Obama may use UN to bypass congress on gun control

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Obama may use UN to bypass congress on gun control

Obamas Hidden Gun Strategy Dick Morris TV: Lunch ALERT! - YouTube

Political pollster and strategist **** Morris believes that President Obama may use the United Nations to bypass congress and enact new gun restrictions. In a video message released today, Morris pointed out that Obama’s gun control proposals are unlikely to pass the senate because a number of Democratic senators are opposed to gun control.

Currently, the Democrats control the senate with 55 senators (including two independents) to 45 Republicans. Many of the Democratic senators have been endorsed by the National Rifle Association and hail from red states. In particular, Morris cites Joe Manchin (D-W.V.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.), Kay Hagan (D.-N.C.), Tim Caine (D-Va.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), and Bob Casey (D-Pa.). Even Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the senate majority leader, has been endorsed by the NRA in the past although the group stayed neutral in his 2010 election. So far no Republican senators have signed on to Democratic gun control proposals such as a new assault weapons ban.

Under senate rules, a simple majority, 50 votes, is needed to pass legislation. However, if Republican senators filibuster gun control bills, 60 votes will be needed to overcome the filibuster. If, as seems likely, at least five Democratic senators vote against Obama’s proposals, they will not pass. Even if no Democrats oppose the bills, there would not be enough votes to overcome a filibuster without Republican help.

Morris believes that Obama’s strategy will involve the UN Arms Trade Treaty. As Examiner reported last summer, many critics believe that the treaty would allow the United Nations to define what measures the United States would have to take to combat illegal arms trafficking.

As Morris noted then, the U.S. is a signatory to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Under this treaty, once the U.S. signs the Arms Trade Treaty, it would be bound by its terms until it is rejected by the senate. Under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, treaties are the “supreme law of the land,” equal in weight to the Constitution itself. President Obama could have Secretary of State Kerry sign the treaty and then refuse to submit it to the senate for ratification. Harry Reid could also simply not bring the treaty up for a vote as he has done on budgets and other legislation. Under this scenario, the U.S. would be bound by a treaty that could effectively repeal the Second Amendment without congress ever having voted on it.

Because of the vague language of the treaty, Senate Democrats might be more likely to vote for ratification of the treaty than to vote for a specific gun control measure. Morris notes that the treaty won’t immediately ban assault rifles or other guns, but it “empowers each country to adopt national means to stop these [illegal] exports from taking place. And that’s the key. It means that over the next three or four years this UN mandate, which is now sort of open ended, will increasingly close in on the Second Amendment.”

Under the Constitution, ratification of a treaty requires the approval of two-thirds of the senators present. If all senators are present that would mean 66 votes would be needed for ratification. Some Republican votes would be needed in order to ratify the treaty. The House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, would not vote on the treaty.

After strong opposition from Second Amendment groups the administration declined to sign the treaty last summer, but Reuters reports that the day after Obama’s reelection victory the UN voted to reopen talks. The new round of negotiations will be held March 18-28, 2013.

Recent polling by Rasmussen shows that Americans are split on the issue of gun control. Fifty-three percent favor background checks for existing gun owners and 57 percent believe that enforcing current gun laws is more important than enacting new laws. Only 41 percent believe that the U.S. needs stricter gun laws. The strongest agreement came from those who believe that there is a constitutional right to own a gun (74 percent) and that background checks should be required for anyone who wants to buy a gun (86 percent).

Source: Obama may use UN to bypass congress on gun control - Atlanta Conservative | Examiner.com
 

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Let them promise the UN whatever they want. It isn't binding



Obama may use the UN to force Congress to into enforcing UN Gun legislation.
 

tober

Time Out
Aug 6, 2013
752
0
16
The UN motion has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic gun use in any country. It is intended to control international gun sales, and most particularly to ensure that presently existing firearms and military export/import rules are internationally consistent.
 

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
The UN motion has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic gun use in any country. It is intended to control international gun sales, and most particularly to ensure that presently existing firearms and military export/import rules are internationally consistent.

Holly Crap, Obama won't be able to send more guns to Mexico to Kill Mexican citizens and US Border guards??

The UN agreement pushes for a Gun Registration in the USA.
 

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
The UN motion has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic gun use in any country. It is intended to control international gun sales, and most particularly to ensure that presently existing firearms and military export/import rules are internationally consistent.

International sales of firearms can't be effectively regulated without regulation of domestic sales as well.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,532
9,609
113
Washington DC
The UN motion has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic gun use in any country. It is intended to control international gun sales, and most particularly to ensure that presently existing firearms and military export/import rules are internationally consistent.
Correct.

This particular bit of drooling imbecility has been going around getting on for five years. If Obama's going to turn America into a Kenyan Muslim Socialist police state, he should get on his bike.
 

tober

Time Out
Aug 6, 2013
752
0
16
International sales of firearms can't be effectively regulated without regulation of domestic sales as well.

Mebbe so, but any suggestion that Obama is trying to legislate US gun control through the UN is r/w silliness.
 

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
Mebbe so, but any suggestion that Obama is trying to legislate US gun control through the UN is r/w silliness.

I must applaud your ability to express inconsistent ideas within a single sentence.

President Obama is well aware that he strikes fear into the hearts of millions of Americans. Most leaders would avoid taking any action which further inflames people who fear him. But in the pantheon of American leadership Obama is singular in his role and vision.
 

tober

Time Out
Aug 6, 2013
752
0
16
President Obama is well aware that he strikes fear into the hearts of millions of Americans.

Really? The police strike fear into the hearts of millions of Americans who are engaging in criminal behavior; does that mean America's police should disengage and refuse to do their duty?

You state that "millions" fear Obama. The population of America is in the several "hundreds of millions". Obviously more people support Obama than fear him so why should he abandon the people who support him?

Your position is overly emotional and totally lacking in logic.

Most leaders would avoid taking any action which further inflames people who fear him.

In all my years on the Internet I don't think I have ever read a stupider argument. Is that your idea of leadership? Absolute emotional hyperbole. The election is over - it has been for years. Its time some people got a life and moved on.

But in the pantheon of American leadership Obama is singular in his role and vision.

Pantheon? Indeed?

 

BaalsTears

Senate Member
Jan 25, 2011
5,732
0
36
Santa Cruz, California
...President Obama is well aware that he strikes fear into the hearts of millions of Americans. Most leaders would avoid taking any action which further inflames people who fear him. But in the pantheon of American leadership Obama is singular in his role and vision.

Please note that the word "police" is not mentioned in my post.

Really? The police strike fear into the hearts of millions of Americans who are engaging in criminal behavior; does that mean America's police should disengage and refuse to do their duty?

I've observed your modus operandi. It is based on sophistry and deception. I didn't mention the word "police" in my post. The police and Obama are not synonymous.[/QUOTE]
 

tober

Time Out
Aug 6, 2013
752
0
16
Please note that the word "police" is not mentioned in my post.

So what? Obama is Commander in Chief. Are you unable to make the connection?

I've observed your modus operandi. It is based on sophistry and deception. I didn't mention the word "police" in my post. The police and Obama are not synonymous.

Obama and police are both authority figures as part of American government. Are you really this simple minded, or are you just being disingenuous?
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM