Gun rights supporters are up in arms over a pair of moves the White House made last month to reverse longstanding U.S. policy and begin negotiating a gun control treaty with the United Nations.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton first announced on Oct. 14 that the U.S. had changed its stance and would support negotiations of an Arms Trade Treaty to regulate international gun trafficking, a measure the Bush administration and, notably, former Permanent U.S. Representative to the United Nations John Bolton opposed for yearsBolton, for example, told Ginny Simone, managing editor of the National Rifle Association’s NRA News and host of the NRA’s Daily News program, “The administration is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt – as was the case back over a decade ago – that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”
I CtPatriot see this as One of the Biggest Attacks on our Freedom that this Insane President and Congress are trying to do. And the UN? what A JOKE… hey UN stop Raping young women in Africa before you Judge us
Share this:
2 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
A Ct Patriot's Blog 
Rolex
Obama revives talk of U.N. gun control NRA guests warn international treaty would strip 2nd Amendment rights… This is the one thing they fear Our right to bear arms …. Once they take our guns… well isnt that what Europe did right Befo…
LikeLike
Regarding threats to our 2nd A. rights via treaties, please consider the following. Obama is unnecessarily scaring a lot of people for the following reason. Regardless that Obama has been passed off as a constitutional expert, everything he is doing shows that he was indoctrinated up to his eyeballs with perversions of the Constitution by his Constitution-hating socialistic mentors, IMO.
But the other side of the coin is this. Many citizens are likewise being unnecessarily intimidated by Obama’s threats to their personal freedoms because they need to brush up on the limited Constitutional powers of the federal government as much as Obama does.
That said, where our constitutional gun rights are concerned, let’s not overlook the following. The Founders made the 10th A. to reserve those powers not expressly delegated to the federal government to the states. And since the 2nd A. gives the federal government little, if any, authority to regulate guns for ordinary citizens, this power was originally reserved to the states. Therefore, gun regulation was originally a state power issue. (The 14th A. has changed this, actually in the citizens’ favor, IMO.)
So consider that regardless that Obama and the Senate have constitutional authority to negotiate treaties, what constitutionally-impaired citizens don’t seem to understand concerning constitutional limits on federal treaty power is this. The Oval Office and Congress cannot use treaty power as a back door to force US citizens to comply with foreign laws, including gun laws, which the feds have little or no constitutional authority to regulate in the first place.
And if you don’t believe me about the federal government’s constitutionally limited power to negotiate treaties, then perhaps you will believe a respected constitutional expert.
“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” –Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1800. http://www.constitution.org/tj/tj-mpp.htm
Note that the above excerpt is from what appears to be a government publication, not a personal letter.
Finally, the following words of Thomas Jefferson are appropriate for any official actions of the Oval Office and Congress based on constitutionally nonexistent federal government powers.
“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.” –Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. http://tinyurl.com/oozoo
LikeLike