Obama Finds Legal Way Around The 2nd. Amendment and Uses It.

[Mr. T]

Obama Finds Legal Way Around The 2nd. Amendment and Uses It.

The Full Article Here

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNew...E59E0Q920091015 <http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015>

Subject: Obama Takes First Step in Banning All Firearms.

On Wednesday the Obama administration took its 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.

This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means they can find, so will gun control.

Read the Article!

 

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 than UN's.

The Full Article

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNew...E59E0Q920091015 <http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE59E0Q920091015>

Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the

direction in which Obama and his Appointees are leading this nation..

"You should not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will

convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would

do and the harm it would cause if improperly administered." Lyndon

Johnson, 36th President of the U.S.

Article

National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive

[Pumpkin Eater]

horse shit.

The President can only sign a treaty after 2/3 of the senate aprroves.

In addition, an international accord that is inconsistent with the constitution is VOID. The Supreme Court clearly ruled that this was the case in Reid V. Covert.

No need to get your panties all in a bunch.

[Mr. T]

You are right, but do the progressives follow the constitution?

Wouldn't they love to rewrite it.

[Pumpkin Eater]

They may (both sides do). It's not an easy task. It takes 2/3 Congress and 3/4 of all states to ratify an article before it becomes an amendment.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I can't picture that happening.

[Mr. T]

@pumpkin-eater said:

They may (both sides do). It's not an easy task. It takes 2/3 Congress and 3/4 of all states to ratify an article before it becomes an amendment.

Speaking of both sides this is from "W"

Presidential Directive 51 grants the POTUS un-precedented authority and power. It puts the executive over the other two branches. It's an outrage. And was another "Friday" night special that Bush signed for himself and for the future guy/gal as well. Notice current POTUS has not "reversed" that one. It is the official "martial law gateway".

[calfoxwc]

Well, we now have our new 9mm. I can't believe the number of guns being sold at gun shows... the

number of people there. It was amazing. Still considering the concealed carry thing.

Saw a show - "Human prey"...

One young lady trail biker got attacked by a mountain lion. Got mauled badly, her girlfriend could

only hold onto her foot while the lion mauled her friend.

She needed a gun.

An older guy was riding a lawn mower, ... rabid coyote attacked him. But, it bit him in the boot...

and he kept kicking at it and got to his house. Got his rifle, shot it. Glad he HAD a gun.

Leftists diss our military and our guns, because they dream of taking over permanently, and they

their dreams keep turning into a nightmare because we HAVE our military and our guns.

If Obamao sells us all down the river, I hope he doesn't know how to swim.

[mario]

Ok lets get this straight for all the people who DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment does NOT.... must i say it again... DOES NOT give YOU an individual the right to have a weapon.

The 2nd Amenment DOES... I repeat DOES... gives the state the right to have a well regulated and armed MILITIA.

Get it clear... owning a gun is not your constitutional right, it is a PRIVLEDGE given to you by the government.

[calfoxwc]

BALONEY.

The

SUPREME COURT ruled otherwise. I repeat. The SUPREME COURT ruled otherwise...

therefore, since you definately know less than the SUPREME COURT, you are

hereby requested to continue bopping across people's computer screens, making

funny noises, SuperMario.

"Brawwwwk ! SuperMario wanta cracker?"

[Pumpkin Eater]

@mario said:

Ok lets get this straight for all the people who DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment does NOT.... must i say it again... DOES NOT give YOU an individual the right to have a weapon.

The 2nd Amenment DOES... I repeat DOES... gives the state the right to have a well regulated and armed MILITIA.

Get it clear... owning a gun is not your constitutional right, it is a PRIVLEDGE given to you by the government.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

What part of "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" do you NOT understand?

[Westside Steve]

I think Mario is forgetting that when this was written the US defense was made up of citizens who brought their own firearms to the battlefield. If farmer Joe had a cannon in the barn, so much the better.

And in those days the framers weren't all that trusting of any government not abusing its power.

Hence the need for the public to be on the ready to toss the bums out, if need be.

WSS

[DieHardBrownsFan]

@mario said:

Ok lets get this straight for all the people who DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment does NOT.... must i say it again... DOES NOT give YOU an individual the right to have a weapon.

The 2nd Amendment DOES... I repeat DOES... gives the state the right to have a well regulated and armed MILITIA.

Get it clear... owning a gun is not your constitutional right, it is a PRIVILEGE given to you by the government.

No you are wrong. It is a constitutional right. Better read up some more before you spout supposed "facts". I also corrected your spelling errors.

[hoorta]

@westside-steve said:

I think Mario is forgetting that when this was written the US defense was made up of citizens who brought their own firearms to the battlefield. If farmer Joe had a cannon in the barn, so much the better.

And in those days the framers weren't all that trusting of any government not abusing its power.

Hence the need for the public to be on the ready to toss the bums out, if need be.

WSS

Yeah Steve, just think of how much safer our boys would be in Iraq & Afghanistan if those pesky locals didn't have weapons!

FWIW, more than ever I don't trust our government of power abuse- and that's exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. Yeah, and I'd already be subject to arrest if I had a nice 155 howitzer (with live ammo) in the garage, (dangerous ordinance) or maybe a full auto AK 47 without a permit.

So we're already getting infringed upon because a few nutso cases decided to back up a truckload of ammonium nitrate next to a Federal Building and set it off.

Who was it that said "those who would trade freedom for security will get neither?"

[Kosar_For_President]

@mario said:

Ok lets get this straight for all the people who DON'T UNDERSTAND THE 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment does NOT.... must i say it again... DOES NOT give YOU an individual the right to have a weapon.

The 2nd Amenment DOES... I repeat DOES... gives the state the right to have a well regulated and armed MILITIA.

Get it clear... owning a gun is not your constitutional right, it is a PRIVLEDGE given to you by the government.

I had to read this again to see if he was joking. I don't think he is, lol.

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Not militia, it says people. All people. That is why there is a distinction between the two. It doesn't say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms and the rest of you can have guns because we are such a nice government..."

[hoorta]

@kosar_for_president said:

I had to read this again to see if he was joking. I don't think he is, lol.

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Not militia, it says people. All people. That is why there is a distinction between the two. It doesn't say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms and the rest of you can have guns because we are such a nice government..."

And I just noticed, for the first time- it says: well-regulated militia. We've all seen what an unregulated militia can do.

[Westside Steve]

@hoorta said:

And I just noticed, for the first time- it says: well-regulated militia. We've all seen what an unregulated militia can do.

Overthrew the British?

Actually it's more the "shall not be infringed" that sticks out.

But I know what you mean.

I don't want the local crack dealer to have a LAWS rocket.

It's just time for us to admit the constution is out of date.

Sure that's another topic but there's no one that can't see that most of what we call "freedoms" have been whittled away by shifting public opinion on any given season.

Not to mention that the constitution itself lives and dies at the whim of 9 guys.

I think there are more on the Politburo.

And we have traded freedom for security.

We made that deal long ago.

WSS

[ballpeen]

And we have traded freedom for security.

We made that deal long ago.

I agree.

I must admit I feel more secure with my loaded glock and loaded shotgun near my person when in the home over knowing some cop is half assing it out on patrol 10 miles from my house.

[Kosar_For_President]

@hoorta said:

And I just noticed, for the first time- it says: well-regulated militia. We've all seen what an unregulated militia can do.

Yea they are perceived as terrorists.

[ballpeen]

What you are called is determined by which side of the fight you stand.

Terrorist to some is a Patriot to others.

[Westside Steve]

@ballpeen said:

I agree.

I must admit I feel more secure with my loaded glock and loaded shotgun near my person when in the home over knowing some cop is half assing it out on patrol 10 miles from my house.

(that is unless you obey the law and have it unloaded and in a locked cabinet.)

Of course unless you're sitting facing the door or window and loaded it won't help much.

And if that does come to pass imagine the world of shit you'll get should you actually kill or injure the perp.

WSS