Posted 23 April 2009 01:33
I hope and pray that this is a dupe. It would break my heart if this comes to pass.


Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading

-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block


Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who “wasn’t going to take away
our guns”?
Well, guess what?
Less than 100 days into his administration, he’s never met a gun he didn’t
hate.
A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and
bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn’t have the
political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that
didn’t keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun
owners.
It’s called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of
and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related
Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title masks a really nasty piece
of work.
First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the “illicit” manufacture of
firearms, what does that mean?

1. “Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of firearms
[or] ammunition ... without a license....”
Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a
kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.”
Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit manufacturing.”
And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it
could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition
of “illicit manufacturing.”

2. “Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition.
“[A]ny other weapon” is a “firearm,” according to the treaty -- and the
term “weapon” is nowhere defined.
So, is a BB gun a “firearm”? Probably.
A toy gun? Possibly.
A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.
If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama
administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some of the
other provisions in the treaty:

* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to
adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize illicit
manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.
Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and modifying or
assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama
administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the basis
of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress to write
legislation taxing greenhouse gases.
* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized acts
should include “association or conspiracy” in connection with said offenses
-- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by regulation, the
criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun clubs, based on the
facilities which they provide their membership.
* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to “adopt such
measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the
offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention” under a
variety of circumstances.
We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its
streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico to
define offenses “committed in its territory” in a very broad way. And we
know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX of the
proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the treaty to
demand to extradition of American gun dealers.
Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful American
gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute through
“other means of peaceful settlement.”
Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on the
proposition that the Obama administration would apply this provision in a
pro-gun manner?
* Microstamping. Article VI requires “appropriate markings” on firearms.
And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be used to require
microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a requirement which is
clearly intended to impose specifications which are not technologically
possible or which are possible only at a prohibitively expensive cost.
* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any records, for
a “reasonable time,” that the government determines to be necessary to
trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly repeal portions of
McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to require a national registry
or database.

ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American
Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms,
Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.

quote:

Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of
and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related
Materials

A quick web search reveals that the US signed this treaty in 1997. ?

http://www.oas.org/juridico/English/sigs/a-63.html

Oh Geez! Muzzle why don't you tell us where you found this gem? When you quote something, it is usual to provide an attribution.
Peter.

quote:

Your days of reloading may be coming to an end.

I'll keep reloading right up till then.....pass me more primers!

jtinidaho look at the post above yours.

OOOps sorry jt I meant peter.

let's see.... I,m about 50 years old.....so this would mean that I need to collect 30,000 primers, 200 lbs of powder and 3000 cases of each caliber cases.

hummmm

oh yes....and the instructions to my wife to put me in the ground with any components that remain unused at my death.

I saw this information on the website Gunowners.org.

quote:

Originally posted by jtinidaho:

A quick web search reveals that the US signed this treaty in 1997. ?

It was signed in '97 but has never been ratified by the Senate.

Regards,
hm

quote:

Your days of reloading may be coming to an end.

They have to catch me first!

IF BO asks the Senate to ratify Clinton's signing of that "treaty" - and he will - I suspect it will start with some soft language that only requires we register and obtain a permit, for a small fee, as reloaders. We whould then have to show our federal permits to purchase supplies. An irritant but fairly painless system. At first.

Within a couple or three years, before BO has a chance to be voted out, the pollyticians will have a good list of us on file. THEN they will begin to raise the annual cost of updating our permits until they force most of us to give it up without any direct law to stop us from reloading.

Factory ammo will be also be taxed specifically to raise the price out of reach but that won't be the public face they will put on it. And the Dems propoganda wing, AKA "the main-stream news media" will put the liberal spin on it to hide what's really happening. Our protests will be ignored or sneered at - as all conserative protests are - and vast numbers of sheeple will thank the pols for saving them from us dangerous folk who play with explosives!

IF we allow it, and I don't see how we are likely to stop them, the nation will soon be effectively disarmed by the loss of ammunition without messing with that silly ol' Constitution thing and the courts at all.

Jim,
You are absolutely correct!
And people wonder why gun, ammo and component sales are going through the roof.
There may come a time when we will all need to ignore a bad law.

Just another reason to vote the liberal bastards out of office. For any of you Dems. here, take heed, stop voting for rights you'll never use like abortion & start voting for rights you'll miss like gun rights.

Support the NRA.

Don't know how much encouragement we should draw from this, but it's quoted from today's MSNBC.

quote:

But the fire has gone out of President Obama’s goal of restricting the availability of firearms. “I don’t know of any plans,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, "to seek an assault weapons ban from Congress."

Attorney General Holder admitted as much when asked, during a recent session with reporters, whether he expected any push for a ban this year to curb the flow of guns from the United States to Mexico.

His answer could have come straight from the National Rifle Association: “I think what we’re going to do is to try to, obviously, enforce the laws on the books.”

Congress imposed a ban on what it called assault weapons in 1994, outlawing the sale and importation of 19 military-style weapons, copycat models with similar features, and high-capacity ammunition magazines. In a compromise with Republicans, the Democrats who controlled Congress agreed to let it expire in ten years unless it was renewed. By 2004, with Republicans in charge, support had evaporated.

Democrats again control Congress, and a Democrat is once more in the White House, the same conditions that allowed the ban to be imposed 15 years ago. But the make-up of Congress is different, with little appetite for restricting gun ownership.

The Senate’s majority leader is a westerner, Harry Reid of Nevada, where gun control is political poison. And though the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, comes from the more liberal San Francisco, she has shown no enthusiasm for reviving the assault weapons ban because of opposition among her colleagues.

Should Obama push for a ban on assault weapons?
Sixty-five House Democrats wrote Attorney General Holder in mid-March, saying they “would actively oppose any effort to reinstate the 1994 ban” and predicting “a long and divisive fight” if the administration tried to push for one. Many of them represent rural districts, where gun control is no more popular than in Nevada.

Calderon: 'The future of Mexico is at stake'
April 15: Mexican President Felipe Calderon tells NBC's Andrea Mitchell he's cleaning house "top to bottom" in Mexico, and would like to see the U.S. enforce its gun laws.
MSNBC

By the time President Obama made his trip to Mexico, he conceded the battle would be futile. “None of us are [of] any illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy.”

I have to believe that Gore's defeat made an impression.

Encouraging report however I believe that the threat will come as stated by others above by attacking ammunition sales and construction rather than the weapon itself.

This is precisely the kind of power play that initiated the American Revolution. Only then the colonies didn't have as many America haters as in those days.

quote:

But the fire has gone out of President Obama’s goal of restricting the availability of firearms. “I don’t know of any plans,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, "to seek an assault weapons ban from Congress."

Attorney General Holder admitted as much when asked, during a recent session with reporters, whether he expected any push for a ban this year to curb the flow of guns from the United States to Mexico.

I do not believe a single word Jigabooga or Holder says about protecting our Rights-- any of them. These two, and Demostools in general, are ultra-left liberals. They look upon our most sacred documents as impediments to what they want to do to us. Remember: Jigabama called the Freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights "negative rights," meaning they restrict government power and empower the People over government. That right there ought to tell you exactly who and what The Kenyan Goatherder in Chief is. He is a very dangerous and most evil man, put in office by a bunch of lazy bastards who want you and me to hand them a living...

If the Obuma and clan clowns don't follow the Constitution in regards too El Dummy's birth certificate

requirement ; what makes any of you think they are people of their word !.

Beware of the Narcissist who focuses attention too him self , rather than too the administration !!.

Read this VERY CAREFULLY ; Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who “wasn’t going to take away

our guns”?. He doesn't have to the House's have to , they could also veto ANYTHING either dip shit

Biden or any other clown could put forth !. What's scary is there are only a few who stand in their

way !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Please remember this come ELECTION TIME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

According too Obuma him self decreeing that America is NO LONGER A CHRISTIAN SOCIETY ????

as he bowed too the King of Saudi Arabia !!!!!!!??????. Only Muslims do that as it's required !.

I failed to get that memo personally !.

What the article said is that they don't have the clout to pull it off. Nothing at all about what they would like to do; we know what that is.

Focusing on the president is a mistake. He's just a puppet representing the degree of subversion this country has experienced. We need a new party that's not for sale.

quote:

We need a new party that's not for sale.

Third parties do not win. What is needed is a coalescing of conservative sentiment at votin' time-- much like what happened in 1994. The TEA parties are just the beginning. Things will snowball over the coming year. When inflation really begins to whittle away at our money, people will come to understand that printing trillions with no gold to back it is lunacy. They will begin to understand that this goatherder has not the best interests of our nation at heart, but rather those of the leaders of Cuba and Venezuela...

quote:

Originally posted by homebrewer:

quote:

We need a new party that's not for sale.

Third parties do not win. What is needed is a coalescing of conservative sentiment at votin' time-- much like what happened in 1994. The TEA parties are just the beginning. Things will snowball over the coming year. When inflation really begins to whittle away at our money, people will come to understand that printing trillions with no gold to back it is lunacy. They will begin to understand that this goatherder has not the best interests of our nation at heart, but rather those of the leaders of Cuba and Venezuela....

Let's just all kiss each other and everything will get better. Which party should we buy off? Cuba and Venezuela don't have anything to do with it. We've been taken from within. Ben Franklin and George Washington should have been better heeded.

quote:

Originally posted by homebrewer:

quote:

We need a new party that's not for sale.

Third parties do not win. What is needed is a coalescing of conservative sentiment at votin' time-- much like what happened in 1994. The TEA parties are just the beginning. Things will snowball over the coming year. When inflation really begins to whittle away at our money, people will come to understand that printing trillions with no gold to back it is lunacy. They will begin to understand that this goatherder has not the best interests of our nation at heart, but rather those of the leaders of Cuba and Venezuela...

I agree - the answer is for the GOP to embrace the best principles of the third parties and strongly communicate their return to strict conservatism. Fiscal responsibility, defense, persona accountability, term limits, states rights, personal freedom, etc.

Until this is done (and possibly even if this is done) the libs will remain in power because they have bought the welfare, give me more, socialst voters.