Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
UN Small Arms Treaty Coference
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HackerF15E" data-source="post: 1822747" data-attributes="member: 9689"><p>As usual when this story pops up...go read the source document and not the news story. There is no "UN Small Arms Treaty" yet...these meetings are the initial meetings to even just start talking about it.</p><p></p><p>Even then, such a treaty is meaningless. It does not at all, in any way, supplane the US law of the land. It deals with international arms transfers, and not anything to do with purchasing, owning, bearing, or anything else related to personal use of firearms by American citizens in the United States.</p><p></p><p>And, no, there is no "supercommittee" or "executive order" that can make this treaty ever supplant the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.</p><p></p><p>Nobody furthers the cause of firearms and firearm owners rights in this country by repeating a bunch of inaccurate crap. "We" are just as guilty of idiotic scare tactics as the Brady bunch, VPC, and all the rest. Make yourself smart on what this treaty ACTUALLY might say, and what it ACTUALLY might impact....don't just repeat talking points posted on a blog or forwarded in an email.</p><p></p><p>There are legitimate reasons to question this treaty, but none of them have anything to do with potential compromises to our Constitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms in this country.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HackerF15E, post: 1822747, member: 9689"] As usual when this story pops up...go read the source document and not the news story. There is no "UN Small Arms Treaty" yet...these meetings are the initial meetings to even just start talking about it. Even then, such a treaty is meaningless. It does not at all, in any way, supplane the US law of the land. It deals with international arms transfers, and not anything to do with purchasing, owning, bearing, or anything else related to personal use of firearms by American citizens in the United States. And, no, there is no "supercommittee" or "executive order" that can make this treaty ever supplant the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Nobody furthers the cause of firearms and firearm owners rights in this country by repeating a bunch of inaccurate crap. "We" are just as guilty of idiotic scare tactics as the Brady bunch, VPC, and all the rest. Make yourself smart on what this treaty ACTUALLY might say, and what it ACTUALLY might impact....don't just repeat talking points posted on a blog or forwarded in an email. There are legitimate reasons to question this treaty, but none of them have anything to do with potential compromises to our Constitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms in this country. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
UN Small Arms Treaty Coference
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom