It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Donald Trump tells NRA gun lobby he's withdrawing from UN arms trade treaty

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

What a great idea! This will make it so much easier for America's enemies all around the world to kill more American soldiers and their own population!
$




posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple

Thats like grade A fap material for you, so, I think we all are happy.

Cheers.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Malisa

Allowed! I guessed first thing to address is what is allowed and by whom?

Guns are weapons of destruction, no amount of arguing they are for defensive reasons will ever cut it, it is what it is.

The USA make more money selling weapons of war than they do any other product, the country is in the business of war and business is good.


So there's no direct sell of guns from China/Russia to Mexico, but there can be to the US

Us buyers get their thousands of AK rifles from said countries, store them away and since there is no law to prevent it, they sell it to Mexico

China/Russia can't sell directly to Mexico, and the law was meant to prevent big sales of the same guns from the US to Mexico

So now it has made easy to just ship to the US, then send to Mexico.. I mean is just a few more dollars and everything is legal, correct?

I get it now




As far as I understand it more guns do not equal more freedom...

Perhaps it's only an educational issue, however I'm not convinced fewer guns leads to fewer gun crime regardless if how its sold.


Education has a lot to do with it, but giving them freedom to get all the guns they need to kill while knowing they won't get beyond grade school is not how you turn around a broken, violent society. Can we agree on that?




Well yes absolutely, I just have given up on being so crass about the reality of the world we live in.

The only western civilizated nation on earth that thinks guns are the answer to solutions are in the USA, that should set the alarm bells ringing.


I take it you’ve given up your right to own guns? I take it you rely on the government to defend you.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tartuffe

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Malisa

Allowed! I guessed first thing to address is what is allowed and by whom?

Guns are weapons of destruction, no amount of arguing they are for defensive reasons will ever cut it, it is what it is.

The USA make more money selling weapons of war than they do any other product, the country is in the business of war and business is good.


So there's no direct sell of guns from China/Russia to Mexico, but there can be to the US

Us buyers get their thousands of AK rifles from said countries, store them away and since there is no law to prevent it, they sell it to Mexico

China/Russia can't sell directly to Mexico, and the law was meant to prevent big sales of the same guns from the US to Mexico

So now it has made easy to just ship to the US, then send to Mexico.. I mean is just a few more dollars and everything is legal, correct?

I get it now




As far as I understand it more guns do not equal more freedom...

Perhaps it's only an educational issue, however I'm not convinced fewer guns leads to fewer gun crime regardless if how its sold.


Education has a lot to do with it, but giving them freedom to get all the guns they need to kill while knowing they won't get beyond grade school is not how you turn around a broken, violent society. Can we agree on that?




Well yes absolutely, I just have given up on being so crass about the reality of the world we live in.

The only western civilizated nation on earth that thinks guns are the answer to solutions are in the USA, that should set the alarm bells ringing.


I take it you’ve given up your right to own guns? I take it you rely on the government to defend you.




Cmon now Les Miserables you know better than that.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Tartuffe

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Malisa

Allowed! I guessed first thing to address is what is allowed and by whom?

Guns are weapons of destruction, no amount of arguing they are for defensive reasons will ever cut it, it is what it is.

The USA make more money selling weapons of war than they do any other product, the country is in the business of war and business is good.


So there's no direct sell of guns from China/Russia to Mexico, but there can be to the US

Us buyers get their thousands of AK rifles from said countries, store them away and since there is no law to prevent it, they sell it to Mexico

China/Russia can't sell directly to Mexico, and the law was meant to prevent big sales of the same guns from the US to Mexico

So now it has made easy to just ship to the US, then send to Mexico.. I mean is just a few more dollars and everything is legal, correct?

I get it now




As far as I understand it more guns do not equal more freedom...

Perhaps it's only an educational issue, however I'm not convinced fewer guns leads to fewer gun crime regardless if how its sold.


Education has a lot to do with it, but giving them freedom to get all the guns they need to kill while knowing they won't get beyond grade school is not how you turn around a broken, violent society. Can we agree on that?




Well yes absolutely, I just have given up on being so crass about the reality of the world we live in.

The only western civilizated nation on earth that thinks guns are the answer to solutions are in the USA, that should set the alarm bells ringing.


I take it you’ve given up your right to own guns? I take it you rely on the government to defend you.




Cmon now Les Miserables you know better than that.


I know you cannot cannot defend yourself, your family, your property with guns.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Lysergic

Haha yeah right.
"And the lemmings cheered as they jumped off the cliff..."



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 04:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Peeple




posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed




I like guns, I also am an advocate for people to protect themselves from criminals and other unsavory elements , what gets me is that fine line between who should be allowed guns and those that should not... It's quite the conundrum


Either everyone gets to have guns or nobody does I think that’s fair?

But then what’s fair about might is right? That’s the way it is unfortunately.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Malisa

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: 727Sky

Ah, so the US must intend to become a protector of arms dealers and sponsor of terrorism.

Got it.




Surely you also protect your most valuable assets...


How does exporting arms to terrorists so they can kill with no harm or care relates to having a gun in your house to protect your family or yourself?

Are we into a backwards universe reality now?



You should probably direct that question towards those that need guns to get on with their day to day activities.


I am partial about guns, there is an use for them actually, as i posted some time ago

My cousin, which is like my sister, is only alive because of having access to a gun when she was 13. The only reason she's alive is that gun and that she knew how to use it


But a revolver gun at home to protect yourself as a last resort is not the same as sending 10,000 assault rifles to another country when you know how those are going to be used...




I like guns, I also am an advocate for people to protect themselves from criminals and other unsavory elements , what gets me is that fine line between who should be allowed guns and those that should not... It's quite the conundrum.


I understand that, but sending a gun out there, to a country that you know is f*ckd up and the guy asks you to send 1,000 AK rifles? That's just not a "to protect my home" reason, and for example, in Mexico where you can't sell legally those guns, then we are clearly looking at an illegal sell of guns and we know who are buying them and why

Is that a good reason to allow it? The entire treaty was to prevent that, you don't sell a gun to someone that tells you i'm going to buy it to go kill some kids i don't like because their father did not sell the drugs i expected and he doesn't want to pay me my share

There has to be some criteria

As it looks right now, this is about selling the guns away regardless of how they will be used, outside of US territory. So completely ignoring international laws and that country's own laws, as it happened in Mexico before

I still don't see how this relates to the second amendment as Trump tried to used as an excuse


Well put. It has nothing to do with domestic gun ownership it's part of neo-con policy and once again giving the green light for CIA to arm terrorist groups like the IRA to destabilise countries.

The regulations are to avoid arming both sides of conflicts and keeping perpetual war going as has happened in the African World War the last 30 years that has seen nearly 100m killed in a war over minerals.

They ban the sale of arms to terrorists, organised crime groups, countries and regions with arms embargoes and the flooding of arms into active warzones. I don't see any reason to be opposed to the treaty.


Good point. Neo Cons are UN One World Order types IMO.

Neo Cons and D's are in the Cabal.

May the RICO laws catch them all!



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 08:11 AM
link   
good. Trump 2020.

we're the #1 arms dealer in the world. that's what we provide best, at home and abroad.

we should withdraw from the University of completely.


this is all like the prelude to how another monstrous super power was pushed to it's precipice -and jumped.

can't wait to see the state of the union at the end of the 4 years.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: surfer_soul

we could export to the world an. infinite number of items; guns and freedom 1st.

now, I wonder how many millions of "civilians" our arms are going to free...

imagine any other country flooding the world with gun..

I'd like to see history written by an outside onlooker



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Trump keeps laws prohibiting Americans from owning bumpstocks

Trump removes signature pledging not to sell weapons to foreign countries

People cheer for second ammendment victory...

Did I miss something here? This benefits gun manufacturers who export to foreign governments. This has nothing to do with guns in America at all.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

Good.

It was not an officially ratified treaty anyway.

10 treaties the U.S. hasn't ratified
www.politico.com...


cei.org...

Article II: [The President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur

Article VI: This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

There are therefore two main differences between the American system and the more usual Parliamentary system of dealing with treaties. First, the President can only make Treaties with the consent of two-thirds of the Senate. That is why President Clinton signed Kyoto but did not ratify it, as the Senate voted preemptively 95-0 against consenting to any treaty that was agreed along Kyoto's lines.

Secondly, and more importantly, treaties trump national law, having the same status as the Constitution. This means that activists can take the US Government to court and have national law quashed on the basis of a treaty commitment. Judges can also instruct the Federal Government to take steps to meet treaty commitments.
edit on 27-4-2019 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Tartuffe

well... no, both have always been trash



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
So we are going to stop policing the globe for the UN? I'm down with that.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Dbl
edit on 27-4-2019 by JAY1980 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I see this as a win. Obama signing this treaty obviously didn't stop Fast and Furious, shipping weapons to Libya and Syria for "freedom fighters", or god knows how many other instances. And the Senate didn't ratify it anyways, so what's the difference if Trump takes the US off the treaty?

I don't believe this has anything to do with the 2nd amendment though.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: thov420




I see this as a win. Obama signing this treaty obviously didn't stop Fast and Furious, shipping weapons to Libya and Syria for "freedom fighters"


Because the treaty was never ratified so it had no power.
If it had been then yes it would have ether stopped the fast and furious sell or been the bases for legal action against those that did it.

Would it have been good to stop or punish the fast and furious crew?

I don't think trump read the treaty. I think he was pandering to people he hopped also hadn't read it.



"I hope you're happy," he told the group, then appeared surprised by the cheers. "I'm impressed," he said. "I didn't think too many of you would really know what it is."



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Eh, I don't think it is so much that we will be giving guns to bad people. It seems its more like so we can trade with other countries. The UN would still step in if we was dealing to bad people. I would like a Garand and a m1 carbine soon. I hope this latter part is more of what it's about.



posted on Apr, 27 2019 @ 06:06 PM
link   
IMO, withdrawing from this John Kerry-signed fiasco is a good thing.

Are we talking about this one? unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com...

We had a brief, but interesting discussion about it here: www.abovetopsecret.com...




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join