Posted on 07/07/2012 7:45:02 AM PDT by yoe
This week begins the most important 26-day period for our Second Amendment freedoms in recent history.
That’s because today, representatives from many of the world’s socialist, tyrannical and dictatorial regimes will gather at United Nations headquarters in New York for a month-long meeting, in which they’ll put the finishing touches on an international Arms Trade Treaty that could seriously restrict your freedom to own, purchase and carry a firearm.
Specifically, the U.N. wants to implement international gun registration requirements, bans on commonly owned firearms, tracking and registration of ammunition purchases, and create a new U.N. gun control bureaucracy.
You might think that something so obviously menacing to one of our enumerated fundamental rights would receive a strong rebuke from our top government leaders.
But you’d be wrong. This is President Barack Obama’s vision for America, and we’re expected to just go along with it.
In fact, a group of anti-gun members of the U.S. House of Representatives, led by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), went so far as to circulate a letter last week to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, in which they “strongly urge the United States to take a leadership role in pushing for a strong, verifiable Arms Trade Treaty.”
These House members insist that the treaty include “controls on a comprehensive list of weaponry, including small arms and light weapons,” as well as controls on ammunition. For good measure, they wrap their unconstitutional demands in the mantle of advancing (“human rights”) and preventing international violence.
Since when did it become fashionable for sitting members of Congress to lobby international thugs, tyrants and dictators against our own U.S. Constitution?
Rep. Grijalva should consider the plight of good people in countries like the Sudan, where it’s virtually impossible for an average citizen to legally own a firearm for self-defense.
He, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton should open their eyes to the unspeakable human rights atrocities that exist in their gun-ban utopia. They ought to see how far their gun-confiscation agenda resonates with hundreds of thousands of defenseless Sudanese men, women and children who live in constant fear of being beaten, raped, sold into slavery or murdered.
It’s easy for Congressmen Raul Grijalva, James McGovern, Bobby Rush, Dennis Kucinich and every other signer of this woefully ignorant letter to sit on high — surrounded by the secure walls of freedom built by our strong Second Amendment rights — and dictate to oppressed citizens in other parts of the world that their lives would be better if they only had less freedom than we do in the United States.
Thankfully, these clueless representatives don’t speak for the majority of us. The NRA has been warning Americans about this ticking time bomb at the U.N. for over 15 years. Now it’s zero hour. Wayne LaPierre and I will be at U.N. headquarters in New York this week, fighting tooth and nail to protect the same constitution that Raul Grijalva and his pals swore an oath to uphold and defend.
And I can promise you, we won’t stop fighting until our Second Amendment freedoms are safe from this international disgrace.
Chris W. Cox is the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.
The problem ain’t Grijalva - it is the people keep returning him to office. Gotta wonder what is wrong with ‘em - and how many illegal aliens are voting for him.
Senate must ratify all treaties. This will never happen.
Just like Obamacare would never make it through SCOTUS...
"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, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
I'm no constitutional scholar, but since Laws of United States have been declared unconstitutional when they conflict with the Constitution itself, I would assume the same can be done for treaties.
A treaty cannot override and thereby amend the Constitution.
That won't matter one whit to 0bummer&Co; they'll just issue an EO or bypass it, like with the illegal Recess Appointments and all the other crap they've done over the past 3&@189;-yrs. And the gutless/balless/spineless GOP will merely cower and wimper.
Somewhere in America, a "Tree" sorely needs "Refreshing".
That won't matter one whit to 0bummer&Co; they'll just issue an EO or bypass it, like with the illegal Recess Appointments and all the other crap they've done over the past 3½-yrs. And the gutless/balless/spineless GOP will merely cower and wimper.
Somewhere in America, a "Tree" sorely needs "Refreshing".
Our Senators must hear loud and clear from their constituencies to oppose this treaty.
A treaty, according to the constitution, has the weight of being constitutional.
A peek at what is “under the radar”.
You are assuming, of course, Ears follows the law and has it go through Senate confirmation.
This guy makes a habit out of bypassing those who would stand in the way of his agenda. To him, congress doesn’t count.
Food for thought.
I fail to understand how a treaty with foreign governments can trump the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution. Could a UN treaty restrict freedom of speech, press and religion too?
Lots of illegals, and dead folks vote for him. South Tucson elections ar a lot like Chicago elections.
Not only will our enemy within, this administration and a good portion of congress, relish this so as to eliminate our 2nd amendment rights but it will insure that every banana or camel fornicating dictator will not have to worry about an armed revolution.
Allowing the UN’s nose under our tent will assure the ruling class unchallenged power for the rest of their lives.
You and Mosaic Wolf, have a lot more faith in the Senate than I do.
Our only chance is to hold their feet to the fire.
Out of curiosity I called senator Harry Reid’s office Friday.
I had only one simple question, requiring only a “Yes” or “No” answer.
My question to his him (his staff, I don’t rate his coming to the phone) was, “Does a U.N. treaty have the power to override the U.S. Constitution?”
The response?
“The senator has not taken a position on that yet”!
Guess he has his finger in the wind, at best.
Or, he’s waiting as long as possible before revealing his socialist intent.
Maybe WE need to blow some hot air HIS way for a change!
Senator Harry Reid (D) NV.
Web site: http://reid.senate.gov
Mail: United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510-2803
Ph. (202) 224-3542, Fax (202) 224-7327
What will his body guards use ?peashooters screw him kick him out right after the UN !
If 51 senators were required to ratify such a treaty, I’d agree with you.
Since 67 are, I don’t see a problem.
You might note that the general trend over the last 20 years or so is for expansion, not limitation, of gun rights. Yet lots of gun rights advocates obessively repeat this mantra that we are losing ground.
That’s just inaccurate, and frankly it’s boring and an insult to the intelligence of anyone who can see the world clearly.
Are there those who want to take away all gun rights? Of course! Are they winning? No, they’re losing ground just about every year. So why the panic?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.