Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

IBD EDITORIALS ^ | November 8, 2012

[raptor22]

Second Amendment: Within hours of re-election, the administration fast-tracked a treaty in the United Nations that transcends borders and tramples our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It was no coincidence.

Less than 24 hours after President Obama's re-election, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations helped move the U.N.'s Arms Control Treaty a step closer to enactment. America joined 157 other nations in voting Wednesday to finalize the treaty in March. None was opposed and there were 18 abstentions.

U.N. delegates and gun-control activists had complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as openly supporting the pact. But once the election was over, the Obama administration had more flexibility to pull the trigger on supporting the pact.

The Obama administration, which reversed long-standing U.S. opposition to the treaty in 2009, says the treaty does not threaten our Second Amendment rights and applies only to international arms trade. But its record of opposition to private gun ownership and its deference to international bodies and their authority give us pause.

So does a paper by the U.N.'s Coordinating Action on Small Arms. It notes that arms have been "misused by lawful owners" and demands that the "arms trade therefore be regulated in ways that would ... minimize the misuse of legally owned weapons."

Is an American defending his home against intruders just such a "misuse"?

Even if the treaty applied only to transfers of small arms between nations, would that mean restrictions on our ability to aid allies such as Israel and Taiwan? Would we be forbidden from supporting resistance movements around the world that rise up against the very dictators who support this treaty?

[1010RD]

2/3s of Senators present - that’s not good news. They just need a quorum.

[Tyrannis]

MOLON LABE

[1010RD]

Look at how the British interpret defensive fire arm incidents and you can expect that the UN will be to the extreme of that.

[ronjon]

Article VI:

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.

*********************************************************
This article makes treaties subject to the provisions of “This Constitution” I.E. Any treaty must be within our Constitution to become “the supreme Law of the Land”.

The UN arms treaty would violate the second amendment of the Bill of Rights of our Constitution.

If the UN arms treaty were to be recognized as law in the United States, our leaders need to go back to learning our nation’s blue print!