[Libloather]

Get to the border. Holder is givin' 'em away.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

[Jonty30]

Thin edge of the wedge.

[WildSnail]

If it wouldn’t impact the U.S., why do they so desperately need us to sign on? If other countries have weak laws, get them to change their laws. Leave us alone.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

“The United Nations, with the Obama administration’s blessing”

All you need to know.

No, No Way, and Hell NO!

[RobertClark]

Thirty years ago, I distinctly recall being told that we must oppose communism and the nations that support it. We were told that communist regimes were bad because they stiffled the rights of residents for the sake of the ruling party, forced them to go through checkpoints, forbid ownership of firearms, oppressed private property rights, did not believe in the free markets, and placed the needs of the state above the needs of the people. We were proud Americans, because none of these things limited us.

Fast forward to today. We have morphed into that which we were told we opposed. So, were we lied to then or are we being lied to now? What did we oppose in the cold war? Someone remind me, or better yet, someone remind our new ruling class.....................

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

They keep harping about other countries not having gun control laws, so they need international gun control laws, yet say these won’t impact American law.

This is not just one bad argument, but two. If other countries do not have gun control laws, that is within their own national prerogative, not the international communities. If these nations leaders can’t or won’t try to change their own laws, why are they seeking a backdoor to their own nation’s lawmaking process?

And exactly how is the US, that also does not have a gun control regime, different from those other nations that do not have one? If it applies to them, it would appear to apply to us.

Those tyrannies, dictatorships, and bureaucratarian elitist regimes that do have gun control have long proven that it is not just a bad idea, but an *awful* idea. And everyone else adopting the bad idea will never make it a good idea.

[familyop]

"Arms bill supporters fight claims US citizens will be robbed of guns"

Firearm and Ammo Vendors Cut Inventories and Hike Prices Again

"Some lawmakers aren't buying it."

Nearly all lawmakers would vote against it. And no, a president can't outlaw firearms by himself. All who perpetuate such myths are wishing that it could happen.

[familyop]

As for the UN, BTW, get the USA out of the UN. Let the third-world dictators keep their evil laws in their own tourism regimes.

[GenXteacher]

US out of the UN, UN off US soil!

[Gene Eric]

Nuts!

[stevem]

has lobbied senators to reject any treaty that includes restrictions on civilian arms...Treaty advocates in the United States insist that's not the treaty's goal...

So they must be intending that the treaty contain that minimum required language.

Maybe the deal is, since that isn't the goal of the treaty, no such language is needed. This would be more of an Obama stance.

[W. W. SMITH]

Citizens with no criminal record should be able, at will, to carry, concealed or open, any firearm they please, hand gun or long gun, anywhere they please without let or hindrance by government authorities.

[stevie_d_64]

Why can’t they leave our guns alone???

Glad I’m down to just what I need...I guess it’ll be easier to turn them in when the time comes...

I lost alot of them on that river trip down the Colorado...That stupid raft just tumpt right over and boom!!! Gone!!! Not recoverable, anyone can certainly try to see what they can find...

Truely a sad day for me...

[longtermmemmory]

oh joy another “hunting is still ok” moron who thinks people will fall for that nonsense.

The second amendment has nothing to do with hunting. It is only about tyrany.