are so worried about it click the "Donate" button and send them $1000. They will never leave you alone again.

Ok Cruiser is kinda out there on a lot of things.
But to be fair he simply asked in his OP if anyone had any info on this stuff.
You and Mid are the ones attackin his motivations .
Why cant ya just answer and move on?

[diverdog]

Ok Cruiser is kinda out there on a lot of things.
But to be fair he simply asked in his OP if anyone had any info on this stuff.
You and Mid are the ones attackin his motivations .
Why cant ya just answer and move on?

I did answer it and you guys started swinging at me.


Vet, I am a second amendment guy and I love shooting. I go to one or two NRA fundraisers a year. That does not mean I agree with every position the NRA takes. In the case of this UN treaty I honestly think they are scaring their membership to raise money. The mail cruiser is getting was probably driven by the NRA. I have sat on a lot of boards for membership organizations and if there is one thing I learned they are always looking for the next buck to keep the professional staff employed. The NRA is no different.


The UN has zero enforceable power over the US. We may comply with things like the internation trade of endangered species or we may blow it off completely like the global warming treaties. There are so many guns in the US that no one could get them all. One of the last things I worry about is someone taking my guns.

I know, I know....you do not trust the government. :)

[olevetonahill]

Yer right , I dont.
I also agree that this wont happen, at least in my life time, But I do think the anti gunners are willing to slowly chip away at our rights until they get what they want.

[diverdog]

Yer right , I dont.
I also agree that this wont happen, at least in my life time, But I do think the anti gunners are willing to slowly chip away at our rights until they get what they want.

Vet, I have no doubt there are people in congress right now who would ban all gun ownership right now. Thank god they are a small fraction of our political system and I hope it stays that way.

I think our biggest threat to firearms is the decline of hunting and shooting sports at the youth level. Animal rights activist in the US are a far greater threat than the UN because they want to ban hunting. The best thing we can do is to get our kids away from video games and take them hunting and fishing. Teaching them how to hunt and fish keeps our basic outdoors traditions going.

[soonercruiser]

Yer right , I dont.
I also agree that this wont happen, at least in my life time, But I do think the anti gunners are willing to slowly chip away at our rights until they get what they want.

And the hard Left would be happy for everyone to ONCE AGAIN just say that "it can't happen".....not to worry....
That's what they depnd on....and uneducated.....ingorant....and apathetic electorate.

Vet! How old are you..."
not in my lifetime"?
Think about how the country has changed in the last 20 years.

[soonercruiser]

Ok Cruiser is kinda out there on a lot of things.
But to be fair he simply asked in his OP if anyone had any info on this stuff.
You and Mid are the ones attackin his motivations .
Why cant ya just answer and move on?

Because it's not the Alinskyian Way...."attack the messenger".
Attack the truth!

[olevetonahill]

And the hard Left would be happy for everyone to ONCE AGAIN just say that "it can't happen".....not to worry....
That's what they depnd on....and uneducated.....ingorant....and apathetic electorate.

Vet! How old are you..."
Think about how the country has changed in the last 20 years.

Ill be 62 this month

Ive watched em try to erode our gun rights a little at a time .

[diverdog]

Because it's not the Alinskyian Way...."attack the messenger".
Attack the truth!

Where did I attack you or anyone else in this thread?

[diverdog]

Ill be 62 this month

Ive watched em try to erode our gun rights a little at a time .

What rights do you think have been eroded? Just asking.

[olevetonahill]

What rights do you think have been eroded? Just asking.
I said Ive watched em try to erode em Bro
But if you cant see whats been taken then yer blind my friend

Granted a lot of the the laws passed were needed. But its still an Inroad to Gun Bans

[Midtowner]

Because it's not the Alinskyian Way...."attack the messenger".
Attack the truth!

What's the truth here oh medical expert?

[diverdog]

I said Ive watched em try to erode em Bro
But if you cant see whats been taken then yer blind my friend

Granted a lot of the the laws passed were needed. But its still an Inroad to Gun Bans

Olevet the only gun laws that have affected me are the background checks and that is about it. The diversity and amount of weapons available for purchase today far exceeds anything I could get my hands on in my youth. The assault weapon band was somewhat of a joke. About the only thing it did was remove a bayonet fix point, pistol grip and flash suppressor. Made the AK's look a little stupid but they still fired just fine.

Yes we need to remain vigilant but it ain't as bad as people think it is. I still have a boat load of guns.

[soonercruiser]

Ill be 62 this month

Ive watched em try to erode our gun rights a little at a time .

So! The truth is out!
You're just a youngster vet.
Got my Medibandaid card last month.

[soonercruiser]

Where did I attack you or anyone else in this thread?

Funny how some folks memories are only good for a couple of hours.
:disturbed:

[diverdog]

Funny how some folks memories are only good for a couple of hours.
:disturbed:

Yours or mine?

[olevetonahill]

Olevet the only gun laws that have affected me are the background checks and that is about it. The diversity and amount of weapons available for purchase today far exceeds anything I could get my hands on in my youth. The assault weapon band was somewhat of a joke. About the only thing it did was remove a bayonet fix point, pistol grip and flash suppressor. Made the AK's look a little stupid but they still fired just fine.

Yes we need to remain vigilant but it ain't as bad as people think it is. I still have a boat load of guns.
What ya dont remember being able to order a gun thru the mail and have it shipped right to ya?

[Curly Bill]

What ya dont remember being able to order a gun thru the mail and have it shipped right to ya?

I was too young to order em, but I remember when I was a kid Sears had guns in its catalog.

[olevetonahill]

I was too young to order em, but I remember when I was a kid Sears had guns in its catalog.
Heh, I never did I was poor

[Curly Bill]

Bought a 9mm hangun at Walmart once upon a time. Try doing that now.

[SicEmBaylor]

Bought a 9mm hangun at Walmart once upon a time. Try doing that now.
Thank God for Academy.

[diverdog]

What ya dont remember being able to order a gun thru the mail and have it shipped right to ya?


You can still do it. The restriction is you have to send it to someone who has an FFL license. The good ones only charge a minor fee. I know it is not the same as sending it to ones house but I am not sure that would be a good idea in todays world.

[Curly Bill]

Thank God for Academy.

I do like me some Academy!

[diverdog]

Bought a 9mm hangun at Walmart once upon a time. Try doing that now.

If I had to guess it is a liability issue. Kid buys a gun, goes out and shoots someone and low and behold Walmart gets sued.

[olevetonahill]

You can still do it. The restriction is you have to send it to someone who has an FFL license. The good ones only charge a minor fee. I know it is not the same as sending it to ones house but I am not sure that would be a good idea in todays world.

Agree or disagree , Its still a Right thats been taken

You axed, I just gave an example.

[Curly Bill]

Dumbest thing ever was the limit on magazine capacity to no more than 10 rounds. All they accomplished on that one was driving up the price of hi-cap magazines, making the gun companies even more money, and causing people like me to hoard them.

[diverdog]

Dumbest thing ever was the limit on magazine capacity to no more than 10 rounds. All they accomplished on that one was driving up the price of hi-cap magazines, making the gun companies even more money, and causing people like me to hoard them.

You must be fricking rich. LOL. I can't afford to fire 15 rounds of anything. That is one thing that concerns me is the price of ammo. I reload my shotgun shells but not pistol ammo.

[Curly Bill]

You must be fricking rich. LOL. I can't afford to fire 15 rounds of anything. That is one thing that concerns me is the price of ammo. I reload my shotgun shells but not pistol ammo.

I didn't say I ran through full mags of ammo often! I just thought it was incredibly dumb to set an arbitrary number of 10 on the capacity of em. Ammo is where I think the anti-gunners could have their best chance of success. If they can make ammo so expensive we can't afford it, then they will have largely accomplished their goal.

[diverdog]

I didn't say I ran through full mags of ammo often! I just thought it was incredibly dumb to set an arbitrary number of 10 on the capacity of em. Ammo is where I think the anti-gunners could have their best chance of success. If they can make ammo so expensive we can't afford it, then they will have largely accomplished their goal.

Oh I agree.

While we on the subject have you ever seen this video?

OuX-nFmL0II

[soonercruiser]

Yours or mine?
Yours - about the person attacks and negative generalizations.

[soonercruiser]

Bought a 9mm hangun at Walmart once upon a time. Try doing that now.

At Walmart, all I care about is being able to conceal carry my 9mm.
(especiallyu after 10:00 PM)

[soonercruiser]

WND update:


OBAMA TOLD TO BACK OFF U.N. GUN TREATY
Lawmakers join general in declaring pact a threat to freedom
Over 100 members of Congress appear to share the concerns of a former Army general who has sounded the alarm over efforts by the Obama Administration to push through the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, or ATT.

As WND reported, retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin earlier this year, in a video in which he claimed Obama was leading America down the path of a quiet, Marxist revolution, blasted the ATT, also known as the small arms treaty, saying it would regulate private gun ownership.

“There has been a decree by the administration by the president and the secretary of state saying that our president will sign the United Nations small arms treaty, which is about how we will buy sell and control individual private weapons,” Boykin warned. “That means the United Nations, an international body will decide how you and I as Americans can buy and sell our weapons, how we control those weapons, who is authorized to have those weapons and where they are. This is a dangerous trend.”

Now some 130 lawmakers, consisting of mostly Republicans, but also including Democrats such as Reps. Jason Altmire, Sanford Bishop, Jerry Costello, Danny Davis and Peter DeFazio sent off a letter to the Obama administration opposing the treaty.
The letter states that Congress is concerned the treaty could “pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.”

The letter goes on to declare that the Second Amendment guarantees the “fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms” and the U.S. has no business supporting a treaty that infringes on the Bill of Rights.

The ATT would specifically require signatories to identify and trace, in “a timely and reliable manner,” illicit small arms and light weapons. The information would be required to be submitted to the United Nations.

The treaty was opposed by the Bush administration, but President Obama’s administration reversed direction on the treaty. U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said the United States would support talks towards ratifying the treaty.

While the treaty is still in a draft stage, the United Nations is beginning a month-long process beginning this week to craft the final details of the treaty.
Supporters say the treaty is necessary to prevent rogue countries from being able to purchase guns from arms dealers. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said concerns about the treaty restricting individual rights are “misplaced” and that he supported its goals.

Critics of the treaty have long maintained that the treaty would lead to mandatory registration of all firearms and every sale; even those between individuals.

The congressional letter also takes issue with the “moral equivalence” of comparing America to totalitarian regimes and calls upon the administration to break consensus and reject the treaty. It goes on to remind the president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that “the Constitution gives the power to regulate international commerce to Congress alone.”

This is not the first time Congress has sent letters to the administration opposing the small arms treaty. Last year, Congress sent off a similar letter addressing many of the same concerns. This letter was signed by 12 Democrats who joined 45 Republicans in opposing the treaty.
The letter stated, “The Arms Trade Treaty must not in any way regulate the domestic manufacture, possession or sale of firearms or ammunition.”

It went on to state, “The establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”

While that letter was been touted in the mainstream media as an indication that Democrats are now opposing gun control, some pointed out that the letter actually proved the opposite. The Senators stated they support the general concept of the treaty but believe countries such as the U.S. should have “exclusive authority to regulate arms within their own borders.”

Critics point out that this statement indicates that the senators believe firearms registration is acceptable provided it is initiated by individual governments.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/obama-told-to-back-off-u-n-gun-treaty/


George Soros has been busy behind the scenes also...if Media Matters says "not to worry"; then maybe we should worry!



Soros Promotes UN Control Over Gun Ownership Written by Joe Wolverton

George Soros is financing the fight to give the United Nations control of your guns.

Through his Media Matters organization, Soros is dumping pro-UN gun control propaganda into the mainstream media to coincide with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York July 2–27.
In a blog post published on July 3, Timothy Johnson of Media Matters describes the notion that the United Nations would ever try to take away the right of Americans to keep and bear arms “laughable.”

Johnson goes on to promote the passage of the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) as a means of “curtailing the illicit arms trade” and thus cracking down on those who use these weapons to deny others their “human rights.”

The blog post assures citizens concerned about the potential eradication of the rights guaranteed in the Second Amendment to the Constitution that they have nothing to fear from the UN’s gun control treaty.

Top officials from the United Nations, the United States, and other high profile supporters have repeatedly and clearly said that the treaty does not aim to restrict anyone's "freedom to own" a gun. Indeed, the UN General Assembly's resolution on the treaty makes clear that countries will "exclusively" maintain the right within their borders to "regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownerships."

Constitutionalists will instantly notice a couple of red flags raised by Media Matters’ word choice.

First, there need be no quotation marks around the phrase freedom to own a gun. Americans should enjoy the unqualified right to bear arms and it is not some antiquated idea or some unicorn-like mythical creature that requires special punctuational treatment. Americans are well aware that an unarmed citizenry is easier to subdue and will rightly resist all efforts to abridge that right.

Second, the citizens of the United States do not need the permission of the United Nations to maintain the “exclusive” right to own a gun. This right, as with all others protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, comes from God, not man, and may be neither given nor taken away by any government.http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/11983-soros-promotes-un-control-over-gun-ownership

[soonercruiser]

Wonder why the main stream media is staying away from the story?

Here is an old story on Forbes....

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/
U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms