[I want the USA back]

He will leave illeqal guns in the hands of violent criminals, while trying to take them away from honest, non-violent citizens.

[Turbo Pig]

This holds true under 3 conditions

1) The Senate ratifies the treaty, or
2) King obama tries to implement it w/o Senate ratification, and
3) The people of the United States stand idly by as conditions 1 or 2 happen.

[grobdriver]

Neither court decisions nor the language of the Constitution have deterred this corrupt president in the past. Will the American people be forced to watch as Barack Obama implements the provisions of a treaty which the vast majority do no support and which the US Senate is unlikely to ratify?

Bring It!

[M Kehoe]

Just a thought...

Blue helmets, the other red meat.

Take heed those in the NSA reading this. You are NOT anonymous, and neither is your families' locations.

Same with the drone operators...

5.56mm

[MissMagnolia]

Nothing is out of the question when a thuggish president meets a cowardly opposition party.

The crux of the matter.

[The Great RJ]

To accomplish this Obama would have to use heavily armed goon squads to take guns from the hands of legal owners. I do not believe the gun owners or the American public at large would tolerate such Gestapo tactics without rebelling.

[struggle]

Nope. Senate already struck it down 56-43-1

[struggle]

Nope. Senate already struck it down 56-43-1

[TigersEye]

Bring a rope to a gun fight. Bring it.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Barky can sign that treaty all day long but it won’t ever get ratified.

[tanknetter]

Lets remember a couple of things.

First, while an administration can make some limited policy decisions that are within its normal Constitutional scope/powers (for example placing limits on imports/exports to the extent the Executive Branch is permitted/delegated to do so) once a treaty has been signed, the treaty does not go into effect until the US Senate properly ratifies it.

Second, even if a treaty is ratified, it still cannot override or circumvent the Constitution. This requires an Amendment or a Constitutional Convention.

So having said that, the only way that Obama uses this “signed” (but unratified) treaty to seriously usurp gun rights (as in full-up registration, confiscation, etc) is through blatantly unconstitutional means. No treaty, signed/unsigned, ratified/unratified - whether this particular one or any other - conveys to ANY President/Administration that ability.

[alphadog]

Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate.

The Senate could vote 100 to 0 in favor of the UN BS ... but it would lose in SCOTUS.