Quantcast

Are you okay with having to register your guns with the UN?

Drue-AFCL 2012/08/09 17:06:59
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • doc moto 2012/08/09 17:09:16
    hell no
    doc moto
    +10
    No, NOPE and it is against all that we have in this country; they need to do it now, that is to move the UN two hundred miles East of it's current location! And do it now, all delegates and their staff and whomever is tied to the UN!!!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Cat 2012/08/12 20:37:26
    hell no
    Cat
    +1
    Oh yes another reason to dump Obama.
  • DuncanONeil 2012/08/11 01:47:58
    hell no
    DuncanONeil
    +2
    In fact it can be considered a violation of the sovereignty of the US.
  • Drue-AFCL DuncanO... 2012/08/12 17:47:51
    Drue-AFCL
    Obama and Hillary are selling that out to the UN.
  • DuncanO... Drue-AFCL 2012/08/12 18:29:14
    DuncanONeil
    +1
    ONLY the UN?
  • NakedRei 2012/08/10 21:21:59 (edited)
    hell no
    NakedRei
    +1
    The UN should have no control over individual citizens.
  • Iamfree 2012/08/10 18:19:38
    hell no
    Iamfree
    +1
    Over my cold dead body.
  • LastRanger 2012/08/10 18:04:56 (edited)
    hell no
    LastRanger
    +1
    My guns are already registered (in the sense that the founders meant – not) under the Second Amendment of the Constitution - copywrite 1776, all rights reserved.



    I realize that support for this useless POS of a treaty has died - actually to my surprise.

    But, consider the ostensible goal of it ‘to control the illegal transfer of arms’.

    Considering the disdain the UN holds for the US, and knowing that the treaty was aimed directly at the Second Amendment.

    Can you guess who would be the first to be prosecuted? Think ‘Fast and Furious’.

    Perhaps the current administration realized that their beloved Holder would end up being dragged in front to the UN to explain why he was transferring arms across a national border – illegally – without the knowledge of that nation.

    Think about it. The reasons may go further than the obvious unpopularity of the treaty.



    Analyst, Ph.D.





    Sneaky Dems Attempt Gun Control In CyberSecurity Bill



    By the way, watch out for the end run.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/201...
  • mikeyavelli 2012/08/10 17:17:40
    hell no
    mikeyavelli
    +1
    once those guns are UN registered, you have no ability to use it. use it and lose your freedom. guns only in the hands of rulers. obama's dream, the UN's dream, and iran's too.
  • micha77 2012/08/10 15:59:27
    hell no
    micha77
    +1
    Gun registration was the centerpiece of Nazi Germany and Hitler's plan to take over Europe. Hitler himself was quoted as saying "Any conqueror who allows his subject races to remain armed has prepared his own downfall by so doing." The Nazi Gun Control law was the basis for our own Gun Control Act of 1968. The blue helmeted thugs of the UN can have my weapons when I run out of ammo. It won't be pretty.
  • NymRod 2012/08/10 15:23:17
    hell no
    NymRod
    +1
    HELL NO!
  • Jeff Smith 2012/08/10 12:47:28
    hell no
    Jeff Smith
    +1
    I am an American I have no use for the UN
  • Prophet 2012/08/10 06:21:43
    hell no
    Prophet
    +1
    I don't think so!
  • Rich Matarese 2012/08/10 05:35:04
    hell no
    Rich Matarese
    +2
    Not one friggin' little bit.

    ANY statute or regulation - local, state, federal, U.N. - which infringes the individual right to keep and bear arms within these United States or the affiliated territories - is null and void before the ink dries.

    The unalienable human rights to life, to liberty, and to property, REQUIRE the exercise of deadly force in the protection of those rights. Any government thug in our republic who makes any effort whatsoever to impose any limitation on the private citizen's desire to acquire, practice with, and pack weapons of any kind is, ipso facto, a criminal guilty of malfeasance in public office.

    L. Neil Smith's famous essay "Why Did It Have to Be...Guns?" bears reading. From that article I quote:

    "Make no mistake: all politicians - even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership - hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician - or political philosophy - can be put.

    "If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, ANYTHING -...








    Not one friggin' little bit.

    ANY statute or regulation - local, state, federal, U.N. - which infringes the individual right to keep and bear arms within these United States or the affiliated territories - is null and void before the ink dries.

    The unalienable human rights to life, to liberty, and to property, REQUIRE the exercise of deadly force in the protection of those rights. Any government thug in our republic who makes any effort whatsoever to impose any limitation on the private citizen's desire to acquire, practice with, and pack weapons of any kind is, ipso facto, a criminal guilty of malfeasance in public office.

    L. Neil Smith's famous essay "Why Did It Have to Be...Guns?" bears reading. From that article I quote:

    "Make no mistake: all politicians - even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership - hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician - or political philosophy - can be put.

    "If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, ANYTHING - without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

    "If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

    "What his attitude - toward your ownership and use of weapons - conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?"

    =======

    See http://www.lneilsmith.org/why...
    -
    (more)
  • BILL 2012/08/10 05:20:02
    hell no
    BILL
    +2
    I don't have any guns but if I did I sure wouldn't register it with that bunch of Dick Wads
  • Christopher Kirchen 2012/08/10 04:39:10
    hell no
    Christopher Kirchen
    +2
    I barely acknowledge the UN's existence; I'll never acknowledge authority on their part over me.
  • MR. 2012/08/10 04:21:42
    hell no
    MR.
    +1
    AND "THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE" THEY GOT THIS IDEA! *(LOCK AND LOAD AMERICA!)
  • Master of Disaster 2012/08/10 02:56:30
    hell no
    Master of Disaster
    +1
    They can kiss my posterior end!
  • RobHom 2012/08/10 01:46:16
    hell no
    RobHom
    +3
    Not happening, period.
  • Rand 2012/08/10 01:09:47
    hell no
    Rand
    +1
    What guns ? The US is a soverign nation. Or was.
  • ComeOnNow 2012/08/10 01:09:12
    hell no
    ComeOnNow
    +1
    Not going to happen.
  • Ashley 2012/08/10 00:39:11
    hell no
    Ashley
    +3
    They have no jurisdiction over it.
  • Ben 10- P.H.A.E.T 2012/08/09 23:47:06
    sure why not
    Ben 10- P.H.A.E.T
    I honestly don't give a crap. I own a gun. But I'm not going to melt into the floor and evaporate like many would without one. Its so funny how some people find their guns orgasmic. It's just a gun... Yeah its fun to shoot a couple times a year but I don't see any reason to go through bitch fits every time something vaguely anti gun comes up.
  • Rand Ben 10-... 2012/08/10 01:10:52
    Rand
    I suggest you read what the founders of this great nation said concerning your postion on guns.
  • Ben 10-... Rand 2012/08/11 06:06:43
    Ben 10- P.H.A.E.T
    They just added that to make southern gun nuts happy and approve the constitution
  • Christo... Ben 10-... 2012/08/15 21:40:58
    Christopher Kirchen
    Back then there probably weren't people who attached such bad joss to a tool, like a gun.
  • mikeyav... Ben 10-... 2012/08/10 17:15:52
    mikeyavelli
    +1
    UN gun control is the end around plan of obama's to get rid of the second amendment. it is the first step in a plan to level the world into one government. one law, one standard of living.
    anyone who cares not about this leftist goal is naive.
  • Christo... Ben 10-... 2012/08/15 21:38:44
    Christopher Kirchen
    When someone is talking about having their guns taken away, it's not the guns themselves that we would bemoan; it's about the right to own it. I'll probably never own a gun myself, but it's a freedom of the Constitution that we have a duty to protect.
  • Patriot Unit 2012/08/09 21:56:41
    hell no
    Patriot Unit
    +5
    Good

    The UN does not run this country, and its none of their damn business if I have a gun or don't have a gun. And the fools in this country that are pushing this foolishness should back off.
  • Jane 2012/08/09 21:30:50
    hell no
    Jane
    +1
    No and there is nothing in the works to try to do something like this. Just scare tactics, probably initiated by the NRA.
  • Jane Jane 2012/08/09 21:34:49
    Jane
    Also I read the foxnews link and it is full of blatant lies. They have been kind enough to under line their biggest lies.
  • Drue-AFCL Jane 2012/08/15 20:47:58
  • Jane Drue-AFCL 2012/08/16 04:16:36
    Jane
    Read what David said. Your link didn't change any of my thoughts.
  • Fred Ro... Jane 2012/08/09 23:01:40
    Fred Rogers
    +2
    The NRA wanted people to believe that the treaty would be used to somehow restrict arms trade within the U.S., saying things like "we won't surrender the 2nd Amendment to the U.N.". The treaty can't override the Constitution or any U.S. law, so that's pretty much bogus (scare tactics, as you said). It would, however, force someone who sells a foreign-made weapon to report it, which I guess is what they mean by "registration". In my opinion, since the U.S. is the largest arms exporter, the real rationale for opposing the treaty is more about the U.N. figuring out who we're selling guns to, not who is buying guns in our country. Anyway, the treaty's already failed after U.S. and Russian opposition.
  • Jane Fred Ro... 2012/08/10 01:26:57
    Jane
    +1
    It is encouraging to know people your age know what is going on.
  • Prophet Fred Ro... 2012/08/10 06:19:35
    Prophet
    +1
    It can not legally override the constitution. But we have a president who overrides it all the time; soooooooooo?
  • Fred Ro... Prophet 2012/08/10 07:21:22
    Fred Rogers
    If you honestly believe that, there is a court system at your disposal whose sole purpose it is to determine such matters. Feel free to use it.
  • unicorn_lady1 2012/08/09 21:18:44
    hell no
    unicorn_lady1
    +4
    I have a problem with the UN having ANY authority over US Citizens or our Country or its Waters or Minerals or AIR.
  • Wyzard 2012/08/09 20:27:33
    hell no
    Wyzard
    +1
    Fuk no, no one needs to know what guns I have!
  • Kat ♪.BTO-t-BCRA-F~PWCM~ 2012/08/09 19:43:56
    hell no
    Kat ♪.BTO-t-BCRA-F~PWCM~
    Hell no
  • Tennessee3501 2012/08/09 19:38:46 (edited)
    sure why not
    Tennessee3501
    +1
    It would get them off of the streets of America and make us all safe from criminals! Then we surrender our sovereignty to the UN and dissolve our country! We would have "One World Government" and we would all be singing John Lennon's song "Imagine." (Sarcasm!)

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/07/23 11:19:32

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals