Obama Takes the First Step in Banning All Firearms

A friend of mine just sent this along. It was posted on Wayne Mercier's Blog on November 11th

Reuters is very reliable
Date: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 4:20 PM

Obama Finds Legal Way Around The 2nd. Amendment and Uses It.
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDT Reuters News Service
The Full Article Here

Subject: Obama Takes First Step in Banning All Firearms
On Wednesday Obama Took the First Major Step in a Plan to Ban All Firearms in the United States

On Wednesday the Obama administration took its 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.

Read the Article

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.

The Full Article

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

Silence will lead us to Socialism.

Tags: 2nd, amendment, control, gun, international, nations, treaties, united

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Robert A. Martino on November 12, 2009 at 7:59am: Trust me the American people would immediately know. The NRA for one is a watch dog on this issue. To quote the late Charlton Heston the former spokes person for the NRA before his death "the government will have to take my guns from my cold dead hands". I think that is the sentiment that is pervasive among many gun owners. If Obama launchs an attack on legal gun owners he risks out right revolt from an armed populus.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by J W Larson on November 12, 2009 at 8:04am: Agreed, if Obama signs an agreement of that type he would face armed insurrection at home and would be the primary target along with all the politicians who backed him.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Melinda on November 12, 2009 at 1:44pm: I do believe that anything restricting Legal and Constitutional Gun ownership will be the thing that ignites the flames that will end this one way or the other for sure .
People are afraid and they are angry ,their lives have no way of predicting ,or preparing any kind of secure Future for them or their family's anymore. Other than Obama being all over the place and in their face constantly ,Taunting us as if he is calling us out for a fight ,and we are cowards and this Country he is conquering right before us means nothing to him .This Health care bill is going to push us to the point where we will all become criminals, because we do not have the money to pay for his insurance now ,because he ruined our economy and there are no jobs out there anymore.
He demands More Future Taxes , and mandatory Money from a public who is totally broke and who are trying to hold on to at least their Homes as the only solitude or sanctuary they have away from this Obama nightmare, and the last reminder of a Happier , Dependable America they once had.
Attempting to take the only means off protection or identity they have have left to them ,as our Government looks more like Stalin preparing his Army to roll across America crushing everything American in his path, this is going to be all the people who were the true America can take even if it means their own demise.
As once said in the American Old West " You can only keep taking from a Man so long until he has nothing left to give . At that point the specter of Death is far more accommodating than having you keep tearing his life apart for your own pleasure and greed ." Look how bad Obama and all the rest of his Thugs are right now ,and our Police and Military are getting to the point they are fragmented within their ranks, so they may become good or bad for freedom depending on who it is they are . Or as Hitler did in holding their Family's in fear so the German Soldier would fight to the Death for Him .
If you think its bad now ,give up your guns and you will see what bad really is folks , he and his handlers will become ruthless to us in their plans ,and we will be the sounding board for all of Obamas anger toward America and its people.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Alice Grannas on November 12, 2009 at 2:44pm: Yep, if you get a rat in the corner where he sees no way out, he's gonna bite you. When enough people think they're in a corner, they are gonna fight. If the government persists and declares martial law, the revolution will start. I hope they think long and hard before they push the citizens into a corner. War is Hell but sometime it is necessary. I don't condone fighting and war but the new world order isn't going to go over to well around my neck of the woods.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by dale sampson on November 12, 2009 at 3:41pm: well spoken and i totally agree; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael Paul Revere on November 12, 2009 at 1:59pm: A friend said it better than I could so I'll comment using some of his words:

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution includes this language, in regards the President: "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;..."

This means that two thirds of the Senate must vote to ratify to make it official.

also...

“The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states. But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid, it must be consistent with the Constitution—that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties.”

Hillsdale College Imprimis, July 2009, The Constitution and American Sovereignty.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&...

It's unlikely that the current government would sign and ratify such a treaty and start collecting weapons in direct violation of the Constitution.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by a.n. silvestri on November 12, 2009 at 2:20pm: M.P.Revere, I wish I could have as much confidence in this congress as you have , but I don't. You reference the constitution, yet how much that has been done lately is in violation of our constitution. History is repeating itself, this is Germany of 70 years ago. So much of our freedom is dependant on how the police forces and military react to any action we patriots take, if we take any at all.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael Paul Revere on November 12, 2009 at 2:56pm: I don't have as much confident as you might think, but I do know they are going to have a very difficult time getting 60 votes for the Pelosi bill. If that is the case, think of how difficult it would be to get 66 votes for an unconstitutional treaty like this.

Ok, so let's say they do manage to get 2/3 of the Senate to ratify it and it becomes the "law of the land". It's still an invalid treaty since it is contrary to the Constitution, a treaty which will be defied by We the People. For some, that means states will refuse to enforce it. For others, it means they will take to arms to fight it. I think (hope) there are enough leaders who know the potential outcome and they will not allow it to get to this point.

But you have every reason to doubt and I may soon join you in having no confidence at all. Let's hope for the best here.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Donald M Rammel on November 12, 2009 at 2:38pm: Before Pres. B Hussain Obama's I would agree with you. Since his election have you seen what the LIBERALS have done to our Republic? the LIBERALS do not care, nobody can stop them. The White House cam out and said the Sen can pass healthcare with only 51 votes. Ther are 50 LIBERALS in the Senete plus a few LIBERAL Republicans, I could see this treaty being shoved down our throats.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mel Frost on November 12, 2009 at 2:32pm: When I posted a copy of this last night, mine had a line at the bottom which said:
Shoud anything like this come to pass for any reason, this will start a war...

I don't know who added that before I got it, but it rings true to me and others...
There is a line in the sand and it will not be moved or ignored by WE THE PEOPLE here in the streets!

EVERYONE...
Look at what Obama has done in the name of this common "flu"...we are under a declared National Emergency...by PD.
Do you all realize that it now only takes one (1) signature, his, on a PD and WE WILL BE UNDER MARTIAL LAW????

Do your research...learn what that means...as for "binding" treaties and agreements, during such a time period...
Can you understand that for 6-mo at least there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR BASIS FOR REDRESS????
AND...can you not see that with Copenhagen/climate coming...in Dec...and our own "cap & trade" buried until next spring...eh?

This can go two (2) ways...I think:
First, BHO panic's and signs the PD for Martial Law so he can push these agenda items through without fear or oversight...
THIS WILL MEAN WAR IN OUR STREETS!!! Don't fool yourself, it is not funny or fun...WAR IS HELL !!!
Second, SOME small group, or large group, in DC will come to their common senses and put the skids to this guy & agenda!
This will mean that we have "dodged the bullet"...but, not by much...

We do NOT have until 2012 !!!
Nor, do we even have enough time for 2010 ... I am afraid.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Michael Paul Revere on November 12, 2009 at 3:06pm: Jung said we create what we refuse to acknowledge. The more we deny violence is necessary the more we create the need for it.

I thank you for acknowledging it so that, if it is possible, we may not have need for it. Let's hope they heed our warning so it can be avoided.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Terry Crace on November 12, 2009 at 3:17pm: In the event this UN treaty doesn't succeed, don't forget about the treaty brewing south of the border and H.R.45 that is on the table in the House. Any or all of which I will consider null and void if enacted because of the 'shall not infringe' part of the 2nd Amendment - irregardless of the most recent proclamation of the Supreme Court.; ▶ Reply to This