Letter sent to Obama on UN gun treaty

[redlevel]

It wasn't either of them it was someone wearing masks. And they didn't really say what we thought they said, 2 seconds of audio was missing.

I don't see where anyone is forced to read, participate or respond to any thread, I checked the rules.

Many of their statements were rather vague. I still haven't been able to determine what the heck Holder was talking about below. Any ideas?

"Well, as President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."

Gentlemen . . .
You didn't get the memo?
Up is Down, Black is White, In is Out, and Hot is Cold.
There is no anti-gun sentiment in the Obama administration.
If Eric Holder was Catholic, he would be a candidate for Sainthood.
Chicago is a perfectly safe city to walk wherever one pleases.
The UN is just a paternal IO that wants to make the World safe for the children.


You are banging your heads against the wall. When one pretends not to understand or grasp the realities of videos such as the ones you have linked, or some of the other facts that have been presented, the word is "obtuse."

Nothing good can come from continuing this.

 

[Biginge]

I am afraid some members here have their heads buried so far in the sand that they believe they are no longer an ostrich. Denial can be a fear mechanism for a few.

Regards

Bill

 

[StatesRightist]

Gentlemen . . .
You didn't get the memo?
Up is Down, Black is White, In is Out, and Hot is Cold.
There is no anti-gun sentiment in the Obama administration.
If Eric Holder was Catholic, he would be a candidate for Sainthood.
Chicago is a perfectly safe city to walk wherever one pleases.
The UN is just a paternal IO that wants to make the World safe for the children.


You are banging your heads against the wall. When one pretends not to understand or grasp the realities of videos such as the ones you have linked, or some of the other facts that have been presented, the word is "obtuse."

Nothing good can come from continuing this.

Dead on my man, either that or they are too busy putting Obama 2012 stickers on the Prius bumpers to care.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I think you're right, Redlevel. A new discussion closer to the signing and perhaps photo-op with the new key negotiator of the global arms treaty might bring fresh perspectives. Moving along...

 

[McBear]

Good thing we don't have 8 more Ginzburgs on the SCOTUS:

I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a Constitution in the year 2012.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...sg=AFQjCNFWYVtWEQlet6U8xzQ0yS3K_RktRw&cad=rja

I seriously doubt Madison, Morris, Adams or Wythe would look at the past document either at the beginning of the process. They would clean board any new Constitution in order to insure focus was on the current and future rather than the past. Our Constitution was written for the current and future, not the past. Only after the first drafts was the Articles of Confederation referenced, along with the Magna Carta.

It doesn't mean the current Constitution has no significance, just that a new constitution [or any document of that sort] has to be clean slate written.

 

[ladder13]

I seriously doubt Madison, Morris, Adams or Wythe would look at the past document either at the beginning of the process. They would clean board any new Constitution in order to insure focus was on the current and future rather than the past. Our Constitution was written for the current and future, not the past. Only after the first drafts was the Articles of Confederation referenced, along with the Magna Carta.

It doesn't mean the current Constitution has no significance, just that a new constitution [or any document of that sort] has to be clean slate written.

Sounds good, except at 2:25 she says that "I might look at the Constitution of South Africa" and at 3:00 mentions Canada. and towards the end says "why not look elsewhere in the world".
Seems she doesn't agree with your assessment. Jus' sayin'

So why not the US Constitution? Look everywhere else but the US?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNC-kbmpscE

 

[McBear]

I'd be curious to know if you consider the NFA, GCA and the AWB an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. I do. Do you? I'm not asking if you "like" or not, as you answered before, I'm asking if you believe them to be an infringement.

I previously answered the AWB by saying "I believe that it would be very possible to implement it to not infringe", meaning I do believe there would be ways to implement it that would not be a Constitutional infringement. Then again, I am not a Constitutional lawyer. As for NFA and GCA...no, I don't consider them an infringement based on the 2nd Amendment. It says we have the right to bear arms and that right shall not be infringed. I have never seen a single word that says that the "infringement" references the types of weapons we can have. Just that we can, without infringement have arms. Case in point...I can have a Barrett but I can't have an A-10 with 30mm cannon [or more realistically a Sandy with all the toys]. Is that an infringement? What if I crank it down to a slightly used M1A1 Abrams? Infringement?

My 1st Amendment rights have conditions on them, my 4th Amendment rights have conditions on them. My 5th Amendment rights have conditions as well as my 6th Amendment rights. 8th Amendment rights have conditions. The 9th has conditions and then there is the 10th...that whole state v federal thing. In fact the only Amendments that I can find that doesn't have conditions is the 3rd and that is because nobody cares about it any longer and the 7th which would require a lawyer to answer.

My point...Bill of Rights Articles HAVE conditions. All of them do.

Who doesn't know that this President has said he'll exploit the space and flexibility of a second term to get things done that he can't do now? Just ask Russian President Medvedev.

Things? Things that require Congresscritters that stand for reelection every two years? Things.

 

[McBear]

Sounds good, except at 2:25 she says that "I might look at the Constitution of South Africa" and at 3:00 mentions Canada. and towards the end says "why not look elsewhere in the world".
Seems she doesn't agree with your assessment. Jus' sayin'

So why not the US Constitution?


US Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg Tells Egyptians Don't Look to The Old US Constitution - YouTube

Ya think maybe South Africa's constitution [1996] and Canada's [1982] might have contemporaneous relevance as they are so new?

 

[ladder13]

Ya think maybe South Africa's constitution [1996] and Canada's [1982] might have contemporaneous relevance as they are so new?

They're "past" aren't they as you said.


"insure focus was on the current and future rather than the past."

Btw, how do YOU know what Madison or Adams might have done, have you spoken to them or watched an unedited tape?


Now you'll say "well it's recent past"......like it matters according to your requirements that it be "a clean slate".

 

[McBear]

They're "past" aren't they as you said.


"insure focus was on the current and future rather than the past."

Btw, how do YOU know what Madison or Adams might have done, have you spoken to them or watched an unedited tape?


Now you'll say "well it's recent past"......like it matters according to your requirements that it be "a clean slate".

I only know what Madison or Adams might have done based on what they did when they, through the committee wrote the Constitution as the next step from the Articles of the Confederation. It's pretty well documented in their writing.

And if you don't understand the difference in looking at an 18th Century document and a couple of under 30 year old contemporary documents when doing a clean slate rewrite...I can't help you.

 

[kennyb]

Yea... sure. It's a 50/50. Just like the Republican candidate.



Not sure why you find that so hard to believe

At the end of the day, the NRA exists for one purpose, to make money. They make a lot more money spreading anti-gun fear than they do otherwise. It's pretty much the template of every charity.

The NRA does good stuff, and I am a member, but at the end of the day, i'm not naive. They have their agendas, political and otherwise, just like all the other charities out there.

50/50...well nip..you cannot have it both ways...earlier in a number of threads you expound on obama has done nothing whatsoever towards gun control...now you say 50/50...hmmmm
the NRA would not exist as we know it without money....that does not mean however that "they exist for one purpose,to make money" as u mention...they are the best thing going regarding the 2nd adm.hands down....and that costs a lot of $$

 

[ladder13]

And if you don't understand the difference in looking at an 18th Century document and a couple of under 30 year old contemporary documents when doing a clean slate rewrite...I can't help you.

So a clean slate means you can go back 30 years, is that your standard now after posting the opposite? Can we go back 38 years, 3 months, 2 days, 4 hours and 16 minutes?
the KING of spin and wiggle, I understand THAT.
Clearly you agree with Ginzburg, the US Constitution is not a good standard.

"Now you'll say "well it's recent past"....... LOL, how did I know you were going to say that?

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides)

RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.

Redlevel is right, no good can come from this.

 

[p51mstg]

As an NRA member, I receive their e-mail alerts and have found them organization-serving, not member-serving. What I mean is, I rarely see anything in them that requires my immediate attention.

Mostly, I see - sorry, Mr. LaPierre - propoganda that boosts the bottom line of the firearms industry. No where - not in the mainstream media, not in the platforms of the polical parties or candidates themselves, and certainly not in the NRA news releases - do I see any hint of the truth. Nobody is laying the cards on the table. They are all acting in their own self interests.

The UN is coming for my guns? Wake me up when someone is saying what's really going on.

 

[nipster]

50/50...well nip..you cannot have it both ways...earlier in a number of threads you expound on obama has done nothing whatsoever towards gun control...now you say 50/50...hmmmm
the NRA would not exist as we know it without money....that does not mean however that "they exist for one purpose,to make money" as u mention...they are the best thing going regarding the 2nd adm.hands down....and that costs a lot of $$

There is a virtual 50/50 chance that anyone will do anything at any time. It's just how it is. Obama or Ronald Reagan notwithstanding. As I mentioned in an earlier thread, Ronald Reagan signed into law the most restrictive gun law ever until Clinton went off the deep end in 1994, yet you all worship the ground he walked on...

 

[ladder13]

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, Ronald Reagan signed into law the most restrictive gun law ever ...

What law was that, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986? Can you re-post the Bill he signed into law as President, thank you.

 

[nipster]

What law was that, the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986? Can you re-post the Bill he signed into law as President, thank you.

The 1986 revision to the National Firearms Act which pretty much outlawed machine gun manufacture for non-military or police use, revamped requirements for purchase, 3 day wait, background check, etc

 

[McBear]

So a clean slate means you can go back 30 years, is that your standard now after posting the opposite? Can we go back 38 years, 3 months, 2 days, 4 hours and 16 minutes?
the KING of spin and wiggle, I understand THAT.
Clearly you agree with Ginzburg, the US Constitution is not a good standard.

"Now you'll say "well it's recent past"....... LOL, how did I know you were going to say that?

RULE 8: "Keep the pressure on. Never let up." Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides)

RULE 10: "If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.

Redlevel is right, no good can come from this.

Here is the thing about "QUOTES" When you use them in a sentence like "Now you'll say "well it's recent past". Well, I didn't say that. I simply answered YOUR question as to why I thought someone might look at contemporary documents rather than 18th Century documents when doing a clean slate rewrite. If you want to use MY WORDS...do so. Don't make up attributions.

Again, if you don't understand the difference in contemporary and 18th Century, I can't help you. You will have to figure that one out yourself.

 

[McBear]

Just like Obamacare.

How can a treaty trump the US Constitution?

Let's hope we have a rational Senate.

"Respect for the sovereignty of state-parties and non-interference with "internal affairs" or "constitutional provisions"

What part of that sentence is so confusing for folks?

 

[ladder13]

The 1986 revision to the National Firearms Act which pretty much outlawed machine gun manufacture for non-military or police use, revamped requirements for purchase, 3 day wait, background check, etc

I see the machine gun thing, not the others, can you help me?


The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 addressed the abuses noted in the 1982 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee report. Among the reforms intended to loosen restrictions on gun ownership were the reopening of interstate sales of long guns on a limited basis, legalization of ammunition shipments through the U.S. Postal Service (a partial repeal of the Gun Control Act), removal of the requirement for record keeping on sales of non-armor-piercing ammunition, and federal protection of transportation of firearms through states where possession of those firearms would otherwise be illegal. However, the Act also contained a provision that banned the sale of machine guns manufactured after the date of enactment to civilians, restricting sales of these weapons to the military and law enforcement

 

[ladder13]

The 1986 revision to the National Firearms Act which pretty much outlawed machine gun manufacture for non-military or police use, revamped requirements for purchase, 3 day wait, background check, etc

The background check came in with the Brady Law, signed by Pres Clinton NOT Pres Reagan

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Pub.L. 103-159, 107 Stat. 1536) is an Act of the United States Congress that instituted federal background checks on firearm purchasers in the United States. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 30, 1993, and went into effect on February 28, 1994

It appears the 3 day wait also came in with the Brady Law.