Will the UN ban that was signed effect me, in Florida, in any way? - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: Will the UN ban that was signed effect me, in Florida, in any way?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by buckey01 View Post
    It isn't the UN treaty that's a danger. Kerry's signature means nothing and ratification is not going to happen. It is our President and his executive orders that are a danger. Our president thinks that he is dictator who is able to rule by decree. And Obama will claim that the executive orders will be necessary for the U.S. to he brouht into compliance with international norms. He can not constitutionally alter the Bill of Rights. The real danger is a very unpredictable Supreme Court. In the Heller decision the right to keep and bear arms was only upheld in a 5 to 4 decision. This is by no means a comfortable margin. And if SCOTUS goes against us that only leaves redress directly by the people.
    Sadly I fear you are right on your last sentence and think that it will come to that.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    Our Constitution says that a treaty is only valid if it goes along with the Constitution. Makes no difference if the President ( note that ) signs it or if the Senate by a 2/3rds vote of those Senators present approve it if it violates the Constitution. Too many Liberals have tried to subjugate the Constitution to their opinion on treaties.

    ( Note) Kerry is not the President so it doesn't even make it to the first level yet.
    Not to get into a pissing match here; but where exactly does The US Constitution say that a treaty must go along with The US Constitution?

  4. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Geosan1030 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    Our Constitution says that a treaty is only valid if it goes along with the Constitution. Makes no difference if the President ( note that ) signs it or if the Senate by a 2/3rds vote of those Senators present approve it if it violates the Constitution. Too many Liberals have tried to subjugate the Constitution to their opinion on treaties.

    ( Note) Kerry is not the President so it doesn't even make it to the first level yet.
    Not to get into a pissing match here; but where exactly does The US Constitution say that a treaty must go along with The US Constitution?
    The Constitution isn't entirely clear about the status of a treaty, other than that it does have the status of the "law of the land". But it is implied that the President will protect and defend the Constitution and ensure that the treaty doesn't violate the Constitution. Since the state's were required to ratify amendments and the original Constitution; a super majority of the Senators, as direct representatives of the state legislatures, is required to ratify a treaty. It is also assumed that the Senators will protect the Constitutionail interests of the states.

    There are also lesser treaties that aren't directly authorized by the Constitution. One only requires the President's signature under authority of the Congress; and it has been been upheld by the courts. The other type of treaty requires only the ratification by a simple majority. The present UN treaty is of the kind that would require a super majority. Arms control treaties are of the variety that require a simply majority vote. And trade treaties usually require the President's signature with prior Congressional authorization.

    Treaties and their authority under U.S. law are very complicated. I hope that my attempt to simplify didn't lead to errors and confusion. The founders trusted the division of power and a moral President and Senate to protect the Constitution against violations by a treaty. Unfortunately times have changed and morality and honor have become much more rare. I hope that you will forgive me for a "ham handed" attempt simplify a very complicated subject.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    Damn I really hate to totally ignore the POS UN, but OK done, as they say in her in Texas Come and Take It.

  6. #15
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    I forgot to mention in my previous and overly long post that executive orders are the biggest threat to gun rights. And they don't appear anywhere in the Constitution.

  7. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    Executive orders apply only to the executive branch.

  8. #17
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    north east Iowa
    Posts
    1,250
    In the last few years Obama has used executive orders to alter laws, bypass Congress and the courts, and enact laws that he couldn't get through the congress.

  9. #18
    This UN treaty thing does not bother me. The executive orders do not bother me. The local and state laws do not bother me. I have long since come to the realization that this once great country is in serious decline and that one day that the government agents with their MRAPS and SWAT teams will come for me and my gun. I only hope that I am able to make it a worthy fight.
    A man must do what he has to do, ain't none of us getting out of this alive....I have it from a reliable source....
    There can be no love without pain; to show you the value of love......

  10. #19
    Article 6 the Supremacy Clause is what overides treaties.
    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding

    Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    SCOTUS
    Reid v. Covert - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday

  11. #20
    Once again, talk about it all you want. As long as all you do is talk, the folks will keep on doing it to you......can't you see it....
    A man must do what he has to do, ain't none of us getting out of this alive....I have it from a reliable source....
    There can be no love without pain; to show you the value of love......

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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