After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks

Comments (217)
Globalman wrote:

The Japanese military in WWII were very much aware if they invaded mainland USA there would be a great deal of civilian armed opposition. Not a bad thing.

Nov 07, 2012 3:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dragos111 wrote:

Here we go. Here comes gun control, Cap and Trade, taxes imposed by the UN, flexibility with the Russians, etc.

Dems, you wanted Obama. Now we all have to live with him.

Want to know where we are headed? Look at Athens, on fire, today.

Nov 07, 2012 7:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
paynegrp wrote:

The gun control manics have no idea what a can of worms they are going to open. We gun owners will fight (not vote) for our 2nd amendment rights.

Nov 07, 2012 8:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TonyBert wrote:

They will have to pry my rifles and pistols out of my cold dead hands.

Nov 07, 2012 8:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
srowcliffe wrote:

Let me get this straight: In this world, aren’t GOVERNMENTS the highest per capita abuser of civil rights?

Nov 07, 2012 8:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Night2769 wrote:

Indeed the ilk that is the U.N will invade slowly like how socialism spread by talking and brainwashing the younger generation and promising gifts. It will take years but they will get in here. As the older generation heads for retirement the younger generation will concede. The great ” white male” hate mongering allows the brainwashing to continue. I fear for the future. Just look at the ilk coming into this country.

Nov 07, 2012 8:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
rhenrywv wrote:

You have to admit, Obama doesn’t waste any time putting his plans for America into action. One step at a time and eventually the 2nd Amendment will become history.

No mention in article was about whether the new UN agreement would prevent the Obama administration from delivering guns to the Mexican drug cartel or other narco-terrorists.

Nov 07, 2012 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
onewire wrote:

The ballots are barely counted and now the prez is going for the
Arms Control Treaty. Well, gun registration in the U.S. will be
followed by confiscation. It will not happen to me.

Nov 07, 2012 9:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BearMarine wrote:

The illegal gun runners will love this, because it won’t affect them one bit.

Nov 07, 2012 9:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
skinnyb82 wrote:

I’m not worried about this. There are legal precedents (SCOTUS) stating that the U.S. Constitution has legal precedence over international treaties. Plus two-thirds of the U.S. Senate has to ratify this and I don’t believe any U.S. Senator in their right mind would ratify this Treaty. These people are career politicians, they wanna keep their seats and ratifying this Treaty would effectively end their careers.

Then again, there’s a loophole…
“Signature by a United States President would indicate to the international community that the United States intends to abide by the gun control laws, with or without ratification by the Senate.”
Or in another case, he doesn’t even need to sign it if “gun control becomes customary international law.” This will get messy.

Nov 07, 2012 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
garlicsauce wrote:

Did anyone bother to actually read the article? This has nothing to do with domestic gun sales.

Nov 07, 2012 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MikeReno wrote:

I find it amazing that the best example the spokesman could give for the need of this UN arms limit is the 30,000 who died trying to oust the tyrant Assad from power. The UN will ensure peace and safety by protecting despots from rebellion? Really?

Nov 07, 2012 10:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Steve_CA wrote:

We a WELL ARMED militia for good reason. Never forget WE are the people. Not the govt.

Nov 08, 2012 12:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
DoomPaul wrote:

How would this small arms treaty affect the Syrian Civil War when the US is funding the rebels through Turkey and Russia is funding the Assad government directly. It sounds like a dumb scrap of paper that will either be used to undermine the 2nd Amendment at home or give suckers good feelings abroad.

Nov 08, 2012 1:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
Marla wrote:

OMG, are the gun owners who posted here all morons? This article has nothing to do with legal US gun ownership, it’s about illegal arms trading around the world. Get a grip!

Nov 08, 2012 1:46am EST  --  Report as abuse
mebgone24 wrote:

It’s just a small step towards it.

Nov 08, 2012 5:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
PatC109 wrote:

All of you people who keep saying “They will have to pry my rifles and pistols out of my cold dead hands.” Get it straight It’s My Warm Dead Hands,

Nov 08, 2012 6:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

paynegrp wrote:
“The gun control manics have no idea what a can of worms they are going to open. We gun owners will fight (not vote) for our 2nd amendment rights.”

Which is exactly why you are not responsible enough to own a gun.

Nov 08, 2012 6:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

Marla wrote:
“OMG, are the gun owners who posted here all morons?”

Yes, and they all have guns. Think about that…

Nov 08, 2012 6:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
krueg wrote:

this article blames 30000 deaths in syria on illegal arms flowing into the country. I thought syrias problem came from people wanting to live free. Seems to me most of the deaths have resulted from the Syrian govt using weapomns on their own people.

Nov 08, 2012 6:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
jncarlos007 wrote:

I find it amusing to read all the talk on here by those who say this DOESN’T affect domestic sales and it only targets the ILLEGAL gun trade.
But these are people who don’t understand that ANY treaty we sign supercedes the Constitution as the law of the land, Bill ofRights or not. This treaty will be the law of the land, no matter what it says or is INTERPRETED to say.
Secondly, if illegal arms trading is already illegal what will a UN treaty do? Has it stopped Iran? Has it stopped anything?
No. This is, AS PREDICTED, exactly what the obama meant when he was caught whispering not to worry, they just had to work behind the scenes on gun control.
BE clueless and blind, I really don’t give a crap anymore about the babblings of the ignorant. Its your funeral

Nov 08, 2012 8:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
MonkeyDoodle wrote:

Here it comes people. You voted for for free contraception and unlimited abortions. You are going to get a lot more than you bargained for.

Nov 08, 2012 8:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
MonkeyDoodle wrote:

Here it comes people. You voted for for free contraception and unlimited abortions. You are going to get a lot more than you bargained for.

Nov 08, 2012 8:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
passpass55 wrote:

And so it begins. I told everyone I know that Obama’s first effort….if he were re-elected…would be the restriction of the right to bear arms. Obama is pushing this UN effort in order to restrict the right of Americans to bear arms. We were warned, by Obama himself, in the debates. Obama said he wanted to support bans on firearms. And the firearms he mentioned were NOT weapons of war. An AR-15 or an M4 is not a weapon of war, but is a semi-automatic rifle. The 2nd Amendment must stand no matter what. My right to bear arms will not be infringed. Not while I have a breathe.

Nov 08, 2012 8:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
passpass55 wrote:

And so it begins. I told everyone I know that Obama’s first effort….if he were re-elected…would be the restriction of the right to bear arms. Obama is pushing this UN effort in order to restrict the right of Americans to bear arms. We were warned, by Obama himself, in the debates. Obama said he wanted to support bans on firearms. And the firearms he mentioned were NOT weapons of war. An AR-15 or an M4 is not a weapon of war, but is a semi-automatic rifle. The 2nd Amendment must stand no matter what. My right to bear arms will not be infringed. Not while I have a breathe.

Nov 08, 2012 8:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
Guest1212 wrote:

I am not an NRA member, but as a human being with an inalienable right to self defense I say, “From my cold dead hands.” And that’s exactly what I mean.

Nov 08, 2012 8:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
fredoaks wrote:

And UN mandated gun control in the US begins. When Obama was first elected, I filed for divorce from Amerika. That divorce is now finalized. I now have a “transactional” relationship with the occupants of my former country. I will obey the law and pay taxes only to avoid becoming a political prisoner. I fell no moral obligation to do so, however.

Nov 08, 2012 8:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
restephens1 wrote:

@PatC109…you are absolutely correct, they won’t wait for our dead hands to cool. They will however fill millions of body bags on both sides before they accomplish their goals.

Nov 08, 2012 8:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

In who’s hands do guns kill the most?

Gangsters?
Hillbillys?
Private Citizens?
Gun Nuts?
Government?

I think there should be one clear answer – so statistically, who should be disarmed?

Nov 08, 2012 8:34am EST  --  Report as abuse
Phish wrote:

They can sign whatever treaties they like, they can draft whatever legislation they want. I will not allow my constitutional rights to be usurped, and I will never surrender my firearms.

The constitution guarantees my right to keep and bear arms against the rise of tyranny. However, I believe the right to protect ones life and destiny is a far deeper and more resonant principle. Words on paper, even those evoked by paragons of our past, are not what grant us this right. We are born with this right. No words on paper can take it away. Only you can give up your arms, and I never will, they can have my bullets though. One at a time and carefully aimed.

Nov 08, 2012 8:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
TomGenin wrote:

Of Course China voted in Favor of restricting arms exports. Because if they can restrict ours, god knows China who illegally copies and sells every product we make isn’t going to stop. All that treaty does is kill a competitor, US.

Nov 08, 2012 8:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

Guess Obama can’t decide what to do first – raise taxes or start a “war on guns” – I bet he’ll call it that too.

LOL

Another “war on ….. ” freedom.

Nov 08, 2012 8:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
TomEE wrote:

As he is a fraud and a traitor, Obama is not my President!

Nov 08, 2012 8:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
sbob850 wrote:

We need to keep fighting the Marxist Democrats and Obummer. They are busy as always selling out our country and our individual Civil Rights. Obummer told the Gun Grabbers that he was working on stripping us of our Gun Rights “under the radar”, while lying to the Public. Here it is folks, now all you libertards, you’re going to see who you really voted for.
Never ever vote for a Democrat

Nov 08, 2012 8:47am EST  --  Report as abuse

This treaty is all about propping up the petty despots that are member states of the U.N.

Democrats are behind this because it is also about enabling gun control on an armed US citizenry.

Nov 08, 2012 8:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
BuggyBob wrote:

Triumph of the Will, Kristallnacht, Night of the Long Knives,Breaking a Few Eggs to Make an Omelet, The Great Leap Forward all depend on an unarmed citizenry. Slightly more than half of this country believes she should have that power–we are on our own.

Nov 08, 2012 8:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
Melvinleigh wrote:

We have heard this same story every since the League of Nations. When a bureaucrat says he or she wants to make the world safer or invoke the name of children red flags should be raised.
When a bureaucrat says these things, it means they want to invoke control. The world’s Nation’s has millions of treaties and laws on they’re books, but armaments still keep flowing to Countries or individuals bent on they’re type of power.
The answer to this silly feel good treaty is, will China, Russia, and the USA still export arms the answer is yes for China and Russia as well as other Countries and the USA will be the only Nation stupidly abiding to this treaty by going after it’s own citizens that have legal firearms to show the rest of the world, “See we’re enforcing the treaty, does this means you’ll like us now?”
Will humans all over the world still be being killed by military style firearms, absolutely because it is in the human DNA to do so. And has been doing so since Cain and Able.
The UN is a body bent on total complete control and the one Nation that still barely stands in it’s way is the USA, and the UN will try it’s hardest to finish the job it started right after WW2.

Nov 08, 2012 9:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
rakesbill wrote:

Hopefully, Obama doesn’t do something that will cause us to have to take our nation back. We’re capable of taking care of ourselves. No amount of government control will change the fact that people make stupid decisions sometimes and people will always have the power to kill other people. Our number one priority shouldn’t be protecting the dumbest of the dumb from themselves (natural selection at work), it should be rewarding success and empowering the many who dedicate themselves to improving the lives of others.

Nov 08, 2012 9:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
Ironmansouth wrote:

He will get my guns….bullets first!

Nov 08, 2012 9:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
elixelx wrote:

When Colombia tried to ban marlboro cigarettes in the 1980′s the illegal trade increased threefold….
When India tried to ban the illegal trade in internal organs the trade increased forfold….
I believe Prohibitionsaw a tenfold increase in illegal booze…
What’s that you say?…this is about arms, illegal arms, illegal international trade in arms..?Please check to make sure that the members of the UN DON’T BUY SHARES in gun-making companies before hey pass his law!
Gun-running is an old and respected trade! Were it not for gun-running there would be NO AMERICA!

Nov 08, 2012 9:14am EST  --  Report as abuse
stepheninnc wrote:

Well, I would remind everyone that the Founders intended the public have weapons, not for sport or pleasure, but to guard against the tyranny of the government. I would suggest anyone wanting semiautomatic pistols, rifles or shotguns go out and acquire two of each now with spare parts and plenty of ammunition. I would also suggest you look at the appleseed marksmanship training course. Nobody ever had too many firearms or too much ammunition! God bless America!

Nov 08, 2012 9:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

In what way, exactly, is stopping idiots from having guns a bad thing? It looks to be a really sensible move to me, and way over due. Think of all the American lives that would be saved.

Nov 08, 2012 9:19am EST  --  Report as abuse

gun confiscation has already happened in the Us New Orleans was the test faze and it worked flawlessly. They had 6 man teams kick in doors with rifles ready pointing in the faces of citizens forcing them to hand over arms or die. This is exactly what is going to happen all over america they will come and they will take them, some of us will be killed but they will win. Obama has all the power he ever wanted and now the people that support the US Constitution are enemy number one. There is no preparation that can stop this there is no group that will be able to hold it off DHs has been armed to the teeth to murder american citizens. Thousands of american will die Obama loves the idea of white american blood on his hands it is his fantasy.

Nov 08, 2012 9:22am EST  --  Report as abuse

There goes the Second Amendment. I guarantee a massive civil insurrection if this President tries to forcilbly take away the guns citizens have. Even UN troops would not be enough to overcome the will of a free people and their determination to stay that way. The very idea of foreign troops on our soil would be enough to bring most of us together to fight it. Using law enforcement and the our own military to diarm the citizenry will be rife with outright opposition from the troops and the law officers. In short, it will be a bloody mess.

Nov 08, 2012 9:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
Happy_Hauler wrote:

I suppose it’s just a coincidence that Harry Reid has initiated the process to restrict filibuster in the Senate. After all, treaties like this require passage by the Senate to become applicable to the United States, and if he succeeds those Senators who actually believe that the Constitution and its Amendments mean something will not be able to come to the Nation’s defense.
Welcome to Obama’s second term. Who wants to bet that, somehow, it might not be his last?

Nov 08, 2012 9:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
deanh wrote:

the one historical constant: the look of complete surprise on the liberal’s face when it’s THEIR front door that ultimately gets the midnight knock from jackbooted government “representatives”….

Nov 08, 2012 9:28am EST  --  Report as abuse
IraqVet wrote:

If you have been aware of what’s been happening in the last 12 years, especially these last four, the you know what to expect and plan accordingly as best you can. As for the other bobble headed dolts that value image over substance, let them be unpleasantly suprised as life gets mor uglier and more expensive.

Nov 08, 2012 9:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
detret wrote:

All the Americans did was complain and write letters, until King George sent his troops to seize the arms and powder of the colonists.
When the tyrants in Washington, or the United Nations, try taking the arms of the citizens of the United States, then another revolution will take place. Liberty or death!

Nov 08, 2012 9:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
LTCB wrote:

“Arms Control” as these socialist envision it, is merely a ploy to take away EVERY human’s right to defend themselves. What do you think governments are anyway? They were created by people to protect themselves from others. Now, we’ll have a system where NO ONE will be safe.

Nov 08, 2012 9:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
TimBrowerAZ wrote:

think this country is divided now? shove anything UN down our throats and you will have over 55 million upset people.

Nov 08, 2012 9:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
LTCB wrote:

I have no intention of ever defending the rights or freedoms of another liberal again. They can go stew in their own juices. In case you in the rest of the world didn’t notice, there is a very real and active socialist takeover of the world going on. For you Chinese, I know you like your communism but, even that will fall.

Nov 08, 2012 9:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
gkeeperwilly wrote:

People fail to realize that the 2nd amendment is in place for such as event. All treaties require congressional approval. Even if this passes in the liberal Senate, it will never pass the house. IF obozo attempts to by pass the constitution and use an EO to bypass, there are close to 100,000,000 million gun owners in the US, and many of which would be at the whitehouse to evict the tenant. Myself included.

Nov 08, 2012 9:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
Stepper57 wrote:

This is how it starts? It has already started…listen to the rhetoric ..Obama is going to “fundamentally change the United States” froma Captitalist economy to a Socialist one..it will eventually reach a Communist one…ask the Cubans that came to the U.S. of how Castro’s speeches and slow indoctrination of the youth occurred…how the take over of the free market to government control…then slowly gun rights disappear…then all of your other rights disappear! read teh real history…not the revised to meet the Dems needs history!

Nov 08, 2012 9:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
StunnedAmazed wrote:

One of my neighbors said the following yesterday: “Infringe on my right to keep and bear arms, and I’ll infringe on their right to keep breathing. I lost brothers and blood in two different wars to preserve our rights. I wouldn’t hesitate to do it again.” Now that’s a scary but powerful statement coming from a 72 year old veteran. I hope the powers that be understand the reality they face.

Nov 08, 2012 9:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Stepper57 wrote:

@ Abulafiah …sure, when criminals or those that want control are the only ones with gones we are no longer citizens , we are slaves!

Nov 08, 2012 9:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
domowames wrote:

unfortanently it we do not want a new world order taking over our government , united nations control, carbon taxes and our loss of freedom we are going to have to stand up eventually and i get the feeling it is not going to be pretty.. it is going to get really messy if we do not want to lose our country.

Nov 08, 2012 9:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
domowames wrote:

unfortanently it we do not want a new world order taking over our government , united nations control, carbon taxes and our loss of freedom we are going to have to stand up eventually and i get the feeling it is not going to be pretty.. it is going to get really messy if we do not want to lose our country.

Nov 08, 2012 9:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
ghost62 wrote:

“In what way, exactly, is stopping idiots from having guns a bad thing? It looks to be a really sensible move to me, and way over due. Think of all the American lives that would be saved.” Let me guess you want to decide who the idiots are? Ill make you a deal if you dont complain about my guns I wont impose my beliefs and protect you with them, ok.

Nov 08, 2012 9:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
DrNo wrote:

So they’re saying that such a treaty would have “no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports.” Don’t our gun companies export firearms? So the treaty could run some companies out of business by depriving them of a worldwide market. They’re a bunch of scheming scumbags.

Nov 08, 2012 9:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
ghost62 wrote:

“In what way, exactly, is stopping idiots from having guns a bad thing? It looks to be a really sensible move to me, and way over due. Think of all the American lives that would be saved.” Let me guess you want to decide who the idiots are? Ill make you a deal if you dont complain about my guns I wont impose my beliefs and protect you with them, ok.

Nov 08, 2012 9:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
TexasChris wrote:

The day will come when every person will have to decide between rolling over and giving up their rights, or violently fighting the tyranny.

On that day, if I see a blue-hat UN gun grabber, I split the whig that’s wearing it.

Nov 08, 2012 9:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
accbar wrote:

There are many changes coming to us. The strategy of incrementalism, used by our old progressives, will now be accelerated. Like the Soviets, the Nazis, and other flavors of totalitarian control and murder over these last one hundred years, they have been experimenting. But they will never be successful because their own weakness drives them mad.
Stay healthy my friends.
Trust in God and know that there is a Way a Truth and a Life to follow.

Nov 08, 2012 9:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
DaddyHawg wrote:

They say this only affects exports, but how many firearms are imported to the US? This will make it hard to get anything other than Remington or Winchester, not to mention any type of military that you shoot in a foreign military match.

Nov 08, 2012 9:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Who wrote:

“Advocates say the treaty would bring much of the world in line with U.S. standards without affecting the rules that govern domestic sales. And they say gun enthusiasts are wrong to worry about their Second Amendment rights, since the Constitution trumps international law.”
Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2906252/posts

So it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! and the NRA knows this conflict between the Treaty and the Constitution is prime grounds for Abuse by
gun control zealots “JUDGES”. Looks like the NRA is being perfectly reasonable about this issue.

Nov 08, 2012 9:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Who wrote:

“Advocates say the treaty would bring much of the world in line with U.S. standards without affecting the rules that govern domestic sales. And they say gun enthusiasts are wrong to worry about their Second Amendment rights, since the Constitution trumps international law.”
Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2906252/posts

So it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! and the NRA knows this conflict between the Treaty and the Constitution is prime grounds for Abuse by
gun control zealots “JUDGES”. Looks like the NRA is being perfectly reasonable about this issue.

Nov 08, 2012 9:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
DaddyHawg wrote:

The treaty also mandates a global gun registration which would provide the required information to confiscate any and all registered firearms.

Nov 08, 2012 9:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
CK2 wrote:

Any Blue Helmet or one of their supporters that tries to lay their fascist hands on the least of my firearms will be shot.

Nov 08, 2012 9:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
topsykrets wrote:

” we’re only months away from securing a new global deal that has the potential to stop weapons reaching those who seriously abuse human rights.”
oh you mean countries like China!! this treaty does not bode well for the American people.

Nov 08, 2012 9:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
bytra wrote:

Where have I seen this before? Oh yea, that’s right, every tyrannical government from Chavez to Castro to Stalin to Hitler to Mao Zedong to Mussolini to, etc., etc., etc., first on the to-do list is to strip the rights of the civilians to their possession of firearms. It makes it so much easier if you disarm those you want to control with tyranny. The only difference now is it is taking place at a world-wide concept instead of individual countries. Welcome to a new world order!!!!

Nov 08, 2012 10:04am EST  --  Report as abuse
Denan wrote:

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

– Thomas Jefferson

Nov 08, 2012 10:04am EST  --  Report as abuse
Denan wrote:

Also, it is important to maintain a broad context of all such UN treaties. Take a step back and consider that some courts in America are allowing international law to be considered/used as precedent in American juris prudence. Consider the ramifications on our rights of both.

Nov 08, 2012 10:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
friedo wrote:

Obama is selling our country down the drain.

Nov 08, 2012 10:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
A_Vet wrote:

I worked for a year in Africa and from personal experience the UN was the most useless and inept organization I have ever encountered. In a country where there was no running water in the largest hospital in the capital, the UN would have a march to raise awareness against smoking. They are in love with “grand plans”, like this treaty, that will probably do a lot to curb lawful firearms ownership in free countries and very little to remove guns from warlords and dictators.

Nov 08, 2012 10:18am EST  --  Report as abuse

An official at the U.S. mission said: “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms.”

He forgot to add “yet.”

Nov 08, 2012 10:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
AngryOne wrote:

What is really laughable about the mindset behind these sort of treaties, is that the authors and supporters assume that if the flow of small arms and ammunition is decreased, people would then stop killing each other over long standing disputes and national interests. As if for the preceding 5,000 years before firearms were invented nations did not wage war. You could actually make the case that being shot in the head is vastly more humane than taking a sword to the gut.
Regardless, all this treaty would do, besides open the door to possible infringements upon our 2nd Amendment, would be to curtail one of the last American Trade surpluses (40% of the total global arms production) in a time of severe unemployment.

Nov 08, 2012 10:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
DEML wrote:

And so it begins….the dismantling of the US Constitution and the rights of its citizens. You people voted for it, so now OWN it! Anything that happens after this election is YOUR fault!!!

Nov 08, 2012 10:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
neverenough wrote:

Abulafiah. Just because your implausible stat says only 35% of the households posses guns doesn’t mean that the 35% own enough to cover the entire population with up to 1.2 guns per man, woman, and child. One gun behing any blade of grass. Your 11,000 plus from deaths every year probable include the Fort Hood shooter and some of your brother’s ilk. Not to mention the 80% of people killed by illegal gun owners in Chicago, gun free, New York, gun free, Detroit, gun free, Washington D.C, gun free…The list can go on. Head out to LA for a spell. Trapes along the border in Texas with Mexico. You might see some relatives at the wall holding on to some of Holder’s guns. Bite me.

Nov 08, 2012 10:34am EST  --  Report as abuse
MATTY13 wrote:

The treaty will, “make certain types of arms trading illegal.” Define that please. I die, I will my guns to my children or brothers. Is that arms trading? I buy a shotgun for my son for Christmas. Is that arms trading. I would be very very suspicious of the wording in this “treaty”.

Nov 08, 2012 10:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

AngryOne wrote:
“What is really laughable about the mindset behind these sort of treaties, is that the authors and supporters assume that if the flow of small arms and ammunition is decreased, people would then stop killing each other over long standing disputes and national interests.”

No they don’t. Is this straw-man the best you can do? Or do you simply not understand the issue but feel obliged to say something anyway?

This treaty limits illegal, as in criminal, as in not legal arms trade. You know… the ones who arm terrorists.

Why are you supporting the people who sell arms to terrorists and drug lords? Is this sort of nonsense that lost you lot the election.

Nov 08, 2012 10:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Luxomni wrote:

How about before you take away guns from our own citizens, you stop using them in every little country of the world that doesn’t want to play in your new world order.

Nov 08, 2012 10:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
Twinspeedr wrote:

The problem with this kind of treaty is that is is a foot in the door for UN to usurp the sovereignty of the US Citizen. Giving the corrupt-o-crats in the UN a seat at ANY United States policy table is a prelude to Globalism which is the unlikely touch-stone that both the GOP and The DNC share. Global governance would multiply their power. cement their legacy and further insulate them from any responsibility. America will not comply…

Nov 08, 2012 11:04am EST  --  Report as abuse
P1234 wrote:

Soooo, if guns can’t be sold freely, then the Syrian opposition won’t have any weapons? Until the UN decides they’re a righteous opposition? Which means the dictator will have time to exterminate them before the UN makes up its mind. Asinine.

Nov 08, 2012 11:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
MetalHead8 wrote:

Goverments, Gangs, Mafia, Militants and Terrorist have a far larger kill count then your average joe, But you want to dis-arm law abiding citizens? You do this, and thousands in the gun trade loose there jobs, that obama certianly isn’t going to replace.

I have weapons passed down from generation to generation in my family along with my deceased best friends prized rifle. You are NOT taking my guns away.

Nov 08, 2012 11:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Dryden01 wrote:

Where is Obama going to evolve next? One would guess that only Vladimir knows for sure!

Nov 08, 2012 11:14am EST  --  Report as abuse
Armyman62 wrote:

Abulafiah wrote:

No they don’t. Is this straw-man the best you can do? Or do you simply not understand the issue but feel obliged to say something anyway?

This treaty limits illegal, as in criminal, as in not legal arms trade. You know… the ones who arm terrorists.

Why are you supporting the people who sell arms to terrorists and drug lords? Is this sort of nonsense that lost you lot the election.

Well, when you tell us what the definition of “illegal arms” is now and can guarantee us that it will never become “any entity other than the government” I am sure that this lot (as you put it) will rest much easier. I believe that you are ignoring things that should not be ignored at your own peril. That is fine if you wish to do that, just don’t come knocking on my door asking for help and protection when history repeats itself here in this country. I will have neither the inclination nor the desire to help you because you have supported treasonous and criminal activities committed by the government. I am a legal gun owner and a patriot, I took an oath to support and defend the constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic, and I will honor that oath. In the interest of your own health and wellness I would advise you to look a little deeper than the surface of what the news media is telling you. The internet is the “ring to control them all”, use the ring Frodo.

Nov 08, 2012 11:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
xfiler93 wrote:

So, the Dictatorship of America has begun with the help of the UN. The next 4 years will be the end of our country as we have known it.

Nov 08, 2012 11:29am EST  --  Report as abuse

One of the reasons given for supporting this is because of the weapons flowing into Syria. Of course, it was the US and its allies that were supplying the weapons, but we can blame it on gun shops in Texas.

Nov 08, 2012 11:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
DetroitNative wrote:

Obama unleashed…. nothing to lose. Extremism coming out of the left makes it certain that civil war will be a reality within our lifetime.

Nov 08, 2012 11:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
SeanAlexander wrote:

I have handled a lot of claasified material in my time.
I mention this because we were always told that enough un classified information can paint a very classified picture.
So let us put a few things to conversation.
Heard of the Lone Wolf provision of the Patriot Act?
In a nutshell, no warrant, no reason needed to spy on anything and everything you do.
Military spec surveillance hardware flying over American cities, and strangely no one seems to care.
Cameras just about everywhere, and now are starting to record convsersations in public places.
Perhaps you heard of some of the provisions from the latest NDAA?
Snatch up American citizens wil no due process and hold indefinitely.
How does that stand against your idea of what The Constitution means and is supposed to protect?

Now let us discuss the massive purchase of ammunition by the DHS.
Well beyond any training levels, and being in the military, I’ve burned through a lot of training ammo, but nowhere near those amounts purchased by DHS.
Is DHS expecting IED’s or landmines? They have purchased a significant number of MRAP vehicles. Look it up. They are painted as such for use by the DHS.

You can procure the machine tool programming for any number of various machine tools of nearly any firearm. Easily.
Drug cartels could easily buy a couple and make their own weapons, they are either too stupid, cheap or lazy to do this. But they will catch on and really wonder why they weren’t churning out full auto weapons a long long time ago.

So it would be easy to say government is out to get you, us.
But is it they are seeing things on the horizon that others choose to ignore? Perhaps while spending $4 billion a day they see something not pretty happening?

Perhaps we have become willing partners with the normalcy bias.
Everything will be OK, just ask anybody.
A classic example of this is when someone says, like Google’s execs
“Well if you aren’t doing anything wrong then you have nothing to worry about” I may have that quote wrong, but the idea is correct.
Well, did anyone ask you for your definition of wrong? Do you get to be the final arbiter on this subject? Even if it only pertains to your actions, or web post or musings?
Have you been given a definitive answer on what is considered wrong?
I guess as long as you continue to beleive that the decision makers think exactly as you do, you’ll be OK.

Nov 08, 2012 11:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
GST72 wrote:

American gun owners and those who wish to own guns had better pay attention to this UN mandate that the Democrat Senate will ratify. Harry Reid is changing the rules of the Senate to limit the minority party’s capability to filibuster. What this UN mandate does is to strip the 2nd Amendment rights under the US constitution and put it in the hands of the UN (remember a signed treaty becomes a defacto amendment to the constitution) and makes owning a gun in the US almost impossible. This is why the Democrats and the President put it off until after the election. History lesson: Per Saul Alinsky and the liberal, progressive movement this must be a long term plan — disarm America. An unarmed public can be controlled! Where is the NRA on this? Do not count on the Obama media to cover this story at all.

Nov 08, 2012 11:44am EST  --  Report as abuse
CMilneVT wrote:

The NRA has certainly done it’s job. This bill has NO effect on gun ownership for US citizens. They only thing it may affect is how and what guns are imported here from other countries. This will help limit and regulate intra-country gun trade as a way to reduce access of weapons to those who we dont want to have weapons. The NRA opposes this becuase the Gun industry sees it as a bad thing as it may hamper overseas sales. Meanwhile it will try and reduce the abliity of rogue states and terrorists to get weapons. So make your choice.

Nov 08, 2012 11:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
togrp wrote:

Don’t bother the hunters. Plenty of well armed desert soldiers around. ;)

Nov 08, 2012 11:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
DamnFast wrote:

“U.S. officials have acknowledged privately that the treaty under discussion would have no effect on domestic gun sales and ownership because it would apply only to exports”

This is the scary paragraph in this story. When they talk about stopping exports are they talking about manufacturing exports, well that harms hundreds of American Gun Manufacturers that export arms leagly. Also it says it would not hamper the importation of arms that would also limit the arms available to those in the US no more Beretta FN Glock SIG Taurus …………. They will not be happy till they take them all.

Nov 08, 2012 11:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
awshizz wrote:

This doesn’t reflect American values. The UN wants ONLY governments to have small arms. Our newly re-elected leader agrees with this.

It’s to protect the citizens of all those dictatorships. They’ll be better off under rule than under liberty.

Nov 08, 2012 11:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@SeanAlexander, In the spirit of fairness I have to say that you never said anything anti-Obama specifically, but did you know that every law or agency you mentioned, Patriot Act, NDAA, DHS, were created by the GOP?

So those of you that think that it is Obama that is all for government tyranny, need to direct your anger at someone else.

Nov 08, 2012 12:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wolf73b wrote:

“I will have more flexibility after the election.”

“I will transmit that to Vladamir.”

Well, this guy has told us everthing he was going to do…I guess he did in this case, too!

Nov 08, 2012 12:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tcsword wrote:

“Want to know where we are headed? Look at Athens, on fire, today.”

Not Athens, but London. Although the people of England have been steam-rollered since WWII, the bankers there still set the daily price of gold, and interest rates around the world(LIBOR). So the US will be a third world country internally, but our intl bankers will still issue the world’s reserve currency.

Nov 08, 2012 12:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
HankHill9 wrote:

“In Syria, we have seen the death toll rise well over 30,000, with weapons and ammunition pouring in the country for months now,” he said. “We need a treaty that will set tough rules to control the arms trade, that will save lives and truly make the world a better place.”

Yes, but the US is not Syria, and should not sign on to the kind of restrictions that inhibit freedom, liberty, and our way of life. In fact the founding fathers included the right to bear arms specifically so that the populace could rightly defend itself against such oppressive governments as the Syrian government.

Restricting the freedoms of a peaceful nation in the name of helping one at civil war is nonsense.

Nov 08, 2012 12:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PittUSMC wrote:

I will not surrender my guns or ammunition, nor will I help confiscate other people’s Constitutionally protected property. I will kill any UN entity that comes to trample on our rights. THAT is a promise! This will be cause for full on revolution. Semper Fidelis!

Nov 08, 2012 12:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Lawless71 wrote:

USAPragmatist–Yeah, but a couple more Obama Supreme Court justices, and the Second Amendment will be rendered meaningless.

Nov 08, 2012 12:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
SeanAlexander wrote:

USAPragmatist, no, no anger just looking at multiple pieces.
But the Lone Wolf provision was revised by Obama so as not to have the need of a warrant, and he first threatened to veto the NDAA because of the nature of the spoken to clause, but signed it anyway.
My greater point, though not specifically mentioned, was about politicians in general.
I have hundreds of articles saved about Democrats speaking ill in so many ways of the Patriot Act, but in the first two years of their majority they did nothing about it. They did strenghen it though.
The irony being how much they disliked when their idealogical opposites made it law.

Nov 08, 2012 12:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Lawless71, except for the fact that you have ZERO evidence, beyond rightie conjecture, that Obama has any desire to regulate gun sales in the USA.

Nov 08, 2012 12:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
clavier49 wrote:

People who gravitate to power with the intention of expanding that power, be they local drug lords, communists, fascists, or democrats, do not like truth. Truth threatens their legitimacy, exposes their blunders, and points to better ways. This is the reason they seek to control the flow of information, be it through control of news media and education, or by direct threats of bodily harm. And they can’t effectively threaten bodily harm unless the citizenry is unarmed. That is why the founding fathers gave us the second amendment. They knew how important it is for people to be able to seek truth without fear of retribution.

The presence of gun crime in our country is the fault not of the second amendment, but of a subculture that rejects personal responsibility.

Nov 08, 2012 12:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Laka wrote:

“We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,”

Damn straight you won’t! You don’t have any power to enter into any treaty that is in direct contravention of the US Constitution. It is a bizarre thought that anyone could do an end-run around the Constitution by making an agreement with a foreign power. To think otherwise is ludicrous.

Nov 08, 2012 12:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Benjamin360 wrote:

The UN can have my gun when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.

Nov 08, 2012 1:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whtnationaist wrote:

Those whites who survive the Obama followers doing redistribution (looting) are encouraged to move to Iowa. We have “shall issue” concealed carry, few restrictions on gun ownership. You are even allowed to protect your hard earned property. Blks are mostly confined to large cities like Des Moines and Waterloo. Unemployment is low, housing outside of urban centers is cheap. You can buy a nice home in a safe white community for $40,000. Surprisingly Iowa is neither as religious nor as conservative as one may think.

Nov 08, 2012 1:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Randy549 wrote:

USAPrag: “…accept the fact that you lost the election…”

Ha, I think John Boehner and a few others would disagree with that one. “The election” is about more than the executive branch. But go on believing what you want to believe.

Nov 08, 2012 1:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Curmdugeon10 wrote:

Chance of ratification by the Senate: zero. This is just more cocktail party aargle bargle.

Nov 08, 2012 1:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse

“We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” he said.

Bull Shiite. The U.N. will do ANYTHING to disarm Americans because they do not want an independent nation. Independence means no one-world government. It is that simple.

Nov 08, 2012 1:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Seryusly wrote:

This from the President that allowed Fast and Furious, and is at this very time providing weapons to Syria via the Muslim Bros? What’s wrong with this picture?!

All gun owners rightly believe that this is just the “camel’s nose under the tent.” This is the beginning of repeal of the Second Amendment, and the right to bear arms would be lost.

Nov 08, 2012 1:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Swissik wrote:

The Dems don’t like weapons, so there will be no resistance from their side. The Repubs are spineless. Neither party cares what the people want. You live in a socialist state which in four years or less will be full fledged communist. Get used to it.

Nov 08, 2012 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whtnationaist wrote:

Many people are finding out what happens when state and local government effectively revokes the 2nd Amendment. Look at the reports of epidemic looting in areas hit by hurricane Sandy. Those who survive are welcomed to Iowa. We have “shall issue” concealed carry, routine federal background check at gun stores, etc. You are allowed to defend yourself or another with reasonable limits. You are even allowed to protect your hard earned property! Outside of urban areas you can even by a home in a safe mostly white town for $50,000.

Nov 08, 2012 2:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Globalman wrote:

I am more in danger from the idiots driving cars with a cell phone in one hand! I have never been shot at, but cannot count the number of times I have been nearly hit or run down by cell phone using drivers. Obama and Holder and Dems said its political when congress inquires about them sending guns to Mexico. While this UN resolution does not impact domestic sales, it is an attempt to begin to whittle down the Second amendment. Next step will be easier, then the next even easier etc. I can understand why China favors as it eliminates competition. China has no qualms about ignoring international norms.

Nov 08, 2012 2:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TXLiving wrote:

@ Abulafiah
“Why are you supporting the people who sell arms to terrorists and drug lords? Is this sort of nonsense that lost you lot the election.”

Let me guess, you voted for Obama. Well did you forget about the Fast & Furious case? Obama sold to drug lords and is currently selling to terrorists in Libya and Syria. These facts and your voting record pretty much invalidate all of your arguments.

Besides, look at Chicago, D.C., & New York. Each have the strictest gun control laws in the country and yet still have the highest gun violence rates. Apparently these gun conrols laws don’t work. Only the criminals get the guns then. Before you promote new restrictive laws, why don’t you figure out how to make the laws on the books work first if these laws are such great things to you libs.

Nov 08, 2012 2:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Randy549….

Obama won the presidency.
Dems gained 2 seats(or was it 3) in Senate
Dems gained about 5-10 seats in House.

Seems to be a Democrat win to me? Or are you with Karl Rove?

Nov 08, 2012 2:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Globalman wrote:

Dems do not like guns becasuse they cannot shoot straight. Can’t talk straight either.

Nov 08, 2012 2:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
autzone wrote:

New term for babies born on or after Nov 6 2012 will be “Generation Extinct” for Freedom is just a generation away from extinction!

Nov 08, 2012 3:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@TxLiving you say ‘Obama sold to drug lords and is currently selling to terrorists in Libya and Syria. These facts and your voting record pretty much invalidate all of your arguments.’ These are not facts…

1. Obama NEVER sold guns to drug lords. in the Fast and Furious ‘scandal’ (not really a scandal unless in the mind of a Rightie) the ATF NEVER sold guns to drug lords. What they did was monitor known purchasing agents and track the guns, or at least try, and let the guns ‘walk’.

2. The administration is taking steps to help ensure that any arms that get to, or got to, Libyan or Syrian rebels, are not going to the parts of the rebel force associated with terrorist groups. While yes this is not going to be 100%, it is either that or let the Qaddafi or Assad have free reign’s.

Those are the facts.

Nov 08, 2012 3:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
stevedebi wrote:

Wow, what a lot of comments. I just wanted to correct some facts.

First, the Senate is tasked with ratifying treaties (not both houses of Congress), and it takes a 2/3 majority, unlikely with the current split.

Second, I believe the Republicans picked up seats in the House, but lost a couple in the Senate. The Democrats still do not have a “supermajority” in the Senate.

Nov 08, 2012 3:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TXinSC wrote:

One more nail in the coffin of the U.S. Constitution. We are chipping away at our freedom one small piece at a time.

Nov 08, 2012 3:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Marlboro wrote:

The back door to gun control here.

Nov 08, 2012 3:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sageadvice wrote:

Just remember folks. They will NEVER know what and where we truly have. And making something illegal does nothing to prevent the availability and acquisition of it.

Nov 08, 2012 4:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
notmyguns wrote:

This most certainly affect gun owners in the U.S because now The U.N can mandate anything they want in the U.S

Nov 08, 2012 4:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

I say cut off all arms sales to everyone. EVERYONE. Use what you can make, or use nothing. The blood money arms sales industry that fuels death and wars, must stop. The industrialists and the wealthy make and sell the weapons, they make huge profits, then US taxpayers get ripped by having to clean up the mess after wars start. The US is one of the WORST offenders at selling weapons to eveyone and their mother for PROFITS.

Nov 08, 2012 4:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sageadvice wrote:

USAPRag. Sorry but Obama did provide arms to terrorists all around the world. The Syrian ‘resistance’ for one. Also to the Al Qaeda in Libya. He only ‘let’ the guns be sold to the drug lords who shot and killed the federal agent. An accessory before the fact.

He should have shut down Fast and Furious when he shut down Guantanamo! wait, he didn’t do that either.

Nov 08, 2012 4:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
judester wrote:

Elections over back to the same BS. http://godfatherpolitics.com/7967/obamas-second-term-regulations-that-will-destroy-america/#.UJvxjFd6Y6I.email

Nov 08, 2012 4:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

Nothing new coming out of the UN here. A resolution to “be more friendly to everyone.” Yawn.

We need to stop putting money, time, and effort in the UN.

Nov 08, 2012 4:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
judester wrote:

Those darn criminals are not registering their guns and causing all sorts of laws for the legal gun owners, we need to pass a law to make them be responsible for their guns.

Nov 08, 2012 4:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

@USAPragmatist where do you think the weapons that the terrorists in Lybia got to assassinate our Ambassador? Surely not from us!

Nov 08, 2012 4:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Jones2371 wrote:

From my COLD, DEAD HANDS…. Mark my word.

Nov 08, 2012 4:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse

By the way I would like to make a comment regarding Bearmarine’s comment that this will not effect the illegal gun trafficing one bit. Well I hate to break the news to you but it most certainly will. If you think they are only going after your guns and not the ammunition as well you are sadly mistaken. And a gun trafficer could sell guns but they are no good if people cant get ammo to shoot them. And if they could get it it would be harder and harder to obtain.

Nov 08, 2012 4:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whtnationaist wrote:

This means that we will soon have another mass shooting. It seems to happen whenever this treaty gets scheduled for a vote. For example the Tuscon shooting:
- The shooters psychiatrist warns police several weeks before the shooting. Police do nothing.
- Gun Ban Bloomberg’s former head of NYC police Intelligence, Dan Oates, is chief of police for little Aurora Colorado.
- Chief Oates has a perfect gun ban shooting in his town out of all the towns in the country.
- The shooting happens just before voting on ratification of a UN gun ban treaty.
- The alarm on the fire door didn’t work and the shooter was able to re-enter that way.
- For a sell out opening of a VERY popular movie there were no officers for crowd control. At other theaters but not this one.
- Gun Ban Bloomberg’s anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is now using a victim of shooting for TV ads.

Nov 08, 2012 4:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bkern wrote:

Let’s not forget! This bill also requires UN taxes to be paid! Obama is not only raising taxes on EVERYONE but we will also have to pay UN taxes to boot! But once again, only the 50% that pay taxes and voted against this administration’s policies will have to foot the bill!

Nov 08, 2012 4:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
whtnationaist wrote:

- Shooter’s psychiatrist warns police several weeks before the shooting. Police do nothing.
- Gun Ban Bloomberg’s former head of NYC police Intelligence, Dan Oates, is chief of police for little Aurora Colorado.
- Chief Oates has a perfect gun ban shooting in his town out of all the towns in the country.
- The shooting happens just before voting on ratification of a UN gun ban treaty.
- The alarm on the fire door didn’t work and the shooter was able to re-enter that way.
- For a sell out opening of a VERY popular movie there were no officers for crowd control. At other theaters but not this one.
- Gun now Ban Bloomberg’s anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, is using a victim of shooting for TV ads.

Nov 08, 2012 4:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
LesLegato wrote:

Blue helmets stand out clearly in the light.

Nov 08, 2012 4:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mmilesll wrote:

This is just a start. None of this will go before the Senate because the chosen one knows all.Hope all you morons who voted for this clown are happy now

Nov 08, 2012 5:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mmilesll wrote:

This is just a start. None of this will go before the Senate because the chosen one knows all.Hope all you morons who voted for this clown are happy now

Nov 08, 2012 5:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
randy99 wrote:

I do not for one minute believe the statement, “We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” as it is (some of) the left’s stated goal to bring about an end to private gun ownership.

Nov 08, 2012 5:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
godbluff wrote:

There is a great video on youtube called; gun control The History of Gun Control – FULL LENGTH It will open up all whose eyes still don’t see.

Nov 08, 2012 5:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
vinman711 wrote:

Did anyone actually read the article?

An official at the U.S. mission said Washington’s objectives have not changed.
“We seek a treaty that contributes to international security by fighting illicit arms trafficking and proliferation, protects the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade, and meets the concerns that we have been articulating throughout,” the official said.

“We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” he said.

Nov 08, 2012 6:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FTCAIN wrote:

Obama is going to go hog wild on guns, the EPA, Green energy, global warming, Liberal Supreme Court justices, expanding welfare programs and taxing anyone with a job into poverty. His belief in “Trickle up Poverty” will touch us all!

Nov 08, 2012 6:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
shredman wrote:

If someone in a beret comes to my door they better be selling cookies!

Nov 08, 2012 6:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Sageadvice, please prove your assertion that Obama is arming terrorists around the world?

@Biostudies, can you provide proof for your assertion that Obama provided the arms used in attack on Benghazi? I heard rpgs were main weapon and the USA does not make rpgs.

Until I see proof the logical thing to believe is these are just ideas in ypur heads.

Nov 08, 2012 6:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DrRyan wrote:

To protect my life, liberty and property…that should be the ONLY thing the government has power to do. I feel like my government is threatening all three! Sad days are upon us.

Nov 08, 2012 7:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Heretic2011 wrote:

And good luck to them trying to disarm 100 million pissed off Americans.

Nov 08, 2012 7:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Zoney wrote:

I have recently come to the conclusion that a preponderance of my “fellow Americans” are so effing stupid that they make a sack of hammers look like a MENSA meeting.

I mean we’re talking sinfully complacent, sinfully stupid here. These so-called “Americans” would follow the Pied Piper off a cliff. They would ostensibly hand over their precious freedoms for a shiny new penny.

Nov 08, 2012 7:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Changes2000 wrote:

We have more than enough laws that the Feb fails, as usual, to enforce. Now the Feb wants to be a good UN citizen and subject citizen of our nation into more “laws” set by this United corrupted Nations? Fat chance.

Nov 08, 2012 7:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Changes2000 wrote:

By the way, I thought Obama against outsourcing and off-sourcing US jobs. What do I know, I guess he needs more hands to help Holder to suppress armed militias in our nation.

Nov 08, 2012 7:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse

To all who ask if the unhappy folk have read the article:

1. The constitutional rights are subject to interpretation by SCOTUS. Obama will have opportunity over the next 4 years to alter the make-up of SCOTUS to the left which translates to gun control.

2. Our UN delegate was unfortunately using lawyer-speak. The treaty might not impact domestic sales of domestically produced guns that meet the criteria set forth by the treaty. Unfortunately, the last draft of the treaty would place the majority of domestically produced guns outside of the criteria, grossly increase the price of “acceptable” domestically produced guns, and price foreign guns out of the market. The net result would be a destruction of the consumer gun industry.

Everyone with an interest in this topic should take the time to read the proposed draft treaties.

Nov 08, 2012 7:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TimCrowleyUSA wrote:

The rabid right shows up with insanse conspiracy theories about the UN talking way their guns. The poor kids are so insane they can’t read or think.

“”We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms,” he said.”

Nov 08, 2012 8:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Woodpiggie wrote:

Hey UN, before you get involved with privately owned firearmes in the US, how about doing something about wholesale rape and murder by machete hacking in Africa.

Nov 08, 2012 8:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Liberty4Ever wrote:

Here it comes… bend over everyone – this is just the beginning of a VERY long and scary four years

Nov 08, 2012 8:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
oneduhgurl wrote:

We still have a Supreme court and a constitution, this idiot is going to get impeached along with many in his admin.

A lawsuit seeking the return of $43 trillion (with a “t”) and an audit of all the TARP programs by an independent receiver has been filed against senior members of the Obama Administration and the New York group known as the “Banksters”.

The Wall Street Journal’s MarketWatch is reporting that the Spire Law Group, LLP has moved its mass tort action into the federal court in Brooklyn, New York. In this District Court lawsuit (Case No. 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML), the Spire Law Group, LLP is acting on the behalf of homeowners across the country seeking to halt all foreclosures nationwide until the return of the $43 trillion.
The independent audit the lawsuit is seeking of the TARP Program stems from a report by the former Inspector General of the bailout program, Neil Barofsky, who is countering the claims made by President Obama both publicly and privately to Congress that the money has been paid back. Mr. Barofsky asserts that none of the money advanced by the Treasury has ever been paid back by the recipients of the program.
The Plaintiffs have established the location of the $43 trillion of laundered money in a criminal racketeering enterprise participated in by the following individuals:
Eric Holder
Tony West

Kamala Harris
Jon Corzine
Robert Rubin
Timothy Geitner
Vikram Pandit
Valerie Jarrett
Anita Dunn
Robert Baueras
The lawsuit alleges that the Obama Administration actively borrowed money from these “Banksters” to fund his political campaign in this 2012 Election and has not pursued any criminal charges against them
The lawsuit also claims multiple violations of the United States Patriot Act, along with the Policy of Embargo Against Iran and Countries Hostile to the Foreign Policy of the United States, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and other State and Federal laws by the Obama Administration.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/111301234/43-Trillion-Complaint pg 7 some more names pg11 suit

Nov 08, 2012 8:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ILikeRush2 wrote:

Americans remember “You can live for nothing or die for something”.
Rambo

Nov 08, 2012 9:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bozz2 wrote:

This act if approved and brought against the people of the USA will surely start the next revolt against the US government.

Nov 08, 2012 9:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CharlesMoody wrote:

OH, HELL NO.
Not in my lifetime.

Nov 08, 2012 9:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CharlesMoody wrote:

OH, HELL NO, don’t even go there.
OUT OF THE UN!

Nov 08, 2012 9:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
comprof wrote:

Another step toward an Obama goal, universal government.

Nov 08, 2012 9:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse

PROPAGANDA, the US is force fed just about as much of it as N Korea and not I am not exaggerating, Gaddafi wasn’t even an evil man, he was actually quite the contrary and he had set up an amazing system that was actually sharing the oil wealth with the people of his country, Gas was 17c a gallon, all the people had free health care as well as a check every month, $50k to couples when they marry, 1/2 of purchase price for a new car & he vowed to house every Libyan before he housed his own parents (his dad died before he could make this happen). They also had interest free loans and w/in hours after his murder, a Rothschild banking system was initiated in place of the old system that was in favor of the people. We are going to be under complete socialist control followed by Iron Clad Communism that will not be a force that can be successfully fought once it is in place, wake up!

Nov 08, 2012 10:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse

My first thought when Obama won was ” are we going to see the same things we did when Clinton got reelected?”. Home grown terrorism and gun battles with government agencies and citizens. Obama came close to activating the Militia once already and it looks like he may push it to that point again. I am not bashing one because I thought the other should win. Neither one of the numbskulls who ran for office can perform the kind a magic it would take to straighten this country out. My second thought was a good world war would bring us together and get the economy going like it did after the last depression. Maybe Obama is trying to affect real change after all. Or, maybe he is just suicidal. I certainly can not believe he is that stupid. Those without guns think those with guns are nuts but in a real fight I would rather have one than depend on the government to protect me. As I understand the writings of our forefathers it is our right and duty to protect ourselves from a government that has gotten out of control. Many who own guns feel the same way. I think it is redundant to point this out but there are more of us with guns and a willingness to revolt if someone tries to take them then there are armies in the world to stop it. It is what formed this country and may very well be what reforms it. I hope not and I also hope those who think they should try to disarm US citizens take this resolve into account. It will bring nothing peaceful as far as solving our problems goes. We need to start working together and stop the government and media from pitting us against each other. For Christ’s sake people, talk to each other. You will find out you have more in common than you think ! Put yourself in each others shoes and come up with real answers. Or just continue to be played and trained like dogs.

Nov 08, 2012 10:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse

You’re basically correct, just1of99prcnt, Obama is not that stupid. He will not destroy our Constitutional rights with a sweeping change that could invoke a revolt, rather he will continuously and relentlously erode those rights. We all understand the science lesson of frogs and boiling water — place a frog in boiling water and it will hop out, but place a frog in cold water and bring up the flame and it will sit there until it slowly boils to death. The UN Treaty is merely turning the flame on under the pot.

Nov 08, 2012 10:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

@vinman

The average US gun-owner can’t read. Ever watch Doomsday Preppers? That is the kind of person you are dealing with; a bunch of people who spend their lives thinking the sky is falling.

To justify their actions, they all go to Fox or Glen Beck or whatever, dream up some crazy conspiracy theory while ignoring the facts , and then pat themselves on the back for being prepared for some fantasy scenario.

The bottom line? Everybother advanced country has gun control, and it works. Nobody in an advanced state needs a gun, and the result of gun control is always a reduction in violent crime.

None of the crazy fantasies of the gun-nuts occur. Nobody loses freedom. If anything they gain freedom from the risk of being shot by a gun owner. The government does not turn into a dictatorship. It is the opposite – European visitors to the USA invariably comment on how little freedom Americans have. Criminals do not take over, because they can’t get a gun from the corner shop.

Try taking a look outside the USA, where gun control is alive and working well. Reality proves the gun- nuts wrong.

Nov 08, 2012 11:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CadillacMike wrote:

“this article blames 30000 deaths in syria on illegal arms flowing into the country. I thought syrias problem came from people wanting to live free. Seems to me most of the deaths have resulted from the Syrian govt using weapomns on their own people.”

If all those civilians didn’t have access to the guns their government banned the government wouldn’t have to kill them. Come on man, get with the program. Goobernmints are always right and serfs are always wrong. All Washington is doing is tying to restore that natural balance.

Nov 09, 2012 12:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Zombie-Sniper wrote:

Out of “MY COLD DEAD HANDS” will any UN, LEO, of fed agent get my weapons!

Nov 09, 2012 1:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

@Zombie-Sniper

You, and all the similar Wild West wannabe comments, illustrate perfectly why gun controls are needed. If that is how you view your guns, you are not responsible enough to have them.

Nov 09, 2012 2:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
bigjets wrote:

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed
their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the underdog is a sine qua non ["something essential" lit. "without which not"] for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or police.” Hitler’s Secret Conversations – 1941-1944 – Farrar, Straus and Young – 1953 Pg. 345

Nov 09, 2012 3:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
GMBuls wrote:

To all the people saying this doesn’t affect gun ownership here: Take a look at some analysis outside of the dinosaur media. This treaty requires gun registration. That’s always the first step to confiscation. At least it always has been, but never here, huh? Wake up. The (leftists) governments always want a monopoly on deadly power.

Nov 09, 2012 3:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
CoolTex wrote:

Take all the stuff they say and make it the opposite and you have the real agenda here…the US will be the only country not allowed to sell weapons on the open market after this passes…

Nov 09, 2012 5:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
alldayUSA wrote:

“We need a treaty that will set tough rules to control the arms trade, that will save lives and truly make the world a better place.”

For whom??? the scumbag elite? The crooked governments? Your looking to save the lives that most definitely need to be snuffed out.

Abolish the U.N. or at least withdraw from it…it has been a circus for decades now.

Nov 09, 2012 5:50am EST  --  Report as abuse
daddywarbucks wrote:

“When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia.” – George Mason

“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have SUFFICIENT ARMS AND AMMUNITION to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” — George Washington (during first state of the union address january 8,1790)

Nov 09, 2012 6:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
stambo2001 wrote:

Here we go folks, just as was warned. Amerians will be stripped of their ‘right to bear arms’ because it makes people across the ocean feel bad. In most European countries they’re not even allowed to own a pocket-knife. This is for real. Soon enough you’ll need a license to own a television or radio. Complete and utter control of your life is what you voted for and it’s what you’re going to get.

Nov 09, 2012 6:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
retrobit wrote:

You can be sure there is more to this treaty than presented here. It opens the doors to chip away and finally do away with our second amendment rights. Ain’t gonna happen. Time to start leaning on our Senators. The line has been drawn.

Nov 09, 2012 6:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
Saristas wrote:

@HankHill9
“Restricting the freedoms of a peaceful nation in the name of helping one at civil war is nonsense.”

Excuse me, US was a country for ~235 years and it has been at war for ~209 years. Peaceful nation is an understatement.

Nov 09, 2012 7:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
gphx wrote:

Limit arms deals? Won’t that put a crimp in Obama’s monopoly on gun trade with Mexican drug lords? Oh my.

Nov 09, 2012 7:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
Bkern wrote:

There are already 100,000 UN troops in the US! Why? With the UN it is all about the money! Look at the track record of this organization. Every dollar they get their greedy little hands on gets squandered to the crooks that run it! When you through Chicago thugs in the mix…….This administration has prooven they clearly are intimidated by the US Military beacause the US Military is sworn to protect and defend the people and the Constitution of the US and this administration can’t have that in order to go through with their socialist agenda!

Nov 09, 2012 7:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
stambo2001 wrote:

This election is a perfect example of why Plato himself said that no person under the age of 30 should be allowed to vote. Children and immoral degenerates, massive in their numbers, out-voting their betters. Not much the grown-ups can do now but watch the ignorant children tear their own country apart in their juvenile revenge.

Nov 09, 2012 7:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
Mishaan wrote:

Garlicsauce, you might be a new personal hero. All this rhetoric about the 2nd amendment and “prying you guns from you dead cold hands” goes to show that most of you haven’t even read the entire article. Look at the quote from the US official guys. Come on!

Nov 09, 2012 8:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
gobnait06 wrote:

And so begins the inexorable march towards one world government-the new world order. Foolish, self-absorbed Americans who reelected Obama: do you realize the damage you’ve done? You will forever bear the blood of this once great nation on your hands. You deserve the misery that will surely befall you.

Nov 09, 2012 8:20am EST  --  Report as abuse
gobnait06 wrote:

To those who dismiss the concerns about the effect of this treaty on gun sales in this country: Do you honestly believe the left will stop with this treaty? Your shortsighted perspective and failure to see the big picture will doom us. You’ve already sealed our nation’s doomed fate by reelecting Obama. You deserve whatever misery befalls you.

Nov 09, 2012 8:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
coast2co wrote:

This is the back door to all of Obama’s extreme left policies. UN agreements to trump constitution. Watch and see what the American people have done to us all. Professing themselves wises they have become or perhaps proven themselves to be Fools.

I also am looking at changing my payroll methods. I can not afford the taxation that obamacare will place on me. I make about 70K a year employee 6 people they make anywhere from 25K to 40K a year a very small business. Yet regulations coming will eliminate some write offs I get and increase employer taxes in other ways. Also the health insurance tax because I can’t afford to provide it. It will eliminate us bankrupt us. OBAMA is only for the Uber Rich. Look at Solendra those guys walked off with 100′s of millions of dollars Uber Rich and numerous others SOLO’S uber uber rich multibillionaire is big Obama supporter. The increase of taxes mean little to extremely deep pockets my pockets well there none existent. Plus the increase on wealthy doesn’t add to more than 80 million a year more thats nothign compared to a trillion debt each year. He lies to the fools that voted for him and there happy. I’m Trying to dig my way out of bad economy its benefits my big competitor national firm with deep pockets.

Nov 09, 2012 8:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
dbsdey wrote:

Elections have consequences. Obama has wanted gun control since his firt election, but the American people would not accept it. Now he is going to control our guns through the UN. Thanks all of you brain dead people who voted for him. We will now have gun control, more failed green projects and Card Check, which will force ALL Right to Work states to go union.

Nov 09, 2012 8:32am EST  --  Report as abuse

Of course, rooters, another bunch of globalislt lying commie newswhores, must ‘approve’ our so-called ‘freedom of speech’ before it can be ‘allowed.’

Nov 09, 2012 8:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
mec1 wrote:

hopefully, this will turn out to be the same meaningless background noise that always comes from the UN.

Nov 09, 2012 8:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
MTterb wrote:

Bad move libs, bad move! Elections do have consequences and you, and you alone just sealed America’s fate. I don’t care if ya’ll want to drown but why the hell do you have take me (and the rest of us Bible, Gun, and Religion clingers) with you. If you don’t like our constitution, move somewhere where you do. I still say that it will be an absolute miracle that we don’t have a civil war over Obama’s policies… and this is the first ingredient. Two coincidences, one is the first civil war (1961-65; source: history.com) was to free the black slaves (or as many believe and don’t get me wrong, I am all for it) and 150 years later, which is right now about the time of the second year (1862 vs 2012, 1963 vs 2013) our first black president will be president during the second civil war. Secondly, Obama will be the one promoting and defending slavery (to all Americans, not just one group) while his predecessor Abraham Lincoln was defending freedom to all Americans, specifically one group) even though Obama’s ancestors was never slaves in the United States of America. When folks say “the south’s gonna rise again”, they’re right, although I don’t think this is what they had in mind. One thing is for sure, when Civil War 2.0 begins, I’ll be ready… and I will be fighting for the south (primarily, conservative, as demonstrated in this most recent election).

Nov 09, 2012 9:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
whtnationaist wrote:

Very interesting that coverage of the looting in Sandy hit areas has completely disappeared. The comments must have been too much for liberals! That looting is exactly why people need the right to the means of self protection. That means the right to own and bear firearms. Pepper spray requires you be close and the wind not too strong. Tasers require you get close and you only get one chance.

Nov 09, 2012 9:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
vazili89 wrote:

This thing won’t pass the Senate. Not with the 2/3rds majority it requires.

Nov 09, 2012 9:42am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jones2371 wrote:

Too many of you are thinking logically. This regime won’t follow the law or conventional thought. They don’t even blink at killing hundreds of Mexicans. What makes you think they’ll abide by any law, treat or component of the US Constituon. HA!! You’re funny. But seriously. Dead seriously… No one will take my guns unless out of MY COLD, DEAD HANDS! Bring it on Feds, local subservient LEOs, whomever. Any one.

Nov 09, 2012 10:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

This thread is a perfect example of the mentality of the right nowadays…

1. Not based in reality.
2. No respect for our Democracy.
3. No respect for those that disagree with them.

It would be sad if their rhetoric was not so harmful to OUR country.

Nov 09, 2012 10:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
NRRInglee wrote:

Also supporting this measure, the traditional list of gun control advocates: Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Dong, Saddam Hussein, and on and on. The best way to crush civil liberties is to crush all means of resistance. That is why firearms ownership and the competent use thereof was enshrined in our Bill of Rights. Those who forget their history are condemned to relive it.

Nov 09, 2012 11:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

Bkern wrote:
“There are already 100,000 UN troops in the US! Why?”

The UN has no troops. None. Not a single one.

Nov 09, 2012 11:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
rgould22 wrote:

I wouldn’t trust the UN to give me the correct time of day. They need to go.

Nov 09, 2012 11:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
249Sniper wrote:

If they come for mine they better bring theirs cuz the only way their getting mine is by prying it from my cold dead hands

Nov 09, 2012 11:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

stambo2001 wrote:
“This election is a perfect example of why Plato himself said that no person under the age of 30 should be allowed to vote.”

No he didn’t. Check you r facts before posting.

What Plato said was that nobody under the age of thirty (completion of his fifth stage of education) should be allowed to have children.

Learn something here -> http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agexed/aee501/plato.html

Nov 09, 2012 12:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
NogginAbroad wrote:

Not mentioned in this article is the requirement that the Senate must approve it. Not only that, but it requires a 2/3 supermajority. The bug in the ointment is that “2/3″ in this case means 2/3 of the senators PRESENT AT THE TIME THE VOTE IS TAKEN. Given a midnight special session, 51 Democrats present, means that 34 senators could ratify the treaty and BHO would ratify it in a heartbeat. Back door way to avoid repealing the 2nd amendment, by nullifying its effectiveness.

And look carefully at the “human rights” thing. A finding by the UN that a nation was not in full compliance with what they consider “human rights” (capital punishment?) would prohibit that nation from exporting any conventional weaponry or ammo until the prohibition was lifted. So firearms, components, accessories, parts, ammunition, etc. from companies (or US subsidiaries) in such nations could not be imported into the US. Browning, Star (Spain), Taurus and Armenius (Brazil), Sako (Finland), Yildiz (Turkey), and the list goes on. Many American made scopes are made in Japan, Korea or China.

this is NOT a simple issue about military weaponry at all.

Nov 09, 2012 12:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AtaColJT wrote:

How many people knew that the reason the U.N. arms treaty talks collapsed earlier this year because of Obama’s re-election bid and also said that as soon as he was re-elected this treaty would be back. U.N. gun control to circumvent the Bill of Rights. and how many know that Obama will be a lot more flexible with Putin on reducing the U.S. nuclear arsenal, like he said to Medvedev in Seoul. and then of course he will have to dismantle the Military to pay for his plan to destroy private health insurance and subject us to his health rationing ala the health care advisory boards which will decide who gets treatment and who gets the shaft. Welcome to Obama’s America. BOHICA (BEND OVER HERE IT COMES AGAIN)

Nov 09, 2012 12:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kernal wrote:

If the OBAMA Administration along with Erik Holder can lose thousands of assault rifles in Mexico with Fast and Furious, Why in Gods name would the UN sequester the OBAMA administration to a UN treaty to limit weapons export. OBAMA is clueless along with the UN!!
BLIND LEADING THE BLIND!!

Nov 09, 2012 1:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JDasien wrote:

Please.Please,Please send naybo with a blue helmet to my house.

Nov 09, 2012 2:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jkg418 wrote:

This is bad enough but I also heard the U.N. wants to make a rule regarding the rights of children that will all but abolish parent’s rights. What have we done? Actually it’s “they” that have done this but how do we stop them?

Nov 09, 2012 3:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DSTIEBS wrote:

This arms treaty will effect the second amendment and limit the people in other country’s from securing their freedom from a suppressive government. I will vote against any Senator or Congressman that votes for it.

Nov 09, 2012 3:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DSTIEBS wrote:

We will refrain from publishing comments that do not meet our standards. Is this a form of censorship?

Nov 09, 2012 3:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
treeburner wrote:

I think all those gun kooks should pack up their guns and bullets and hand deliver them to the steps of the White House.

Nov 09, 2012 3:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JinXer wrote:

The only thing this treaty will insure, is that if an oppressed population ever wants to revolt against it’s government they’ll be fighting with slingshots against automatic weapons.

Nov 09, 2012 7:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
truthdiktat wrote:

Does anyone read the article or do they just see “arms treaty” and have a seizure? This debate has nothing to do with guns inside the United States. The treaty is seeking to limit the sale of arms BY governments to OTHER governments. The individual gun owner has nothing to do with this issue.

Nov 09, 2012 9:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse

The dictatorships of the United Nations are pushing their agenda, they should not have jurisdiction over the United States, nor should the United States accept this step toward control of what the United States can do.

Nov 10, 2012 9:11am EST  --  Report as abuse

YIKES! The UN is going to control America’s power?

Nov 10, 2012 9:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
freckles4080 wrote:

oklahoma here come on as the phase say when you pry it from my cold dead fingers obama then and only then can you have my guns

Nov 10, 2012 10:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
freckles4080 wrote:

you unbelievers shut the h up we the gun owner know you well and you will get yours if you try this bs

Nov 10, 2012 11:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
freckles4080 wrote:

When the war starts and you don’t have a gun in your hand I will asume you are the enemy and respond with all my fury

Nov 10, 2012 11:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
Janeallen wrote:

Good move, Obama!

Invest in people, not in guns!

Nov 10, 2012 5:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

I find it ironic how crazy gun owners get when their liberty is threatened, but they have absolutely no power taking liberties from other Americans. No drugs, No abortions, No gay marriage. The bible is against them all. You get what you deserve.

Nov 10, 2012 5:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Ya great move everyone that voted on someone that is not a full american ad voted on color of skin,ya real good one!

Nov 11, 2012 9:12am EST  --  Report as abuse

Obama and Hillary agreed to that one, not we americans! Heck, we don’t even agree to Obama and Hillary!

Nov 11, 2012 11:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JoeBachofen wrote:

Does membership in the NRA interfere with one’s ability to read and understand English or is literacy not a requirement for NRA ownership?

The proposed UN treaty deals ONLY with international arms trade. It is not a threat to anyone’s 2nd amendment rights. This news story clearly stated that. Whatever, your position is on a given question your point of view will not prevail if you can’t even deal with reality or understand written English.

Nov 12, 2012 1:01am EST  --  Report as abuse
Janeallen wrote:

This article mentioned the arms entering Syria, but
it failed to mention how Susan Rice went ranting and raving about how the UN should arm the rebels in Syria, and how many news networks, from the far left to the far right, all covered it incessantly.

David Ignatius, after a recent visit to Syria, stated that many Syrians he met were blaming the United States. And there are serious worries about arms get into the hands of Al Qaeda. Is it a surprise? How do we get stuck in this situation now?

Nov 12, 2012 5:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ChewyBees wrote:

All of these liberals that are up in arms (pun intended) about gun control are going to be in for a very unpleasant surprise when they find out that the only thing actually protecting them from bigoted tyranny was an armed populace.

The idea that government wants to protect homosexuals, minorities and abortions is a laugher. Those are all manipulative tools government uses to distract the populace from its true intent (theft, plain and simple) and raise a furor with people that don’t have the competence or critical thinking ability to understand any of it in the first place. Amidst the media created confusion, government justifies its increased control and tyranny by passing it off as security to protect a bunch of horse manure freedoms. If freedom is about racism, infanticide and licking someone else’s nasty then it isn’t worth protecting in the first place.

Nov 12, 2012 5:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fleshmeatz wrote:

you can have my guns when i run out of ammo fighting your corrupt UN bullshit… WE don’t need the UN or any form of alteration to OUR 2nd right to BEAR ARMS!

Nov 13, 2012 3:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
1peevedbob wrote:

No, you have it wrong. The U.S. didn’t back this treaty, OBAMA DOES

Nov 13, 2012 10:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.