2aHawaii
General Topics => Legal and Activism => Topic started by: SpeedTek on July 06, 2012, 10:43:36 PM
-
http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles/2012/20120706002-obama-arms-treaty.html (http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles/2012/20120706002-obama-arms-treaty.html)
-
I'd say for folks write your Senators to stop this ridiculousness, but maybe it would be better to write to that wall in front of you. You'll get the same response either way, and you can save postage. It's a better idea to vote for new Senators come November...
-
I've been warning of this for awhile too. It seems even on 2@ hawaii there are doubters. Keep your sights clean and powder dry. For those on the big island. If you're looking for a safe place, get behind me. Cause this is as far as those sons of b##33?!!s are gonna go. To all who will take a stand....I will pray for you and yours. God Bless each and every one of you.
Pastor Dennis
-
I knew this was coming but didn't think it would be till after the election.
-
I'm sorry, but just because a political commentator says so doesn't qualify it as official white house policy. I think that a "see I told you" is a bit premature. Heck, Dick's not even the first commentator to predict this. He also takes some liberties in applying the supremacy clause.
I'm not saying that Obama won't pursue gun control. I am saying that there's no call to get whipped into a lather every single time someone gets a headline. I mean, really, anyone remember why Dick lost his cushy government consulting job? Of course he's eager to grab some publicity!
-
Holy biased news source, Batman!!
There is no treaty. yet. The meeting to define and finalize the treaty started on July 2nd and ends on July 27th. So unless your news sources have crystal balls that work better than mine there is nothing concrete to talk about, yet. No one knows the terms of the treaty because it doesn't exist. Every news source crying about how Obama is bypassing congress to ram something down the throats of gun owning Americans is full of shit.
Treaties do NOT assume parity with amendments, I'm sorry. The article is just flat out wrong. Need proof? Ask ANY Native American. If the treaty contains provisions that do, indeed, seem to affect privately purchased and owned firearms in the US then we'll still have a legal battle on our hands to define how (and if) the US is going to meet that mandate. The treaty will not tell the "member states" how meet the terms of the treaty. For all we know the US's current federally mandated background checks might be held up as a shining example of meeting the UN treaty's requirements.
How is Obama bypassing congress by signing a treaty? Signing the treaty is the FIRST step. All his signing it means is that the US was there when the treaty was finalized and that THIS is the final version and the only one that we will consider. This one, right here, with the signature on it. THEN is has to be ratified. Relax. Even if it is a bad deal it still has to get through congress before it is binding. Obama is just doing his job and isn't bypassing congress at all.
I'm guessing that even if it has zero affect on private ownership and sales in the US the conservative propaganda machine will spin it as such anyway. If you want to deal with real information your only reliable source is going to be reading the UN documents with your own eyes.
If you want the to read the latest preparatory documents regarding the meeting that is currently going on it can be found here: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.217/1&Lang=E (http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.217/1&Lang=E)
The scope of the treaty (and not TERMS - those have yet to be defined) start with the Preamble on page 11.
Until we have specific details of the treaty's terms on small arms and ammunition sales and ownership within each "member state" there really isn't anything to discuss. And we won't have that until around the same time the President signs it. Which, if you understand how international treaties are ratified, is fine.
-
So doesnt the senate have to ratify it after obama signs it?
Learned something new. In the video he says that even if the senate doesnt ratify it, its still legally binding. Interesting.
-
good cause there's no way i'm getting behind pastor dennis
-
The 2a stuff is important, but probably the biggest threat from all these treaties is the ability of international corporations to dictate local environmental labor and environmental standards. They would be allowed to sue towns and cities if their local laws aren't in line with the treaties. It's basically another way of driving down the standard of living and undermining autonomy so that guys getting paid 100 million dollars a year in compensation packages can make then numbers look good even thought the society that supports them is about to collapse.
-
The 2a stuff is important, but probably the biggest threat from all these treaties is the ability of international corporations to dictate local environmental labor and environmental standards. They would be allowed to sue towns and cities if their local laws aren't in line with the treaties. It's basically another way of driving down the standard of living and undermining autonomy so that guys getting paid 100 million dollars a year in compensation packages can make then numbers look good even thought the society that supports them is about to collapse.
Do you have any examples, or court rulings, legislature, or anything citing past examples of this or where have you seen or heard this?
-
Once a President signs a treaty, there's no deadline for the Senate to ratify it, is there? I'm pretty sure it can just sit around until a lame-duck session says, "Hey, we're all getting fired anyway, let's ratify that un-Constitutional POS treaty Obama signed back in 2012!"
-
Holy biased news source, Batman!!
There is no treaty. yet. The meeting to define and finalize the treaty started on July 2nd and ends on July 27th. So unless your news sources have crystal balls that work better than mine there is nothing concrete to talk about, yet. No one knows the terms of the treaty because it doesn't exist. Every news source crying about how Obama is bypassing congress to ram something down the throats of gun owning Americans is full of shit.
Treaties do NOT assume parity with amendments, I'm sorry. The article is just flat out wrong. Need proof? Ask ANY Native American. If the treaty contains provisions that do, indeed, seem to affect privately purchased and owned firearms in the US then we'll still have a legal battle on our hands to define how (and if) the US is going to meet that mandate. The treaty will not tell the "member states" how meet the terms of the treaty. For all we know the US's current federally mandated background checks might be held up as a shining example of meeting the UN treaty's requirements.
You say over and over that there is no treaty, so there's no way to know what it will do, then you confidently tell us what it won't do. Your Indian argument is flawed, much like saying that the Second Amendment doesn't protect your right to keep and bear arms; just ask any black slave from the 19th century. Just because we failed to honor some treaties a century and a half ago, doesn't change the way they're supposed to work.
How is Obama bypassing congress by signing a treaty? Signing the treaty is the FIRST step. All his signing it means is that the US was there when the treaty was finalized and that THIS is the final version and the only one that we will consider. This one, right here, with the signature on it. THEN is has to be ratified. Relax. Even if it is a bad deal it still has to get through congress before it is binding. Obama is just doing his job and isn't bypassing congress at all. [/b]
He's not illegally bypassing Congress, but as Dick pointed out in the video, we are not allowed to do things counter to the treaty once it's been signed, which means in a way he can bypass Congress and institute a total gun ban in the US, at least until and if Congress refuses to ratify it. Again, you tell us that we don't know that the treaty will call for an end to private firearms ownership, and I say, we also don't know that it won't. Anyone who doesn't get nervous about this or any authority figure mulling over citizens' right to arms is a fool; ask the Turks, the Jews, the Gypsies, the blacks, the Armenians, the Brits, and the Australians, to name a few.
I'm guessing that even if it has zero affect on private ownership and sales in the US the conservative propaganda machine will spin it as such anyway. If you want to deal with real information your only reliable source is going to be reading the UN documents with your own eyes.
If you want the to read the latest preparatory documents regarding the meeting that is currently going on it can be found here: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.217/1&Lang=E (http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.217/1&Lang=E)
The scope of the treaty (and not TERMS - those have yet to be defined) start with the Preamble on page 11.
Until we have specific details of the treaty's terms on small arms and ammunition sales and ownership within each "member state" there really isn't anything to discuss. And we won't have that until around the same time the President signs it. Which, if you understand how international treaties are ratified, is fine.
Basically your point is that until we pass the health care bill and find out what's in it, there's no point talking about it. I know that's a bit of a stretch because signing is not the same as ratifying, but once it's signed the President is pretty much free to start implementing it. Do you really trust Congress to proactively oppose him?
-
Cougar, you are correct in that I am saying there is no treaty and that no one knows what it will do. You are incorrect in that I am saying what it will do - I am only saying my interpretation of what the UN working documents say since it is apparent that not many people have actually read it. I think this because so many people are talking about what this treaty will do that aren't mentioned anywhere in the working documents. There ~is~ room for these thing to happen, sure, but none of it is spelled out yet.
I'm not suggesting we should believe the UN document, by the way, but at least read it.
My Indian Argument is not flawed. Black slaves in the 19th century were legally slaves so of course the 2nd amendment didn't apply to them - they weren't even legally people. The treaties with the various Native American tribes were treaties with sovereign nations that were not citizens under out constitution. The American government does not enforce treaties at anywhere near the same level as constitutional amendments. Nor do they enter into judicial precedent cases with the same weight. Fact. Historically proven. Generally this is a non-statement, anyway, because the international treaties don't come anywhere close to conflicting with the constitution. My only point is that the linked article is wrong on that point. International treaties do not have the same legal weight as amendments. Do you disagree with that?
He's not illegally bypassing Congress, but as Dick pointed out in the video, we are not allowed to do things counter to the treaty once it's been signed...
This is also wrong. It is true once the treaty is ~ratified~ not once the treaty is signed. Signing an international treaty isn't the same thing as President signing a bill into law. It still has to get a 2/3 vote in the Senate before it has any affect on us. And if the treaty does conflict with US law we actually need to change the law BEFORE ratifying the treaty. This isn't a "back door" for gun control. This thing, if it gets signed at all, is going to be marched up Capital Hill and right in through the big double doors.
Basically your point is that until we pass the health care bill and find out what's in it, there's no point talking about it.
If you assume that signing the treaty makes it binding it looks like that, doesn't it? But this is the nature of international treaties - all the signing means is that this is the final wording that we all take home for ratification. So by definition there is no treaty to discuss until it is signed. Until it is signed the wording can still change. That is my point here: signing the treaty is not at all the same as passing a law and that there will be no definitive treaty UNTIL it is signed. Do you disagree?
Consider the alternatives to having the state department do the negotiating for this kind of treaty. Do all the nations involved shut down their congresses, parliaments, etc. and trundle them ALL off to the conference to hash out the collective will of their various nations' interests directly? Can you imagine?
So the state department goes and represents the US interests for the process of negotiating the treaty, puts it stamp of approval on the final document - along with all the other nations - gets the final, signed copy in their language and takes it home for, in our case, Senatorial review. The state department is not authorized to make binding agreements as part of this process, only to represent the US interests in it.
I'm not saying that the treaty itself will be good or bad, I'm saying that all of the current alarm about it stems from an incomplete understanding of how the treaty process works. And that an opportunity to see the treaty as a potentially GOOD thing for gun rights, and to strategize accordingly, is being lost.
-
I stumbled upon this today!
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2012/05/dhs-insider-obama-agency-plan-to-stage.html (http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2012/05/dhs-insider-obama-agency-plan-to-stage.html)
DHS Insider: Obama, Agency Plan to Stage Fake Presidential Assassination Attempt Bringing Widespread Race Riots,
Martial Law, and Cancelled Elections
"Expansion of FEMA camps and massive DHS ammo buys starting to make sense now"
I totally believe this will happen!
-
I stumbled upon this today!
http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2012/05/dhs-insider-obama-agency-plan-to-stage.html (http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2012/05/dhs-insider-obama-agency-plan-to-stage.html)
DHS Insider: Obama, Agency Plan to Stage Fake Presidential Assassination Attempt Bringing Widespread Race Riots,
Martial Law, and Cancelled Elections
"Expansion of FEMA camps and massive DHS ammo buys starting to make sense now"
I totally believe this will happen!
OMG :shake: :shake: :shake: :shake: :crazy: :shake: :crazy:
-
The original article also talked about Louis Farrakhan and Rev. whats his name on obamas payroll through some other outfit. And OWS people getting paid the same way to start the trouble.Lucky conservatives are so peaceful otherwise.............This is one of many reasons I believe the POTUS will not obey the US constitution and take away the 2@ somehow.Its late, Im tired. I will try to find the original article and post the link if I havent deleted it. Keep vigilant boys. Its coming.
-
Farrakhan is actually a Ron Paul supporter
-
Do you have any examples, or court rulings, legislature, or anything citing past examples of this or where have you seen or heard this?
sorry I got this one mixed up with Trans Pacific Partnership, which is basically NAFTA on steroids. everybody's paying attention to the arms bill which may lead to a slippery slope down the line. TPP will be a disaster right out of the gate.
-
::)
Next up...Obama is really a reptilian from Sirius.....
-
Robust agenda of change
Soetoro’s 2012 election contingency
Author
- Doug Hagmann Saturday, July 21, 2012
(24) Comments | Print friendly | Email Us
252
It was a conversation with my source inside the DHS that I did not want to have, but was not totally unexpected. “I’m not sure how long I can continue to provide you with information.” he stated. I was unable to tell if he made his statement with relief or sadness, or perhaps a mixture of both. “I could be wrong, but I don’t think there’s much time left, if I am interpreting certain information and actions correctly.”
Previous Insider Columns
The planned re-election of Obama, revolutionary style
More from DHS Insider
-
::)
Next up...Obama is really a reptilian from Sirius.....
(http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/reptilian.jpg)
omg, you were right.
-
Oh cr*p!!!! I knew he was a reptile!!!
More food for thought.
http://conpats.blogspot.com/2012/05/obamas-intention-cancel-2012-election.htm (http://conpats.blogspot.com/2012/05/obamas-intention-cancel-2012-election.htm)
-
Whiskey & Gunpowder
AuthorsArchivesContactWhitelist Unsubscribe
Gary Gibson, Acapulco, Mexico...
Yesterday we presented an impassioned plea. Jeffrey Tucker never wants to touch a gun again. So he hopes all his fellow citizens don't share his admitted squeamishness. Because more guns in private hands means more safety (as the numbers we shared in the Parting Shot yesterday strongly indicated)...
But when the government comes for those private guns...will Americans resist? Not if they know what's good for them, says Jim Karger in today's featured article.
(And learn what you can really do to save yourself before the militarized police start rolling through your neighborhood and demanding your guns – or gold – in today's Parting Shot...)
-
clshade, heres for ya!
http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/08/white-house-confirms-obama-wants-to-ban-guns/#ixzz22w2lKpNU (http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/08/white-house-confirms-obama-wants-to-ban-guns/#ixzz22w2lKpNU)
-
from Prophecyupdate
Are The Government And The Big Banks Quietly Preparing For An Imminent Financial Collapse?
-
This?
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/mega-banks-plan-for-collapse-with.html?m=1
-
Dennis, thanks. I do know, however, that Obama supports gun control.
I also want a super hot blond who is intelligent, sexy, caters to my every whim, lives right down the road and loves to go shooting.
The chances of either of us getting what we want is slim. We both know it, too, so he hasn't ~done~ much of anything to push gun control and I generally don't bother asking those hot blonds who are ignoring me for their phone number.
There is a huge difference between wanting something and being able to get it.
-
I can see this coming too! Is that why they buying up more ammo????
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
clshade....hey if you find one of them hot blondes..... see if she get one sister kind'a litle bit blind.
-
From canada free press
Christianity & gun owners in the crosshairs: Chilling tactic exposed
-
UN Small Arms Treaty Passes While Media Sleeps
September 20, 2012 By Breaking News Comments (13)
inShare17
United Nations flag SC UN Small Arms Treaty Passes While Media Sleeps
-
Obama and his gang of cohorts of radical muslims going to take over the world!
-
Police: "Enter Detroit At Your Own Risk"Things are going to become much, much worse.
The Economic Collapse
The Economic Collapse
Are You Prepared For The Coming Economic Collapse And The Next Great Depression?
CommentsBy EmailPosts
Police: "Enter Detroit At Your Own Risk"