U.S. agrees to timetable for UN Gun Ban (Update)

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Bigcountry02, Feb 3, 2010.

  1. Bigcountry02

    Bigcountry02 Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup Supporter

    7,251
    51
    48
    This has been warned before; however, now I know why Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been away from the spot light! Cutting dirty deals with the U.N. This is going to a nasty ride! :mad:

    U.S. agrees to timetable for UN Gun Ban

    U.S. agrees to timetable for UN Gun Ban

    Clinton-United Nations “Small Arms Treaty” Update

    National Gun Rights Blog
    Posted February 2, 2010

    The United Nations and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are moving forward with their plan to confiscate your guns.

    The United States joined 152 other countries in support of the Arms Trade Treaty Resolution, which establishes the dates for the 2012 UN conference intended to attack American sovereignty by stripping Americans of the right to keep and bear arms.

    Working groups of anti-gun countries will begin scripting language for the conference this year, creating a blueprint for other countries when they meet at the full conference.

    The stakes couldn’t be higher.

    Former United Nation’s ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners about the Arms Trade Treaty and says the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

    Establishing the dates for the Arms Trade Treaty Conference is just the first step toward their plans for total gun confiscation.

    The worldwide gun control mob will ensure the passage of an egregious, anti-gun treaty…

    . . .and that’s where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton steps in

    Once the UN Gun Ban is passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations it must be ratified by each nation, including the United States.

    As an arch enemy of gun owners, Clinton has pledged to push the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty. She will push for passage of this outrageous treaty designed to register, ban and CONFISCATE firearms owned by private citizens like YOU.

    That’s why it’s vital you sign the special petition I’ve made up for your signature that DEMANDS your U.S. Senators vote AGAINST ratification of the UN’s “Small Arms Treaty.”

    So far, the gun-grabbers have successfully kept the exact wording of their new scheme under wraps.

    But looking at previous versions of the UN “Small Arms Treaty,” you and I can get a good idea of what’s likely in the works.

    Don’t let any of the “experts” lull you to sleep by saying “Oh, we have it handled” or “Until you know exactly what’s in the treaty you can’t fight against it.”

    Judging by Ambassador Bolton’s comments — who certainly knows what to expect from the American-freedom-hating international crowd that infests the U.N. — we are certain the treaty’s going to address the private ownership of firearms.

    If passed by the UN and ratified by the U.S. Senate (which is where we must ultimately make our stand), the UN “Small Arms Treaty” would almost certainly FORCE national governments to:

    *** Enact tougher licensing requirements, making law-abiding citizens cut through even more bureaucratic red tape just to own a firearm legally;

    *** CONFISCATE and DESTROY ALL “unauthorized” civilian firearms (all firearms owned by the government are excluded, of course);

    *** BAN the trade, sale and private ownership of ALL semi-automatic weapons;

    *** Create an INTERNATIONAL gun registry, setting the stage for full-scale gun CONFISCATION. So please click here to sign the petition to your U.S. Senators before it’s too late!

    You see, this is NOT a fight we can afford to lose.
     
  2. opaww

    opaww New Member

    4,868
    0
    0
    Blue and white helmets make for a real good target
     

  3. IGETEVEN

    IGETEVEN New Member

    8,358
    4
    0
    I strongly concur, and I share the the passion, anger and motivation, but personally, I am just a little Leary about signing something that will undoubtedly give the names of present gun owners, that can be cross-matched with federal records and speed up the process, if indeed this POS ATTR passes.

    IMO, this needs big money sponsorship and backing, from all the pro-gun organizations and their supporting lobbyists to fight this agenda, with our pledged support combined with them. That seems to be the only thing that seems to work with this administration, and still, there are no guarantees.

    Jack
     
  4. Dzscubie

    Dzscubie New Member

    2,508
    0
    0
    All right I’m probably going to catch hell on this but what the hey. I do not believe even if the United States ratifies this thing it will lead to the confiscation of our personal firearms. To attempt to do this the anti-gunners in Congress will have to amend the constitution and eliminate the second amendment and I really don’t see that happening. I’m going to watch this very closely but I’m not going to start running around shouting “the sky is falling, the sky is falling”. I will tell you that I, my wife and all of the officers under my authority will NOT enforce a law to confiscate or seize privately owned weapons contrary to the constitution and I know I am not alone in this thinking as I have talked to other officers around the country who think the same way. Contrary to some peoples thoughts we are not unthinking automatons that just blindly follow orders lawful or not.
     
  5. Dillinger

    Dillinger New Member

    23,972
    2
    0
    Thank you for posting that. I have been saying this for a couple of years now.

    If such a mandate came down, any cop would be a sitting target to try and walk up to the front door of a house, in a neighborhood of probable gun owners, and demand you hand over the firearms.

    Then what?

    Put them in a truck and roll down the street, house to house, and we all just file out and put our weapons in the armored truck and return to our houses like good little puppets??

    I kind of doubt that. It would be easier for 6 or 8 like minded folks to wipe out the entire troop and take all the weapons back.

    And what about the officer's own families when they are not home with them?

    We all saw what happened in Katrina when officers left their posts to take care of their own ( not passing judgement here, just stating facts that were known ).

    I don't think a large portion of the police or national guard folks are going to jump right up and say "Me first, I want to be the first guy in my unit to collect 1,000 firearms."

    Could it happen? I suppose they could try, but I can't see the whole nation just sitting back and letting the 2A just be crossed out. I got a feeling even the ACLU would have a problem with that, since the Second Secures the First.

    I think we shall all be watching, and if the latest trends have shown anything, we are not alone in that effort.

    JD
     
  6. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    4
    0
    I read this earlier and wanted to think about it a bit before I posted a response. I think the watch and wait idea is the way to go. This has been on the burner for a while.

    I believe it's unconstitutional and cannot be legally enforced in this Country. I realize that doesn't mean that it couldn't be, just that it would be unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

    I guess we'll find out in the future. If it's tried, then Molon Labe!
     
  7. anm2_man

    anm2_man Member

    504
    2
    18
    Everybody needs to do their homework for the Nov., 2010 elections. Check out the GOA's Political Victory Fund.
     
  8. hunter Joe

    hunter Joe New Member

    2,361
    1
    0
    Maybe 2012 is the year of Armageddon, it will be in my neighborhood if they come for my firearms.

    Live free or die.
     
  9. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    Bring it! I'll just have an illegal hobby then.

    I can see the local sherriff being dumb enough to try this, in neighborhoods he can't properly police; it should be a fairly quick & satisfying message to him (not a typical or good or even decent LEO, IMO). Around here, he would be safer shooting or confiscating people's dogs.
     
  10. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,279
    396
    83
    This one has been debunked. There is no such treaty at present. The earliest a treaty could be ready is 2012. 67 US senators would have to vote to ratify the treaty.


    International Gun Ban Treaty? | FactCheck.org

     
  11. IGETEVEN

    IGETEVEN New Member

    8,358
    4
    0
    I thought you already had an illegal hobby, Orange. :D

    Jack
     
  12. Bigcountry02

    Bigcountry02 Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup Supporter

    7,251
    51
    48
    This thing has not been approved; however, look at the little dirty deals this administration has been doing behind are backs. We just need to pressure the legislators to review every bill coming up the pipeline for some little wording on this hidden within each and every bill! We also need to do the same!
     
  13. orangello

    orangello New Member

    19,156
    0
    0
    My point exactly. I've had that hobby for 24 years or so with very few real problems/impairments, hence "bring it". When the common sense of the government fails, it can be augmented by individual choice.
     
  14. Shooter

    Shooter Administrator Staff Member

    6,296
    13
    38
    I don't think it would work at all. The first pilot city they tried it in I would suspect would just turn into a blood bath. That would be the tipping point for a lot Americans, the forced confiscation of firearms.