Sec of State John Kerry to sign UN Arms Trade Treaty on Wednesday

[printcraft]

No where does the treaty ban importation of ammo AND there are plenty of American ammo makes out there, in fact I think most of the "big boys" are American made. Ammo runs are just fear mongers driving up the price so they can dump their stocks at a much higher rate and laugh all the way to the bank.

Domestic ammo is already the most expensive ammo out there typically.
Those Mosins won't get shot when ammo is over $1.00 a round.
They are trying to price stuff out of reach. Will competition drive the price down? Perhaps.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I think I'll stand with Ted Cruz.



"The Second Amendment must never be subject to an 'international norm'".

 

[dirtfarmerz]

I think I'll stand with Ted Cruz.

"The Second Amendment must never be subject to an 'international norm'".

There are a few good men still fighting for freedom and Ted Cruz is right out in front.

The U.S. signing the UN Small Arms Treaty is just one more step for the NWO. They don't want a gun behind every blade of grass because they know free men will not accept what they have planned. They will not stop, as you've probably noticed. We are losing our freedom a little at a time now, what do you think will happen if we are not armed?

 

[Kagnew]

There are a few good men still fighting for freedom and Ted Cruz is right out in front.

The U.S. signing the UN Small Arms Treaty is just one more step for the NWO. They don't want a gun behind every blade of grass because they know free men will not accept what they have planned. They will not stop, as you've probably noticed. We are losing our freedom a little at a time now, what do you think will happen if we are not armed?

Yep. Exactly what Barry Goldwater referred to as "creeping socialism" a long time ago. (And, in my heart, I still know that he was right!)

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Yep. Exactly what Barry Goldwater referred to as "creeping socialism" a long time ago. (And, in my heart, I still know that he was right!)

I've read parts of this treaty but not all of it. While it appears to be true that it does not appear to create gun confiscation over night, etc. I've yet to read a compelling argument for ratifying this thing by those that are not opposed to it.

 

[Streak]

Domestic ammo is already the most expensive ammo out there typically.
Those Mosins won't get shot when ammo is over $1.00 a round.
They are trying to price stuff out of reach. Will competition drive the price down? Perhaps.

It's idiots that are buying up ALL of the ammo like tomorrow will be WW3 and we'll have no military or something. Ammo was insanely cheap before all of the buying and it'll drop back down once people stop buying it whenever someone says a word that begins with the letter O.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Streak, you just don't have a grasp on what's really going on here. "Human Rights Violations" - that will be the phrase pulled out - the US will be held in violation for violating human rights because the UN has historically and continues to hold personal possession of firearms as a violation of human rights. Why not make it explicit in the treaty that the constitutional amendments will not be violated? Why isn't Canada signing? Why has the UK said they will ratify by the end of the year? Why would we ever allow any president additional push for personal agendas through international treaties? Why would we ever sign any treaty that can be modified or re-written and maintain conformance by signatories? There are so many things wrong with this treaty I can't imagine anyone paying attention supporting it.

 

[rockhopper46038]

Donnelly is conspicuously absent from the bipartisan list of 51 Senators that have stated categorically they will not vote to ratify this treaty. I dropped him a note expressing my expectation that he commit to voting against ratification. He reminds me more a Daschle/Bayh type more every day. Back home he's all "Hoosier Values", "Washington is broke", "I represent my constituents"; but once he's in D.C. he's a rubber stamp.

 

[Trigger Time]

**** the U.N.

Yep. Come and try. I might not live through it but someone is coming with me.

 

[Streak]

Streak, you just don't have a grasp on what's really going on here. "Human Rights Violations" - that will be the phrase pulled out - the US will be held in violation for violating human rights because the UN has historically and continues to hold personal possession of firearms as a violation of human rights. Why not make it explicit in the treaty that the constitutional amendments will not be violated? Why isn't Canada signing? Why has the UK said they will ratify by the end of the year? Why would we ever allow any president additional push for personal agendas through international treaties? Why would we ever sign any treaty that can be modified or re-written and maintain conformance by signatories? There are so many things wrong with this treaty I can't imagine anyone paying attention supporting it.

No, you have no grasp. You've not even read a non-Rush Limbaugh summary of this treaty I bet.

Well here's a summary to help you out


When you're done with the homework assignment come back and talk to me. The treaty makes it explicit that sovereignty and Constitutional rights would not be overridden with this treaty. That's not to say the treaty is good or bad, just that you've not bothered to do a damn bit of research and you have the audacity to claim that I don't know what's going on here.

I haven't stated my ****ing opinion on this treaty, I'm just merely pointing out lies, bull****, and misunderstanding. So don't tell me I don't know what is going on. And btw, the UN will NEVER be stupid enough to seriously claim that one of their biggest donators and a large part of their peacekeeping force is a human rights violator.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Haven't listened to Limbaugh in years, think for myself, have enjoyed thinking for myself and been part of the engineering industry for more years than I suspect you've been alive. I would agree to disagree, but you haven't developed a valid counter argument. So, I will leave you to your ignorance and the completely unbiased sources of your link namely Reuters, The Christian Science Monitor, The New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune. Lots of luck.

 

[Streak]

Haven't listened to Limbaugh in years, think for myself, have enjoyed thinking for myself and been part of the engineering industry for more years than I suspect you've been alive. I would agree to disagree, but you haven't developed a valid counter argument. So, I will leave you to your ignorance and the completely unbiased sources of your link namely Reuters, The Christian Science Monitor, The New York Times, and the Chicago Tribune. Lots of luck.

You seemed to have forgotten the Wall Street Journal. But yes, attack me for my sources and offer zero for your claims. Your being an engineer has absolutely no bearing other than to highlight your insecurities because you were proven wrong by a 27 year old computer programmer who has been programming computers for more years than I suspect you've used them. Or do we want to continue comparing our proverbial dicks and you can do more than "agree to disagree" and show me where I'm wrong and what your source for this information is?

Somehow I suspect you'll not do that and just continue baseless insults as of the idea that your career has any bearing on your knowledge of politics (seeing as how most engineers aren't politicians).

 

[Bennettjh]

 

[printcraft]

 

[Streak]

 

[printcraft]

It's idiots that are buying up ALL of the ammo like tomorrow will be WW3 and we'll have no military or something. Ammo was insanely cheap before all of the buying and it'll drop back down once people stop buying it whenever someone says a word that begins with the letter O.

Do you think the big o and his ilk would like to go after all guns if they thought they could get away with it or do you think they would respect and hold dear the 2nd Amendment?

 

[Streak]

Do you think the big o and his ilk would like to go after all guns if they thought they could get away with it or do you think they would respect and hold dear the 2nd Amendment?

I believe if you give anyone the power to do anything and get away with it, they'd probably do it to see what it would be like. I honestly don't see it happening in any real-world circumstance. Period.

 

[printcraft]

I believe if you give anyone the power to do anything and get away with it, they'd probably do it to see what it would be like. I honestly don't see it happening in any real-world circumstance. Period.

Ah, kind of round about but I get the gist of what you are saying.

YES on big o and his ilk taking guns if they were able and NO they would not respect and hold dear the 2nd Amendment given the chance.

Refreshing bit of honesty there. I applaud you sir.

 

[Tombs]

Do you really fear these blue helmet clowns?

 

[cbhausen]

I don't want to have to face a blue helmeted clown here on American soil. That would be endgame stuff.

Remember: soapbox, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. In that order. This thread is working its way toward ban hammer territory. Let's not take it there.