Watch The U.n. Gun Debate On Pay-per-view!


PDA






mustanger98
October 3, 2004, 08:31 PM
(Have any of ya'll seen this? This is the first I've heard of it.)


A Special Message from NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre:

Tune in to iN DEMAND Pay-Per-View and Watch the U.N. Gun Debate!
**IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE DEBATE: DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!**

Make plans now to watch iN DEMAND Pay-Per-View on October 12 for my
90-minute debate with international gun-ban ringleader Rebecca Peters. And
after the debate, be sure to vote on whether the U.S. Senate should approve
the U.N.'s gun-ban treaty!

Rebecca Peters almost single-handedly brought gun confiscation to Australia
and to England, and is now the most feared gun-banner in the world. With
more than 500 gun control organizations under her command worldwide, and
with the unlimited financial backing of billionaire George Soros, she's
determined to make gun confiscation a reality here in the United States-
through a U.N.-backed treaty that would be binding on every American
citizen.

You and every American gun owner need to watch this debate-and see
first-hand this enormous and very real threat to our Second Amendment
rights.

Tune in on October 12, and you'll see how gun banners have taken over the
U.N.-and how they intend to infect America with their anti-gun poison.
You'll see for yourself how the biggest coalition of gun-ban organizations
ever assembled on earth is working with the U.N. and with U.S. politicians
to take away your rights.

You'll learn the truth about George Soros - the foreign-born American
financier who is spending his personal fortune to advance the global gun-ban
movement as well as elect John Kerry to the White House on November 2. And
you'll see for yourself why U.N. gun-ban extremists will be rejoicing around
the world if John Kerry is elected President.

To prevent our nation from living under this soon-to-be-drafted United
Nations gun ban treaty in the years ahead, every American needs to know what
the U.N. intends to do with our Second Amendment rights-and every gun owner
needs to watch this debate.

Please tune in to this historic debate. See the threat for yourself. And
invite your gun-owning friends, neighbors, and co-workers to watch with you.

I promise you, you'll never look at the U.N. in the same way again-and
you'll get the information you need to help defeat this U.N.-backed effort
to ban our guns. Thanks in advance for watching-and for Voting!

SHOWTIME: Tuesday, October 12, 9:00 p.m. - 10:30 p.m., EST

HOW TO ORDER:

iN DEMAND is the world's largest provider of Pay-Per-View television
programming. Ordering methods vary from one local cable system to another,
with the use of either your cable remote or your telephone. Call your local
cable company for more information about its Pay-Per-View ordering process.
Pricing is also determined by your local cable system. Please note that this
debate will not be available on DIRECTV, Dish Network, or any other satellite
network. Remember, the calling volume increases immediately before the start
of an event. In order to avoid getting a busy signal we recommend that you
place your order several hours beforehand. Thank you in advance for watching
this important debate!!!

**IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE DEBATE: DON'T FORGET TO VOTE!**

At the end of the debate, you'll be provided a password allowing you to
vote, using the Internet or your telephone, on this critical question:
"Should the United State Senate ratify the proposed United Nations treaty
that bans private ownership of firearms?"

It's vitally important for gun owners to win this vote-and show the world
that we won't give up our Second Amendment rights without a fight! But only
those who have ordered this Pay-Per-View show and obtained the password are
allowed to vote. So please, make sure to watch at the end of the show for
your password, then cast YOUR vote for freedom!

SHOWTIMES (All Showtimes are Eastern Time)
Tuesday, October 12-9:00 p.m. - 10:30 p.m.
Tuesday, October 12-10:30 p.m. - 12:00 a.m.
Wednesday, October 13-12:00 a.m. - 1:30 a.m.
Thursday, October 14-6:30 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Friday, October 15-5:30 a.m. - 7:00 a.m.
Friday, October 15-11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
Saturday, October 16-3:30 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Sunday, October 17-9:30 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
Monday, October 18-11:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
Monday, October 18-8:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.
Tuesday, October 19-6:30 a.m. - 8:00 a.m.
Wednesday, October 20-4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, October 20-11:00 p.m. - 12:30 a.m.

BE SURE YOU REGISTER TO VOTE!

One of the simplest, yet most important, things gun owners can do this
election season is ensure they are currently registered to vote. Our vote is
our voice; if we don't use it, we will lose it! We can't afford to let
others decide for us who will represent our interests in Washington or in
the state legislature. Even if you can't vote in person on November 2, your
voice can still be heard! Early voting (where one votes prior to Election
Day, either in-person or by mail) is underway now, or will commence shortly,
in many states. Also, every state allows absentee voting if you plan to be
away on November 2. But time is running out! Remember, some states require
individuals to register to vote well in advance, so if you haven't
registered, please be sure to do so right away! NRA-ILA has a section on its
website that will provide you with information about early voting and
absentee voting options that will make your participation easier. You can
also use this site to register to vote, or to update your voter registration
to reflect a recent change in residence. To access this site, please go to
http://NRAILA.org, and click on the "NRA-ILA HelpingAmericansVote" icon and
select your state. Or, you can go directly to the site at
http://NRA.HelpingAmericansVote.org.

If you enjoyed reading about "Watch The U.n. Gun Debate On Pay-per-view!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Moparmike
October 3, 2004, 09:03 PM
I saw it, but I am not going to pay for PPV to watch something that will enrage me to blindness. Any Senator that votes for this treasonous peice of garbage will be removed from office. Peacefully or no, that will be their decision.



And HTF does the UN expect to get our guns anyway? The US has ALWAYS made up the bulk of the UN's expeditionary forces when the UN wants something done. If the UN wants my guns that bad, they can come to my front door and ask for them.:fire:

wasrjoe
October 3, 2004, 09:18 PM
Hahahahahaha, I'd love to see them try that in the US.

SoundWave
October 3, 2004, 09:32 PM
I hope Wayne rips her a new one.

Ryan1021
October 3, 2004, 09:39 PM
I hope he does too.

NoHarmNoFAL
October 3, 2004, 09:51 PM
Hahahahahaha, I'd love to see them try that in the US.

Be very careful of what you wish for.

If Kerry wins in November you just may see it.

MAURICE
October 3, 2004, 11:30 PM
through a U.N.-backed treaty that would be binding on every American
citizen.

No it will not.
Molon Labe.

Psssniper
October 3, 2004, 11:57 PM
How much do we have to pay to see this??

jefnvk
October 4, 2004, 12:29 AM
Here. Save your money (or better yet, send it to me :neener: )

UN Disarmament Home: http://www.un.org/issues/m-disarm.asp
Small Arms in specific: http://disarmament.un.org:8080/cab/salw.html

You can view all their plans there.

nico
October 4, 2004, 01:26 AM
How about we all chip in a few cents and one person records it on TiVo, rips it, and posts the password so we can all vote?

I'm down for at least a quarter;)

TarpleyG
October 4, 2004, 10:43 AM
Blue Helmet: "Sir, we are here to collect your guns."
Me: "What guns?"
Blue Helmet: "We show here that you have several guns. Here are the ID numbers."
Me: "Oh, I sold those a while back and no, I didn't get a record of the legal private transaction. Do you have a warrant to search my residence? Didn't think so."

Greg

Sam Adams
October 4, 2004, 03:50 PM
...though a U.N.-backed treaty that would be binding on every American
citizen.

No it will not.
Molon Labe.

Of course it won't. Which won't stop a Kerry administration from signing the UN treaty in 2006 and pushing for laws to enforce that treaty. Yet another reason to vote against that pond scum.

Oh, and I plan on handing in my guns as soon as possible. The bullets will be sent via airmail to the nearest Blue Helmet available, and if he's unable to handle the task, the others will be sent to his nearest friends. Note: I don't expect all of the Blue Helmets to be citizens of other nations.

Cosmoline
October 4, 2004, 04:24 PM
The UN treaty wouldn't come in the form of US registration. Rather, it would address international shipment laws. States signing the treaty might agree, for example, to prohibit all import from companies who are not able to track their firearms and assure they are in "proper" hands. No problem for companies only selling to governments--even to governments which use those arms for mass murder. But it would present difficulties to all those US and European companies selling to US civilians.

bj426
October 5, 2004, 08:45 PM
Someone here must have the technology to record and post the show....

twency
October 5, 2004, 11:01 PM
Someone here must have the technology to record and post the show....


Surely someone does, but I think that someone might think twice before doing so, as it would be a rather egregious copyright violation, and not justifiable by the any of the usual "fair use" exceptions.


-twency
________________
A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.

Atticus
October 5, 2004, 11:16 PM
From the UN website

"Small arms are responsible for over half a million deaths per year, including 300,000 in armed conflict and 200,000 more from homicides and suicides."

Boy...makes me glad I own a safe....I wouldn't want those small arms to attack me while I sleep!! :cuss: :cuss:

Typical UN BS - The slaughter of millions of unarmed innocents is so much more convenient for them.

Oh well...time for some more blue helmet range time.

Tharg
October 6, 2004, 01:20 AM
hehehe according to those stats i'm guessing they better move a lil quicker to get to those hot spots.... where governments are popping people by the bucketload....

oh wait - that would require action...

we can't have that. After all - Kerry admits that the war was necessary... but i think he wanted to talk about it for about 8 more years so it wouldn't have to be on his record... you know - kinda like Clinton...

heh

J/Tharg!

Cosmoline
October 22, 2004, 02:04 PM
Did anyone watch this thing? How did it go?

zougou
October 22, 2004, 02:48 PM
I watched it. sorta

The UN woman did not exactly take the 'high road' as she seemed bent on spewing statistics and throwing out sarcastic one-liners and barbs. She said at one point that America is not the world (to great applause). At one point she said something to the effect that she admired Wayne's bravery in daring to come to England considering how dangerous he thought it was. When Wayne was speaking, she would stand with her head cocked to one side and smirk.

Wayne didn't stoop to personal attacks and he spewed out his statistics. Several times he would say, I reject that to something the UN lady said. Seemed a little silly. Of course, his statistics claimed that England and Austrailia had higher crime and victimization after honest people were disarmed. Of course, the UNer's statistics showed that crime was reduced. Oh, vey.

