UN moves quick to revive global gun treaty

[fd15k]

IF that were to happen, again a BIG F, that wouldn't be a bad thing. Foreign manufacturers would either make their glocks and XD's here in the US or they would license them out to American manufacturers both of which would be a boon for US manufacturing either way.

Not to forget that weapon imports are already severely restricted. Many weapon systems are completely disallowed from being imported from Russia, all firearms and ammo can't be imported from China. Any long gun to be considered non-sporting, or any long gun that is converted from a select-fire version. Even barrel importation for non-sporting rifles was banned recently. And of course my favorite - handguns, if not equipped with enough safety features, are prohibited for importation.

All of that, and we seem to be doing okay. I think if ALL small arms were prohibited for importation, that would be inconvenient, but never end of the world. That being said, many countries rely on US non-government market as their main place for selling small arms, and they will do everything in their power to prevent any treaty from taking that away.

 

[Misterbill]

Sure, the US Senate, which last time I checked, opposed this treaty by huge majorities is suddenly going to change to a 66% approval majority?

WTF are you smoking? And since it's legal now, can you get me some? sounds like great stuff.

Seriously Dave, Is it not possible for you to write about REAL threats to our rights, like say, JAY INSLEE winning thanks to King County?

 

[MrFiux]

But it does limit all exports and imports, requiring the manufacturer to track guns right to the buyers home. That makes it a gun registration scheme and we know the Obwan admin has said they will support it.

Gun registration is the first step for confiscation. Ask England, Australia, Canada, and new Zealand how their gun registration endef up working for them...

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

 

[fd15k]

Sure, the US Senate, which last time I checked, opposed this treaty by huge majorities is suddenly going to change to a 66% approval majority?

WTF are you smoking? And since it's legal now, can you get me some? sounds like great stuff.

Seriously Dave, Is it not possible for you to write about REAL threats to our rights, like say, JAY INSLEE winning thanks to King County?

If only that was the objective...

 

[oknow]

so much for those j--- a's an there belief on how o won't try anything on a gun ban since he didn't move on the first 4

 

[Grunwald]

What the heck? Read the rules - I am pretty sure you aren't supposed to make death threats on this site. At best it is infantile, at worst distasteful. Sheesh.

Blue helmets represent a foreign military presence on US soil. What he did was not make a death threat but a patriotic statement that anyone who cares about their nation would make.

 

[Redcap]

Well, it's un Christian and wrong.

Good thing I'm not a "christian".

 

[gehrheart]

IF that were to happen, again a BIG F, that wouldn't be a bad thing. Foreign manufacturers would either make their glocks and XD's here in the US or they would license them out to American manufacturers both of which would be a boon for US manufacturing either way.

oh... I see is this a big brother plan to grow jobs??

 

[Benihaus]

I cant wait to see what some people are gonna pay for ARs and AKs now... wish I hadnt sold so many guns over the last couple years.. theres gonna be another gold rush! or better yet people buying cases of wolf 7.62x39 at $700 and buying them by the handtruck load.
seriously though... the only thing thats gonna happen is a huge price gouge, a settle of the market, then an overall %10 price increase in the end.

 

[Kevatc]

Well, that didn't take long, eh?

There is a link to the story in the Chicago Trib about this, and I talked to Gottlieb right after he got word. It was one of those "Well, maybe this time people will pay attention" kinda moments.

The UN wasn't even subtle about it. How cavalier is that?


Faster than you can say "We told you so," a major national gun rights organization is raising a ruckus over quick action by a United Nations committee Wednesday to renew talks over a proposed international Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) with the support of a newly-re-elected Obama administration.

<broken link removed>

This is brought up so often and discredited so often that I am amazed that anyone even pays attention to this baloney anymore. This is a prime example of some in the gun community beating the dead horse of paranoia and actually making the entire gun community look like paranoid conspiracy nut jobs.

 

[Bacchus]

Didn't take long for the U.N. to go in for the kill. They recognize that we now have a president who is 1) weak on character, 2) low IQ, and 3) and thinks he now has free rein to come out of the closet since he can't be president after this term.

Don't blame me; I voted for Romney.

 

[8ball]

Another non-story meant to try to rile up gun rights activists. This proposed treaty has nothing to do with gun rights or ownership here in the US even if it were to pass, which is a big IF. The Obama administration was one of the countries originally opposed to certain language in the treaty which is why is was shelved in the first place and sent back to the drawing board. This treaty may not even see the light of day to even begin to debate but that won't stop certain groups from gouging hard working Americans for more of their hard earned money.

