APOD Firearms

No to the UN!!!

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • mosin

    Active Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 21, 2013
    876
    21
    Laredo
    isn't this the same list as posted when this all came up before? names look really familiar.

    it looks familiar because someone just copied and pasted an email without verifying a damn thing. The senate did not hold a vote over the treaty this weekend.
     

    Soldiernurse

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 2, 2011
    440
    1
    Cedar Park, TX
    I didn't hear anything about the senate considering ratification of the UN farce of a treaty. Those "traitors" listed are the ones who would support ratification but it hasn't come to a vote yet. I doubt, even if it did, it would even remotely come close to ratification.
    However, the measure voted upon was not the treaty itself, but a non-binding test amendment expressing opposition to the ATT which was tacked onto an unrelated congressional budget resolution. The record of the U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote confirms that all the senators who voted against the amendment were Democrats or independents.
    Read more at snopes.com: U.N. Arms Trade Treaty
     

    Soldiernurse

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 2, 2011
    440
    1
    Cedar Park, TX
    it looks familiar because someone just copied and pasted an email without verifying a damn thing. The senate did not hold a vote over the treaty this weekend.
    Here's another copy-n-paste, my friend...
    However, the measure voted upon was not the treaty itself, but a non-binding test amendment expressing opposition to the ATT which was tacked onto an unrelated congressional budget resolution. The record of the U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote confirms that all the senators who voted against the amendment were Democrats or independents.
    Read more at snopes.com: U.N. Arms Trade Treaty
     

    Ole Cowboy

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 23, 2013
    4,061
    96
    17 Oaks Ranch
    Here's another copy-n-paste, my friend...
    However, the measure voted upon was not the treaty itself, but a non-binding test amendment expressing opposition to the ATT which was tacked onto an unrelated congressional budget resolution. The record of the U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote confirms that all the senators who voted against the amendment were Democrats or independents.
    Read more at snopes.com: U.N. Arms Trade Treaty
    John (never met a Purple Heart he did not want) Kerry our bumbling fumbling Sec of State just signed the UN Small Arms Treaty about 10 days ago or less. It is expected that Obama will also sign it. When he does then will be interesting, EO? Who knows. As for the Senate ratifying it, YES they can and in fact we are only about 6 seats away from it.
     

    benenglish

    Just Another Boomer
    Staff member
    Lifetime Member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    23,933
    96
    Spring
    As for the Senate ratifying it, YES they can and in fact we are only about 6 seats away from it.
    They can, but it's unlikely. Consider this:

    • Some serious domestic political pressure is being applied against it.
    • The actual language is so watered-down and ambiguous, it might not mean anything important to us even if it were ratified.
    • It's not a priority; things like this typically languish for years.
    • Several major players (Russia and China, for example) have already said they would NOT sign it, putting the U.S. at a potential commercial disadvantage in sales of heavy weapons if we do ratify it.
    • As a result, not too many senators are anxious for an opportunity to simultaneously piss off both the gun owners and the big, military arms dealers (who pour lots of money into their campaigns) back in their home districts.
    I consider the arms treaty to be something to be monitored but, compared to other threats to our rights, pretty much a low-level distraction.
     

    Ole Cowboy

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 23, 2013
    4,061
    96
    17 Oaks Ranch
    They can, but it's unlikely. Consider this:

    • Some serious domestic political pressure is being applied against it.
    • The actual language is so watered-down and ambiguous, it might not mean anything important to us even if it were ratified.
    • It's not a priority; things like this typically languish for years.
    • Several major players (Russia and China, for example) have already said they would NOT sign it, putting the U.S. at a potential commercial disadvantage in sales of heavy weapons if we do ratify it.
    • As a result, not too many senators are anxious for an opportunity to simultaneously piss off both the gun owners and the big, military arms dealers (who pour lots of money into their campaigns) back in their home districts.
    I consider the arms treaty to be something to be monitored but, compared to other threats to our rights, pretty much a low-level distraction.
    Agenda 21 which this is Chap 21 is very ambiguous, in fact any passing review of A 21 leads one to the conclusion that it means what ever the reader (or in this case, the IMPLEMENTER) wants it to mean.

    Granted, in the Preamble of Chap 21 Arms Treaty it does state it 'reaffirms the sovereign right of any state to regulate and control conventional arms within its territory according to its legal system'. Then one would think it has no effect on us the gun owners of America...or so you would think but in fact that is not the goal. At this time Obama is in compliance with A-21 Chap 21....
     

    benenglish

    Just Another Boomer
    Staff member
    Lifetime Member
    Admin
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    23,933
    96
    Spring
    We're on the same page. We both know that by leaving the language ambiguous, the treaty means nothing now but could be re-interpreted in a draconian fashion in the future. We both realize that's the goal.

    However, I must give props to the U.S. negotiators under Bush who managed to get much of the directly harmful language stripped. For example, Article 14 that covers Enforcement has been pared down to a single sentence that says nothing, really. It only says that each party should take "appropriate measures" to create law and regulation to enforce the treaty. That one critical sentence is worded so that even if some future administration tries to run with the treaty, we'll be able to stall and push back on the meaning of "appropriate measures" for, quite literally, decades.

    Of course I say "No!" to the treaty. However, on my list of things to worry about, it's buried somewhere in the second hundred pages.
     

    Ole Cowboy

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 23, 2013
    4,061
    96
    17 Oaks Ranch
    We're on the same page. We both know that by leaving the language ambiguous, the treaty means nothing now but could be re-interpreted in a draconian fashion in the future. We both realize that's the goal.

    However, I must give props to the U.S. negotiators under Bush who managed to get much of the directly harmful language stripped. For example, Article 14 that covers Enforcement has been pared down to a single sentence that says nothing, really. It only says that each party should take "appropriate measures" to create law and regulation to enforce the treaty. That one critical sentence is worded so that even if some future administration tries to run with the treaty, we'll be able to stall and push back on the meaning of "appropriate measures" for, quite literally, decades.

    Of course I say "No!" to the treaty. However, on my list of things to worry about, it's buried somewhere in the second hundred pages.

    Concur


    I have been in Austin of late on business the past few months. A-21 is in FULL IMPLEMENTATION in Austin, Texas, WOW, I have been blown away by things I have read in the local papers that are somewhere left of center and reporting the strides and success stories...
     
    Top Bottom