Skip to comments.Defense hawks take cautious approach with NRA, UN arms trade treaty (Senate may ratify treaty)
Posted on 07/13/2012 6:26:35 PM PDT by pabianice
Defense hawks in the Senate are in a holding pattern on a United Nations arms treaty thats drawing strong opposition from the National Rifle Association over Second Amendment concerns.
Several influential Republican defense hawks said Thursday they have to study the issue further before signing on to oppose it, despite a loud pressure campaign from the NRA.
NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre on Wednesday told the U.N. conference negotiating the agreement that 58 senators have pledged to oppose the treaty if it covers civilian arms over fears that would infringe on the right to bear arms. LaPierre pointed to letters signed by the senators last year.
But the comments from senators on Thursday signal the fate of the treaty in the Senate might remain more up in the air.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
let me guess, one of those defense hawks is Juan Mclame.
What a farce our government is.
What a bunch of cowards.
One nugget in the treaty would make a list of all U.S. gun owners available to the UN and its member nations. Nice. In further news, an Obama spokesman said that “the 2nd Amendment is not an issue in opposing this treaty.”
What a bunch of
There ... fixed it.
They better not!! That will end any chance of getting a Republican majority in the Senate. The NRA and other civil rights groups should spend their entire war chest to defeat anyone who votes to ratify this.
We cannot grow nor exercise our influence without YOU!
I guess ratifying a treaty with a foreign entity doesn’t include “we the people”. Glade I accidentally dropped all my guns in a lake several years ago.
Every Repub should vote against this but 34 of them will be enough defeat it, hopefully we’ll have that many.
If this isn’t a ‘litmus test’, I don’t know what is. This goes FAR beyond firearms ownership and the Constitution. This is all about our sovereignty. If the Senate ratifies this, we might as well not have a Union.
Each and every US Senator that supports this should be made to decorate lamp posts along Pennsylvania Avenue!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
In a better world, it would take no thought whatsoever before repudiating an effort by One World Fantasists to persuade America to cede American self-determination to a gaggle of political hacks, fast talking con artists, deluded Utopianists, and internationalist hangers on.
But our demented Washington politicans have to check carefully into the feelings and wishes of their equally demented constituents before casting their votes once again to shred the constitution and further hobble the nation; a nation which, however laughable the proposition may now sound, was once the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Apparently, there is no shortage of volunteers.
Are these the ones?
Enzi, McConnell, Ayotte, Mike Johanns (R. Neb) Kay Bailey Hutchinson
Do we add Murkowski, Portman, Graham, McCain, Snowe, Collins, Lugar and Graham?
So much for the oath they all took. obama, Hillary and ??? are doing it to us with an end run around the Constitution.
They have made an error in judgment.
This will be taken as a declaration of war by the many millions of gun owners.
Impeach them before they start Civil War II!
It appears that American people may have to take on the baby raping, UN blue helmets to defend our Bill or Rights. I never dreamed that I’d live long enough to see this day. Gee! Thanks Barry!!!
Just look up: Reid v. Covert
Yes, the court can try do something stupid (Roberts) but that arguement could be made at any time. All Americans should be opposed to any treaties from the U.N. but the NRA is using this as a fundraiser.
A treat can and will trump US law. Ask anyone who deals with shipping.
Also, well within our lifetimes we’ll find out why 0bama’s been using armed drones so extensively in Pakistan; PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT!
58 Senators have pledged to oppose this. How is it going to pass?
For those of you who might ask...yes a treaty ratified by the Senate has the same effect as an amendment to the Constitution and it is just as hard to repeal.
“A treat can and will trump US law. Ask anyone who deals with shipping.”
That is not what I said so let me repeat.
A treaty cannot trump the Constitution, like the 2nd Ammendment. This is established case law.
That is the order.
Who? We need names!
Justice Black declared: neither the cases nor their reasoning should be given any further expansion. The concept that the Bill of Rights and other constitutional protections against arbitrary government are inoperant when they become inconvenient or when expediency dictates otherwise is a very dangerous doctrine and if allowed to flourish would destroy the benefit of a written Constitution and undermine the basis of our government.
While I agree that this case could be construed as to your assertion, with the court that we now have, I’m not so sure that this case would surfice as a defense... just saying. Did this case involve an agreement or a treaty?
You listed Linda twice. But that’s okay. She prolly wishes she could vote for the treaty twice.
Twisted BS statement. Implies that "W" was instrumental in writting it. He was not, the UN was the culprit. The GOP and "W" opposed it. This is Reporter twisted speech.
Just oppose it in its entirety.
No qualifications or stipulations about “if it covers this” or “if it includes that”.
Just oppose it.
We already have too much UN meddling in our affairs.
>> but 34 of them will be enough defeat it,
Apparently there’s a quorum factor that only concerns those present, not the entire body. The implication being that the RINOs could simply call in sick the day of the vote yielding the outcome to the Leftist scumbags that are determined to continue raping the Constitution, our Bill of Rights.
which lake and where in that lake.....Mine were discovered stollen after we came home from a weeks vaca and realized the house was broken into.
As we get closer they are pulling out all the stops from all sides. As the more important criminal behavior rises to the top the more smoke and mirror stories will enter the picture hopefully to capture the peoples interest while the dirty work is being negotiated and finalized. I want to see prosecutions and jail time for thiese treasonist bastards, can we all agree?
Reid v. Covert is not just a case. It is THE landmark case on the supremecy of the Constitution over treaties.
Here is what the Court wrote: (my bold)
P.17 - There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty.*fn33 For example, in Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258, 267, it declared:
P.18 - This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which must comply with the Constitution, is on a full parity with a treaty, and that when a statute which is subsequent in time is inconsistent with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict renders the treaty null.*fn34 It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument.
Linda’s such a drama queen! ;>
Thanks, Gene. You’re right, I’d forgotten that. I wouldn’t put it past some RINOs to pull that stunt.