Kerry to sign UN arms treaty...

[Jeff]

Because politics?


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...21107?irpc=932

Well I can honestly say in my 51 years on this earth this is the first president I knew that took time from all the parties going on on election night to get something going that he put on hold back in July , yup I could be wrong unlike all you geniuses on this board ( well the good ones anyway, you know the 4 or 5 that will actually be here participating within a couple weeks ) have made it quite clear I have no idea what I am talking about so I guess all presidents do that the night they are elected

[logroller]

Well I can honestly say in my 51 years on this earth this is the first president I knew that took time from all the parties going on on election night to get something going that he put on hold back in July , yup I could be wrong unlike all you geniuses on this board ( well the good ones anyway, you know the 4 or 5 that will actually be here participating within a couple weeks ) have made it quite clear I have no idea what I am talking about so I guess all presidents do that the night they are elected

Its funny to me because it seems like you're concerned he wasn't partying it up. Which is ironic considering the recurring issue of Obama's leisure time (I'm sure you've received emails/FB posts on this)-- to which I say the president doesn't get time off, not really ever-- its a 24/7 job.

It's not that you're wrong, its that you're now aware. The frenzy of media glams onto all kinds of drudgery and its difficult to sort through it all. I mean what was bush doing after he was reelected? Clinton? Reagan? Was it all fine cigars and cognac? I honestly don't know but I can venture to guess that, after months of campaigning its back to work on the agenda. What constitutes Obama's agenda on gun control is hardly a secret, so all I can say is the administration's pursuit of such is no less surprising. But that doesn make it law and congress was forthwith in proscribing any attempt to enforce it. That, to me, is the end of it-- back to the other things which require attention. I'm not saying its not worth keeping an eye out, never enough watchdogs IMO, but pick your battles-- you can't win em all and dividing your efforts is a sure-fire losing strategy.

[Jeff]

Its funny to me because it seems like you're concerned he wasn't partying it up. Which is ironic considering the recurring issue of Obama's leisure time (I'm sure you've received emails/FB posts on this)-- to which I say the president doesn't get time off, not really ever-- its a 24/7 job.

It's not that you're wrong, its that you're now aware. The frenzy of media glams onto all kinds of drudgery and its difficult to sort through it all. I mean what was bush doing after he was reelected? Clinton? Reagan? Was it all fine cigars and cognac? I honestly don't know but I can venture to guess that, after months of campaigning its back to work on the agenda. What constitutes Obama's agenda on gun control is hardly a secret, so all I can say is the administration's pursuit of such is no less surprising. But that doesn make it law and congress was forthwith in proscribing any attempt to enforce it. That, to me, is the end of it-- back to the other things which require attention. I'm not saying its not worth keeping an eye out, never enough watchdogs IMO, but pick your battles-- you can't win em all and dividing your efforts is a sure-fire losing strategy.

Well of course he was partying but to take even a second from the party he deserved to get this going shows how bad he wanted it, but all is good Y'all got it going on

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Its funny to me because it seems like you're concerned he wasn't partying it up. Which is ironic considering the recurring issue of Obama's leisure time (I'm sure you've received emails/FB posts on this)-- to which I say the president doesn't get time off, not really ever-- its a 24/7 job.

It's not that you're wrong, its that you're now aware. The frenzy of media glams onto all kinds of drudgery and its difficult to sort through it all. I mean what was bush doing after he was reelected? Clinton? Reagan? Was it all fine cigars and cognac? I honestly don't know but I can venture to guess that, after months of campaigning its back to work on the agenda. What constitutes Obama's agenda on gun control is hardly a secret, so all I can say is the administration's pursuit of such is no less surprising. But that doesn make it law and congress was forthwith in proscribing any attempt to enforce it. That, to me, is the end of it-- back to the other things which require attention. I'm not saying its not worth keeping an eye out, never enough watchdogs IMO, but pick your battles-- you can't win em all and dividing your efforts is a sure-fire losing strategy.

HELL, OBAMA JUMPED ON THE GUN CONTROL CRUSADES BOTH HANDS AND FEET AS SOON AS HE KNEW HE HAD WON HIS SECOND TERM. JUST LIKE I SAID HE WOULD. AMAZING HOW RIGHT I WAS YET WAS TOLD BY MANY HE IS NOT FOR GUN CONTROL BECAUSE HE IGNORED IT IN HIS FIRST TERM. Which I correctly pointed out he did to win his second term. -Tyr

[logroller]

HELL, OBAMA JUMPED ON THE GUN CONTROL CRUSADES BOTH HANDS AND FEET AS SOON AS HE KNEW HE HAD WON HIS SECOND TERM. JUST LIKE I SAID HE WOULD. AMAZING HOW RIGHT I WAS YET WAS TOLD BY MANY HE IS NOT FOR GUN CONTROL BECAUSE HE IGNORED IT IN HIS FIRST TERM. Which I correctly pointed out he did to win his second term. -Tyr

You pointed out that he ignored gun control? Hardly. He may of pressed pause for the election, but he certainly didn't ignore it. I've admitted that he's a snake in the grass on gun control, fast and furious is irrefutable proof of that, but for you to take credit for some predilection of obama's agenda on gun control is laughable. You even quoted evidence of his admin's position on this very treaty months before the election; the articles clearly expose whatever prognostication you now claim was yours.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/5/the-un-is-coming-for-your-guns/

-The Washington Times
Thursday, July 5, 2012


Illustration: U.N. gun grabbing by Alexander Hunter for The Washington Times more >Story TopicsPolitics
United Nations
U.N. General Assembly


The United Nations is deliberating over a treaty that will place comprehensive limits on the international weapons trade. The language of the draft agreement is so expansive it wouldn’t take an Obama-appointed judge very long to extend the treaty to cover the domestic firearms market as well. If American jurists continue to be enamored by the popular trend to consider international precedence when making U.S. rulings, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye.


This week, the U.N. General Assembly began formal discussion of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), which seeks to establish “common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms.” The scope of the proposed treaty is vast. It covers tanks, military vehicles, aircraft (including drones), ships, submarines, missiles and ammunition. It seeks to regulate arms import, export, transfer, brokering, manufacture under foreign license and technology transfer. The proposed global regulation instructs countries to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measures, to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty.”


The George W. Bush administration opposed the treaty when it was first proposed in 2006. However, the Obama administration is giving it high-level support. This has generated legitimate alarm on Capitol Hill. Last week, more than 125 members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton registering strong objections about the treaty language being drafted, which they say is “likely to pose significant threats to our national security, foreign policy and economic interests as well as our constitutional rights.” In particular, the members are concerned about an international arms treaty that infringes on “the fundamental, individual right to keep and to bear arms that is protected by the Second Amendment, as well as the right of personal self-defense on which the Second Amendment is based.” They conclude that the ATT “should not cover small arms, light weapons or related material such as firearms ammunitions.”


Arms Trade Treaty backers argue that because the treaty will only regulate international trade, it poses no threat to individual gun rights. That propaganda aside, defenders of the Second Amendment are right to be suspicious. The recent Obamacare debate over the Constitution’s Commerce Clause highlighted that goods and services need not actually cross state lines to be considered “interstate.” Successive Supreme Court rulings have extended the term to any commerce that even indirectly affects interstate markets - which in practice means all commerce. A ratified treaty, with constitutional authority, could be interpreted in a way that any weapon made with foreign components - or that might some day be exported, or that affects the overall arms market - could be said to be part of “international” trade.


There are also concerns that the ATT would be so broad, vague and poorly defined that it could be used as a political tool to obstruct otherwise licit U.S. arms sales and transfers to countries like Israel and the Republic of China (Taiwan). Some backers want the treaty to contain language regarding human rights, international humanitarian law and “sustainable development” that could be applied in ways that frustrate U.S. global strategy and oppose U.S. national interests. The final draft won’t be ready for a vote for several weeks, but even if radical changes are made to it, U.N. gun control is a misfire for America.


The Washington Times


Don't think this is harmless to we citizens. Its designed to be broad enough to be used later to take away our gun rights! Remember if obama is for it we should be against it!--Tyr

Obama Seeks US Congressional Ratification of UN Global Gun Control Treaty


http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-seeks ... reaty.html


Susanne Posel
Prisonplanet.com
June 14, 2012


Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State has announced that the Obama administration is working with the United Nations (UN) to approve, through the US Congress, the Small Arms Treaty (SAT).


Clinton affirmed that the US would facilitate talks with the UN in the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, as long as it “operates under the rules of consensus decision-making. Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly.”


This global gun control scheme, concocted by the UN, is called the International Arms Control Treaty (IACT). Disguised as a way to combat terrorism, insurgents and international criminals, this document endeavors to secure that the world’s citizens cannot defend themselves.


The IACT will empower the UN to literally force the US government to:




Enact internationally agreed licensing requirements for Americans.
Confiscate and destroy unauthorized firearms of Americans while allowing the US government to keep theirs.
Ban trade, sale and private ownership of semi-automatic guns.
Create and mandate an international registry to organize an encompassing gun confiscation in America.






Yet again an end run around that which he can not get enacted by way of Congress!
Americans had better wake up to exactly what obama is doing. For this cedes not only our gun rights but another chunk of our Sovereignty as well. -Tyr

You did go on to say that this 'end run' would entail executive orders on gun control. So, any such EO on gun control? Show me them and I gladly concede your being correct but, I gotta be honest, it better be more heinous than the end run committed with fast and furious to reduce f&f to his 'ignoring' gun control in his first term.

[fj1200]

Well I can honestly say in my 51 years on this earth this is the first president I knew that took time from all the parties going on on election night to get something going that he put on hold back in July , yup I could be wrong unlike all you geniuses on this board ( well the good ones anyway, you know the 4 or 5 that will actually be here participating within a couple weeks ) have made it quite clear I have no idea what I am talking about so I guess all presidents do that the night they are elected

I don't know what your typical POTUS does after reelection but the Reuters article didn't actually say BO did anything, just that the US backed a UN committees call.

[jimnyc]

I'd like to punch that 'ol Lurch lookalike right in his face. I'm not saying I "AM" going to do that, so calm down, NSA!!! There's probably a few million people I would like to punch in the face, just a desire of things that would never happen. But even though just wishful thinking, my top 100 are almost all comprised of politicians.

[aboutime]

I'd like to punch that 'ol Lurch lookalike right in his face. I'm not saying I "AM" going to do that, so calm down, NSA!!! There's probably a few million people I would like to punch in the face, just a desire of things that would never happen. But even though just wishful thinking, my top 100 are almost all comprised of politicians.

JIM. ENLARGE the photo, then print it on paper, and DO IT!.....