Thread: UN Arms Treaty could put US gun owners in foreign sights, say critics

Originally Posted by ttwtt78640

I never said that, I said that state/local laws can be overriden by a treaty. We NOW readily accept STATE and CITY "infringment" of the right to keep an bear arms, by allowing the states to issue "permits" for large fees to actually exercise these "rights of the people", it is but a TINY step to let the UN do so as well.

we also allow cities & states to infringe upon freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and freedom of religion by requiring protest & demonstration permits, and enforcing Blue Laws.

Originally Posted by apdst

If we didn't currently have a president who hates our costitution, I wouldn't be concerned.

Yes.....
Cool baseless accusation bro. Keep on living in fear of absolutely nothing. It really brings the best out of you.

Originally Posted by ttwtt78640

Not so, as international treaties are "on par" with the U.S. constitutional and override ALL state/local laws.

Link: Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well you didn't address what I said for one thing, and given the fact that gun ownership has been ruled an individual right protected by the 2nd Amendment, my statement still stands. No treaty can override the Constitution. Any contradiction to the Constitution is null.

Originally Posted by Thunder

we also allow cities & states to infringe upon freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and freedom of religion by requiring protest & demonstration permits, and enforcing Blue Laws.

We can finally agree on something. They also infringe on our 2nd Amendment rights.

Originally Posted by American

Well you didn't address what I said for one thing, and given the fact that gun ownership has been ruled an individual right protected by the 2nd Amendment, my statement still stands. No treaty can override the Constitution. Any contradiction to the Constitution is null.

If state and city law can NOW override the constitution then why NOT a treaty as well? I would agree with your assertion IFF federal law did not define what are legal "arms" and that state and city gov'ts could not impose fees (infringements?) for the preservation of that right. If you do NOT pay the state/city a large fee in advance then you have NO "right" to carry that arm, so how is that NOT an infringement? That fee/permit convert that right into a mere state issued privilege, like driving, not a right like voting or having an attorney present during police questioning. Sure I may BUY a handgun and keep it in my home, yet if I leave home with it (bear it), then my "right" is contingent upon a state/city permit, thus it is hardly constitutionally protected.

Originally Posted by Thunder

we also allow cities & states to infringe upon freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and freedom of religion by requiring protest & demonstration permits, and enforcing Blue Laws.

The first amendment states "Congress shall pass pass no law to...." the second says "the right of the people to... shall not be infringed", a distinct difference as the "right of the people" is far different that only banning any federal gov't restrictions. Establishing "gun free" zones, or charging fees for "parade permits" to cover added LEO costs, is far different that saying that any and ALL carrying of arms must be precleared by a permit. Your free speech right is NOT totally restricted to use only by permit, or you are subject to arrest.

Originally Posted by apdst

If we didn't currently have a president who hates our costitution, I wouldn't be concerned.

Obama hates the Constitution a lot less than Bush & Reagan did.

Originally Posted by Thunder

Obama hates the Constitution a lot lesis than Bush & Reagan did.

Say hello from leftfelid.

Forbes Op Ed piece seems to support the possibility:
U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Forbes

Originally Posted by Sphere

Forbes Op Ed piece seems to support the possibility:
U.N. Agreement Should Have All Gun Owners Up In Arms - Forbes

But, but, but, the big government lovers said this could never happen...

tyranny_montesquieu.jpg