Post by: bearpaw on November 28, 2012, 04:15:27 AM
NRA News' investigative reporter Ginny Simone takes a look at the global gun control goals of the United Nations. By pushing for a binding international treaty aimed at superseding the U.S. Constitution, the United Nations is committed to rendering Americans' Second Amendment rights to own a firearm meaningless. Simone interviews past and current U.N. officials and politicians and examines the debates at the United Nations Small Arms Summit to expose the international anti-gun agenda.
NRA News: UN Doomsday Treaty With Ginny Simone (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDMeDmV0ufU#)
Post by: Eli346 on November 28, 2012, 04:30:53 AM
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 28, 2012, 03:58:53 PM
Post by: washelkhunter on November 28, 2012, 04:06:28 PM
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 28, 2012, 04:10:10 PM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
For sure!
This stuff pisses me off! And all the coward a@# liberal americans will just roll over and take it! Or if I even should call them americans.
Post by: MikeWalking on November 28, 2012, 04:12:55 PM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
Post by: washelkhunter on November 28, 2012, 04:19:19 PM
Post by: Special T on November 28, 2012, 04:24:14 PM
Post by: Pallindrome on November 28, 2012, 04:25:36 PM
Post by: Jingles on November 28, 2012, 04:26:05 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on November 28, 2012, 04:30:48 PM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
For sure!
This stuff pisses me off! And all the coward a@# liberal americans will just roll over and take it! Or if I even should call them americans.
No, you should not. I don't. To be American means to love freedom more than life itself. To be free means to fight for your God given rights. Those cowards are slaves in waiting.
"From my cold dead hands."
Post by: Kola16 on November 28, 2012, 04:45:44 PM
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 28, 2012, 04:51:05 PM
Forgive me If I'm wrong, but we (USA) are a member in the UN, if this passes we could just withdraw, correct? In which case, an organization which depends on its members to enforce its laws would be rendered unable to enforce anything without its largest militaristic ally...
correct but.... if you have a government (obama) as PRO U.N. our government will be for the agenda of the U.N. meaning our own troops will be forced to be the ones to take our guns.
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 28, 2012, 04:52:28 PM
Notice the signature
love the quote!
That is the beating heart of America!
Post by: csaaphill on November 29, 2012, 02:35:09 AM
Hope I'm wrong though.
I will come running though!!!
Post by: 3nails on November 29, 2012, 05:26:22 AM
first neighbore in need we will need to come to his aid. I would prefer open battle, but beleive that's a pipe dream. I bet it will be one home to the other in the dead of night all in the name of LAW enforcement!!!!.:yeah:
Hope I'm wrong though.
I will come running though!!!
Post by: Bean Counter on November 29, 2012, 05:27:28 AM
Post by: b.roberts on November 29, 2012, 06:19:47 AM
Forgive me If I'm wrong, but we (USA) are a member in the UN, if this passes we could just withdraw, correct? In which case, an organization which depends on its members to enforce its laws would be rendered unable to enforce anything without its largest militaristic ally...
They are trying to pass a treaty. Obama may sign it, but there is no chance of that treaty being ratified in the Senate.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk 2
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on November 29, 2012, 10:31:55 AM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
Heck, you think our PEOPLE would allow it? Japan would'nt send troops to invade the US 70 years ago--you think they will NOW?
Post by: jaymark6655 on November 29, 2012, 10:39:38 AM
They just might. It wouldn't be an invasion with the full support of the POTUS.Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
Heck, you think our PEOPLE would allow it? Japan would'nt send troops to invade the US 70 years ago--you think they will NOW?
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on November 29, 2012, 11:07:55 AM
They just might. It wouldn't be an invasion with the full support of the POTUS.Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
Heck, you think our PEOPLE would allow it? Japan would'nt send troops to invade the US 70 years ago--you think they will NOW?
That's an image I can see in my mind--one UN soldier flanked by 4 liberals armed with a Latte! :chuckle: :chuckle:
Post by: Jingles on November 29, 2012, 11:14:17 AM
Forgive me If I'm wrong, but we (USA) are a member in the UN, if this passes we could just withdraw, correct? In which case, an organization which depends on its members to enforce its laws would be rendered unable to enforce anything without its largest militaristic ally...
correct but.... if you have a government (obama) as PRO U.N. our government will be for the agenda of the U.N. meaning our own troops will be forced to be the ones to take our guns.
Not necessarily the oath a service member takes says he will obey the lawful orders of the President and those appointed over them Unless it has changed since I retired I think the majority of the service members would elect to disobey that order knowing it is unconstitutional. At least I hope that the military would make that decision if not then they become casualties as well
From my cold dead hands surrounded by a large pile of spent brass and a booby trapped body
Post by: h2ofowlr on November 29, 2012, 11:17:12 AM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
My guess is our military would follow the orders of the president who is also pushing this agenda. Most would roll over. Unfortunatley if ordered our military would take them from us.
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on November 29, 2012, 01:03:19 PM
Forgive me If I'm wrong, but we (USA) are a member in the UN, if this passes we could just withdraw, correct? In which case, an organization which depends on its members to enforce its laws would be rendered unable to enforce anything without its largest militaristic ally...
correct but.... if you have a government (obama) as PRO U.N. our government will be for the agenda of the U.N. meaning our own troops will be forced to be the ones to take our guns.
Not necessarily the oath a service member takes says he will obey the lawful orders of the President and those appointed over them Unless it has changed since I retired I think the majority of the service members would elect to disobey that order knowing it is unconstitutional. At least I hope that the military would make that decision if not then they become casualties as well
From my cold dead hands surrounded by a large pile of spent brass and a booby trapped body
Imagine all the resignations when the surviving military see that It's not as easy as they thought it would be!
Post by: MikeWalking on November 29, 2012, 01:09:27 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on November 29, 2012, 01:37:52 PM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
My guess is our military would follow the orders of the president who is also pushing this agenda. Most would roll over. Unfortunatley if ordered our military would take them from us.
Most will roll over, and most military/LEO would obey orders. A few will disobey, and a handful of gun owners will have a backbone. I pray that there is enough for deterrent.
Post by: addicted2hunting on November 29, 2012, 03:39:30 PM
...to protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. :salute:
Is that the actual oath?
If so why arent they doing something???
Post by: csaaphill on November 29, 2012, 03:46:59 PM
Post by: LeeMajors on November 29, 2012, 04:21:09 PM
Post by: MikeWalking on November 29, 2012, 04:47:11 PM
...to protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. :salute:
Is that the actual oath?
If so why aren't they doing something???
It's part of the oath I took when I enlisted in 1978.
Post by: crazysccrmd on November 29, 2012, 05:20:03 PM
Those light blue helmets should make attractive targets. :tup:
UN forces come from member nations. What nation on Earth would actually supply troops to round up American Arms? Think our Military would allow it?
My guess is our military would follow the orders of the president who is also pushing this agenda. Most would roll over. Unfortunatley if ordered our military would take them from us.
Most will roll over, and most military/LEO would obey orders. A few will disobey, and a handful of gun owners will have a backbone. I pray that there is enough for deterrent.
The military would definitely not be the ones taking your guns. Who's going to do it? The commo, cooks and paper pushers? I can tell you that 90% of the real soldiers (combat arms) would most certainly refuse that order since it would mean turning in our own personal weapons. Just like you guys we are not going to do that.
Of course that would only happen in the foil hat wearing world since this treaty isn't even about taking guns away but rather the better regulation of international arms trade.
Post by: Bean Counter on November 29, 2012, 05:25:40 PM
While you guys are conspiracy theorizing, please remember that all treaties must be ratified by congress.
Not the House and Senate--just the senate. And it must be done by 2/3rds majority. At least half have already signed its death warrant on arrival. Thank God.
Post by: csaaphill on November 29, 2012, 09:16:36 PM
So ya lets hope it isn't ratified and hope 2/3rds actually have enough sense to say no.
Post by: KFhunter on November 29, 2012, 09:32:34 PM
His appointees will have majority rule then.
Post by: csaaphill on November 30, 2012, 12:27:48 PM
http://www.ammoland.com/2012/11/26/political-left-is-firing-back-with-more-lies-about-the-arms-trade-treaty/#axzz2Djne6S5J (http://www.ammoland.com/2012/11/26/political-left-is-firing-back-with-more-lies-about-the-arms-trade-treaty/#axzz2Djne6S5J)
theres a link to tell your senators to appose this.
WHile searching for articles on this I seen a lot of articles that say no fear it's not a gun confiscation I found this site. Registration is the first move never let anyone tell you otherwise. What ever side you fall on the conspiracy theory this is happeneing for a reason of design not random.
Post by: jackmaster on November 30, 2012, 12:32:53 PM