doomsday email

[viceunit]

I received this email today - some of you may have also. There is a link to the Reuters article that does not mention any of the stuff in the email - dont know what to make of it.

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress.

Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg. The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth?

What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

Copy the ULR to your browser and check the article. Or click on the link.
U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade | Reuters

[HKSmith]

I don't know why this keeps coming up. For a treaty to be binding on the U.S., it must have both the President's signature and approval by a two-thirds majority of the Senate - that's 67 votes. When you subtract out the pro-gun Democratic Senators (Jim Webb, Max Baucus, Harry Reid etc.), you wouldn't even be remotely close to that number. The idea that this could occur in secrecy and without debate is silly - we're already discussing it here!

[oldRoger]

I maintain a long list of things to worry about, this is on my list somewhere but nowhere near the top for exactly the reasons that HK Smith has pointed out.
If BHO or the Clintons could do this in secret or any other way it would have been done long ago.

[DonD]

While I don't trust our Fearless Leader any farther than I can throw a Trident submarine, I don't think this issue has any traction. The UN is held in great contempt by most of the US and probably much of Congress.

All this may mean is that the US will participate in the farcical UN efforts, that doesn't mean they intend to back a strong anti gun outcome.

While is is probably quite safe to say that more Congressional Democrats support anti gun efforts than Republicans, there are certainly many pro gun Democrats who will side with the Republicans. I think any UN measure is DOA in Congress. Don

[bk43]

I'm sure this grew out of another of those loony GOA alerts. The current administration wants to get a treaty approved that addresses arms trafficing(don't recall the name of it). What they don't tell you is that Clinton signed the treaty more than 10 years ago but it was, and still is, DOA in the Senate.

Bob

[oldRoger]

I would predict that like climate control many meetings will be held, many speeches made, and you and I will pay for First Class Flights, or Airforce One, the best rooms in the best five star hotels, with the best caviar, Kobe Beef, and Lobsters, with fine wines all at various vacation spots for the State Dept, Administration, NGOs and various congress creatures.
Many of these people will make a career of this noble effort and hope that it never ends.

Nice work if you can get it!

[DonD]

Originally Posted by oldRoger

I would predict that like climate control many meetings will be held, many speeches made, and you and I will pay for First Class Flights, or Airforce One, the best rooms in the best five star hotels, with the best caviar, Kobe Beef, and Lobsters, with fine wines all at various vacation spots for the State Dept, Administration, NGOs and various congress creatures.
Many of these people will make a career of this noble effort and hope that it never ends.

Nice work if you can get it!

Probably true, I like your brand of cynicism, it's appropriate. Don

[Hoplophile]

Clinton signed the CIFTA (Inter-American Arms Control treaty) 10-12 years ago. The Senate has yet to ratify it.


And the Supreme Court has ruled that provisions of any treaty MUST conform to the US Constitution.

[oldman45]

Who knows what may happen in the future. I do know Japan has made demands on the US to ban guns across the board here.

England has hinted at saying we should take their same position on guns.

There are laws now in place that I never thought I would see in my life time.

[DonD]

Originally Posted by oldman45

I do know Japan has made demands on the US to ban guns across the board here.

England has hinted at saying we should take their same position on guns.

Who gives a **** what those two lame countries want? I'm really tired of the Brits lecturing us on how to run this country. Some of their cities have some of the highest violent crime rates in the western world despite draconian gun restrictions. The obvious answer in their minds is more gun control. Don

[John Deere]

Originally Posted by DonD

Who gives a **** what those two lame countries want? I'm really tired of the Brits lecturing us on how to run this country. Some of their cities have some of the highest violent crime rates in the western world despite draconian gun restrictions. The obvious answer in their minds is more gun control. Don

Amen, DonD!! Well said!

JD

[ENGINE18]

"from my cold, dead fingers!"

[jag312]

If the Japanese want to invade California to confiscate our guns, all I can say is, "Come and take 'em!" There will be more Californians with guns to meet them on the beaches than there were Germans at D-day.

[james56]

Originally Posted by ENGINE18

"from my cold, dead fingers!"

DITTO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!