Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » 46 US Senators voted to give your gun rights to the UN

46 US Senators voted to give your gun rights to the UN

+5
2seaoat
Joanimaroni
knothead
ZVUGKTUBM
KarlRove
9 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

KarlRove

KarlRove

Astonishingly, 46 out of our 100 United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.



Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N.

Baldwin (D-WI)

Baucus (D-MT)

Bennett (D-CO)

Blumenthal (D-CT)

Boxer (D-CA)

Brown (D-OH)

Cantwell (D-WA)

Cardin (D-MD)

Carper (D-DE)

Casey (D-PA)

Coons (D-DE)

Cowan (D-MA)

Durbin (D-IL)j

Feinstein (D-CA)

Franken (D-MN)

Gillibrand (D-NY)

Harkin (D-IA)

Hirono (D-HI)

Johnson (D-SD)

Kaine (D-VA)

King (I-ME)

Klobuchar (D-MN)

Landrieu (D-LA)

Leahy (D-VT)

Levin (D-MI)

McCaskill (D-MO)

Menendez (D-NJ)

Merkley (D-OR)

Mikulski (D-MD)

Murphy (D-CT)

Murray (D-WA)

Nelson (D-FL)

Reed (D-RI)

Reid (D-NV)

Rockefeller (D-WV)

Sanders (I-VT)

Schatz (D-HI)

Schumer (D-NY)

Shaheen (D-NH)

Stabenow (D-MI)

Udall (D-CO)

Udall (D-NM)

Warner (D-VA)

Warren (D-MA)

Whitehouse (D-RI)

Wyden (D-OR)



Folks: This needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take OUR guns. They need to lose their next election. We have been betrayed.

46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Did this really happen? Or, are you really just sensationalizing again?

I would guess the latter, since you provided no link to back-up your assertions (likely this came from some obscure wingnut blog site, or one of those chain emails, I am guessing....).

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

knothead

knothead

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:Did this really happen? Or, are you really just sensationalizing again?

I would guess the latter, since you provided no link to back-up your assertions (likely this came from some obscure wingnut blog site, or one of those chain emails, I am guessing....).

Z, me thinks this falls into the BU.....IT category!



Last edited by knothead on 2/24/2014, 7:08 pm; edited 2 times in total

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

http://commonsensecampaign.org/site/index.php/csc-concerns-choose-alabama-or-america/csc-concerns-in-america/410-list-of-46-senators-who-voted-to-repeal-the-2nd-amendment-via-the-un-small-arms-treaty.html



http://www.saveamericafoundation.com/2013/12/21/46-senators-voted-give-rights-un/

Guest


Guest

I FULLY exspect Z and knot to take back thier nasty comments now.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00091

Statement of Purpose:  To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00091



Last edited by Dot on 2/24/2014, 6:45 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : working link hopfully)

Guest


Guest

BTW. I think all you liberals need to come and look at these people who are traitors to our country and constitution. They are willing to give over our freedoms to a FOREIGN POWER.

That should concern you.

Thankfully it didnt pass. But Bill Nelson needs to take note. Because I will write this on my car and let everyone I know know that he tried to rip the 2nd adm from us and give those powers to the UN.

2seaoat



Really? Are people this naive?


The above-referenced piece of scarelore about the United States' having already entered into a such a treaty — one which supposedly provides a "legal way around the 2nd Amendment" and will result in a "complete ban on all weapons for US citizens" — is erroneous in all its particulars:

The Arms Trade Treaty has nothing to do with restricting the legal sale or ownership of guns within the United States. The aim of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty is to combat the illicit international trade of arms by "tightening regulation of, and setting international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons" in order to "close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market":
The Arms Trade Treaty obligates member states to monitor arms exports and ensure that weapons don't cross existing arms embargoes or end up being used for human-rights abuses, including terrorism. Member states, with the assistance of the U.N., will put into place enforceable, standardized arms import and export regulations (much like those that already exist in the U.S.) and be expected to track the destination of exports to ensure they don't end up in the wrong hands. Ideally, that means limiting the inflow of deadly weapons into places like Syria.
The text of the proposed treaty specifically "reaffirms the sovereign right and responsibility of any State to regulate and control transfers of conventional arms that take place exclusively within its territory, pursuant to its own legal or constitutional systems," so even if such a treaty came to pass, U.S. rights and laws regarding the sale and ownership of small arms would still apply within the United States.

The Obama administration has stated that mandatory conditions for U.S. approval of such an arms trade treaty include the following:

The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be upheld.

There will be no restrictions on civilian possession or trade of firearms otherwise permitted by law or protected by the U.S. Constitution.

There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.

As the Wall Street Journal reported, the U.S. 'voted in favor [of the treaty only] after the Obama Administration secured its key "red line" that the treaty would have no impact on the Second Amendment. The final draft specifies "non-intervention in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of signatories.'

No such treaty could "bypass the normal legislative process in Congress," as all treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory must first be approved by a two-thirds vote of the U.S. Senate before they are considered to be ratified and binding.

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp#LJDCAwHfxVausQHO.99

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

knothead wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:Did this really happen? Or, are you really just sensationalizing again?

I would guess the latter, since you provided no link to back-up your assertions (likely this came from some obscure wingnut blog site, or one of those chain emails, I am guessing....).

Z, me thinks this falls into the BU.....IT category!

I think you are correct, Knothead. The odorous smell of bovine defacation emanates greatly from this thread.... Hip-waders will be needed shortly, followed by gas masks.....

The UN Arms Treaty has nothing to do with America's 2nd Amendment, as the wingnuts are claiming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

"The Arms Trade Treaty obligates member states to monitor arms exports and ensure that weapons don't cross existing arms embargoes or end up being used for human-rights abuses, including terrorism. Member states, with the assistance of the U.N., will put into place enforceable, standardized arms import and export regulations (much like those that already exist in the U.S.) and be expected to track the destination of exports to ensure they don't end up in the wrong hands. Ideally, that means limiting the inflow of deadly weapons into places like Syria.”

It has more to do with controling the flow of arms to rogue states like Syria and North Korea, and has nothing to do with the trading of arms in America or restricting our constitutional rights.

I guess since no Republicans voted for the measure, they are in favor of turning a blind eye toward arms trafficking to Mexican cartells, drug lords, rogue nations, and eventually, I would also assume terrorist enterprises. How typical of them, correct?

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

The above-referenced piece of scarelore......

Very good! Scarelore it is.... Meant for the non-thinkers among us....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

2seaoat



They are willing to give over our freedoms to a FOREIGN POWER.


What utter nonsense.  Propaganda does not work against an intelligent informed population, it however is quite effective in regards to people who lack intelligence.  The bill introduced was the classic technique of a question which cannot be answered.  When did you stop beating your wife?  It can never be answered because the person never beat his wife, and this treaty is not what the bill said it was.........it stands on the merits of the four corners of the documents and the vote was not on the treaty.

Guest


Guest

You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

And Iran serves onthe security council for gun proliferation

Why should we deal with the UN with any of this?

You guys just defend anything that the left does

You're all idiots

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:They are willing to give over our freedoms to a FOREIGN POWER.


What utter nonsense.  Propaganda does not work against an intelligent informed population, it however is quite effective in regards to  people who lack intelligence.  The bill introduced was the classic technique of a question which cannot be answered.  When did you stop beating your wife?  It can never be answered because the person never beat his wife, and this treaty is not what the bill said it was.........it stands on the merits of the four corners of the documents and the vote was not on the treaty.

I agree with you, but it seems to be working well with certain posters from our forum.... Starting with PaceDog, of course....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

part og the name of the damn bill they voted on says to uphold the second amd rights. did you even look at the government link?

snopes is nothing but two libs who believe in fairy dust lol dumbasses I swear lol

2seaoat



You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

Here is the link to the copy of the treaty. Feel free to find the language which you believe does these things.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf#page=21

Please note that Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Republicans in Congress are the only ones against this treaty.....do you find a common thread?

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Dot wrote:part og the name of the damn bill they voted on says to uphold the second amd rights. did you even look at the government link?

snopes is nothing but two libs who believe in fairy dust lol dumbasses I swear lol

There are dumbasses on this forum, but I don't think Seaoat is one of them....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

2seaoat



To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

Chrissy,

What if the bill said: To uphold the quality standards of medical labs in the United States and prevent Chrissy from being hired anywhere in America.

The first assumption is that Chrissy cannot meet the quality standards of a medical lab. If we took a vote on this forum, and some people came to your defense, those people would be attacked as wanting to lower quality standards in labs in America, and the simple vote and focus on the vote ignores the critical question: What is the quality standard, and has Chrissy breached the same. You did not breach any quality standard, rather the mere vote by those who defend you are being attacked, rather than the standard of care being breached. This requires a whole lot of stupid to fall for this propaganda. Apparently North Korea, Syria, Iran, congressional Republicans, Chrissy, and Pace share a parallel universe.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Apparently North Korea, Syria, Iran, congressional Republicans, Chrissy, and Pace share a parallel universe.

They are lost somewhere in the Delta Quadrant.......  Razz



Last edited by ZVUGKTUBM on 2/25/2014, 12:33 am; edited 1 time in total

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

TEOTWAWKI

TEOTWAWKI

Dear Mr. Teo

Thank you for contacting me regarding your concerns about gun control and the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) that was adopted by the UN General Assembly.
The ATT seeks to better regulate the international trade of conventional arms, thereby helping reduce the risk that they will fall into the hands of terrorist groups, rogue states, or other extremists who commit major crimes against humanity. In the United Nations, the treaty passed by a vote of 154 to 3. Iran, Syria, and North Korea voted against the treaty.
Secretary of State John Kerry has stated that the ATT "...applies only to international trade, and reaffirms the sovereign right of any state to regulate arms within its territory…nothing in this treaty could ever infringe on the rights of American citizens under our domestic law or the Constitution, including the Second Amendment.”
I support the constitutional right to bear arms. I grew up on a ranch in the Florida countryside and have been a hunter since I was a boy. As with all treaties, the U.S. Senate must vote to ratify any treaty signed by the Executive Branch. I would never vote in support of an international treaty that would impact the right to bear arms in the United States or require regulation of domestic sales of arms.

You can be sure that I will keep your thoughts in mind when the ATT is considered by the full Senate.

Sincerely,
Bill Nelson

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

Chrissy,

What if the bill said: To uphold the quality standards of medical labs in the United States and prevent Chrissy from being hired anywhere in America.

The first assumption is that Chrissy cannot meet the quality standards of a medical lab.  If we took a vote on this forum, and some people came to your defense, those people would be attacked as wanting to lower quality standards in labs in America, and the simple vote and focus on the vote ignores the critical question:  What is the quality standard, and has Chrissy breached the same.   You did not breach any quality standard, rather the mere vote by those who defend you are being attacked, rather than the standard of care being breached.   This requires a whole lot of stupid to fall for this propaganda.  Apparently North Korea, Syria, Iran, congressional Republicans, Chrissy, and Pace share a parallel universe.

well obviously that part of you that claims to be a republican is completely finished if you think giving any more power the UN, run by countries like iran is a good thing.

I don't particularly like the part about my personal information being given to foreign countries that produce guns if I buy one here.

Article 8
Import
1. Each importing State Party shall take measures to ensure that
appropriate and relevant information is provided, upon request, pursuant to its
national laws, to the exporting State Party, to assist the exporting State Party in
conducting its national export assessment under Article 7. Such measures may
include end use or end user documentation.
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf

National data base that will be shared <<< do you get that?

But I don't expect you to have a problem with this, because you follow along with everything the gov does. don't worry though, your information will be shared with these other countries too. And if you don't see a problem with that as a American citizen and how it undermines our rights, liberties and freedoms, well then there is nothing left to say.

I have given y'all the UN doc, read it for yourself.


Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

Here is the link to the copy of the treaty.  Feel free to find the language which you believe does these things.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf#page=21

Please note that Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Republicans in Congress are the only ones against this treaty.....do you find a common thread?

The United Nations is made up of tin pot dictators who see the United States as a cash cow to transfer wealth to third world countries.

Here is a quote from the treaty.

2. Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system,
including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this
Treaty.

Would you explain to us all how that does NOT place our weapons under the control of the United Nations?

Please show your reliable source and a link to verify your statement that only North Korea, Iran and Syria are the only countries opposed to this treaty. Once again, Democrats are eager sell out our country if in some way it further their Socialist agenda.

Markle

Markle

One of the largest sources of civil opposition to the ATT has come from the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), which is the lobbying arm of the NRA. In July 2012 ILA stated that:


"Anti-gun treaty proponents continue to mislead the public, claiming the treaty would have no impact on American gun owners. That's a bald-faced lie. For example, the most recent draft treaty includes export/import controls that would require officials in an importing country to collect information on the 'end user' of a firearm, keep the information for 20 years, and provide the information to the country from which the gun was exported. In other words, if you bought a Beretta shotgun, you would be an 'end user' and the U.S. government would have to keep a record of you and notify the Italian government about your purchase. That is gun registration. If the U.S. refuses to implement this data collection on law-abiding American gun owners, other nations might be required to ban the export of firearms to the U.S."[30]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_Trade_Treaty

Here are others who agree with the anti-gun Democrats and Progressives we see here on this forum...along with President Barack Hussein Obama.

46 US Senators voted to give your gun rights to the UN Whodoyoutrust



Last edited by Markle on 2/24/2014, 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

Here is the link to the copy of the treaty.  Feel free to find the language which you believe does these things.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf#page=21

Please note that Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Republicans in Congress are the only ones against this treaty.....do you find a common thread?

The United Nations is made up of tin pot dictators who see the United States as a cash cow to transfer wealth to third world countries.

Here is a quote from the treaty.  

2. Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system,
including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this
Treaty.

Would you explain to us all how that does NOT place our weapons under the control of the United Nations?

Please show your reliable source and a link to verify your statement that only North Korea, Iran and Syria are the only countries opposed to this treaty.  Once again, Democrats are eager sell out our country if in some way it further their Socialist agenda.

Shut up, you stupid Neanderthal jackass.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


This treaty represents an effort to prevent EXPORT of arms to other countries that might support terrorism and has nothing whatever to do with our right to bear arms.

Markle

Markle

Floridatexan wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

Here is the link to the copy of the treaty.  Feel free to find the language which you believe does these things.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf#page=21

Please note that Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Republicans in Congress are the only ones against this treaty.....do you find a common thread?

The United Nations is made up of tin pot dictators who see the United States as a cash cow to transfer wealth to third world countries.

Here is a quote from the treaty.  

2. Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system,
including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this
Treaty.

Would you explain to us all how that does NOT place our weapons under the control of the United Nations?

Please show your reliable source and a link to verify your statement that only North Korea, Iran and Syria are the only countries opposed to this treaty.  Once again, Democrats are eager sell out our country if in some way it further their Socialist agenda.

Shut up, you stupid Neanderthal jackass.


As usual...that's the best you can do.  You must be so proud! ONE sentence you cannot refute and like a child, you resort to profanity. Keep up the good work!

46 US Senators voted to give your gun rights to the UN HystericallyLaughingmanandboy

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:You may recall this treaty which you do not have a copy of would allow foriegn countries to receive your personal information if you bought a gun made in another country.

Here is the link to the copy of the treaty.  Feel free to find the language which you believe does these things.

https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2013/04/20130410%2012-01%20PM/Ch_XXVI_08.pdf#page=21

Please note that Iran, North Korea, Syria, and the Republicans in Congress are the only ones against this treaty.....do you find a common thread?

The United Nations is made up of tin pot dictators who see the United States as a cash cow to transfer wealth to third world countries.

Here is a quote from the treaty.  

2. Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system,
including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this
Treaty.

Would you explain to us all how that does NOT place our weapons under the control of the United Nations?

Please show your reliable source and a link to verify your statement that only North Korea, Iran and Syria are the only countries opposed to this treaty.  Once again, Democrats are eager sell out our country if in some way it further their Socialist agenda.

that in red says enough.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » 46 US Senators voted to give your gun rights to the UN

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum