Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Obama's/Hillary's Backdoor Control!

blondekosmic15
Report
Wishing everyone a very happy new year~
Yesterday at 7:08 PM
Posted by on Jul. 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM
  • 123 Replies
1 mom liked this

 

UN Small Arms Treaty: Barack Obama’s Backdoor Gun Control May Pass

July 10, 2012 9:04 am

There are always enemies of individual liberty. Many, in socialist and globalist circles, hate the fact that the common US citizen can exercise his or her liberty of free speech, worship without government intrusion, and is protected by ‘due process of law’. However, there is no hate in this world among those who promote and prop up tyranny like there is against the 2nd Amendment: the US citizen’s God-given liberty to own firearms.

This is why men, like George Soros, put in an ‘honest day’s work’ attempting to utilize United Nations powers in order to neutralize US sovereignty and the 2nd Amendment with it. According to John Wolverton, II of The New American, Soros is pulling every little string possible to strip your home of its defenses against crime and tyranny:

George Soros is financing the fight to give the United Nations control of your guns.

Through his Media Matters organization, Soros is dumping pro-UN gun control propaganda into the mainstream media to coincide with the United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty being held in New York July 2–27.”

While it is difficult to sift through the various UN treaties, the ‘small arms treaty’ is a part of a much larger initiative to curtail individual gun rights. In essence, the ‘small arms treaty’, the ‘Law of the Sea’ treaty, and the ‘Arms Trade Treaty’ can be bundled into one giant effort to remove US sovereignty, giving the UN control over the liberties of US citizens, nullifying protections Americans have enjoyed since the birth of the US.

    

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have already vowed to sign such a treaty. In fact, both have largely been working behind closed doors, as they know full-well that Americans would surely show staunch resistance if their agenda committed to ‘open war’.

Douglas J. Hagmann of the HomelandSecurityUS.com reports:

Regardless of how unlikely it would appear that the U.S. Senate would ratify the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, the antagonism to the right to bear arms in the U.S. by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and our elected officials cannot be disputed. While seeming to loathe the Second Amendment, the majority of their efforts to enforce gun control appear to be “under the radar” to avoid raising the ire of the advocates of the right to bear arms.”

What does this mean for Americans? All of these ‘treaties’ have a common thread, which boil down to 4 directives. Katie Pavlich, the Editor of TownHall.com, reports:

-Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

-Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

-Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the anti-gun media never seem to grasp).

-Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.”

According to various White House insiders, Barack Hussein Obama has not been idle, saying, “I just want you to know that we are working on it,” he continues …“We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.” Perhaps, this is why the President has been curiously silent on the subject, as he does not want to attract attention to what he is truly doing through the various UN treaties.

Either way, this spells bad news for American gun rights. Anthony Martin of the Examiner.com stated:

As the United Nations prepares its final push to ratify a controversial gun treaty, the U.S. Senate is set to approve the measure which critics say will not only give away U.S. sovereignty but directly attack the individual gun rights of American citizens, according to a report published Thursday at Stand Up America.

Democrats still hold the majority in the Senate.”

If we wish to keep our liberties, then we must send a clear message to our politicians …their jobs will not survive election day if they even consider the ‘small arms treaty’ to be a good idea. The disarmament of the American people will signal the beginning of the end of any semblance of freedom we had left. As the saying goes, ‘Hitler, Stalin, and Mao agree …gun control works.’

http://www.ijreview.com/2012/07/10064-un-small-arms-treaty-barack-obamas-backdoor-gun-control-may-pass/

by on Jul. 10, 2012 at 1:52 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
Veni.Vidi.Vici.
by on Jul. 10, 2012 at 1:55 PM
2 moms liked this

I am so sorry. My first thought regarding the title is that I, too have a sphincter.

Carry on

matreshka
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:03 PM
2 moms liked this

I love that sculpture in the front of the un that is in the picture :)

I understand that the constitution gives us the right to bear arms.  The intent was so that Americans could form militias and defnd themselves before there was a cohesive military system in place.

However, No one can argue that gun violence is NOT out of control in this countr. other nations, like the UK that have gun control do not have the crime rates we do.

Something has to be done about guns and crime.

rccmom
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:07 PM
6 moms liked this

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms.  Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

matreshka
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:13 PM
3 moms liked this

I have a hard time taking info like this seriously too.  With the widespread growth of political blogs, people can pass anything off as "truth" and spin a idea so far from its beginnings.  I find its best to check the AP, BBC, ITAR-TASS or major newspaper websites.

Quoting rccmom:

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms.  Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.


rccmom
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM
3 moms liked this

I was looking up online and found this.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/12/international-gun-ban-treaty/

It says that the treaty specifically states that what a country does within its own border in regards to gun ownship is up to that country. The treaty will not regulate domestic gun laws.

blondekosmic15
Report
Wishing everyone a very happy new year~
Yesterday at 7:08 PM
by Blonde on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:15 PM
4 moms liked this

 

Quoting rccmom:

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms.  Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

The bias is directed @ the gun owner & the 2nd Amendment. Not the President who exhibits a reputation of disrespect for Congress and the Constitution. Unfortunately some who support Barack Obama, his policies attacking our freedoms, will never believe this man is bent on changing America forever and taking our liberties away til it's too late~

rccmom
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM
2 moms liked this

 

Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting rccmom:

I don't know. I have a hard time reading an article like this because of its bias. I really doubt a lot of other people hate US citizens because of our freedoms.  Nor do I think people hate the 2nd Ammendment, but some people do not agree on how it is interpreted and applied.

Therefore since the beginning does not make sense, but uses inflammatory rhetoric, it makes me suspicious of the entire article. I will have to research this some and see if there is any real truth to it, but my first guess is that no, there is probably little to no truth to the claims.

The bias is directed @ the gun owner & the 2nd Amendment. Not the President who exhibits a reputation of disrespect for Congress and the Constitution. Unfortunately some who support Barack Obama, his policies attacking our freedoms, will never believe this man is bent on changing America forever and taking our liberties away til it's too late~

Well, the article's bias is directed towards others, not gun owners. If Obama had wanted to enact gun control, he probably would have done it already. I remember when he took office everyone out buying up ammo for fear he was going to take away our guns. Nope, didn't happen, just fear mongering. If the article was correct that you cited, it certainly could have found a more factual and less biased way to talk about it. Stuff like that just puts people like me off, and I'm not even a far left Liberal, just a moderate one.      

Also, luckily for me, we own swords, and I have a cool pair of sais, and no one is regulating those!   

kailu1835
by Silver Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 2:29 PM
2 moms liked this

 I guess that's sort of correct.  The UK has one of the highest violent crime rate in the world, despite having less numbers than just one of our states.  They are considered the Crime Capital of Europe, with higher crimes than America, Canada, Australia and South Africa as well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Taking away guns does not stem violence; violence does not come from gun ownership, but from the people themselves.

Quoting matreshka:

I love that sculpture in the front of the un that is in the picture :)

I understand that the constitution gives us the right to bear arms.  The intent was so that Americans could form militias and defnd themselves before there was a cohesive military system in place.

However, No one can argue that gun violence is NOT out of control in this countr. other nations, like the UK that have gun control do not have the crime rates we do.

Something has to be done about guns and crime.

 

babiesbabybaby development

matreshka
by Gold Member on Jul. 10, 2012 at 3:20 PM

That article cited statistics from 2007, and listed 927 murders, when gun control laws were lifted briefly, they have since gone back to tighter gun control. According to the CDC an average of 18,000 murders are committed in the US within the last decade.

As for your second point, if people are the problem, then why give them guns?

Quoting kailu1835:

 I guess that's sort of correct.  The UK has one of the highest violent crime rate in the world, despite having less numbers than just one of our states.  They are considered the Crime Capital of Europe, with higher crimes than America, Canada, Australia and South Africa as well.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

Taking away guns does not stem violence; violence does not come from gun ownership, but from the people themselves.

Quoting matreshka:

I love that sculpture in the front of the un that is in the picture :)

I understand that the constitution gives us the right to bear arms.  The intent was so that Americans could form militias and defnd themselves before there was a cohesive military system in place.

However, No one can argue that gun violence is NOT out of control in this countr. other nations, like the UK that have gun control do not have the crime rates we do.

Something has to be done about guns and crime.

 


asaffell
by on Jul. 10, 2012 at 3:24 PM
2 moms liked this

I really want one reason why anyone NEEDS a personal semi-automatic weapon.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN