12 Democrats join Republicans to oppose Obama-UN Gun Control Treaty

My senator, Mark Udall, is also the sponsor of a bill to increase the number of ranges on National Forest land. . .

Way to go, Mr. Udall.

There is no treaty. There likely won't be one. But even if there were to be one, it's a moot point thanks to the Constitution.

Can we stop beating this horse already? It's quite dead.

I disagree, K/Pin.......any and all Pro 2 news needs to be publicized and repeated as often as possible. It's the only way to squelch the cacophony of b.s. and untruths from the other side.....

How does that saying go? People with guns are citizens...People with out guns are subjects. Something like that.

Kingpin, I have heard this over and over also. I have been to Snopes which chides the inquiring minds and admonishes the reader for not knowing it has to be ratified.

So what?

They ARE discussing this treaty. Obama is FOR this treaty as is Hilarious. Sorry, but I agree the continued airing of this matter will keep us informed as much as possible.

Thinking about it, why are so many politicians hopping on a bandwagon that, supposedly, is a non matter?

El Mariachi said:

I disagree, K/Pin.......any and all Pro 2 news needs to be publicized and repeated as often as possible. It's the only way to squelch the cacophony of b.s. and untruths from the other side.....

Click to expand...

...and antis are like vampires; very difficult to kill.

It would really great to say, "Oh, that would be a violation of the constitution, so it will never happen. Don't worry about it." Unfortunately, the enemy plays by different rules. Never turn your back; trust no one.

President Obama has moved more toward the center on some issues and appears to be comparatively open to compromise and bipartisanship and even if he personally supported this treaty which is probably dead anyway it would be political suicide to try and push gun control in a republican house, especially with lots of bipartisan opposition in the senate.

I'm not in favor of going nuts about the treaty yet either, but does anyone believe that the constitution would prevent the ratification of such a treaty? Hows the constitution doing in its fight against the NFA, GCA, FOPA, AWB? Those unconstitutional laws are still on the books (well not the AWB, for a while at least) and people are arrested and caged frequently for violating them. A treaty would be no different, if its signed and ratified it would be here to stay. That said we should fight things that are actually happening rather than things that are just likely going to happen.

There is no treaty. There likely won't be one. But even if there were to be one, it's a moot point thanks to the Constitution.

Click to expand...

While I agree with the former sentiment, I actually disagree with the latter - it has been proven time and again that the Executive Branch will expand their scope of regulatory authority beyond that granted to them via legislature.

But, in any event, it's getting pretty tiresome to try to discuss something that has not happened.