UN disarmament plans

[jakebrake]

True, yet Bobbi Casey will get re elected, somehow.

[TSimonetti]

Correct.

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/s...s/treaties.htm

Article VI of the Constitution is VERY clear on this.

Quote:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Quote:
HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that

1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.
2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,

3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17

I get the argument. We should feel safe because treaties do not override the constitution and there is established case law backing that up. But there is an easy and established way the the gun grabbers will get around that fact. They will simply not admit they are violating the 2nd Amendment with any provisions they enact due to a UN arms treaty. Licensing, registration, gun and magazine bans, purchasing limits, storage laws, taxation, the lautenburg amendment, etc etc all have been tried and tested in the courts and have not generally been disallowed. They are also testing the waters with microstamping of ammunition, so-called "smart gun" technology, restrictions on guns and ammo with non-sporting purposes, import bans, banning lead, banning non-lead, closing gun ranges, closing public lands to hunting, and attempting to greatly expand mental health and disability restrictions that are tied to entitlement benefits and health care. Through it all they will proudly claim that they have protected the rights of Americans to bear arms for "legitimate purposes".

When they crap all over the constitution, it takes years, sometimes almost a decade to get to the final court decision. They know this. So they clamp down hard and then dare the courts to overrule them. Funny how they always seem to have a ringer on the court who agrees with them on an issue? I wouldn't put too much faith in our court system overturning UN sanctioned gun ownership rules and restrictions, especially if a Democrat wins the White House in 2016... Even the all important Heller decision was only 5-4. It could have easily gone the other way.

Then after they have watered down the 2nd Amendment to such an extent that it is effectively meaningless, they can still proudly claim that the goddam UN treaty does not violate your 2nd Amendment "Rights". And there we will stand years from now, de-balled, and disarmed to a large extent, with a bunch of us shouting "We told you so" but with zero satisfaction over being correct about our warnings.

[Solaran_X]

The problem with Trump is that he may be as anti gun as most of the democrats.

Trump IS a Democrat.

Remember when he endorsed Hillary during the 2008 primaries and Obama during the 2008 general election?

[ungawa]

As mentioned several times before, that treaty does not supersede the US Constitution and our protected rights under the 2nd Amendment.

The only way it could affect us is regulating international trade.

Everything supersedes the US Constitution and we have zero protected rights. Name one of the first Ten Amendments that the government can't deny with zero due process.

[tlnzz1]

I know, right. And the second states the right shall not be infringed.
Oh, and congress is to make all laws.
And potus is sworn to uphold and protect the constitution.
I could go on but I shouldn't have to here.

"We the People" have allowed all that to happen. You ready to change that?

[tlnzz1]

I get the argument. We should feel safe because treaties do not override the constitution and there is established case law backing that up. But there is an easy and established way the the gun grabbers will get around that fact. They will simply not admit they are violating the 2nd Amendment with any provisions they enact due to a UN arms treaty. Licensing, registration, gun and magazine bans, purchasing limits, storage laws, taxation, the lautenburg amendment, etc etc all have been tried and tested in the courts and have not generally been disallowed. They are also testing the waters with microstamping of ammunition, so-called "smart gun" technology, restrictions on guns and ammo with non-sporting purposes, import bans, banning lead, banning non-lead, closing gun ranges, closing public lands to hunting, and attempting to greatly expand mental health and disability restrictions that are tied to entitlement benefits and health care. Through it all they will proudly claim that they have protected the rights of Americans to bear arms for "legitimate purposes".

When they crap all over the constitution, it takes years, sometimes almost a decade to get to the final court decision. They know this. So they clamp down hard and then dare the courts to overrule them. Funny how they always seem to have a ringer on the court who agrees with them on an issue? I wouldn't put too much faith in our court system overturning UN sanctioned gun ownership rules and restrictions, especially if a Democrat wins the White House in 2016... Even the all important Heller decision was only 5-4. It could have easily gone the other way.

Then after they have watered down the 2nd Amendment to such an extent that it is effectively meaningless, they can still proudly claim that the goddam UN treaty does not violate your 2nd Amendment "Rights". And there we will stand years from now, de-balled, and disarmed to a large extent, with a bunch of us shouting "We told you so" but with zero satisfaction over being correct about our warnings.

I hear you and agree. Who is the last line of defense of the Constitution that a criminal Government ignores at will?

[Noah_Zark]

Come take them boys

Not sure how that would work, because when there's a hot spot in the world and the UN makes a presence, the UN is usually on the first plane outta Dodge when the shooting starts.

I recall how fast the UN hared itself out of Baghdad when GWII started.

Noah

[phillyd2]

Exactly. I always laugh when anybody is afraid of anything the UN thinks about doing. Almost as funny as those worried about UN peace keepers. Obviously none has ever deployed with or worked around these troops.

[Gunsnwater]

"We the People" have allowed all that to happen. You ready to change that?

I'm ready, this is the year I started showing up, not just sending letters and voting. I'm hoping for company.

[mikelets456]

Everything supersedes the US Constitution and we have zero protected rights. Name one of the first Ten Amendments that the government can't deny with zero due process.

Birth control....