Thread: U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

This scares me


(Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.
http://www.reuters.com/article/polit...59E0Q920091015

Don't let it. There's a very profitable market here in America selling guns, ammo, and accessories. And that's more powerful than any political ideal, at least in America. (And many east european countries, and Russia make a lot of money as well.)

First, note that it's the Obama administration (the Executive Branch) which is willing to join a world order to regulate arms sales. No surprise there for me.

Second, please be aware that no treaty is valid unless ratified by a vote of 2/3 of our Senate, which means 67 of the 100 members. I don't see that happening today, much less after the elections in Nov.

I have never trusted the progressives regarding gun rights, and I hope there is a continued push among states for states' rights in many areas.

Originally Posted by Gunner3456

First, note that it's the Obama administration (the Executive Branch) which is willing to join a world order to regulate arms sales. No surprise there for me.

Second, please be aware that no treaty is valid unless ratified by a vote of 2/3 of our Senate, which means 67 of the 100 members. I don't see that happening today, much less after the elections in Nov.

I have never trusted the progressives regarding gun rights, and I hope there is a continued push among states for states' rights in many areas.

Agreed! Gun rights and the progressive agenda will bump heads soon enough. You can't have guns and socialism at the same time, it does not exist in Europe and is fast changing the enviorment in Australia and Canada.

I believe there will be a push for some form of gun control this year. After Amnesty is approved and maybe some form of Cap & Trade. Its in the agenda, and the progressives in Congress are licking their chops to move it forward.

First they stopped the ammo supply....not a believer...how come you didn't see Wolf(Russian) ..Aquila(Mexican) ect imported? Why the try to stop military brass sales?

First the ammo..then the guns...then a chip in our foreheads....

Originally Posted by Gunner3456

Second, please be aware that no treaty is valid unless ratified by a vote of 2/3 of our Senate, which means 67 of the 100 members. I don't see that happening today, much less after the elections in Nov.

.

Surely you are not referring to the current Senate headed by Biden ? Why should a trifle like the Constitution hinder this bunch ?

To quote our esteemed pestident of the Senate from a comment he was heard making to bama when he signed the health scare bill today, this would just be another "big f****g deal"

Originally Posted by ob1

Surely you are not referring to the current Senate headed by Biden ? Why should a trifle like the Constitution hinder this bunch ?

To quote our esteemed pestident of the Senate from a comment he was heard making to bama when he signed the health scare bill today, this would just be another "big f****g deal"

Right now I have this little smirk remembering how Obama dissed the Supreme Court during his State of the Union Address.

At the very least, Alito and Roberts we're really ticked at him. I'll bet there are others. Payback time?

Well now we have Sota Mayor tilting the balance further. I wonder, are any of the others getting ready to retire or kick the bucket ?

Sotomayor didn't tilt the balance further. She replaced someone at least as progressive as she is.
Ginsberg is will probably go next. Can't get any more liberal than she is either.

Originally Posted by Jamie6.5

Sotomayor didn't tilt the balance further. She replaced someone at least as progressive as she is.
Ginsberg is will probably go next. Can't get any more liberal than she is either.

Agreed, her predecessor (Souter) was another progressive, or at least not a conservative in the normal sense, but I don't recall a comment being made by him like Sotomayor's "there is no constitutional right to self-defense". Comparing rotten apples and oranges I guess. Let's hope they don't run out of formaldehyde for Ginsberg, if anyone could find someone more liberal, it would be 'bama.

The Supreme Court aspect being laid aside for a moment, why am I getting the impression that this gang, finding that they didn't have the necessary votes in the Senate, wouldn't try to bypass the whole ratification question with an end run, like they did with EPA and "cap & trade" (Copenhagen) ?

Originally Posted by Jamie6.5

Sotomayor didn't tilt the balance further. She replaced someone at least as progressive as she is.
Ginsberg is will probably go next. Can't get any more liberal than she is either.

You can, and worse. Living, breathing, document some think the Constitution is. Berkeley anyone?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supre...ry?id=10150288

Originally Posted by ob1

Surely you are not referring to the current Senate headed by Biden ? Why should a trifle like the Constitution hinder this bunch ?

To quote our esteemed pestident of the Senate from a comment he was heard making to bama when he signed the health scare bill today, this would just be another "big f****g deal"

I didn't know what you meant when I first read your post. Last night I saw it on the news. That Biden has to be the biggest mouth in the history of DC.

For any who didn't see it, at the signing ceremony for the HC bill Tuesday, he leaned over and said into Obama's ear "this is a big (censored) deal." The mike was hot. Now it's all over the news and YouTube.

Originally Posted by JAFO

You can, and worse. Living, breathing, document some think the Constitution is. Berkeley anyone?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supre...ry?id=10150288

Here's where a couple of generations of Americans got their "news" and brainwashing. Here for a fact is the progressive Walter Cronkite strongly advocating a one-world government to establish "justice."

Anyone who thinks Hillary would have been better than Obama on following our constitution should take note. This belief in abandoning our rights and constitution runs a lot deeper and wider than most know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUuXxA2UgOA

Originally Posted by Gunner3456

I didn't know what you meant when I first read your post. Last night I saw it on the news. That Biden has to be the biggest mouth in the history of DC.

For any who didn't see it, at the signing ceremony for the HC bill Tuesday, he leaned over and said into Obama's ear "this is a big (censored) deal." The mike was hot. Now it's all over the news and YouTube.

Now it's left to us to interpret whether this comment was purely rhetorical, or was he referring to all the shady back room "****** deals" ? I won't dwell on this, but the point I was trying to make on your original comment is that I don't think we can rely upon inane details such as a 2/3 majority for ratifying treaties, especially with these jokers. If there is one lesson that we all should have taken away about this bunch by now is that they are socialist fanatics, and hold the Constitution and similar restraints in low regard, unless they can manipulate it's intent to forward their own agenda. It's only an obsolete speed bump on the road to socialist utopia.

Originally Posted by SSG

First they stopped the ammo supply....not a believer...how come you didn't see Wolf(Russian) ..Aquila(Mexican) ect imported? Why the try to stop military brass sales?

First the ammo..then the guns...then a chip in our foreheads....

Wolf was being imported. Who said it wasn't? I remember hearing it, but knew it was a BS rumor because you could always find Wolf stuff, even if it was higher than usual.

Originally Posted by 56kninja

Wolf was being imported. Who said it wasn't? I remember hearing it, but knew it was a BS rumor because you could always find Wolf stuff, even if it was higher than usual.

One possible reason for this, to ponder, would be the low original pricing for that stuff, from the source. This translates into larger lots being imported and therefore larger stockpiles to sell off by dealers and speculators at the shows.

Geez, can you remember the good old days when you could buy a can or two of the Norinco 7.62 and go out and blast it all in one outing, painfree ? So much of that stuff was imported that it was still showing up on shelves and at the shows for a couple years. Not too much now.

What did I do !!! I shot all that stuff up !!!

After how the Healthcare bill passed I wouldn't be surprised if they tried a similar approach to pass everything else on their agenda. Its rather clear now that everything they are doing is an effort to control the people.

As Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said “The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re passing legislation that will cover 300 million American people in different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”

Originally Posted by ob1

Agreed, her predecessor (Souter) was another progressive, or at least not a conservative in the normal sense, but I don't recall a comment being made by him like Sotomayor's "there is no constitutional right to self-defense". Comparing rotten apples and oranges I guess. Let's hope they don't run out of formaldehyde for Ginsberg, if anyone could find someone more liberal, it would be 'bama.

The Supreme Court aspect being laid aside for a moment, why am I getting the impression that this gang, finding that they didn't have the necessary votes in the Senate, wouldn't try to bypass the whole ratification question with an end run, like they did with EPA and "cap & trade" (Copenhagen) ?

In addition Sotomayor is a rabid La Raza/Atzlan member and a communist. She will back anything that takes down Constitution and BORs

Originally Posted by thatkidwho

After how the Healthcare bill passed I wouldn't be surprised if they tried a similar approach to pass everything else on their agenda. Its rather clear now that everything they are doing is an effort to control the people.

As Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) said “The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re passing legislation that will cover 300 million American people in different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”

They have nothing to lose now because they are toast in November

Originally Posted by Jamie6.5

Sotomayor didn't tilt the balance further. She replaced someone at least as progressive as she is.
Ginsberg is will probably go next. Can't get any more liberal than she is either.

My money is on Stevens. He only hired one clerk this year, when he typically hires three. He's 89 and trends to the left on most issues.