+1

The title should be 'SAF moves quick to revive flagging donations with a scare story'....

 

[Dave Workman]

Sure, the US Senate, which last time I checked, opposed this treaty by huge majorities is suddenly going to change to a 66% approval majority?

WTF are you smoking? And since it's legal now, can you get me some? sounds like great stuff.

Seriously Dave, Is it not possible for you to write about REAL threats to our rights, like say, JAY INSLEE winning thanks to King County?

Well, I've already written about Inslee.
But using the "standard" set by some folks here, since he hasn't really done anything yet...he's not even confirmed the winner, yet...and since he has said he supports the 2A but also supports reasonable regulation (define that please)...there's nothing to get riled up about.


eh?

And BTW: If you read what I wrote, it's a report that addresses the timing of this as much as anything. Whether the UN goobers will actually get this adopted is up to debate, but the fact that within 12 hours of the election call, these guys were back from the dead with this proposal. Look around some of the forums and you will see there are differing opinions about this.

Not everyone agrees with you. I spotted this on one of the chat lists:

"Can a treaty actually take precedence over the Constitution, specifically the Second Amendment?

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/un-treaties/266687-us-endorses-un-arms-treaty

It would still have to get approval by the Senate, but that is only a 60% majority (of those present), NOT 60 senators voting to ratify.

The Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2)
The slimeoid Democrats will simply call a vote at zero-dark-30 and get prepositioned Democrat Senators to the floor for the vote.

Nothing is safe with this crew in charge."

I learned long ago to avoid insisting that "It'll never happen here." That's what they said in California, New York, New Jersey...

 

[Jamie6.5]

36 hours since the election, and already this admin has rebooted the small-arms/gun-control treaty.
Of course, they'll deny asking, back in July, that it be shelved until after the election, allowing obama more "flexibility."
(Gee where have I heard that one before?)
Think the timing was coincidence? (wanna buy a bridge?)

Of course the other predictable scenario is all of his apologists showing up here within 36 hours with the Kool-Aide and the excuses, and the poo-poohs about tin-foil.


So, it would appear that liberal-progressive gun owners have been duped again.
It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

And predictable.

 

[Dave Workman]

So, it would appear that liberal-progressive gun owners have been duped again.
It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

WRONG!

they simply have moved into that riverfront property...you know, along 'De Nile'

Seriously, if someone doesn't want to believe the seriousness of these people, I don't have a problem with that.
I am merely the messenger. I've watched this UN melodrama drag on for many years. One thing about all of the advocates of this treaty is that they are uniformly gun control proponents who look down their noses at U.S. gun owners and sneer...
And they do not give up. Erosion, slow and steady and determined, is the means to their end.

 

[gunfreak]

We had to work with those blue helmets in Somalia and they are all screw-ups. Used to tell them they were going on a foot patrol convoy. They would let skinnies walk right into our camp and we would have to force them out.

Well, it's un Christian and wrong.

 

[DMax]

After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks | Reuters

Enjoy your obammy nation

 

[DMax]

36 hours since the election, and already this admin has rebooted the small-arms/gun-control treaty.
Of course, they'll deny asking, back in July, that it be shelved until after the election, allowing obama more "flexibility."
(Gee where have I heard that one before?)
Think the timing was coincidence? (wanna buy a bridge?)

Of course the other predictable scenario is all of his apologists showing up here within 36 hours with the Kool-Aide and the excuses, and the poo-poohs about tin-foil.


So, it would appear that liberal-progressive gun owners have been duped again.
It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

And predictable.

Oxymoron

 

[Sling Blade]

Oxymoron

There are way more progressives with guns than you'd think. Our politics may be different, but we are 2nd Ammendment backers, same as you.

 

[DMax]

There are way more progressives with guns than you'd think. Our politics may be different, but we are 2nd Ammendment backers, same as you.

You may be right but in the end when the only constitutional thing libs care about in small numbers is 2A then whats the point. So its the last amendment to get ended. Ideoloy will always trump personal exceptions so in the end it does not matter its only a delay of the inevetable. You think Harry Reid and the senate will not put in a progressive in the supreme court. Every liberal policy leads to a distruction of our liberties. If you don't believe that. Progressives always talk about fairness but never Liberty. Thier idea of fairness is putting people in a box and treating then as the same. The only minority in America being treated unfair is the INDIVIDUAL.