U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
26,524 posts, read 62,960,474 times
Reputation: 30564

Advertisements

I recieved an E-mail from a rather extreme friend claiming the Obama admnistratoin is planning to do an end run around the 2nd amendment by entering into treaties with other countries that requrie the US government to confiscate all privately owned weapons. I thought this was probably exaggerated or BS, so I forwarded to a friend who is not an extremeist but is involved in gun safety and gun control lobbies.

It turns out this is actually true. Treaties supercede constitutional amendments. The Obama admnistration has already started the process to enter into these treaties, but they tabled it until after the elections because it is too controversial.

Regardless of anyone's position on gun control, the precedent of eliminating portions of the bill of rights through treaties is a dangerous precedent. Are these people nuts?

I wonder wehther there is any liklihood of getting such a treaty ratified. What other parts of the bill of rights will be susceptible to elimination through this process?

If they pass such a treaty and begin confiscating weapons, I think it will get messy. There will be bloodshed, and probably not just the hicks in the ozarks or wherever. The politicians are probably not thinking about the consequences. I think some of these people are so caught up in "winning" they just do not think about the consequences.

If the government were to enter into such a treaty, could a subsequent president and congress over turn it? I guess I should have paid more attention in my international law courses 25 years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:21 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
9,033 posts, read 8,748,604 times
Reputation: 5665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
I recieved an E-mail from a rather extreme friend claiming the Obama admnistratoin is planning to do an end run around the 2nd amendment by entering into treaties with other countries that requrie the US government to confiscate all privately owned weapons. I thought this was probably exaggerated or BS
It is exaggerated, and it is BS. The so-called "UN gun grab" is nothing more than a paranoid ultra-right-wing fantasy.

It. Will. Never. Happen. No matter who wins in November. Your guns are safe from President Obama (he hasn't seized them yet, has he)?

And where did you get the insane idea that treaties supersede Constitutional amendments? If the UN passed a law proclaiming Islam as the one true world religion, do you really think we'd have to suspend the Second Amendment? I realize the right wing is grasping at every straw they can find to try to prevent Obama's re-election, but this is beyond ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Montgomery Village
4,120 posts, read 3,834,918 times
Reputation: 1695
Default You have failed your ancestors

............................................______ __
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?........................... ...........................,
.................../.................................................. .........,}
................./.................................................. ....,:`^`..}
.............../.................................................. .,:"........./
..............?.....__............................ .............:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`..... ..._/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.`~,......"~.,....................`.....} ............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|............ ..`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,.............. .............`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_......... .._,-%.......`
...................................,
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:26 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
9,033 posts, read 8,748,604 times
Reputation: 5665
More info:

FactCheck.org : Still No International Gun Ban Treaty
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,090 posts, read 7,811,960 times
Reputation: 6971
This is the UN Treaty against international transfer of guns to countries. It has nothing to do with taking away any 2nd amendment rights for American citizens. It has to do with countries dumping surplus weapons on third world nations and destabilizing them. At the most if the treaty is signed, it will curtail the sale of surplus foreign made weapons into America. So what? We have Remmington, Colt, Smith and Wesson, Strum & Ruger, Springfield, Intrac, and a host of other American manufacturers. Plus, if a company like Heckler and Koch who manufacture in Germany have a U.S. Subsidiary (which they do) then they can still sell all the guns they want here in the US.
Seems that this NRA fund raising rumor keeps making the rounds of the internet sites about every two weeks now.

Just for reference. President Obama has never passed any anti-gun bill,............ever. Mitt Romney banned all assault type weapons in Mass. and the ban still stands to this day.

Edit to add. So the OP is just a niave little head-scratcher on this issue? Had no clue before a friend brought it up? Yeah, Right.

This item has been drug up and down the internet street by the right more times than Romney has bankrupted companies for Bain Cap.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
26,524 posts, read 62,960,474 times
Reputation: 30564
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:38 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
9,033 posts, read 8,748,604 times
Reputation: 5665
I'm eagerly awaiting that tried 'n' true classic, "Due to high turnout, Democrats will be voting on Wednesday, November 7." Should start making the rounds any day now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:40 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
9,033 posts, read 8,748,604 times
Reputation: 5665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
... which derives from -- guess what? -- the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:42 AM
 
4,487 posts, read 4,368,262 times
Reputation: 4000
This just in, pigs are now being born with wings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2012, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Grosse Ile Michigan
26,524 posts, read 62,960,474 times
Reputation: 30564
Looking at this issue a bit it appears that they have to get the treaty ratified with a 2/3 vote which they do not have right now, and then get past a Supreme Court Challenge which would be based on precedent. They only need one seat to get a majority on the supreme court, but wehether that would be enough to overturn rather clear precedent is quesitonable. Of course they can sign the treaty and let it sit unratified until they have the votes and enough support on the Supreme court. Can it happen? Certaily, but it would be quite a while. Will it happen? Hopefully we will never know. However if the Obama administraiton is re-elected, it may go aas far as signing the first treaty or series of treaties. In general most manilupation of the constitution is slow and accomplished in tiny increments.

As far as the link to an article about what the admnistration says their intentions are - um - they are politicians. When does what they saythey intend to do mean anything? I do not care which side they are on, I have only once seen a politician actually do anything like what they say they will do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top