John Kerry Signs UN Gun Ban Treaty!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: John Kerry Signs UN Gun Ban Treaty!

  1. John Kerry Signs UN Gun Ban Treaty!

    While Everyone Are Distracted Over The Elections, John Kerry Signs UN Gun Ban Treaty!

    If U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has his way the United Nations will be able to say if Americans are allowed to have their Second Amendment rights. He signed an anti-gun treaty with the United Nations that the U.S. Senate has already said it is against.

    The treaty Kerry signed without authorization from the Senate would create an un-Constitutional registry of all US gun buyers and would lead to the UN controlling American’s gun rights.

    Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. treaty on arms regulation, riling U.S. lawmakers who vow the Senate will not ratify the agreement.

    As he signed the document, Kerry called the treaty a “significant step” in addressing illegal gun sales, while claiming it would also protect gun rights.

    “This is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors. This is about reducing the risk of international transfers of conventional arms that will be used to carry out the world’s worst crimes. This is about keeping Americans safe and keeping America strong,” he said. “This treaty will not diminish anyone’s freedom. In fact, the treaty recognizes the freedom of both individuals and states to obtain, possess, and use arms for legitimate purposes.”

    U.S. lawmakers, though, have long claimed the treaty could lead to new gun control measures. They note the U.S. Senate has final say on whether to approve the agreement.

    Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., in a letter to President Obama, urged his administration not to take any action to implement the treaty without the consent of the Senate.

    He claimed the treaty raises “fundamental issues” concerning “individual rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

    The National Rifle Association blasted the plan, claiming it would impose an “invasive registration scheme” by requiring importing countries to give exporting countries information on “end users.”

    “The Obama administration is once again demonstrating its contempt for our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “These are blatant attacks on the constitutional rights and liberties of every law-abiding American. The NRA will continue to fight this assault on our fundamental freedom.”

    Once again Obama’s regime tries to end the Second Amendment by stealth.

  2.   
  3. Obama has already proven he has little or no regard for rule of law or a limited power government. These elietest bastards have zero respect for law abiding God fearing citizens. They will stop at nothing to see our country fall to this new world order style of dictatorial submission. These people aren't american and the next installment in this process is HC. What ever happened to the America I know and loved? The America that cared about the will of the people. The America that would tell the UN or anyone that wanted to control us or our interests abroad to politely go "F" themselves. Thingso are sad and getting more sad folks. Keep buying ammo. I wear no tinfoil hat but these elected leaders are determined to sell us out.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by CustomSatellite View Post
    Obama has already proven he has little or no regard for rule of law or a limited power government. These elietest bastards have zero respect for law abiding God fearing citizens. They will stop at nothing to see our country fall to this new world order style of dictatorial submission. These people aren't american and the next installment in this process is HC. What ever happened to the America I know and loved? The America that cared about the will of the people. The America that would tell the UN or anyone that wanted to control us or our interests abroad to politely go "F" themselves. Thingso are sad and getting more sad folks. Keep buying ammo. I wear no tinfoil hat but these elected leaders are determined to sell us out.
    Treason.

  5. #4
    Any treaty has to be ratified by the US Senate. The senate usually votes it down in the past. Let's hope they continue.

  6. #5
    Butcher's Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 US 746 (1883)."
    Our rights cannot, by acts of Congress, be bartered away, given away or
    taken away."

    Boyd v U.S., 116 US 635. "...constitutional provisions for the
    security of person and property should be liberally construed ... It is
    the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of
    citizens, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon."

    Norton v. Shelby County, 118 US 425
    "Any unconstitutional act is not law, it confers no rights, it imposes no
    duties, it affords no protection, it
    creates no office, it is an illegal contemplation, as inoperative as
    though it had never been passed."

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436
    "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO
    rule making or legislation which
    would abrogate them."

    Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137
    The Constitution for these united States is the Supreme Law of the Land.
    Any law that is repugnant to the
    Constitution is null and void of law and effect from its inception. 1.
    Do you have a right? 2. If you have a
    right and it is violated, do the laws of the country afford a remedy? 3.
    If you have a remedy at law is it a
    mandamus issuing from this court? The opinion of the court on all three
    questions was yes, yes, yes.


    The Constitution --- Plain and Simple: Treaties

    Supreme Law School : E-mail : Box 036 : Msg 03678

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause
    Last edited by Seeya; 10-09-2016 at 01:18 PM. Reason: adding
    The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Western South Dakota
    Posts
    1,021
    Have you looked at what the treaty actually is?
    Never argue with a red-haired witch. It wastes your breath and only delays the inevitable. --the collected sayings of Wiz Zumwalt

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,677
    The problem with the signing of it is that any Senate in the future can ratify it. Whether it be in 2016, 2020, or later.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  9. This Treaty power is a neat way of amending the Constitution without going through the amendment process. 67 Senators can sign away the Bill of Rights via ratification of a Treaty...correct? And to think I thought they were stuck with the old fashioned way of confirming SCOTUS judges that ignore the plain language of the Constitution. This Amendment by Treaty is right next to the Article II Sodomy Clause and the Abortion/Privacy Amendment...silly me.

  10. No treaty, whether signed by "us" supersedes the Constitution.
    So... it matters not what that traitor signs.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Seeya View Post
    Butcher's Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 US 746 (1883)."
    Our rights cannot, by acts of Congress, be bartered away, given away or
    taken away."

    Boyd v U.S., 116 US 635."...constitutional provisions for the
    security of person and property should be liberally construed ... It is
    the duty of the courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of
    citizens, and against any stealthy encroachment thereon."

    Norton v. Shelby County, 118 US 425
    "Any unconstitutional act is not law, it confers no rights, it imposes no
    duties, it affords no protection, it
    creates no office, it is an illegal contemplation, as inoperative as
    though it had never been passed."

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436
    "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be NO
    rule making or legislation which
    would abrogate them."

    Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137
    The Constitution for these united States is the Supreme Law of the Land.
    Any law that is repugnant to the
    Constitution is null and void of law and effect from its inception. 1.
    Do you have a right? 2. If you have a
    right and it is violated, do the laws of the country afford a remedy? 3.
    If you have a remedy at law is it a
    mandamus issuing from this court? The opinion of the court on all three
    questions was yes, yes, yes.


    The Constitution --- Plain and Simple: Treaties

    Supreme Law School : E-mail : Box 036 : Msg 03678

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_Clause
    Amen.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast