U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms

#51
#51
Funny thread is funny.

With the possible exception of senior citizens, no group is pandered to more by American politicians than gun nuts are.

This makes no sense. How does one "pander" to an enumerated right? If anything gun owners face a nigh constant battle to keep those rights and, politically speaking, have had to fight all the way through the Supreme Court in cases like v Heller and v McDonald.

Maybe we differ on the definition of pandering?
 
#52
#52
You must being showing your age because I haven't the slightest clue what your referencing.

Sounds like you're showing your age. You've never seen Soylent Green?

Granted, it came out before I was born, it's a permanent part of pop culture.
 
#54
#54
Hitlery is making the meaningless gesture of signing the treaty this week in NYC.

The Obama - Dhimmirat plan is to try to get the senate to ratify this and other odious UN treaties just after the November elections and before Obummer leaves office.

It will take a two thirds majority to do so but in these times you never can tell what might happen.
 
#55
#55
Law of the Sea Treaty: McConnell Toomey Isakson Commit to Vote AGAINST – Portman Ayotte Uncommitted! | Maggie's Notebook

The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), a United Nations initiative, has been bouncing around since before President Reagan's time in the White House. He refused to sign. Obama is yearning for it (amassing power for his future time as UN Secretary-General). As all United Nations treaties, those foolish countries ratifying it lose sovereignty. We will lose taxpayer monies, and monies that we generate from within our 200 nautical mile from our shorelines - among other egregious problems with LOST.
-----------------------------

Today we stand at 18-20 [See UPDATES BELOW] Republican Senators ready to sign this dangerous treaty. For decades we have refused it, but under Barack Obama the treaty may be ratified. It is imperative that you phone, email, fax and tweet. Congress conveniently doesn't allow email from non-constitutents - that's where Tweeting comes in.

Among Republican Senators strongly SUPPORTING LOST are John McCain, Dick Lugar who lost his primary and will go home when the next Congress convenes, Olympia Snowe who is retiring after the November elections and Susan Collins - the usual suspects.

Those Republican Senators straddling the fence (or not committing one way or the other): Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX) who will retire after the elections, Bob Corker (TN), and Lindsey Graham (SC).

These 30 31 Republican Senators are publicly committed to a 'nay' (against the treaty) vote: Sessions (ALA), Shelby (ALA), Kyl (AZ), Boozman (ARK), Rubio (FL), Chambliss (GA), Isakson (GA), UPDATE 7-11-12 Grassley (IA), Crapo (ID), Risch (ID), Coats (IN), Moran (KS), Roberts (KS), McConnell (KY), Paul (KY), Vitter (LA), Wicker (MISS), Blunt (MO), Burr (NC), Hoeven (ND), Heller (NV), Coburn (OK), Inhofe (OK), Toomey (PA), DeMint (SC), Thune (SD), Cornyn (TX), Hatch (UT), Lee (UT), Johnson (WI), Barrasso (WY).


The link above also goes on to detail the reasons why the USA shouldn't sign the treaty.

BTW, anyone going to vote for the Tea Party candidate in the primary instead of Corker? I am.
 
#56
#56
Water Woes: Your voice must be heard to stop this loony Leftist plan to give UN control of our water « « Coach is RightCoach is Right

Is Obama’s federal government getting ready to put a huge red X mark on the Hoover Dam which supplies most of the American West with its life sustaining water? Having this scenario play out is quite plausible as Barack Obama’s Executive Order # 13547 in support of the global Law of the Sea Treaty (L.O.S.T.) seeks to take control of our water and any form of precipitation from sky to ocean!

Total water control will give the American president and his global cohorts total control of all U.S. citizens if this initiative is not stopped by still free citizens. Because the Water World enthusiasts are seeking to protect the earth’s water from contamination, they are jiggering U.S. water laws to conform to Obama’s Council on Interagency Ocean Policy to make sure no contamination happens.

Especially riled up are Americans west of the Mississippi because Chapter 13 of the Global Biodiversity Assessment is demanding that a staggering 50% of all U.S. land mass be blocked from any type of productive usage. This literally would be putting our Western States under United Nations domination by prohibiting any mining, drilling, harvesting of timber, or construction of any buildings made by humans. Not only that, all of our large hoofed, ungulate, animals, meaning domestic livestock, are being deemed unsustainable!

Warning: this action is being fast tracked so the government can “sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands,” under the definition of the UN Sustainable Development program-Bulletin Release No. 0191.12. This is the odious Agenda 21, pure and simple.
-------------------------------

But don’t fall into the globalist spin doctors’ trap because they have taken the word RESTORE, a word that usually carries good connotations, to weave a cleverly crafted Forest Service bulletin that conceals what is really going on. To oppose what they want to do, you have to OPPOSE the following:

“Restore the flow of waters into natural channels and flood plains by removing, replacing or modifying water control structures;

“Restore lands and habitat to pre-disturbance conditions by removing debris and sediment conditions following natural or human caused events;

Restore, rehabilitate or stabilize lands occupied by non-National Forest System roads and trails to a more natural condition.”


You also need to oppose any attempts to remove hoofed animals from America!

So the comment period for this outrage closes on August 13, 2012. Comments from ordinary citizens all over the United States must be received by that date. Submitting comments online, by mail, or by fax must be sent well ahead of that date.

Call toll free 800-877-8339. Email USDA Forest Service - Comment Form . Write directly to Chief Tom Tidwell, US Forest Service, 1400 Independence Ave., Washington, DC 20250-0003. You also need to call toll free your Congressional officials at 1-877-762-8762!
 
#60
#60
I wish some liberals would get off their moral high horse with this "outlaw," or at least "severely restrict" all gun ownership mentality. It's making us (liberals) look bad and stupid and potentially turning away people who might otherwise be receptive to certain liberal projects (like women's rights, gay rights, etc.). Yes, some gun crimes are committed by people who legally purchased weapons; however, I wish these anti-gun liberals could just go ahead and get it through their heads that they're not going to get rid of guns and our resources would be better spent focusing on other efforts.

Now, anyone who's ever been personally affected by gun violence, I give them an exception. If they want to try to promote anti-gun laws, then go right ahead. I can't speak for that, because I've never been faced with it. Being confronted with gun violence personally could possibly change my mind about guns as well.
 
#61
#61
Now, anyone who's ever been personally affected by gun violence, I give them an exception. If they want to try to promote anti-gun laws, then go right ahead. I can't speak for that, because I've never been faced with it. Being confronted with gun violence personally could possibly change my mind about guns as well.

Some exposed to gun violence are precisely the one's advocating having guns. The premise is simple; criminals have guns because they, by definition, don't give a rat's rectum about the laws involved so why have the "good guys" unarmed? For instance, it was a horrific gun crime that turned Suzanna Gratia into a crusader for personal carry laws.
 
#62
#62
Wouldn't a change in the Second Amendment have to be voted on by the populace?

Depends on how constitutional we're feeling. They used a lot of tricks to ratify the 14th amendment, and I'd venture to guess we demonstrated generally more constitutional observance in that era.
 
#64
#64
Now, anyone who's ever been personally affected by gun violence, I give them an exception. If they want to try to promote anti-gun laws, then go right ahead. I can't speak for that, because I've never been faced with it. Being confronted with gun violence personally could possibly change my mind about guns as well.

My dad was shot in 2002. It didn't change mine or my family's position as anti gun control. I went and got a carry permit non long after.
 
#65
#65
Some exposed to gun violence are precisely the one's advocating having guns. The premise is simple; criminals have guns because they, by definition, don't give a rat's rectum about the laws involved so why have the "good guys" unarmed? For instance, it was a horrific gun crime that turned Suzanna Gratia into a crusader for personal carry laws.

My dad was shot in 2002. It didn't change mine or my family's position as anti gun control. I went and got a carry permit non long after.

Sorry to hear about your dad, Deeble. I hope he's doing fine. Obviously there are exceptions, and anyone who is affected by gun violence personally is entitled to speak for whatever side they choose. Perhaps they're the only ones who can speak on this issue. Everyone else acts like they know so much (on the left or the right), but they have never been shot at either.
 
#67
#67
I wouldn't put ANYTHING pass this Govt. remember The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) everyone said that would never pass...I really hope you guys are right, I truly do.
 
#68
#68
UN Proposes Global Carbon, Currency Transaction, Billionaire Taxes | Global Development | Video | TheBlaze.com

According to Reuters, The U.N. World Economic and Social Survey has determined that the needs of developing countries are not being met, and new taxes will help fight dilemmas like “climate change” and the “record of broken promises” by donor countries.

Though the United Nations has no authority to enforce global taxes at the current time, its propositions hold sway and are not unlike schemes proposed by American politicians.
---------------------

Carbon Tax: A tax of $25 a ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted in developed countries…The money could be collected by national authorities, but be earmarked for international cooperation. CO2 is the “greenhouse gas” blamed most often for climate change.
-----------------------

Myron Ebell, director of energy and global warming policy at the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute, noted that the taxing authority would be unaccountable to a sovereign authority, and Phyllis Schlafly, president of the conservative Eagle Forum, argues that the day the United Nations tries to impose a global tax should be the day the country pulls out of the U.N.
 

VN Store



Back
Top