Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1 Secretary Of State John Kerry Signs Controversial U.N. Arms Treaty 
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    5,438
    Via FoxNews:
    Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. treaty on arms regulation, riling U.S. lawmakers who vow the Senate will not ratify the agreement.


    In advance of the signing, a State Department official said the treaty would “reduce the risk that international transfers of conventional arms will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes,” while protecting gun rights.


    “The treaty builds on decades of cooperative efforts to stem the international, illegal, and illicit trade in conventional weapons that benefits terrorists and rogue agents,” the official said.


    U.S. lawmakers, though, have long claimed the treaty could lead to new gun control measures. They note the U.S. Senate has final say on whether to approve the agreement.


    --------

    "While protecting gun rights"

    MY ASS!
    Rest In Peace America
    July 4, 1776 - January 20, 2009
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    3,013
    I sure hope the Senate bitchslaps Lurch the way he deserves on this one, if not you can pretty well count on it being only used against American citizens domestically. The only countries actually implementing any of it would be the English-speaking and most of the Western European ones, most of whom already have insanely-restrictive gun laws and national registries...and of course it won't do a damn' thing to stem the traffic in arms internationally, because every country nominally complying with it, including us and the UK, will still have a large supply of sterile weapons for their black programs to use or hand out, or handle things through third noncompliant parties, like the BS that was going on in Benghazi.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Does this mean that Holder is going to be dragged in front of the International Criminal Court for Fast and Furious? Last time that I checked, that was the stated reason for this treaty, to prevent illicit traffic in arms across national borders. Of course, we all know that this isn't about arms trafficking, which is already banned by most nations, but arms control within nations.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member TVDOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    280
    Quote Originally Posted by DumbAss Tanker View Post
    I sure hope the Senate bitchslaps Lurch the way he deserves on this one, if not you can pretty well count on it being only used against American citizens domestically. The only countries actually implementing any of it would be the English-speaking and most of the Western European ones, most of whom already have insanely-restrictive gun laws and national registries...and of course it won't do a damn' thing to stem the traffic in arms internationally, because every country nominally complying with it, including us and the UK, will still have a large supply of sterile weapons for their black programs to use or hand out, or handle things through third noncompliant parties, like the BS that was going on in Benghazi.
    You are correct.....this has been attempted before, and the Senate struck it down.........treaty ratification requires a 2/3rds majority........the votes simply aren't there.

    doc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Does this mean that Holder is going to be dragged in front of the International Criminal Court for Fast and Furious? Last time that I checked, that was the stated reason for this treaty, to prevent illicit traffic in arms across national borders. Of course, we all know that this isn't about arms trafficking, which is already banned by most nations, but arms control within nations.
    That would mean there is real justice in the world so....no.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Destroyer of Worlds Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Locked in a Dungeon, being tortured and LOVING IT!
    Posts
    5,438
    Go Texas!

    Via The Hill:
    Texas attorney general Greg Abbott (R) is threatening to sue the federal government after Secretary of State John Kerry signed the U.N. arms treaty this week.


    “Texas stands ready to lead the charge to have the treaty overturned in court,” Abbot said Wednesday, according to the Austin American Statesman.



    “By signing this treaty, the Obama administration has attempted to subject Americans’ right to bear arms to the oversight of the United Nations,” he continued. “The very reason we fought for independence was to free ourselves from the dictates of leaders in other lands.”
    Rest In Peace America
    July 4, 1776 - January 20, 2009
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,876
    I thought congress had the right by law to vote on treaties.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    Posts
    5,872
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    I thought congress had the right by law to vote on treaties.
    The treaty, which relates only to cross-border trade and aims to keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers and criminals, still requires ratification by the U.S. Senate and has been attacked by the influential gun rights group the National Rifle Association (NRA).

    Another 16 nations signed on Wednesday, raising the total to 107, and two more countries ratified the treaty, raising that number to six, Bishop said. Fifty countries need to ratify the treaty for it to enter into force.

    May have to give it another 40-50 years before it comes close.


    Reuters
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    A man is but a product of his thoughts. What he thinks, he becomes. Gandhi
    Quote Originally Posted by Carol
    When I judge someone's integrity one key thing I look at is - How does s/he treat people s/he doesn't agree with or does not like?
    I can respect someone who I do not agree with, but I have NO respect for someone who puts others down in a public forum. That is the hallmark of someone who has no integrity, and cannot be trusted.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Retread View Post
    The treaty, which relates only to cross-border trade and aims to keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers and criminals, still requires ratification by the U.S. Senate and has been attacked by the influential gun rights group the National Rifle Association (NRA).
    Another 16 nations signed on Wednesday, raising the total to 107, and two more countries ratified the treaty, raising that number to six, Bishop said. Fifty countries need to ratify the treaty for it to enter into force.

    May have to give it another 40-50 years before it comes close.


    Reuters
    We have under estimated Obama before, he and Tereza's bitch could get this ball rolling faster than you think.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    3,013
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    I thought congress had the right by law to vote on treaties.
    The Senate does, not the House. Unless 2/3 of the Senate votes for it, Kerry's or Obama's signature on it means nothing. And although ostensibly about controlling international arms dealing, the biggest problem from a gun rights perspective is that it reportedly requires each party to the treaty to also set up a complete weapons registry system to gain inventory and serial number control over all small arms within its borders, in order to effectuate that control. It is, therefore, a total nonstarter with anyone who believes the Second Amendment is about more than just having an armed militia.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •