Posted on 07/11/2012 5:31:27 PM PDT by Kaslin
Today NRA Vice President Wayne LaPierre addressed the United Nations as the debate about the Arms Trade Treaty, or the "Small Arms Treaty," continues in New York City. The treaty is written to make it seem as though only arms transferred by governments will be affected but the details of the language seem to show the treaty applies to civilian firearms. The treaty has been classified as an international effort to attack the Second Amendment in the United States Constitution.
"I am hear to announce the NRA's strong opposition to anti-freedom policies that disregard American citizens' right to self defense. No foreign entity has jurisdiction over the freedoms our Founding Fathers guaranteed to us."
Wayne LaPierre Fights for the Second Amendment Before the United Nations
Hopefully they won’t. They are outnumbered. Everyone will just lay low and hide their guns.
I agree, I have a CCDW, my daughter asked if we could get them together as a present for her birthday.
I have come to the realization that when it gets to the point where they actually come after us CCDW people, they are coming after all of us and I might as well have it out then and go down sooner, because I will surely go down later.
Unless the average person in this country realizes that they are going to come after us piecemeal, starting with those who will generate the least amount of protesting, then it will progress exactly has it always has done with despots, on to all those that are foolish to think they will be excluded from the pogroms. One day they will wake up and discover they are the last to be in the crosshairs and there will be no one to defend them.
I would suspect that if something like that happened, the "point of no return" would be reached, would it not?...CWII would be on. It would be fight or die.
The outcome of the fight would decide whether the vote was valid or not.
...
No need to get sarcastic, FRiend. I guess I'm just not bitter enough about the NRA to suit you. I disagree with some things they've done in the past, but I'm not looking for a screw job in the bottom of every Cracker Jack box, either.
I looked at it and it looked like a fairly straightforward statement of principles against a broad-front attack on our rights by the international Lords-Ordainer wannabe's. I've been following them for over 10 years and know the UN cabalists have been on this since the "Poppy" Bush Administration, with Japan and the UK leading, and I know the UN told the NRA to go eff off over a dozen years ago with that patronizing crack about "time to apply lessons learnt" -- which btw tells you the speaker was a gun-hating Brit, FWIW. Only the Brits use (correctly) "learnt" as a participial adjective rather than American usage, "learned".
So yeah, I see them coming, and yes, the NRA has been fighting these guys since they erected their "no-guns" UN treehouse with our money, and I see no reason to start looking for an NRA backstab job now on the identical issues, howbeit they really disappointed a couple of years ago by refusing to return support for other groups fighting other gross assaults on the BoR.
Time for a Republican POTUS and his Republican AG to start taking some of these treaties to SCOTUS and breaking them like the dry sticks that they are. And if SCOTUS won't do it -- well, there's the repealer and demarche route, and Russia and that Murderers' Row of Habitual Rights-Offending States, however self-constituted, can k.m.a.
It's never been done. Not one.
If you understood the historic origins and scope of the treaty power in the Constitution, you would be.
I looked at it and it looked like a fairly straightforward statement of principles against a broad-front attack on our rights by the international Lords-Ordainer wannabe's.
Sad experience has taught me otherwise.
From Webster online:
Definition of TROCAR :
a sharp-pointed surgical instrument fitted with a cannula and used especially to insert the cannula into a body cavity as a drainage outlet
Variants of TROCAR
tro·car also tro·char \ˈtrō-ˌkär\
Origin of TROCAR
French trocart, alteration of trois-quart from trois three + carre edge
First Known Use: circa 1706
My only source was an autopsy report in my possession. Thanks for the correction.
People said that about a lot of things in American politics. There's a time for everything, and the Alinskyites don't get to say what those times will be.
I think I have your drift, and yes, Fedgov has been coloring outside the lines since Webster floated the first iteration of the "Mystical Union" crapola and John Quincy Adams floated the idea of pushing the South into secession, shouting "insurrection", and then using the succeeding military confrontation to "reorganize" the Southern States politically. Which, btw, is the best-kept secret in Civil War history; I didn't know anything about that, until people began trading comments on a passage in the new biography of Adams. Since the Civil War, Fedgov has "gone ape" and needs to be trimmed off and our constitutional damage redressed.
But the NRA isn't the problem here -- it's people like the Pew Trusts, the other assorted Prog-driven NGO's, and the international movable-feast class.
Uh, no. It was before the ink was dry on the Constitution. It did involve the treaty power, it was debated, and it was rammed through anyway. Read the article.
You've referred me to your own writing as authoritative before. Sorry if I'm slow to buy it.
FReegards anyway.
With regard to my work, Malcolm Wallop bought it, so I guess you are just slow. I guess you'd prefer to let the MSM determine who is a worthy presenter of fact. In that book, I explain at great length and in enormous detail how treaty law plays the key role in this nascent system of global governance.
But never mind my "authority," allow me to quote that same article re Patrick Henry's take on the matter of treaty ratification:
He is referring specifically to the unfortunate (and very clever) punctuation of the supremacy clause.
HENRY: I say again that, if you consent to this power, you depend on the justice and equity of those in power. We may be told that we shall find ample refuge in the law of nations. When you yourselves have your necks so low that the President may dispose of your rights as he pleases, the law of nations cannot be applied to relieve you. Sure I am, if treaties are made infringing our liberties, it will be too late to say that our constitutional rights are violated.
[snip]
The Senate, by making treaties, may destroy your liberty and laws for want of responsibility. Two thirds of those that shall happen to be present, can, with the President, make treaties that shall be the supreme law of the land; they may make the most ruinous treaties; and yet there is no punishment for them.
So you have a choice: Admit that you were wrong in that this did begin well before you realized, or descend to the status of pompous moron. Don't get me started on how Madison was behind the idea that later became our misbegotten 14th Amendment.
Oh, there it is.
Sorry, Blimp Boy, but I don't kiss ass and I don't take schooling from imperious gasbags.
Go back to your writing hobby, you won't get anywhere trying to rank me over. You don't even remotely hold the keys to my self-respect; I am surprised that you would even try a play like that, especially in a forum like this one, where people by and large know their own minds.
Go tell your wife that a terrible thing happened to you yesterday: Somebody disagreed with you! I'm sure she'll sympathize.
Given that you are immune to facts that render your post a crock, it looks to me like you've got that projector going full blast.
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.