OT: UN Treaty to Disarm US Citizens

Lots of spin, now how about the text of the proposed treaty.

?-)

Same spin, but no text.

?-/

Here's the bottom line:

Additionally, an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Co nstitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal l aw in conflict with the Constitution. This principle was most clearly estab lished in the case of Reid v. Covert.[8] The Supreme Court could rule an Ar ticle II treaty provision to be unconstitutional and void under domestic la w, although it has not yet done so.

1. formatting link
   &vol=354&page=1

Stop letting these useless troublemakers jerk you around over NOTHING!

"Don't confuse me with the facts - my mind is already made up." --F. Bloggs

Not quite what he said, and krw lecturing anybody else for not facing facts is extremely comical. He's never exhibited any evidence of any capacity to learn anything, or to change whatever it is he uses as a substitute for a mind.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

"Additionally, an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under domestic U.S. law, the same as any other federal law in conflict with the Constitution." Unconstitutional laws defended or enshrined by government actors themselves can take DECADES to get struck down.

I've never seen Congress critters dismissed like that.

You're not even close. UN Treaty language that violates US second amendment rights Sure, the treaty was intended to stop arms from being exported to warlords in Somalia, dictators in Venezuela etc. But when reading Bureaucratese language like this you have to imagine how the language can be interpreted to do things different from the original states purpose. Some parts are so broad or so open ended that they could be INTERPRETED for uses more far reaching than simply control of exports.

Page 23 International Instrument to Enable States to Identify and Trace, in a Timely and Reliable Manner, Illicit Small Arms and Light Weapons, ... Emphasizing the desirability of achieving universal adherence to this Treaty, Page 27

1. Each State Party, pursuant to its national laws, shall provide its national control list [ which is itself a breach of our laws ] [ Plus making firearm registration lists available to foreign powers?? Really?] to the Secretariat, which shall make it available to other States Parties. States Parties are encouraged to make their control lists publicly available. [ Not a very bright idea to HAVE such lists, not to mention it's foolish to make such lists public ] Page 28 "(b) could be used to:" (do a variety of bad things including #4) Page 29 (also labeled page 8 in text) "being used to commit or facilitate serious acts of gender-based violence or serious acts of violence against women and children." [ So they could regulate softball bats because they "could" possibly be used to do bad things? ] Do you KNOW about the recent raid on a journalist involving a LIST of federal agencies, using a signed search warrant about a firearm violation for a toy potato gun? You should KNOW that bureaucrats interpreting "bureaucratese" language result in such idiotic situations. They were actually bullying the journalist because she INFORMED to Congress on a situation where the US Marshall service had LIED to Congress. They didn't even take the potato gun that was the pretext for the raid. Bureaucrats and government are rife with "mission creep" and wild interpretations of laws. Almost anything "could be used to" do something bad. Such open ended language is dangerous where bureaucrats are involved. Did you know that our ATF is legally forbidden to register guns? Did you know that they have found various ways around that legal prohibition? A few years ago they closed down a HUGE number of legal gun shops across the USA, and a "side effect" of that is that they get to seize all of the sales records of the closed gun shop. They scanned and digitized all of those and placed them in databases, despite the law against them registering firearms.

Your first assignment is to learn the meanings on intra and inter.

Your second assignment is to read .

"Do you keep hearing crazy voices? Turn Off Fox News."

Right, swapped them, good of you to point that out.

I did; that's why I responded with the other posting asking if there was a 'snopes' on snopes?

In this case it was Snopes' specifically vague wording and sidestepping factual extrapolations of the exact wording of that trade agreement that bothered me enough to wade in here.

Is that your signature block quote?

If not, and is aimed at me, no and not any of your business, but will admit that I don't watch that news, just can't seem to sit through their ....

In other words, a mouthpiece is STILL a mouthpiece. Entities can do a lot with well structured 'misinformation', and juxtaposition. A twist here, a gap there - one of the BEST examples I ever saw was the US News coverage of Clinton's address at the D-Day event in Europe and how he 'handled' a 'heckler'. Awesome manipulation of the FACTS.

I don't know what's got Jim so agitated? Maybe his Viagra quit working?

The REAL QUESTION is whether or not this treaty would have stopped Oliver North's Iran-Contra affair. If the answer is "No", then what exactly is the Right all whooped up about?

Amen! ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    | 
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142   Skype: Contacts Only  |             | 
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  | 
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     | 
              
I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.

When you ignore the meaning, purpose and intent of the 2nd amendment and ask such questions, you just reveal what a dishonest STATEIST idealogue you are.

It's interesting that this issue finally reveals how politically biased SNOPES is. What excuse will SNOPES use, perhaps that they can't read and interpret bureaucratese language in the treaty itself? Firearms enthusiasts are rightly concerned with government registry of firearms, especially when it's illegal yet it is ongoing. They rightly see that as a first step to disarming the people. Politicians considering firearms regulation started out going after pistols and saying they were going to leave long guns alone. Later they went after long guns. The registry which is illegal for the ATF to maintain is nonetheless still maintained by them, directly or not. Mission creep is NOT just a mere theory when it comes to firearms regulations in the USA.

What is often missed is the fact that it is impossible to stop someone from breaking a law by passing more laws. Lawmakers, and many people, seem to have missed that point.

Its only illegal if you get caught.

True. In that it *IS* important to separate following laws that are a convenience for MAN [in order to live together, control population, etc] versus following laws that are rquired by GOD.

I am always amazed at watching an officer enforcing a traffic statute try to put me on a 'guilt' trip. After a particularly bad response and outcome, I know longer point out that these "laws are arbitrary creations of people and not the Laws of God, so please explain to me exactly why I should feel guilty?". Does the term insulted 'stormtrooper' come to mind?

The purpose of a law is to CONTROL and RESTRICT and thus to DOMINEER and veer to DICTATORSHIP. Mostly, it has nothing to do with actual positive guides for safety.

Want to be absolutely radical crazy? Repeal ALL laws and use only the ten comandments. Hell, be crazier yet and use only ONE (the core of those ten). BE RESPONSIBLE.

That is as stupid as the bit about the falling tree in the isolated forest.

Not even then, see the retrospective immunity for the telecoms companies doing illegal wiretaps.

--

John Devereux