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

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

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?

Question - who gets to decide what constitutes as "mentally unstable people"? Would that be government officials, appointed judges or selected "experts"? Maybe obama himself... maybe huffingtonpost should decide... hell let's just consider any freedom-loving patriot a 'mentally unstable person'. Maybe we should determine it by IQ, in which I'm guessing half of the nation's police force would be removed from the force. Good grief. Do you not see how they use their words very carefully... and not just to sound smart? Do you need further explanation?

Obama knows very well that Americans don't have the right to bear arms specifically for hunting and shooting, they have the right because the founders knew exactly what would happen to an unarmed population.

reply to post by UltraMarine


Take a look at Australia right now.

The only people with Guns are the Police and Criminals.

The general public suffer, both at the hands of the police and the drug/bikey's crossfire.



And dont even get me started on a mental health check before getting a gun.

To get a yellow card - which means i can work with mentaly disabled people. People that are the easiest to take advantage of.... All the background checking they did was me was a criminal history check. No crime on paper? Must be safe to work with the mentally disabled!

Those checks are nothing more than excuse to spend more money to have "paperwork" do the rounds and line the suit's fat pockets.

Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by badgerprints

 

Isn't global gun ban a good idea ?

Yes, for the government and criminals. (Sometimes, they're one and the same.)

You take the guns out of law abiding citizens, the only thing you do then is give every bad guy the edge. Because, no matter what you or anyone else thinks, legal guns aren't a problem. It's the illegal guns. And illegal guns will always exist.

Also, last gun ban in the 60's didn't stop people from shooting each other either. When they couldn't buy guns they made them. A tube with a wooden handle and a nail attached to a rubber band as a hammer makes a lethal 9mm. And you don't have to be smart to make it either.

Obama was a mistake the first round and he's even a bigger mistake now. This time around, he doesn't have to worry about a re-election meaning he'll be all the more merrier to push unpopular laws.

Originally posted by andyr1112
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Ok you are right. Except the treaty PLAINLY SAYS BAN ON ALL SEMI AUTO pistol rifle shotgun. 1st of all dont just bs an oppinion as if it were fact. Cuz you make yourself out to look like an idiot. Who doesnt own guns which is y u dont pay attention to the real truth behind gun control. Go lick Obamas.Tes T's QUE?

So you haven't read it. It states "THE ELICIT TRADING of semi auto pistols and shotguns.

Save all you keyboard tough guy comments until you read something.

Ps, didn't vote for Obama, nice try though.

reply to post by six67seven



Riiiiiight - so you're saying he's going to declare all Americans mentally unstable, therefore a universal gun ban. Sure, that makes sense.

Don't you think maybe he's talking about the Jared Loughner's, or the James Holmes' types? Or maybe you don't agree that they were mentally unstable?

Oh noes! They's wanna tayk mi boom stick! From my cold, dead brain they will!

*rushes out, gun cocked, to fight Abrams tanks head on*

Originally posted by kaylaluv
reply to post by six67seven

 

Riiiiiight - so you're saying he's going to declare all Americans mentally unstable, therefore a universal gun ban. Sure, that makes sense.

Don't you think maybe he's talking about the Jared Loughner's, or the James Holmes' types? Or maybe you don't agree that they were mentally unstable?

oh no, those that are willing to give up their guns are the mentally unstable ones. If they want to give up freedoms for security, they deserve neither.

So you're saying people won't go on shooting sprees because they dont have semi-automatic weapons??

Maybe we should stop sending American troops on 3 and 4 tours so at least THEY don't come back ruined and mentally unstable.

You see, rather, what you don't see is that these types of things happen in steps. It won't be universal at first... it will BECOME universal.

And I don't believe Jared nor James were criminals prior.

soooo, who should we give authority to determine mentally unstable people, again?

Originally posted by six67seven

soooo, who should we give authority to determine mentally unstable people, again?

edit on 8-11-2012 by six67seven because: (no reason given)

Oh, I don't know, maybe make all gun buyers take a written psych test. If anything comes back suspicious, you have to be interviewed by a panel of psychiatrists, and there has to be a general consensus among the panel that you are mentally unstable. You could have a conservative/religious/republican psychiatrist, a liberal/atheist/democrat psychiatrist, and a middle of the road/no affiliated party psychiatrist on the panel. Just to make it fair.

All I know is, Jared Loughner should not have been allowed to purchase a gun. James Holmes should not have been allowed to purchase guns. They were clearly mentally unstable, and they would not have been able to pass a cleverly written psych test. And if we had made it much harder for them to get hold of guns, lives may have been saved.

Originally posted by TigaHawk
Take a look at Australia right now.

The only people with Guns are the Police and Criminals.

Just why do you post such rubbish about Australia? You can legally own guns in Australia, there are just some restrictions as to what type

Not going to happen without a LOT of bloodshed. I would hope Obama or his puppet masters would be smart enough to realize that. There's a reason why Smith & Wesson stock was up on 11/8 when the rest of the market tanked.

2 Words: ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Originally posted by UltraMarine
reply to post by jjkenobi

 

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

We Civilians shouldn't possess guns . There are cops to protect us from Criminals . We cannot take law into our own hand .

Cops also kill innocent people too so I don't see your point here.

It's no surprise the UN hates the 2nd Amendment. And it's no surprise Obama is caving in to the UN's demands.

It seems that with this and the Palestinian's push for UN recognition, Obama will have an eventful four years.

reply to post by badgerprints


Isn't it a small arms treaty?
And isn't this something people think they've known for 4 years?
years later showing his colors? LOL
Isn't this why gun sales have gone up steadily all four years?

If he was gathering loose nukes from around the planet (like he has been for about a decade!) you'd have to figure eventually he was going to get to gathering the loose small arms.

Pity you have a problem with that.
One of the things that divides this Nation.
One favors proliferation while the other favors control.

Originally posted by DarkKnight21
It's no surprise the UN hates the 2nd Amendment. And it's no surprise Obama is caving in to the UN's demands.

It seems that with this and the Palestinian's push for UN recognition, Obama will have an eventful four years.

Do the other Nations have our amendments too?

I mean should our laws be their laws? Should we force them on them?

Seriously...what are you thinking?

reply to post by khimbar


Here you go! "From my cold dead hands." SSG. Murphy (Ord.) US. Army (Vet.) and (Retired)

Believe me change is comming comrade. One way or another.

This sparks two questions:

#1: How is the proposal written?

From the reports I'm finding, the measure is on regulating arms trafficing. It doesn't affect the 2nd Admendment. When you take into account the issues with the Mexican and South American Cartels, it should be no suprise there is talk regarding international support of the arms trade.

#2: Would the US even sign the measure?

Depends. If there was any way of coming back and biting the US in the rear for arms sales, they could pressure smaller countries into signing it, while they support it but have no legal obligation under international treaty to follow it themselves.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by six67seven

soooo, who should we give authority to determine mentally unstable people, again?

edit on 8-11-2012 by six67seven because: (no reason given)

Oh, I don't know, maybe make all gun buyers take a written psych test. If anything comes back suspicious, you have to be interviewed by a panel of psychiatrists, and there has to be a general consensus among the panel that you are mentally unstable. You could have a conservative/religious/republican psychiatrist, a liberal/atheist/democrat psychiatrist, and a middle of the road/no affiliated party psychiatrist on the panel. Just to make it fair.

All I know is, Jared Loughner should not have been allowed to purchase a gun. James Holmes should not have been allowed to purchase guns. They were clearly mentally unstable, and they would not have been able to pass a cleverly written psych test. And if we had made it much harder for them to get hold of guns, lives may have been saved.

Riiiight, because the only way to get a gun in your future would be to submit to taking a psych test. Those future criminals would NEVER find an alternative way to getting a gun.

and yes, i can see that is 'all you know'.

Clearly mentally unstable.. clearly, huh?. you must have known them all too well since you know they were clearly mentally unstable prior to the shootings... and all too well since you know they would not have been able to pass a psych test.

Some things are only realized after the fact, and can't be detected by tests of any kind.

Psychopaths walk around free and undetected all day everyday, and some are holding high positions right this second.

Perhaps we should have to pass a pysch test prior to hopping in the drivers seat too right. One can easily perform a mass run-over of people in a crowded area. No, we should BAN ALL AUTOMOBILES!!! at least the semi-autos, right?

do you see where this leads?!?!?! BAN BAN BAN. Ban cars, ban knives... no (just the sharp ones), ban sewing needles, ban telekinesis, ban people, ban lead pipes and candlesticks and rope and wrenches (Clue) because someone died

the only fear you should have at this point is fear of your government

reply to post by navy_vet_stg3


+1 I'll have your six.

reply to post by six67seven


Wow, I didn't know we had a resident expert on the mentally unstable and how psych tests work.