Global gun control law pushed by Clinton - Page 3
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Global gun control law pushed by Clinton

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-25-2011, 03:15 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttolhurst View Post
And are there Constitution Police who will swoop in and prevent the President and the Senate from entering into such a treaty? Of course not. They can enter into any treaty they wish; maybe a court might subsequently reject the treaty as unconstitutional, but there is nothing that can stop a unconstitutional treaty from being ratified, except the conscience of enough Senators.
Yes there is the Constitution Police. They've been sleeping on the job for a while.

They are "WE THE PEOPLE"
__________________
trip286 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:27 AM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: China,ME
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
Yes there is the Constitution Police. They've been sleeping on the job for a while. They are "WE THE PEOPLE"
Well, good luck with that.
__________________
ttolhurst is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:29 AM   #23
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Reno,Texas
Posts: 10,211
Liked 6563 Times on 3635 Posts
Likes Given: 27929

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trip286 View Post
This isn't one I've seen before. What's it mean?
BTW, as many of us know, it would only disarm the law abiding citizens. This is where many of us have to choose whether or not to become "outlaws"
I choose outlaw.
__________________
texaswoodworker is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:35 AM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Ditto here, Texas.

__________________
trip286 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:37 AM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BigByrd47119's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 3,401
Liked 1102 Times on 677 Posts
Likes Given: 2389

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trip286 View Post
Yes there is the Constitution Police. They've been sleeping on the job for a while.

They are "WE THE PEOPLE"
Quoted for truth!!!
__________________

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
---Ron Paul

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it."
---Dr. Martin Luther King

"If you think we are free today, you know nothing about tyranny and even less about freedom."
---Tom Braun

BigByrd47119 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:40 AM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: West, by God, Funroe,Louisiana
Posts: 18,707
Liked 9203 Times on 5058 Posts
Likes Given: 74

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigByrd47119 View Post
Quoted for truth!!!
Might become my new tag line.
__________________
trip286 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 03:43 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
gutz47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttolhurst

Well, good luck with that.
You are a part of "we the people" so good luck to you. I personally think the government would fail at disarming us. I mean seriously, who's gonna just say "well sure you can have my guns. You wanna f*** my wife and daughters too? Here you go." We're talking serious stuff here, a huge war would certainly happen and I don't think it would end in us handing over our guns. Not me anyway.
__________________
gutz47 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 04:08 AM   #28
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: China,ME
Posts: 125
Default

Quote:
I personally think the government would fail at disarming us.
In the sense that many would become criminals by continuing to possess firearms, perhaps. Just as many became criminals by selling and possessing liquor during Prohibition.

A huge war? I doubt that. If we are ever disarmed, it will be inch by inch, over the course of decades. By the time they come for your guns (more likely your children's or grandchildren's), you will have already lost them; they'll be cataloged and tracked, locked up at a government-licensed gun club where you can visit them once a month, and maybe check them out for a few hours during hunting season. It'll happen so slowly that you won't realize how much you've given up until it's too late. We've already gone a good distance down that road; thankfully, there's been a slow shift in the political tides which has seen the failure to renew the "assault weapon" ban, expanded CCW in the states, and the Heller decision in the Supreme Court. But don't forget that not very long ago at all, we were in serious trouble, to the point that some pro-gun folks were already cutting loose the black-rifle, high-capacity crowd, and leaving them for dead, hoping that if just they let the anti-gunners have the scary, ugly guns, they could keep their deer rifles and duck guns.

All this talk of "huge wars" when "they come to get our guns" is foolish. Don't prepare for a war. Prepare for the next election. And the one after that. And the one after that, forever.
__________________
ttolhurst is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 05:21 AM   #29
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,572
Liked 2490 Times on 1421 Posts
Likes Given: 1940

Default

Yanno, let's take a good look at who we're talking about here.

The United Nations. Aren't these the same people we've

propped up with our military power since WWII?

Aren't these the same people who've been living off the American

tit for over 50 years, with their headquarters on our soil?

Just exactly where do these dickless buffoons get off?

Apparently not much of Americanism has rubbed off on them since they

graced us with their presence post VJ day, and never left.

...and the ultimate "thank you" from these ungrateful, disloyal,

arrogant schmucks is to bite the hand that feeds them?


If those U.N. poltroons in their gay powder-blue helmets show up at my

door, I'll be more than happy to show them what America is all

about.

In the meanwhile, HEY U.N.! GTFO of MY COUNTRY!

N O W !

__________________

Last edited by therewolf; 10-25-2011 at 05:30 AM.
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2011, 09:39 AM   #30
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

While treaties are the supreme law of the land, there is no such thing as treaty supremacy over the constitution itself.

The Supremacy clause reads:

Quote:
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; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
"...under the Authority of the United States" means "pursuant to the constitution".

Jefferson wrote on this subject:

Quote:
Treaties are legislative acts. A treaty is the law of the land. It differs from other laws only as it must have the consent of a foreign nation…

The Constitution must have …meant to except…the rights reserved to the States; for surely the President and Senate can not do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.…And also to except those subjects of legislation in which it gave a participation to the House of Representatives.
“…under the authority of the United States,” means just that. The authority of the United States is the Constitution. There is no such thing as treaty supremacy. President and Senate cannot do what Government has not been given authority to do.

So now we know the legal aspects.

The problem is not the law, but the government we have today that routinely ignores it. While it still seems very unlikely an end-run around 2A via a treaty would even be attempted, stranger things have happened.
__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Nominee advocates global gun control--UN Musket Politics, Religion and Controversy 12 05-05-2009 09:48 PM
Clinton doesn't want job from BO cpttango30 Politics, Religion and Controversy 5 11-20-2008 03:38 AM
Palin-Clinton.... LOL Mark F Politics, Religion and Controversy 8 09-14-2008 08:03 PM
Obama on Gun Control, McCain on Gun Control tracker Legal and Activism 8 06-23-2008 01:00 AM
obama vs clinton cattivo Politics, Religion and Controversy 26 05-19-2008 02:18 AM