UN Arms Trade Treaty pleases no one

by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ Posted 2012/07/26 02:03:30

Related Topics: Harry Reid, Senate, Guns, Text, Links, Destroy, Party, America, Conflict, Gun, Image, Record

77 votes
Read all 135 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

	The treaty is a toothless instrument that no one need fear.
	The treaty does not conflict with the Second Amendment
	The treaty conflicts with, and must yield to, the Second Amendment
	The treaty destroys the Second Amendment if the Senate ratifies it.
	The treaty destroys the Second Amendment once BHO signs it.
	Undecided (Please leave a comment)

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	The treaty is a toothless instrument that no one need fear.	8 votes	10%
	The treaty does not conflict with the Second Amendment	3 votes	4%
	The treaty conflicts with, and must yield to, the Second Amendment	22 votes	29%
	The treaty destroys the Second Amendment if the Senate ratifies it.	14 votes	18%
	The treaty destroys the Second Amendment once BHO signs it.	11 votes	14%
	Undecided	19 votes	25%

The first draft of the treaty is out. Read the linked article for links to the full text (HTML or PDF, take your pick.) Oxfam America is boo-hoo-ing that the treaty isn't strong enough. But the treaty itself commands its State Parties to register guns, and not allow their sale, as the UN demands. That, of course, violates the Second Amendment.

Fifty-eight Senators are on record that they will vote the treaty down if it infringes the right of the people to keep and bear arms, or American sovereignty. But "Dingy" Harry Reid is likely not to bring it up for a vote. So then the Vienna Convention will apply--or at least, our putative President will say it will apply.

Read the treaty for yourselves, and then you tell me:

Does this treaty conflict with the Second Amendment?

By signing it, will the putative President set the Second Amendment at nought?

+17

Add a comment above

Chi~Cat 2012/07/26 02:31:59

The treaty destroys the Second Amendment once BHO signs it.

+18
I am so mad~ I have never been more disgusted in my life than to read that and that traitorous witch, Clinton (I have nothing nice to say right now towards that communist ass-kissing ____ ____ _____ )!

WE are in the fight for our lives and this is NOT good. The UN SHALL NOT DEMAND ANYTHING OF US. This is proof that this is INDEED happening and we better fight the good fight and TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK and never relent or we, as US citizens will become serfs and subservient to foreign countries that have long ambitions to topple US AND this begins with voting the Usurper and all ITs cronies out of our WHITE HOUSE, tar and feather, if necessary. Damnit, AMERICA, WAKE UP!!!

>> See Replies

More polls by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆

S. Gompers 2012/07/27 13:17:42

Undecided

+2
The U.N. is fraud.

reply
dr9nfly 2012/07/26 20:11:25

Undecided

+3
This stupid treaty shouldn't even exist let alone be written up by the UN. Criminals will own guns long after they rip them out of the law abiding citizens hands.

reply
texasred 2012/07/26 19:24:39

The treaty destroys the Second Amendment if the Senate ratifies it.

+3
I should say, when the Senate ratifies it, Obama calls for martial law and signs and executive order to confiscate our arms.

reply
CHUCK to texasred 2012/07/28 21:33:50

+1
CAN T HAVE MINE..

reply
texasred to CHUCK 2012/07/28 22:08:53

+1
Mine, either!

reply
Sheila 2012/07/26 19:00:36

The treaty destroys the Second Amendment if the Senate ratifies it.

+2
Does the president have the right to ratify the treaty? I was under the impression that the Senate alone had that power?

reply
Wahvlvke to Sheila 2012/07/27 20:10:31

+2
Since when does that traitorous flop eared socialist bastard follow the law?

reply
Sheila to Wahvlvke 2012/07/27 20:52:42

+1
When it comes to this I dont see HOW he can ratify that if it is supposed to be the senate. But otherwise that has never slowed him down....ask the judges that tried to hold him in contempt in LA after the offshore drilling moratorium.

reply
Wahvlvke to Sheila 2012/07/27 21:21:17

+3
Killing the Second Amendment is key to a dictatorship.

reply
Sheila to Wahvlvke 2012/07/30 17:37:17

It is one of the keys definitely!! Thanks to our founders we have a few locks. The press is another. Of course they have kind of died. Decided to just MAKE stories, not only cover them....

reply
Wahvlvke to Sheila 2012/07/30 23:21:08

+1
No lie.

