UN moves quick to revive global gun treaty

[Father of four]

Yes I think there should be rules for the road. yes traffic laws should have moral aspects to them, one being slower traffic keep to the right. The practicality or common sense of laws should always be held to Our Countries moral standard. If not then anything could be made into a law.

 

[fd15k]

English is not your friend.

Because public education is socialist, and we should avoid it at any cost.

 

[idRATHERbeOUTDOORS]

United Nations Arms Treaty - YouTube

Opposing point of view ^
Actually makes a lot of sense

 

[fredball]

English is not your friend.

U R special

 

[fd15k]

Yes I think there should be rules for the road. yes traffic laws should have moral aspects to them, one being slower traffic keep to the right. The practicality or common sense of laws should always be held to Our Countries moral standard. If not then anything could be made into a law.

Right, make traffic laws to reflect who we think are dicks on the road Forget property damage, bodily injuries and death, those are just socialist inventions, big government stuff!

 

[dmancornell]

Right, make traffic laws to reflect who we think are dicks on the road Forget property damage, bodily injuries and death, those are just socialist inventions, big government stuff!

Implying the vast majority of traffic regulations have anything to do with actual property damage, injury or death.

 

[Father of four]

Right, make traffic laws to reflect who we think are dicks on the road Forget property damage, bodily injuries and death, those are just socialist inventions, big government stuff!

You win.

 

[Dave Workman]

Always fun to watch a train go off the tracks....

Real danger in U.N. arms pact even if U.S. doesn’t sign?

There is real danger in a proposed United Nations arms trade pact even if the United States does not sign or if the Senate fails to ratify the document, according to one of the leading critics of the effort.

<broken link removed>

 

[gehrheart]

You win.

sometimes its really not worth the effort to even try to reason... Some just wont get it and as such we have what we have..

 

[Kevatc]

I haven't done a lot of research on the UN small arms treaty but I have a strong feeling its being overplayed by the fear mongers. Two thirds of the Senate have to ratify a treaty for it to become law, a difficult hurdle. In the end Constitutional law trumps treaty law, of course the arguments will center around infringement anyhow in the unlikely event it makes it that far.

That is the bottom line.

I am perplexed by those who are quick to say "Constitution this and Constitution that" but completely forget about treaty ratification. Must be something about fear mongering that causes one to forget that document. Perhaps they are doging pieces of falling sky and getting side tracked.

 

[gehrheart]

That is the bottom line.

I am perplexed by those who are quick to say "Constitution this and Constitution that" but completely forget about treaty ratification. Must be something about fear mongering that causes one to forget that document. Perhaps they are doging pieces of falling sky and getting side tracked.

Naw.. In my case I just dont think the government cares any more about the constitution. Nor do I have any faith in the senate in blocking things like this.

 

[fd15k]

That is the bottom line.

I am perplexed by those who are quick to say "Constitution this and Constitution that" but completely forget about treaty ratification. Must be something about fear mongering that causes one to forget that document. Perhaps they are doging pieces of falling sky and getting side tracked.

It's a matter of inconsistency that some of our fellow citizens chose as their way of thinking (beliefs). Here is how how I think it works. First, folks are worried about the UN treaty that may take away their Constitutional rights. When you tell them that there is a specific process for treaties, as well as the fact that Constitution supersedes treaties, they get back at you with idea that the government will circumvent this and that to achieve whatever. Now the only question that I haven't seen answered, if government (and our favorite fearless leader BHO) can circumvent whatever, then why do they need UN treaty in the first place ? Just go take those guns, since Constitution doesn't matter anyway. Not sure, maybe I'm missing something ?

 

[Father of four]

Nope, they will not just make up new ways to do what they want...Harry Reid: Filibuster Reform Will Be Pursued In The Next Congress

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pledged on Wednesday to change the rules of the Senate so that the minority party has fewer tools to obstruct legislative business. "

 

[Father of four]

I believe Harry Reid will try it. Oops, there goes my (beliefs) again.

 

[fd15k]

Nope, they will not just make up new ways to do what they want...Harry Reid: Filibuster Reform Will Be Pursued In The Next Congress

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) pledged on Wednesday to change the rules of the Senate so that the minority party has fewer tools to obstruct legislative business. "

And this is important because ? I think a person who favors "limited government" should be in favor of dropping this practice, since it does nothing but wastes taxpayer money.

 

[Father of four]

It just proves that those in government will do what they want or find a way or pass a law to get what they want. What about The People what do We want? Do you think that any treaty will be off the table? No, they will do what they want or pass a law to do what they want.

 

[Father of four]

I believe...if they could pass a world treaty to take away all citizens firearms...I believe they would.

 

[fd15k]

It just proves that those in government will do what they want or find a way or pass a law to get what they want. What about the people? Do you think that any treaty will be off the table? No, they will do what they want or pass a law to do what they want.

First of all, Senate rules are created by the Senate and for the Senate. Senate is free to change their rules any time they like. Second, a filibuster can be ended by a 2/3 of the Senate... surprisingly the same number of votes is needed to ratify a treaty. So theoretically, should the 2/3 of the Senate decide to ratify UN treaty, no filibuster is stopping them

 

[Kevatc]

Progressivs believe in adapting to and taking advantage of changes in society, protecting natural resources (but don't call us tree huggers, as we are all for good timber management), health care (edit: mistakenly wrote insurance, but did mean helth care) for everyone, living wages jobs, election reform (get rid of super PACS and go toward the popular vote deciding presiential elections), fixing/building American infrastructure, etc.

And, as you mentioned previously, there are lots of gun owning/hunter progressives ... so another good thing about us! With all the things listed above I am curious if any conservative/Repub's are against them? It seems the term progressive is often used as an insult by some but I wear it with a badge of pride and won't shrink from the term for all the reasons you listed above.

 

[The Redpaw]

United Nations Arms Treaty - YouTube

Opposing point of view ^
Actually makes a lot of sense

Thanks for the link...