Obama's 1st step to ban firearms

Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States

http://www.infowars.com/obama-takes-first-step-in-banning-all-firearms/


http://community.marketwatch.com/groups/us-politics/topics/obama-takes-first-step-banning


U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States. The Obama administration intends to force gun control and a complete ban on all weapons for US citizens through the signing of international treaties with foreign nations. By signing international treaties on gun control, the Obama administration can use the US State Department to bypass the normal legislative process in Congress. Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments. These are laws that have been developed and promoted by organizations such as the United Nations and individuals such as George Soros and Michael Bloomberg . The laws are designed and intended to lead to the complete ban and confiscation of all firearms.

The Obama administration is attempting to use tactics and methods of gun control that will inflict major damage to our 2nd Amendment before US citizens even understand what has happened. Obama can appear before the public and tell them that he does not intend to pursue any legislation (in the United States) that will lead to new gun control laws, while cloaked in secrecy, his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is committing the US to international treaties and foreign gun control laws. Does that mean Obama is telling the truth? What it means is that there will be no publicized gun control debates in the media or votes in Congress. We will wake up one morning and find that the United States has signed a treaty that prohibits firearm and ammunition manufacturers from selling to the public. We will wake up another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that prohibits any transfer of firearm ownership. And then, we will wake up yet another morning and find that the US has signed a treaty that requires US citizens to deliver any firearm they own to the local government collection and destruction center or face imprisonment.

This is not a joke nor a false warning. As sure as government health care will be forced on us by the Obama administration through whatever means necessary, so will gun control.

Please forward this message to others who may be concerned about the direction in which our country is headed.

We are being led like a lamb to the slaughter (Socialism/Dictatorship).

Yep, I knew this was coming. He's doing this like he does everything else........whole hog or nothing. He is trying to force all this through before he loses the congress. He has no shame or guilt over what he is doing to this country. This is what he has had in mind all along and 52% of the voters in this contry fell for it. The writing was on the wall and these folks chose to ignore it and now we are screwed. :rant: I pray that we can get things turned around before he does irreparable harm.

yea right, what happend to the right to bare arms, jackin with health care is one thing, takin our guns would really be opening a can of worms:roflmao: thats just askin for a bullet,{long over due}! maybe it's just like drugs, create a black market.

The major obstacle is that all treaties must be ratified by 2/3 of the Senate - neither the secretary of state nor the president have any authority to sign a treaty & give it any effect. The UN & other countries know that too & it's a major reason why there was no binding agreement or treaty from the "climate change summit" fiasco in Copenhagen - if the U.S. Senate doesn't ratify it, it has no legal effect the U.S.

I hope there will be a big change too, but there are 59 Democrats in the Senate & to ratify a treaty you need 67 votes.

As far as I'm concerned, none of the current Senators have the sense God gave seafood - but 67 out of 100 voting for a UN firearms ban treaty isn't @ all realistic - Obama didn't even get near that number for the "healthcare" legislation.

So who passed it ?

Not meanin to change the subject.....

But if the goverment states they are spending 400 Billion for the U.S. Cesnus report, why didn't they just give that money to the people ????????????.............

And they said if I didn't fill it out they would come knockin on my door.
What is it really all about, do they want to know more about me and how many people live in my house?.................

I ain't talkin either.
I filled it as far as the garbage can, and I have no trusspassin signs on my property.
And they means especially them too.

Refer back to the convoluted process - in simple terms, 60 votes in the Senate before Scott Brown was elected passed one bill, a simple majority in the House passed another, which the Senate would not pass & the president can't sign a bill that hasn't passed both houses with the same language. After all the BS "backroom deals", special treatment for certain States etc. & knowing the Senate would not pass any bill that came out of the House, they finally decided to get the House to pass the Senate bill, then a package of "fixes" to modify the final version. Lawsuits challenging the Constitutionality of the legislation were filed the next day.

The voting rules are real confusing too, but what it boils down to is that a simple majority of 51 will pass most bills in the Senate, but it takes 60 votes to stop "fillibuster" tactics used to block further progress on a bill & now the Senate only has 59 Democrats. But to the point of this thread, it takes 67 votes to ratify a treaty & what I'm saying is you won't get 67 for the "UN gun ban" ideas that have been bouncing around.

Don't you feel bad that you voted for him now ?