Obama supports UN global gun ban less than 24 hours after reelection

Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

I'm pretty sure I read the article before you even crawled out of bed. And yes, the OP's title and opening post is spot on.

Hours after U.S. President Barack Obama was re-elected, the United States backed a U.N. committee's call on Wednesday to renew debate over a draft international treaty to regulate the $70 billion global conventional arms trade.

I know the above was in BOLD LARGE FONT type, so maybe it was hard for you to catch.

Maybe you missed the part about RENEWING THE DEBATE. That is not "Obama supporting UN global gun ban". Obama is willing to start debating it again. Get it now? Did you also see the part where it said the U.S. will never agree to take away American's constitutional right to bear arms? See, that's part of the DEBATE - the DEBATE that will be continuing. Do you understand the word DEBATE?

reply to post by jjkenobi


selfmade quoute cause i missed the button... deng

quote ( Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by badgerprints


Isn't global gun ban a good idea ?



Are you 12 years old? The criminals will always have guns because they DON'T OBEY THE LAWS. That's why they are criminals. It just means the rest of us will be defenseless.
)

apparently you're the one who is 12 years old
in our country you wont get a gun that easy...
and guess what we almost have no gun battles over here

Originally posted by tayeltony
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

selfmade quoute cause i missed the button... deng

quote ( Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by badgerprints


Isn't global gun ban a good idea ?



Are you 12 years old? The criminals will always have guns because they DON'T OBEY THE LAWS. That's why they are criminals. It just means the rest of us will be defenseless.
)

apparently you're the one who is 12 years old
in our country you wont get a gun that easy...
and guess what we almost have no gun battles over here

edit on 8-11-2012 by tayeltony because: (no reason given)

So your saying that you do have gun battles in your country, wow look how much good the ban did. you just proved our point. Criminals dont follow the rule of law.

Originally posted by badgerprints
I'm on my phone. Didn't believe it at first but googled it myself. Couldn't get the link to work but not much else on detail yet that I could find. It looks like the real deal.

lol, seriously? You couldn't find much on news site, and the one link you could find doesn't work, but it looks like the real deal to you? What sort of reality do you live in where the burden of proof is so low, you hear it on the internet so it must be true?

reply to post by kaylaluv


There should be no debate. He should tell the UN to shove it.

He's gotta move quick;
He still needs to make us Socialists
Make your children Black Panthers
Destroy the Constitution
Take our guns
Come out as a Muslim (and Anti Christ)
And....... kill your Grandma.
Times a wastin' !

Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by badgerprints

 

Isn't global gun ban a good idea ?

You mean like drug bans have been such a good idea... Oh wait...

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ !

Originally posted by BluFenix

Originally posted by badgerprints
I'm on my phone. Didn't believe it at first but googled it myself. Couldn't get the link to work but not much else on detail yet that I could find. It looks like the real deal.

lol, seriously? You couldn't find much on news site, and the one link you could find doesn't work, but it looks like the real deal to you? What sort of reality do you live in where the burden of proof is so low, you hear it on the internet so it must be true?

The information came in on the live feed for the Sacramento bee. As a piece of information it was a real article from an actual news source. This is clear in the op.
No. I'm not worried about arguing with your standards on conspiracy site reporting.

reply to post by UltraMarine


The right to arm yourself is an unalienable right and the main purpose of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution protects this unalienable right so that the citizens can protect themselves from tyranny. Reading this post and your others, are you stupid, gullible, a troll or all three?


As for any support of the U.N. If any American supports the U.N, they are a traitor to the country.
To support the U.N is treason.

Originally posted by jtap66
No link because this is bogus.

But by all means, argue over something that the OP says "might" be true. Or might not.

But hey, it bashes Obama so let's put it out there, even if it is bogus.

No wonder people laugh at sites like this.

The article was in the live feed of the Sacramento bee and other links are there as added by other posters.

Not bogus. He is supporting the UN gun agenda.

No need to bash Obama. Pointing out what he does on a daily basis is condemning enough.

You see people actually do have the right to look into things and discuss them without a presidential declaration or mainstream media links and coverage.

Why would anybody put up a thread about a partial story headline from the unedited feed on an obscure newspaper
early in the am.

Because these things have a way of being swept under the rug.

It's not a well executed op but it is here and that's better than none at all.

The fact that it seems to get people in a lather tells me that it is just as effective as it needs to be.

I don't understand it. Our 2nd Amendment is very clear. How can there be any debate?

For that matter, how can we have the laws we have? It just goes to show the gymnastics of logic that can be undertaken to rationalize something.

reply to post by kaylaluv


Do you understand the concept of paying attention? This resolution was brought before a special committee in which the only way it could pass was with a unanimous vote of 170 members. They realized they could not get a unanimous vote, so they (that includes WE) agreed to shelve it and bring it before the General Assembly where it WON'T need a unanimous vote...just majority. Now WE have said - bring it up.

Where were you when the town-hall debate was going on and he specifically INCLUDED hand guns as part of small weapons that appear to need restrictions to access?

Where were you in 2009 when WE voted to draft the resolution in the first place and agreed to put 2012 as the year it would be finalized.

Where were you when Barack Obama filled out his candidacy questionnaire in Illinois and unequivocally stated he was for legislation that would restrict access to guns?

Seriously, have you been in a coma? Clinton's position has ALWAYS been for gun control. Obama has done everything he could (and still get re-elected) in his first term to show he is for gun control (including answer the damned question honsstly at least once!) And now you are going to act like WE are twisting things?

Nah....I'm not in on this game.

The campaign is over, you people can cut the crap now.


The NRA started these same silly rumors after Obama was elected the first time. It wasn't true.

C'mon people, grow up and cut the drama.

Here's why:

"Political power comes out of the barrell of a gun." Mao Tse Tung's Little Red Book.

reply to post by nixie_nox


How about you move on if you're not okay with the discussion. We've got plenty of people being paid to make asses out of themselves...I don't see any room for amateurs right now.

Well yeah.

Bammy pretty much IS the UN. You might as well read up on Agenda 21 now. As we will surely see it start to creep in.

Go do the things you've always wanted to do in the next few years.

en.wikipedia.org...

Cause most of the nation will be a wildlife refuge to maintain "biodiversity" and we will be shacked up in lil gov housing units. Say goodbye to any form of private property too.

and along the NDAA lines YOU WILL COMPLY, OR YOU WILL BE ARRESTED WITH NO TRAIL.

Sounds crazy, but it is the plan.
.

Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by xedocodex

 

Excuse me, but Reuters reported this. Be part of the solution...not the problem.

www.reuters.com...

This reuters article isn't about a "global gun ban" as the OP suggests.

This is still the problem, a right wing website took a legit story, distorted it, and it is being spread.

And now to make it worse, people are pointing to the legit article, that is nothing like what is being reported in this thread, as proof.

This is how propaganda and rumors start.

Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

Do you understand the concept of paying attention? This resolution was brought before a special committee in which the only way it could pass was with a unanimous vote of 170 members. They realized they could not get a unanimous vote, so they (that includes WE) agreed to shelve it and bring it before the General Assembly where it WON'T need a unanimous vote...just majority. Now WE have said - bring it up.

Where were you when the town-hall debate was going on and he specifically INCLUDED hand guns as part of small weapons that appear to need restrictions to access?

Where were you in 2009 when WE voted to draft the resolution in the first place and agreed to put 2012 as the year it would be finalized.

Where were you when Barack Obama filled out his candidacy questionnaire in Illinois and unequivocally stated he was for legislation that would restrict access to guns?

Seriously, have you been in a coma? Clinton's position has ALWAYS been for gun control. Obama has done everything he could (and still get re-elected) in his first term to show he is for gun control (including answer the damned question honsstly at least once!) And now you are going to act like WE are twisting things?

Nah....I'm not in on this game.

edit on 11-8-2012 by Valhall because: (no reason given)

And where were you when Obama said this:

"I, like most Americans, believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms," Obama told the National Urban League convention in New Orleans. "I think we recognize the traditions of gun ownership that passed on from generation to generation. That hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage."

Obama continued: "But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals. That they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities.

I believe the majority of gun owners would agree we should do everything possible to prevent criminals and fugitives from purchasing weapons, and we should check someone's criminal record before they can check out a gun seller."

The president called for new restrictions barring mentally unstable people from purchasing weapons. "These steps shouldn't be controversial," Obama said. "They should be common sense."

www.huffingtonpost.com...

There - I even provided a specific quote. Where are your specific quotes where Obama wants to ban all Americans from owning guns?

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

There should be no debate. He should tell the UN to shove it.

Yes cause it's cool and hip to sell weapons to terrorist. It's the new black.

reply to post by kaylaluv


I was sitting right here listening to the son-of-a-bitch lie, where do you think I was?