Replies

Carry, why are so many freepers ok with this? They think limiting my children and grandchildren's ability to purchase weapons or ammunition is ok because they're not talking about direct confiscation of what I have now? Why do they think that's ok?

And unintended gun grabber venues.

When we buy a car in Texas, it has to be compliant with the California Air Resources Board's emissions requirements. Why? Because it was too expensive to keep building California emissions cars and "other" versions. So they just do them all at the strict standard and bring the cost down. exactly as the CARB hoped.

So Fedex is an international company. If they want an easy time in international trade, then they have to comply with international regulators in Brussels and NYC. Do they want to threaten all their international business due to a charge of assisting interstate (or cross border illicit Texas traffickers) arms trades? No. They just politely refuse all gun shipments everywhere. Done deal.

Yeah. Slippery slopes are so common now that nobody cares I guess.

sam - I’m not okay with this treaty - I vehemently oppose it. If given the chance, Barky will sign it, regardless of my opposition. The Senate will not ratify it. If it ever does get ratified, any parts that conflict with the Constitution are null and void, as the Constitution clearly states, and as SCOTUS has ruled on numerous occasions.

I also understand incrementalism, which works both ways. WRT FEDEX - feh, who cares? eBay used to allow gun stuff on their site. Then they didn’t, which spawned numerous gun-auction sites that are better than eBay ever was. If FEDEX says no to international shipments, many someones will take their place.

The big difference between green iguana and I is that I see international law as a Trojan Horse implanted in our legal system before the ink was dry on the Constitution. I have witnessed the way the system is gamed for fun and profit by the owners of tax-exempt "charities." It was a major topic as regards environmental regulation in my first book, and yes green iguana, that book contains original research on sources from the Congressional record as to how dirty the ratification process has been, how massively unconstitutional the enforcement powers pursuant to these treaties can be, and how long this has been going on.

I know how the players will act once such a treaty is signed with the complicity of unaccountable bureaucracies. At that point, guys like gi will be bitching about "federal judges," not understanding how the game was set into play.

I have spent the last ten years since that first book, laying the ground work to turn that system upside down in favor of private property, which is the reason Henry Lamb had me speaking at one of his Freedom21 conventions. I was one of the first people on this forum to point out the potential as regards the Second Amendment. I have advised HSLDA as to the potentials in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. And green iguana pretends to ignore the handwriting on the wall because he does not recognize that once the left gets a policy in place illegally or not, it is very difficult to undo once their pet lawyer NGOs start to sue. The carbon market may be dead, but that does not mean mitigations aren't written into Federal contracts. This very day, my daughter washes roots at Stanford so that they can measure the carbon sequestration in grasslands. Don't think for a second that the owners of various conservancies aren't licking their chops as they wait to cash in.