posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 01:03 AM
Members of the international committee throw around suggestions of "intervention" to disarm Americans within the United States. Immediately followed
by The Secretary of State signing the UN arms ban, but the Senate has assured of this is going nowhere. I seem to remember the "Affordable Care Act"
Obamacare (whichever you find less offensive was dead on arrival. Anyone else sense a trend?
American gun use is out of control. Shouldn't the world intervene?
The Observer, Saturday 21 September 2013 17.12 EDT
But what if we no longer thought of this as just a problem for America and, instead, viewed it as an international humanitarian crisis – a
quasi civil war, if you like, that calls for outside intervention? As citizens of the world, perhaps we should demand an end to the unimaginable
suffering of victims and their families – the maiming and killing of children – just as America does in every new civil conflict around the
But no nation sees itself as outsiders do. Half the country is sane and rational while the other half simply doesn't grasp the
inconsistencies and historic lunacy of its position, which springs from the second amendment right to keep and bear arms, and is derived from English
common law and our 1689 Bill of Rights. We dispensed with these rights long ago, but American gun owners cleave to them with the tenacity that
previous generations fought to continue slavery.
New Yorkers understand that fear breeds peril and, regardless of tragedies such as Sandy Hook and the DC naval yard, the NRA, the gun
manufacturers, conservative-inclined politicians and parts of the media will continue to advocate a right, which, at base, is as archaic as a witch
he same resignation was evident in President Obama's rather lifeless reaction to the Washington shooting last week. There is absolutely
nothing he can do, which underscores the fact that America is in a jam and that international pressure may be one way of reducing the slaughter over
the next generation. This has reached the point where it has ceased to be a domestic issue. The world cannot stand idly by.
With all do respect Mr. Porter mind your own damn business. I think its rich that a Brit (of which I take no issue) would suggest a veiled foreign
invasion of the United States to accomplish what his ancestors could not. Have to appreciate the creativity.
Kerry signs UN arms treaty, senators threaten to block it
Secretary of State John Kerry on Wednesday signed a controversial U.N. treaty on arms regulation, riling U.S. lawmakers who vow the Senate
will not ratify the agreement. As he signed the document, Kerry called the treaty a "significant step" in addressing illegal gun sales, while
claiming it would also protect gun rights.
No doublespeak here
"This is about keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists and rogue actors.
Terrorists like Constitutionalist, 2nd amendment activists, returning Iraq veterans - you know scum of the Earth types. Hey the Govt; calls them out
then sends out their minions to deal with them - they dont get to have it both ways.
U.S. lawmakers, though, have long claimed the treaty could lead to new gun control measures. They note the U.S. Senate has final say on
whether to approve the agreement.
Senate website gets 2nd Amendment wrong, critics say
Does the Second Amendment guarantee an individual right to own guns? The Supreme Court has ruled that it does. But you might be confused if
you visit the official Senate web page on the Constitution, which says only: "Whether this provision protects the individual's right to own firearms
or whether it deals only with the collective right of the people to arm and maintain a militia has long been debated."
Yeah - were screwed!
Those who would comment be mindful of what you say on this "hot button" topic but speak up confidently