He did point out the agenda of the UN on stuff that she didn't bring up, such as reducing gun ownership to single shot hunting rifles that could only reach the length of a football field (I think). The UN person didn't argue about that or dispute it. She would say that people don't need AK47s or landmines or RPGs. Wayne did point out that we don't have full auto AKs (most of us, at least) and that gun-grabbers (not his term) tried to confuse people by confusing semi with full.

The crowd seemed to be on the UN person's side. They applauded her and laughed at her little barbs. Wayne did get some applause.

During question and answer, they cut off one person who tried to argue with the UN person. At one point, the UN critter said something about there being no legitimate use for a handgun and sorry, but you cannot have a handgun and you'll just have to find some other hobby. Her tone was one of a cross mother telling a naughty little boy he couldn't have a pony.

I admit it angered me and I'm biased in reporting what I watched. They made it sound like America supplies the world with dangerous weapons (funny, I thought places like China made lots of machine guns, silly me) and that all they want are reasonable laws so that the poor third worlders can't do their ethnic cleansing. She never really talked about the nuts and bolts of how that would work.

Wayne never touched on the fact that blood would probably flow if the UN started trying to confiscate Americans' arms. He just made the point that he was interested in seeing law-abiding people own guns and punishing those who weren't law-abiding.

The biggest impression I got from watching it was that America is hated and I can probably expect to a) have my rights eroded through politics or b) die screaming dulce et decorum est...:rolleyes:

Cosmoline
October 22, 2004, 04:00 PM
"Her tone was one of a cross mother telling a naughty little boy he couldn't have a pony."

It's maternal tyranny. The flip side of the paternal tyranny that Hitler and Stalin brought us. Instead of taking you out and shooting you, they take you out and reeducate you. Frankly I'd prefer the bullet to the head. At least that's honest.

zougou
October 22, 2004, 04:25 PM
I wish someone would've asked her who decides what's reasonable.:uhoh:

Bubbles
October 22, 2004, 08:57 PM
I also saw it. A friend paid to watch it, taped it, recorded it on DVD, and gave me a copy.

IANSA/Ms Peters believes in banning all firearms from private ownership, except for single-shot long guns that won't fire a round more than 100 meters. These can be kept "for hunting". No pump-action, bolt-action, lever-action, semi-auto, or full-auto long guns can be privately owned, nor can any handguns.

Lapierre made one point, and made it well. The countries with bans also lack the concept of armed self-defense. Firearm ownership was based purely on sport.

BTW we'd all better pray that President Bush wins on Nov 2. The UN is prepared to write up a "National Small Arms Treaty" in 2006, which is the reason for this debate. I do not want Kerry or a Democrat-controlled Congress in power when that thing comes up for a vote.

mustanger98
October 22, 2004, 10:31 PM
There was a guy at the gun club meeting this last week wound up tight about that deal in 2006. Said we have to stand tall and kick some ass or we'll be a ruled nation as opposed to the governed nation we are.

JHill
October 24, 2004, 12:45 AM
How bout a lil hypothetical game:

IF Kerry gets into office AND Clinton becomes some UN authority--how long before we reap a gun banning whether it comes domestically or internationaly?

Will an armed offensive revolution ensue?

NoHarmNoFAL
October 24, 2004, 07:06 PM
Will an armed offensive revolution ensue?

NO.

An armed rebellion will never happen. Best case is that it would be logistically it would be impossible, worst case, mass suicide.

RevDisk
October 25, 2004, 06:26 AM
And HTF does the UN expect to get our guns anyway? The US has ALWAYS made up the bulk of the UN's expeditionary forces when the UN wants something done. If the UN wants my guns that bad, they can come to my front door and ask for them.


I asked some of the UN Special Operations folk that specific question. "What do think would happen if UN personnel were ordered to go to America and take people's privately owned firearms?" It took a while to get it translated, because I don't think the guy believed he made the correct translation.

After asking a few questions, how many firearms the US had, how many trained people there were, etc he gave me his answer. "I'd resign." Everyone else in his squad agreed. He got kinda pale when I explained that advanced firearms training was perfectly legal for civilians, and was a fairly popular sport here in the States. FrontSite, BlackWater, IDPA, etc.

From the tactical standpoint, they'd be a foreign quasi-military that didn't really speak the local lingo and would have a hard time blending in with the locals. There would be little to no emotional stigma for locals (ie, us Americans) to kill or torture the UN personnel cracking down on the locals. That innate "Us vs Them" thing caved into every human's brain. A significant number of local liason personnel (ie, cops and feds) would leak information to locals, meaning they'd be ambushed anywhere they went.

Basically, the UN's commandos thought it'd be a suicide mission and wouldn't do it. Period. In other words, the blue helmets aren't coming. They don't WANT to come either, and would literally be have to be forced at gunpoint to do their job.

Due to Hollywood's propaganda, most foreign militaries think Americans are crazy to some extent, and rather dangerous to back into a corner. They think EVERYONE here has a gun and is likely to use it, especially on a foreign military on American soil.

If you enjoyed reading about "Watch The U.n. Gun Debate On Pay-per-view!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!