Post by: bearpaw on March 24, 2013, 08:43:30 PM
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) introduced an amendment that would prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty in order to uphold the Second Amendment. His amendment passed on a 53-46 vote.
Read more: http://patriotupdate.com/2013/03/senate-votes-53-46-to-stop-us-from-joining-un-arms-trade-treaty/#ixzz2OWH5nDhl (http://patriotupdate.com/2013/03/senate-votes-53-46-to-stop-us-from-joining-un-arms-trade-treaty/#ixzz2OWH5nDhl)
Post by: washelkhunter on March 24, 2013, 08:45:54 PM
Post by: Bean Counter on March 24, 2013, 08:48:50 PM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on March 24, 2013, 08:53:48 PM
Post by: buckfvr on March 24, 2013, 09:26:22 PM
Post by: Noiro on March 24, 2013, 09:30:42 PM
Oath of Office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
Post by: bearpaw on March 24, 2013, 09:45:40 PM
Post by: huntrights on March 24, 2013, 10:21:43 PM
That's good news. Had we know about the amendment, maybe we could have helped promote it further.
We can turn the anti-gun tidal wave around if we continue to build our unified voice. We must be relentless; we cannot rest.
Post by: bearpaw on March 24, 2013, 10:25:20 PM
That's good news. Had we know about the amendment, maybe we could have helped promote it further.
We can turn the anti-gun tidal wave around if we continue to build our unified voice. We must be relentless; we cannot rest.
In this case they made it without our support. It will be our job to get rid of the two WA Senators who are gun control freaks. Come election time we need to hammer them on their 2nd Amendment voting record.
Post by: actionshooter on March 24, 2013, 10:28:15 PM
Post by: csaaphill on March 24, 2013, 10:58:12 PM
good but still not out of the fire yet.
Post by: bearpaw on March 24, 2013, 11:16:58 PM
so does this need Obamas signature or the house now?
good but still not out of the fire yet.
To become law, I think you are correct, it would have to pass the House, which it most likely will, but then Obama would have to sign it.
Most importantly, I am pretty sure the Senate must ratify the UN Small Arms Treaty if Obama had Kerry sign it. So this sends a strong message that will not happen. :tup:
Post by: JJD on March 25, 2013, 12:51:46 PM
Thats great news, but sad to see the vote was that close.:yeah: 7 votes is way too small for something that is this important.
That anyone voted in favor of allowing the UN to decide the valitiy of any part of our Constitution is pathetic.
The 49, who voted to scrap a constitutional right and turn it over to the UN, should be indited by a grand jury and tried for treason.
Post by: jrebel on March 25, 2013, 01:01:53 PM
Post by: Heredoggydoggy on March 25, 2013, 01:06:56 PM
In this case they made it without our support. It will be our job to get rid of the two WA Senators who are gun control freaks. Come election time we need to hammer them on their 2nd Amendment voting record.
:yeah: That and getting that liberal lying sack of dung Inslee out of office at the next Gubernatorial Election.
Post by: Huntboy on March 25, 2013, 01:11:49 PM
Good news....People stay vigilant and keep e-mailing / writing your elected officials.
:yeah:
Post by: Fishstiq on March 25, 2013, 01:15:05 PM
Post by: actionshooter on March 25, 2013, 01:55:53 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 25, 2013, 02:33:23 PM
Post by: buckfvr on March 25, 2013, 03:07:02 PM
We already know how they will vote in the near future ......time to stop being nice. :twocents:
Post by: CP on March 25, 2013, 03:24:16 PM
Post by: Jingles on March 25, 2013, 03:35:37 PM
[/quote]
In this case they made it without our support. It will be our job to get rid of the two WA Senators who are gun control freaks. Come election time we need to hammer them on their 2nd Amendment voting record.
[/quote]
If I might be so bold as to change what you suggest and say we need to hammer them on their entire voting record not just their 2nd Amendment record. Maybe start saving your nickels and dimes to take out an ad in the paper or start preparing your letters to the editor highlighting how they voted to give up the sovereignty of the United States while a US Senator. Just be sure of your facts and figures so as to avoid any possibility of a slander charge
Post by: snowpack on March 25, 2013, 04:23:59 PM
The problem is finding a viable candidate to oppose them. Dino is a serial loser and Cantwell ran practically unopposed last election. We have to do better next time around.
I think probably the best way to win that seat is with a different Democrat or an Independent/Libertarian running for that position. Especially if the runner was gay and takes the pro-legalization of MJ to the fed level. I just can't see puketropolis voting ANY R as Senator.
Post by: csaaphill on March 26, 2013, 02:56:07 AM
True though good message it sends, but really close though.
Post by: pianoman9701 on March 26, 2013, 06:09:23 AM
What's the Odds Obama could, or would use Executive orders on this?
True though good message it sends, but really close though.
Signing onto a treaty takes a 2/3s approval by the senate and is then ratified by the President.
Post by: Bean Counter on March 26, 2013, 07:32:12 AM
The problem is finding a viable candidate to oppose them. Dino is a serial loser and Cantwell ran practically unopposed last election. We have to do better next time around.
Easy there, Turbo. I've met Dino in person a few times. He is a very decent person and a respectable businessman and family man.
Post by: actionshooter on March 29, 2013, 06:01:54 PM
http://www.nssfblog.com/nssf-objects-to-u-s-government-abandoning-position-that-u-n-treaty-must-be-based-on-international-consensus-2/ (http://www.nssfblog.com/nssf-objects-to-u-s-government-abandoning-position-that-u-n-treaty-must-be-based-on-international-consensus-2/)
The National Shooting Sports Foundation today strongly objected to the last-minute reversal on the U.S. government position regarding the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. In the closing hours of negotiations on Thursday, March 28, the government abandoned its previous insistence that the treaty be approved only through achieving “consensus” of all the member states. Requiring consensus had been the United States position going back to earlier administrations.
At the end of the session, a U.S. government spokesperson told reporters “It’s important to the United States and the defense of our interests to insist on consensus. But every state in this process has always been conscious of the fact that if consensus is not reached in this process, that there are other ways to adopt this treaty, including via a vote of the General Assembly.” The spokesperson went on to say that the United States would vote “yes” on the treaty in the General Assembly, regardless of the positions of other member states. By abandoning the requirement for consensus the United States is assuring passage of the treaty by the United Nations.
“This abrupt about-face on the long-standing United States requirement for ‘consensus’ illustrates that the Obama Administration wants a sweeping U.N. arms control treaty,” said Lawrence Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “We are troubled by the timing of the Obama Administration’s decision to abandon consensus on the eve of the Senate debate on pending gun control measures. The United Nations treaty would have a broad impact on the U.S. firearms industry and its base of consumers in the U.S.”
Industry analysts have identified three major areas of concern with the treaty text. The treaty clearly covers trade in civilian firearms, not just military arms and equipment. It will have a major impact on the importation of firearms to the United States, which is a substantial source for the consumer market. And it will impose new regulations on the “transit” of firearms, the term defined so broadly that it would cover all everything from container ships stopping at ports to individuals who are traveling internationally with a single firearm for hunting or other sporting purposes.
“We hope that the Members of the U.S. Senate are closely watching the White House abandon its principles and promises in the rush to ramrod this flawed treaty into effect. Not only will they later be asked to ratify this attack on our constitution and sovereignty, but they will also be lavished with new promises from the administration in its drive to push a broad gun control agenda through the U.S. Senate when it returns from recess. They would be right to question those promises strongly,” concluded Keane