UN Gun Ban Treaty

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

steelfingers

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Messages
8,647
Reaction score
7,808
Location
Coalgate, Ok.
Is our government actually supporting the UN Gun Ban Treaty? This is scary when we start accepting United Nation mandates concerning our countrys 2nd Amendment rights. How can POTUS sign a treaty that is in direct violation to our contitution without consent of the people? The UN has never supported us (US) but we support the UN blindly.
What is happening in this country?
 

Ace_on_the_Turn

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
3,775
Reaction score
418
Location
OKC

6 Strings

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
156
Reaction score
0
Location
Exiled On Main Street
The ATT has language to address “misuse of weapons by lawful owners” which then went on to specify regulations to address such. So yes … it could infringe on our Second Amendment rights.

As well, the ATT could also limit what arms we sell to our allies. Not a good treaty. Well, unless you are an angry troll who chronically whines and calls names in a puerile effort to apologize for the failed policies of Barack Hussein Obama.

Interesting article from Forbes on such.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybe...-our-2nd-amendment-rights-part-of-the-deal/2/

More of the same from Outdoor Life.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/gun-shots/2011/06/uns-small-arms-treaty-threat-second-amendment
 

Ace_on_the_Turn

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
3,775
Reaction score
418
Location
OKC
The ATT has language to address “misuse of weapons by lawful owners” which then went on to specify regulations to address such. So yes … it could infringe on our Second Amendment rights.

No, it can not. An opinion piece from Larry Bell is not going to change the laws of this country. It's simple fear mongering. I would suggest a refresher course in the law making process of the United States. It seems to be needed here.

Well, unless you are an angry troll who chronically whines and calls names in a puerile effort to apologize for the failed policies of Barack Hussein Obama.

Nothing like a little hypocrisy in the afternoon, ah?
 

Free Trapper

Repeat Offender
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 13, 2012
Messages
2,150
Reaction score
4,663
Location
Deep in the Creek County woods.
statue.jpg

Yes, I know.....I've posted this before, but it seems appropriate again in this thread.

This beautiful work of art in in front of the UN building in NYC.

This is all I need to know about the UN Gun Ban Treaty.....that and Obongo from the Congo supports it!
 

6 Strings

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
156
Reaction score
0
Location
Exiled On Main Street
Let’s add “genius” to the moniker of the angry troll who chronically apologizes for Obama and his merry band of incompetents.

To point, if the treaty is ratified it is binding.

“Both the administration and Congress should formally state that the ATT is simply a treaty, that it is binding only on nations that have ratified it, that it is not customary international law, and that its entry into force has no implications for the U.S.,” he said in a recent issue brief.

Source? From Ted Bromund off the link that the “genius” angry troll posted!

Lesson … If you parse posts you are disingenuous and if you don’t read (or understand) the citation you post … you are a moron.
 

donner

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
5,862
Reaction score
2,060
Location
Oxford, MS
Let’s add “genius” to the moniker of the angry troll who chronically apologizes for Obama and his merry band of incompetents.

To point, if the treaty is ratified it is binding.

“Both the administration and Congress should formally state that the ATT is simply a treaty, that it is binding only on nations that have ratified it, that it is not customary international law, and that its entry into force has no implications for the U.S.,” he said in a recent issue brief.

Source? From Ted Bromund off the link that the “genius” angry troll posted!

Lesson … If you parse posts you are disingenuous and if you don’t read (or understand) the citation you post … you are a moron.

First, please knock off the personal stuff.

Second, this issue has come up many times and i don't think anyone has posted any evidence that a treaty supersedes the constitution. I could be wrong, or might have missed it, but last i looked the best answer was 'maybe, but unlikely'.

If that is incorrect, please point to the treaty/decision/example so we may all have a better understanding.
 

steelfingers

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Messages
8,647
Reaction score
7,808
Location
Coalgate, Ok.
Not wanting to cause friction but to only post my concerns. Several have addressed the issue far better than I could, I still fear that the road to ruin starts with one step. I dislike anything such as a treaty, pact, or hand shake made in the name of my country that I feel is dangerous to our rights.
As a new member I should learn from other post and members of longer standing than I.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom