Senate set to approve U.N. Small Arms Treaty

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

http://www.examiner.com/article/senate-set-to-approve-controversial-un-gun-treaty

[matt0611]

The house won't pass this though right?

[Brett85]

Don't they have to get 2/3rds vote in the Senate to pass treaties? How do they know they have the votes for this?

[pcgame]

.............

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

What do they have planned in order to actually enforce this? That's the question.

[andrew1229649]

Is this reality? Where are we?

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

Can we begin publicly condemning Harry Reid, and Hillary Clinton as traitors now? As well as, anyone who votes yes on this legislation? Perhaps have Veteran's threaten Citizen's Arrest if they pass this?

[Brett85]

This article makes it sound like the Senate is going to vote on this this week, but then I read that the treaty isn't even going to be signed until July 27th. Does anyone know when the Senate will actually take this up?

[QuickZ06]

NUTS!!!

[Weston White]

No, this is utter bunkum and they are fully aware that it is (there is simply no valid excuse for any of this):

U.S. Constitution, Article VI,C.2:

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.


“The government of the United States, as was well observed in the argument, is one of limited powers. It can exercise authority over no subjects except those which have been delegated to it. Congress cannot, by legislation, enlarge the federal jurisdiction, nor can it be enlarged under the treatymaking power.” - New Orleans v. United States, 35 U.S. 10 Pet. 662, 736 (1836)


“The concept that the Bill of Rights and other constitutional protections against arbitrary government are inoperative when they become inconvenient or when expediency dictates otherwise is a very dangerous doctrine and, if allowed to flourish, would destroy the benefit of a written Constitution and undermine the basis of our Government. If our foreign commitments become of such nature that the Government can no longer satisfactorily operate within the bounds laid down by the Constitution, that instrument can be amended by the method which it prescribes.
…
There is nothing new or unique about what we say here. This Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty. [Footnote 33] For example, in Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U. S. 258, 133 U. S. 267, it declared:

"The treaty power, as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments, and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or in that of one of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its consent."” - Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 14, 17-18 (1957)


United Nation’s Charter, A.2,S.7:

“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.”http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/index.shtml


UNESCO Constitution, A.I:

“Purposes and functions

1. The purpose of the Organization is to contribute to peace and security by promoting collaboration among the nations through education, science and culture in order to further universal respect for justice, for the rule of law and for the human rights and fundamental freedoms which are affirmed for the peoples of the world, without distinction of race, sex, language or religion, by the Charter of the United Nations.”
http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15244&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html


News article: In U.S., Constitution Supersedes U.N. Charter (http://www.nytimes.com/1990/12/29/opinion/l-in-us-constitution-supersedes-un-charter-280890.html)

[row333au]

Soros Promotes UN Control Over Gun Ownership

http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/11983-soros-promotes-un-control-over-gun-ownership


In order to avoid being labeled a “human rights abuser,” the United States (along with all member states) is ordered by the UN to comply with the ATT. To compel this compliance, the ATT empowers the UN to force Congress to:

• Enact internationally agreed licensing requirements for Americans

• Confiscate and destroy unauthorized firearms of Americans while allowing the U.S. government to keep theirs

• Ban the trade, sale, and private ownership of semi-automatic guns

• Create and mandate an international registry to organize an encompassing gun confiscation in America.

The Obama Administration is now trying to undermine the 2nd Amendment by signing up to UN's Arms Trade Treaty. The big concern here is that this terrible gun-grabbing Treaty is in fact will be signed by the Obama Administration, which means Americans can no longer rely on the Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution given their recent track record on Obamacare. If this Treaty is ratified, it won't be long before Americans will see Federal Judges who are keen to expand international law who will then decide that this Treaty covers domestic gun purchases too.