US Gun Owners To Face Extradition And Foreign Prosecution

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by brett636, May 24, 2009.

  1. brett636

    brett636 Well-Known Member

    US Gun Owners To Face Extradition And Foreign Prosecution
  2. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    Thanks for posting that Brett.
    All those of you that said Obama didn't want to take our guns away? I reckon you were WRONG huh. You better bet your bottom dollar the that lying huzzy Pelosi will be pushing all her influence for this crap too.
  3. dilligaf

    dilligaf IN VINO VERITAS

  4. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    It must be true! I seen it on the internets!
  5. Baba gounj

    Baba gounj pensioner

    Now that i enjoyed.
  6. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt You can call me Chappy Staff Member

    The most impressive thing about this is that this is on the Communist News Network (CNN).
  7. soberups

    soberups Pees in the brown Koolaid

    The treaty wont pass, and even if it did it would be unconstitutional. No one can be extradited to a foreign country of they did not break a law in that country.

    And as far as registration goes....none of my guns are registered, nor will they be. Ever.
  8. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Giving assumption this is all true, I disagree with that blanket "it won't pass" statement as for one, Repub. Senator Lugar according to the piece is for this and therefore will bring some repub. votes with him. There might be a (count on on hand number) number of democrat senators who "might" oppose but the numbers still indicate IMO this thing could pass. All there needs is 67 votes and these cats have proven time and time again that they'll sell out if it means getting something back home for election time. Also republicans I'm sure will sell their vote for this to voters as a measure against the threat of mexican gang violence (immigration) and also the threat of weapons going to international terrorist (law and order/national security). The spin doctors will sell it no matter what.

    As for the 2nd part being unconstitutional? All other issues of debate aside once a treaty is passed and the President signs, it then becomes binding just like any other law and therefore the question of constitutionality becomes iffy if not entirely mute. Just read from the beginning to the discussion of the 1919' Thompson case and you'll begin to see very clearly why and how our constitution gets circumvented time and time again when we are under the illusion otherwise. Read further and you might see why social security one year earlier was ruled unconstitutional only to come back with full court support. This piece was written by a Huntsville Alabama Constitutional lawyer in case some here might object the opinion needs to come from an "expert!"

    I think most Americans feel like you do Sober and on that premise, you nailed it. But I'm sad to say on the other part the deck is completely stacked against us. For years, these slimballs instead of amending the law of the Constitution, they used the law of Art. 2 Sec. 2 (oversight of the unintended consequences of the founders) to circumvent the very Constitution they were suppose to uphold and they've never let up.
  9. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    If it's not, we've always got you and good ole snopes to save us!
  10. soberups

    soberups Pees in the brown Koolaid

    I have heard a lot of people talking about the need to bury their weapons before any sort of confiscation starts.

    I my opinion if its time to bury them then its time to dig them up and use them.

    There are clost to 300 million guns in private hands in this country. From a logistical standpoint it will be impossible to register or confiscate them all.
  11. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    The only reason it's on the internet is to link to the news agency.
    Don't believe it if you want, just get used to having sand in your eyes and ears.
  12. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    If you really think you're going to get extradited to a foreign country just because you're a gun owner, I've got a bridge to sell you :happy-very:.
  13. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    If you really believe that is the sole purpose of this Treaty, I can see why you have a bridge to sell.
  14. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    I don't believe that is the purpose of this treaty, but if you read the title of this thread, that's the implication, no?
    US Gun Owners To Face Extradition And Foreign prosecution
    So if you disagree that the purpose of the treaty is extradite gun owners, what do you think the purpose is?
  15. brett636

    brett636 Well-Known Member

    Who is to say that it could not eventually lead to this? Obama and the rest of the gun grabbing gang know that their hands are tied due to the 2nd amendment and last summer's heller case decision. So what is the best way to start down the road of gun confiscation than to begin to let in foreign influence into our laws when it comes to our firearms. Sign and ratify a few international treaties requiring registration, then restrictions, and finally confiscation and viola, you have successfully bypassed our constitution while make our country a true "citizen of the world". Don't care to follow these new world order laws? Then you are swept off to a foreign court for prosecution since our courts cannot convict you of being a gun owner. To believe otherwise is niave.
  16. Jones

    Jones fILE A GRIEVE! Staff Member

    If you're determined to believe that, I can't stop you. But the purpose of this treaty is to target illicit international arms sales. You can read it here.
    BTW, I'm not saying it's a good idea, I have my doubts about it. But to suggest that it's a precursor to Joe from Alabama getting dragged to the Hague to face a UN tribunal over his hunting rifle? You might need to loosen the straps on that tin foil hat just a tad....
  17. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member we seen how CNN's (Ind) Lou "aka Mexican mad-dog" Dobbs reports on this issue, now, only to be fair, lets see how CNN's mainstream media reports this ;

    Why is it, that I feel perfectly comfortable that my guns aren't going anywhere, and so many out there are freaking out? If your not selling guns to shady characters, what do you have to worry about. Why protect these ir-responsible skumbag gun dealers who give us responsible gun owners a bad name. Who's kidding who, crooked gun-dealers feel they have the right to sell and make profits to any and every un-checked Tom, Dick, and "Pedro" that has cash, funnels these weapons to cartels, and don't care or take responsibility that 9 out of 10 bad guys in Mexico gets their hands on their assault weapons that are killing Mexican officials/citizens, and spilling into the US threaten own own officials/citizens....Lets face it, most who opposed to this support republican policies. Isn't this the party who claims that everyone should take the personal responsibilty approach, or is that just another proven busted myth....or at least admit, to a footnote stating gun dealers are excluded from personal responsibilities...
  18. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    I tend to agree with Jones but Brett has a point that like most things gov't, there is always the devil in the details. Treaty law has been used to circumvent constitutional law but I don't think any treaty proposes to take "every gun owner" and move them off shore to a foreign jail. Now if unemployment gets worse:rofl:

    But don't look the other way either which I think is the real wisdom of Brett's initial post!
  19. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    What Speedy ? Que es loco? Are you running for political office with that kind of response...Stop tip-toe-ing thru the tulips and take a stance....:wink2:, before we dub thy Tiny
  20. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    IMO, there's a lot more to this myth than is being told to the American public. One simple idea would be for the Mexican gov't and the American gov't to take the serial numbers of the many captured weapons that have built the case to support this treaty and publically identify by tracing the numbers back from where the weapons come from? Seems to me in doing that would more than show all that the need for this law is necessary and maybe instead of another treaty, we'd support federal laws with teeth and would address the problem right here at home rather than the need to involve some foreign process. I mean, even the republicans don't want the nasty mexican illegals to have guns so build the case and you got an instant Amen corner.

    Then again, those serial numbers just may actually prove a whole other matter and thus the reason it's all being held on the QT!

    Besides, the only real export business we have these days are guns and weapons so the govt's on policy of domestic destruction and forcing whole industries off shore along with the jobs do tend to leave little else to do other than gun running, drug running, pornography and sex slavery, etc. and now the gov't wants to kill markets they themselves help create!


    As to CNN, if you're gonna call CNN the Communist News Network then in all fairness and honesty you have to call FOX Fascist, Oligrarchic, Xenophobic.

    Truth is, both are worthless propogranda arms of the monster state and do little but puke out the gov't line and rarely challenge the gov't and it's totaliterian idealisms spouted out by both political parties! I'm shocked Fox hasn't kicked Judge Naipolitano to the curb as outspoken as he's become to the democrat or republican party super state!

    How's that Tie Jr.!

    You 2 are joined at the hip, it's becoming impossible to tell whose talking when either of you post!