reply
Temlako... to Wahvlvke 2012/07/28 02:28:33

+1
Good news:

http://www.sodahead.com/unite...

reply
Wahvlvke to Temlako... 2012/07/28 12:46:17

Interesting ... thanks.

reply
none 2012/07/26 18:21:31

The treaty conflicts with, and must yield to, the Second Amendment

+1
The UN sucks and can't tell our nation what to do. Our Constitution overrides the useless and corrupt UN.

reply
ScottyG - Faqueue 2012/07/26 16:53:59

The treaty conflicts with, and must yield to, the Second Amendment

+4
Our law is sovereign and can't be superseded. F the UN.

reply
jimmy to ScottyG... 2012/07/26 18:49:53

+3
i agree but tell that to the a-hole in the wh

reply
ScottyG... to jimmy 2012/07/26 19:06:33

+3
It's not up to him luckily!

reply
jimmy to ScottyG... 2012/07/27 13:07:48

+2
I wouldn't put it pass him to try something, he's a sneaky sob, don't you know

reply
ScottyG... to jimmy 2012/07/27 15:18:03

+1
There will be out and out civil war before that is allowed.

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/07/27 20:15:07

+2
No kidding.

reply
ScottyG... to Wahvlvke 2012/07/27 21:37:35

+1
;)

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/07/28 00:30:21

+2
You're a good man Scotty G.

reply
ScottyG... to Wahvlvke 2012/08/01 01:43:40

+1
I'm tryin'

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/08/01 13:52:53

+1
You are doing a good job.

reply
jimmy to ScottyG... 2012/07/29 12:54:55

+2
that's for sure

reply
ScottyG... to jimmy 2012/08/01 01:43:54

+2
TY!

reply
jimmy to ScottyG... 2012/08/01 19:00:23

+1
OK

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/07/27 20:14:11

+1
Hello Scotty ... but what sort of sneaky crap will obie pull this time.

reply
ScottyG... to Wahvlvke 2012/07/27 21:38:17

+1
Who knows.Career criminals are creative.

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/07/28 00:31:32

+2
Those candy ass Republican RINOs need to get on the stick.

reply
ScottyG... to Wahvlvke 2012/08/01 01:44:26

+1
Stuff them all.

reply
Wahvlvke to ScottyG... 2012/08/01 13:53:41

Never thought of taxidermy.

reply
Lady Wh... to ScottyG... 2012/07/26 20:54:55

+1
agreed

reply
ScottyG... to Lady Wh... 2012/07/26 21:15:44

+1
;)

reply
John Walker II 2012/07/26 16:46:30 (edited)

Undecided

+2
"On July 12, 2012, the United States issued a statement condemning the selection of Iran to serve as vice president of the conference. The statement called the move "outrageous" and noted that Iran is under Security Council sanctions for weapons proliferation.[21] The U.N. watchdog group UN Watch also condemned the move, noting that it happened after a UN Security Council report determined that Iran was guilty of illegally transferring guns and bombs to Syria, which is a breach of a U.N. ban on weapons exports by Iran."

The fact that someone suspect is in a position of leadership over the entire process, poisons it and makes it suspect from the get go.

By the way, the links go to the article, but in the article itself I found it cherry picked from the source and didn't provide proper context. Here's a list of what it DOES cover.

-a. Battle Tanks
-b. Armored combat vehicles
-c. Large-caliber Artillery systems
-d. Combat aircraft
-e. Attack helicopters
-f. Warships
-g. Missiles and missile launchers
-h. Small Arms and Light Weapons

There are some omissions in there.

It's a bit more encompassing then just small arms.

reply
Wahvlvke to John Wa... 2012/07/27 20:16:26

But it does include small arms.

reply
John Wa... to Wahvlvke 2012/07/27 20:24:41

It looks like the major penalty in that document about countries that don't tell, is no weapons shall be exported to them.

Which.. isn't that big of a deal. We make most of our own stuff anyways. This document doesn't have a lot of teeth to it, except for countries that buy those goods.

In the end I think it won't go very far, even if it does passes. The 2nd amendment can't be overridden except by an amendment. And I don't see that happening.

reply
Wahvlvke to John Wa... 2012/07/27 21:22:08

I can see this batch trying.

reply
John Wa... to Wahvlvke 2012/07/27 21:55:18

Sadly. So can I. and I WON'T be a happy camper for it.

reply
Wahvlvke to John Wa... 2012/07/28 00:32:18

It's about time the straw broke the camels back.

reply