Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Firearms related political discussion forum

Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby LarryP on Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:31 pm

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/NRA-Ob ... id/607823/

But the Obama administration is publicly voicing support for the treaty, and the NRA fears that could eventually result in implementation via executive order.

We need to get rid of executive orders!!!






WOW!!
LarryP
 
Posts: 1180 [View]
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 3:57 pm

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby TTS on Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:53 pm

Start by reading the treaty:
https://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/English7.pdf

Next realize that an international treaty does not trump the constitution. Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert

Then recognize that Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants power to the President to make treaties with the "advice and consent" of two-thirds of the Senate. This is different from normal legislation which requires approval by simple majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Owner
Tactical Training Solutions
Specializing in Self Defense and Firearms Training
http://www.minnesotaccw.com
User avatar
TTS
 
Posts: 1233 [View]
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 8:37 am
Location: Lakeville

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Hmac on Mon Nov 17, 2014 4:48 pm

Scare tactics. The NRA knows that there's nothing like a good crisis, manufactured or real, to enhance membership.

Obama can't ratify a treaty. That's a power clearly reserved for the Senate.
User avatar
Hmac
 
Posts: 2599 [View]
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 9:51 am

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby LarryP on Mon Nov 17, 2014 6:12 pm

Nobody thought he could bypass the Senate & give Amnesty to 5 million illegal people either. Which he'll be doing

after he signs the treaty, they'll wait for the swing of power, it's just a matter of time. We could have a democratic senate in a few years to :o
LarryP
 
Posts: 1180 [View]
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 3:57 pm

Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby BBeckwith on Mon Nov 17, 2014 7:07 pm

LarryP wrote:Nobody thought he could bypass the Senate & give Amnesty to 5 million illegal people either. Which he'll be doing

after he signs the treaty, they'll wait for the swing of power, it's just a matter of time. We could have a democratic senate in a few years to :o



If the Senate was going to ratify this treaty why didn't they do that two weeks ago before they lost power???? Stop fear mongering.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
The IQ of a mob is the IQ of its dumbest member, divided by the number of people in it.
User avatar
BBeckwith
 
Posts: 1082 [View]
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:33 am

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Nougat on Mon Nov 17, 2014 7:15 pm

whatever happened with that confiscation after registering their guns too late in Connecticut?
the last google result is from March(edit-or May?), I think its more than likely happening but somehow being kept off the ''radar'' because abusing peoples rights isn't ''news'' ya know :?
User avatar
Nougat
 
Posts: 660 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:25 pm

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Hmac on Mon Nov 17, 2014 9:06 pm

LarryP wrote:Nobody thought he could bypass the Senate & give Amnesty to 5 million illegal people either. Which he'll be doing

after he signs the treaty, they'll wait for the swing of power, it's just a matter of time. We could have a democratic senate in a few years to :o


Uh...the treaty's already signed. It was signed by John Kerry over a year ago. Only step left is Senate ratification. That's not going to happen. Obama would need 67 votes to ratify the treaty. Even in a Democrat controlled Senate last September, 6 months after the Newtown school shooting, they voted 53-46 to not participate in the ATT.

We can all take off our tinfoil beanies now...the one's with the NRA logo on the front.
User avatar
Hmac
 
Posts: 2599 [View]
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 9:51 am

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Deputyhiro on Mon Nov 17, 2014 9:22 pm

Hmac wrote:Scare tactics. The NRA knows that there's nothing like a good crisis, manufactured or real, to enhance membership.

Obama can't ratify a treaty. That's a power clearly reserved for the Senate.


Agreed. If there is no threat to the 2nd amendment, the NRA is out of a job. They are eating this right up.

On the other hand, where are the checks and balances in an executive order? More of a dictatorship thing than a democracy.
It is better to have a gun and not need it, than to need a gun and not have it.
User avatar
Deputyhiro
 
Posts: 412 [View]
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:40 pm
Location: Between a rock.... And a hard place

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Grayskies on Mon Nov 17, 2014 10:43 pm

I would hope the nra would return to its roots if at some points the threats to the 2nd amendment ended, but I doubt the threats will end. IMHO there will always be slick talking politicians willing to say and/or do anything for power, and it is easier to control the people if they are dis-armed, and there will always be those willing to give up anything for a safty and a eutopia that can and will never exist.

People as a whole never change, and for these reasons there will always be a need for people to form groups to protect our rights. Even the founding fathers new this. The price of freedom will always be the same.
NRA Life Member & Certified Range Safety Officer
Honorably Discharged U.S. Army Veteran
General Class Amateur Radio Operator and ARRL VE and SkyWarn
Amateur Radio Emergency Service® (ARES)

P2C since August 2003
User avatar
Grayskies
 
Posts: 3906 [View]
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:52 am
Location: North Central MN

Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby jshuberg on Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:16 am

As long as there are megalomaniacs running the government, the 2A will be under attack. They'll try differing strategies, different angles, they may back off and play rope-a-dope for awhile, but they'll be there. They simply have a philosophical opposition to individuals having any power to control their own lives, provide for their own physical security, or possess any means to challenge their exclusive control over our lives.

Fighting to maintain our 2A rights is absolutely necessary for the people to remain free. However, I don't think preserving our 2A rights will win the "war". For that, we need to change people's hearts and minds.

Back when the country was first founded, the notion of individual liberty and restricted government were the most important concept in our new country. Note that "liberty" as used by the founding fathers meant an absence of government intrusion in people's lives.

Somewhere in the past, I'm guessing in the mid 1910s, the idea that liberty was the central concept that made our country great, and made it's people free was replaced with the notion of democracy. Democracy was never once mentioned in the constitution, and the writings of both federalist and anti federalists at the time completely discounted democracy as a form if government that would result in freedom for the people. That's why we are not a democracy, we are a federal republic.

Liberty and Democracy are in fact as opposite as you can get. One is near absence of government intrusion, the other is near total government control. One empowers the individual, the other empowers the collective at the expense of the individual. This could not has be been accidental, especially given the word "democracy" is never mentioned in the constitution. Somewhere, at some point there must have been an intentional misrepresentation, an intentional replacement of liberty with democracy. There was a propaganda campaign, and the people no longer recognize liberty as the one guiding principle that we should strive for in government. To restrict government to the smallest footprint possible, and to empower the individual.

Until we return the concept of liberty to the public consciousness, and throw off the lie of "democracy", the 2A and all other individual human rights will be under threat from our government.

We need to resist collectivism in any and all forms, and return power to the individual, or our and every cause for freedom will eventually be lost.
NRA Certified Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Certified Personal Protection In The Home Instructor
NRA Life Member
MCPPA Certified Instructor
Gulf War Veteran
User avatar
jshuberg
 
Posts: 1983 [View]
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:35 pm

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Grayskies on Tue Nov 18, 2014 12:43 am

jshuberg wrote:Fighting to maintain our 2A rights is absolutely necessary for the people to remain free. However, I don't think preserving our 2A rights will win the "war". For that, we need to change people's hearts and minds.


There is no winning the war, these people will never surrender, this war of freedom and rights will ever continue. We will win battles, and they will too. There is no safe harbor to be found, and the only peace is that of the grave.
NRA Life Member & Certified Range Safety Officer
Honorably Discharged U.S. Army Veteran
General Class Amateur Radio Operator and ARRL VE and SkyWarn
Amateur Radio Emergency Service® (ARES)

P2C since August 2003
User avatar
Grayskies
 
Posts: 3906 [View]
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:52 am
Location: North Central MN

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Randygmn on Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:53 am

Nougat wrote:whatever happened with that confiscation after registering their guns too late in Connecticut?
the last google result is from March(edit-or May?), I think its more than likely happening but somehow being kept off the ''radar'' because abusing peoples rights isn't ''news'' ya know :?


They passed an unenforceable law. Those that refused to register their weapons are technically criminals at this point. Authorities can't confiscate weapons that they don't know about (which is why everyone is against registration). LE said they intend to "pick up" the occasional unregistered weapon during traffic stops and those they encounter during unrelated house searches.
Randygmn
 
Posts: 901 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby photogpat on Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:11 am

Continuously crying wolf doesn't work well for energizing the base.

I'll get worked up again when there's a real threat - like Bloomberg...
Nothing to see here. Continue swimming.
User avatar
photogpat
 
Posts: 3701 [View]
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 1:01 pm
Location: Securely barricaded

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Grayskies on Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:34 am

As much as Bloomberg is a proven threat, I am a tad more worried about 2016 and hillary and who she migth put on the supreme court if elected queen.

I think the stuff bloomberg and his cronies are getting passed will fail at judicial review.
NRA Life Member & Certified Range Safety Officer
Honorably Discharged U.S. Army Veteran
General Class Amateur Radio Operator and ARRL VE and SkyWarn
Amateur Radio Emergency Service® (ARES)

P2C since August 2003
User avatar
Grayskies
 
Posts: 3906 [View]
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:52 am
Location: North Central MN

Re: Obama could sign UN gun treaty via Excecutive order

Postby Nougat on Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:45 am

Randygmn wrote:
Nougat wrote:whatever happened with that confiscation after registering their guns too late in Connecticut?
the last google result is from March(edit-or May?), I think its more than likely happening but somehow being kept off the ''radar'' because abusing peoples rights isn't ''news'' ya know :?


They passed an unenforceable law. Those that refused to register their weapons are technically criminals at this point. Authorities can't confiscate weapons that they don't know about (which is why everyone is against registration). LE said they intend to "pick up" the occasional unregistered weapon during traffic stops and those they encounter during unrelated house searches.



unrelated house searches-weren't there like 30,000 people that registered late, therefor are officially unregistered. I wonder whats up with them.

traffic stops-any gunfire investigated and seized if they failed to register by the deadline?


I guess its the NY your husband died thread is helping me think this is being swept under or something?
its happening??? but not by swat teams running door to door... I can only think of an analogy of like a huge iron ball slowly creeping along completely smashing stuff.
User avatar
Nougat
 
Posts: 660 [View]
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:25 pm

Next

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

cron