Congrats, Virginia. Your governor and legislature are setting aside money to lock up gun owners.

a reply to: mamabeth

The United Nations has exactly zero troops, so that seems pretty implausible.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I don't think so,I keep hearing about UN equipment being
stored for future use.I WILL be keeping an eye on this.

a reply to: mamabeth

I really doubt that Trump would allow the UN to send foreign fighters into our country to restrict Constitutional rights. host country leadership has to request UN intervention, or it must be voted on in the UN. Again I don't see either happening, though it wouldn't surprise me if the UN tried to do something like that on their own.

I think this Governor is losing his marbles, and needs to be recalled due to failing mental capabilities.

a reply to: mamabeth

Right. The same equipment that’s been manufactured in Michigan and been filmed loaded up on trailers for transit to the east coast and other major ports since like 2014.

A governor can’t request UN intervention without going through the federal government and the UN Security Council. Northam can’t just call up the Secretary General and ask for non-existent troops from the non-existent UN military to be sent to Virginia. Seeing US manufactured UN vehicles loaded on trailers doesn’t overcome any of that.

a reply to: Guyfriday

I agree Trump will never allow UN troops in our country.Maybe
that is just one of many reasons why they have been trying to
get him out of office.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Honest question here, what if the UN decides VA needs help and calls up other UN members military? Can they make a resolution like that since disarming the world is one of their goals, or would that just mean nothing?

I was being facetious. Note my location. Been to Monticello many times.
So what does some 250 year old dude from Massachussets got to do with this conversation?

I changed New York since Trump is from there, didn't want to confuse who was making a joke about.

a reply to: Lilroanie

The US is on the security council with veto power so I would say not.

a reply to: Shamrock6
Didn't I read awhile back the UN was declaring the US in violation of humanitarian rules though because of gun violence? Would that be enough to override a US veto? I don't trust the UN as far as I can throw them, but honestly have no clue what they could or could not do in today's political climate.

Thanks for answering

a reply to: Lilroanie

No forces could or would even want to step foot on US soil.

They haven't taken our boom sticks.

Yet.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Food for thought...thecommonsenseshow.com...

a reply to: DBCowboy

That's what I figured but thanks for reassuring me lol. I have occasional visions of a Red Dawn scenario pop up in my addled brain!

a reply to: Lilroanie

There’s a process by which a matter that didn’t pass the security council can be taken up by the general assembly as a whole and voted on.

After the vote, it’s sent right back to the security council to be enforced, where the same veto power can be exercised to kill any enforcement of the general assembly’s vote. So no, other than symbolically overriding a veto, it doesn’t really go anywhere.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Shamrock6

Do the Crime, Do the Time

That kind of thinking without rationalisation is what is bringing America down. Politicians keep taking away more of our rights and making things crimes. So, we as good citizens should obey the law, right? No, we should object to laws that are not moral and fight to have them removed. As an example: I am now a criminal in my little town if the weeds in my ditch get over 8 inches high. I got the mayor to admit that's what he and the council are doing - making more and more law abiding citizens into criminals. What recourse do we have?

a reply to: mamabeth

Food for thought: vehicles aren’t troops. Vehicles outside a DoS and GSA building with shipping records showing DoS uses it as a shipping site isn’t troops. Vehicles outside a building doesn’t magically give the UN a military.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Many certainly seem to be trending in that general direction, don't they?

This law, or proposed law, can't stand any Constitutional examination--even the most cursory, yet these morons seem to not realize this...

Too much lead paint, as children??

a reply to: DBCowboy

Hmm...

Apparently so.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Then,why so many vehicles in so many different sites?
I am not in panic mode or trying to spread doom porn.
In this case I want to be wrong and go on with my life.
BUT,my mama instincts tells me to keep my peepers on
these things,maybe buy another box of ammo and get
some time in at the shooting range.

a reply to: mtnshredder

Not very many, is my thought.

I wonder if any of those funds are being set aside for the care of widow(er)s, and orphans??

a reply to: dfnj2015

...and you think they're going to use "daisy cutter" bombs...???

Honestly.