Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

UN definition of firearm

Discussion in 'Legal' started by LAR-15, Oct 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. LAR-15

    LAR-15 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    3,385
    For the purposes of this Protocol:
    (a) “Firearm” shall mean any portable barrelled weapon that expels, is
    designed to expel or may be readily converted to expel a shot, bullet or projectile by
    action of an explosive, excluding antique firearms or their replicas. Antique
    firearms and their replicas shall be defined in accordance with domestic law. In no
    case, however, shall antique firearms include firearms manufactured after 1899;
     
  2. NCP24

    NCP24 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    470
    All hail to the Mighty UN the Great! Bow before the presence of immanence you peasants.

    The UN can kiss my international royal whatzit
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2005
  3. kikilee

    kikilee Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2003
    Messages:
    257
    Location:
    Arkansas
    NCP24 - Don't SUGARCOAT it, tell it llike it is! :D


    .
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2005
  4. Flatfender

    Flatfender Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    Second star to the right
    I got your firearm right here...
    Stamp_Image_UN_Blue_Helmet.jpg
     
  5. MechAg94

    MechAg94 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Messages:
    4,732
    So is slower burning powder really an explosive?

    I guess deadly air rifles are not included.
     
  6. DeseoUnTaco

    DeseoUnTaco Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    290
  7. TexasRifleman

    TexasRifleman Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Messages:
    18,302
    Location:
    Ft. Worth
    Smokeless powder is not classified as an explosive is it?

    That means my AR is not a firearm right? Woo Hoo!!!!

    Or, if I bolt my AR to the table then it's no longer portable, thus not a firearm.
    What if I bolt it to the hood of my car, on a turret?
     
  8. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,037
    Location:
    SouthEast PA
    The UN definition of firearm is completely irrelevant without a blue helmet to enforce it.

    Blue helmets are fair targets on American soil.

    Whenever they want to play that game, I'm good to go in 60 seconds.
     
  9. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    The UN is the biggist waste of office space in America. *** do we still house these violenty anti american third world morons?

    I swear if they hate us so friggin much maybe Paris would be a better place for them. The UN is USELESS. They are no longer the United Nations they are now the Useless Nutballs. Kick them out and refuse to take part in any further actions they do. Cause of course, the UN was created to keep brutal tyrants from murdering their own people. Great job they are doing eh? The UN is utterly usless. Kick them out bulldoze the building and put a friggin Armory on the vaccant lot in the shape of a big raised middle finger pointed right at paris.
     
  10. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    I think we should just send the United Nations to Zimbabwe and skip all the kissing.
     
  11. Lupinus

    Lupinus Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,502
    Location:
    Upstate SC
    oh Ihave something the UN can kiss on its way out
     
  12. donkee

    donkee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2004
    Messages:
    432
    Location:
    Michigan
    +1 Geek!
     
  13. Hkmp5sd

    Hkmp5sd Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    6,513
    Location:
    Winter Haven, FL
    IMO, they should pick up the UN building and all associated personnel and transplant them into downtown Baghdad.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Oldtimer

    Oldtimer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Messages:
    370
    The United Nations has been a total farce for several years. Was it the UN that set up the "coalition forces" during the original Gulf War?
    NOPE! The UN did, however, print the "sanction" that President Bush #41 adhered to, by not rolling into Baghdad and destroying Saddam! Then, the UN issued a total of 17 "sanctions" against Saddam, threatening him with "severe and harsh penalties" if he didn't comply.....BUT, at the same time, the UN had set up the "oil for food" program with Saddam, which proved to be a VERY profitable program for numerous UN officials! Then, when President Bush #43 approached the UN for the purpose of finding out what their "severe and harsh penalties" consisted of, since Saddam had NOT complied with any of those "sanctions", the UN didn't want their "money making machine" in Iraq to end. President Bush #43 chose to form ANOTHER coalition of forces to deal with Saddam....and believe it or not, there were MORE countries involved in that second coalition than there had been in the FIRST Gulf War! It was hilarious, how the UN condemned the USA for taking on Saddam in a "unilateral" attack!

    No, I'm not pleased with everything that Bush #43 has done, but by standing up AGAINST the UN was certainly a bright moment! In the long run, I truly believe that our current actions in Iraq will pay us BIG dividends in the way of security for our nation. The Iraqi war is OVER, even though the mainstream news media still calls it a "war". The "insurgency" is nothing more than terrorism being carried out against an emerging, free Islamic country! It is NOT another Vietnam, and while I mourn for all of our troops that have been killed or injured, the numbers are FAR lower than what the liberal/leftist/Democrat folks had anticipated!
     
  15. CAS700850

    CAS700850 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,304
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    You know, I worry very little about the U.N. (right up until the U.S. government starts following and accepting the U.N. party lines). So long as the U.S. is a sovereign nation, the U.N. can do or say whaever they want. From what I've seen, the U.N. cannot even put together a successful peacekeeping operation without NATO (U.S.) involvement. Do we really think that the U.N. can suddenly put together an effective force to impose its will on the U.S.?

    Nah, so long as we, the people, continue to maintain a government that doesn't subscribe to U.N. mandates, etc., they can say whatever they want. We just have to make sure our "leaders" stay independent.
     
  16. Werewolf

    Werewolf Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2003
    Messages:
    4,192
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    [​IMG]

    GAWD! Optimists! Gotta love'em... :D
     
  17. armoredman

    armoredman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    16,213
    Location:
    proud to be in AZ
    Up the UN. Here's a couple of targets for ya...
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2008
  18. NCP24

    NCP24 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    470
    Now I understand why those SS109's were tested on blue helmets.
     
  19. Molon Labe

    Molon Labe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,700
    Location:
    SW Ohio
    I have a definition of the U.N. But I'm confident my posting privileges will be yanked if I reveal it.
     
  20. fletcher

    fletcher Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,559
    Location:
    TX
    They must hate potato cannons, too.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page