CAN A U.N. TREATY TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY?
July 10,2013
Ron DuBois
5:04 AM
There was a Presidential debate question that asked, ” Will you sign a Gun Ban Treaty?” This loaded question (pardon the pun) gave many the idea that the Federal Government, by signing such a Treaty, could grant itself the ability to authorize the U.N. Treaty, causing Americans to be disarmed, and/or limited in their ownership of firearms or ammunition. This, in spite of the Constitution’s limitations on Congress and the President to do this. Americans just don’t take these attacks on our rights seriously, and don’t research for themselves, allowing the Media to tell us what is right, even when the Media is (purposely) wrong.
Under the Constitution, only the States have Police power. Only they define criminal law and enforce it. The Federal government only has the powers that were delegated to it, and only has Police power regarding “Offenses against the U.S.”
The U.S. Department of Justice, under Obama, has tried to convince the Supreme Court that the Federal government may use Treaties to expand its power over the people (including usurping States rights, contrary to the 10th Amendment.) Again, if you rely on the Media, you may believe this crap.
Since before half of us were born, there have been those pursuing a One-World government. Only in more recent years, feeling they may soon succeed, have they been more overt with their plans. In case you are not aware, the U.N. Agenda-21 and the U.N. Small Arms Treaty are just two of their tools. Research these. President Obama and the elitists on the Left, like George Soros, the Clintons, and many more, welcome a One-World government, because they and their fellow Socialists/Marxists would be in charge, and you and I would be the forever-poor serfs under their thumbs. It would be run under the U.N., paid for by the world’s tax dollars, and enforced by a U.N. military comprised of an International force.
I give this bit of background, because I know so any Americans are unaware (and won’t catch on until it is too late for them). The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is a very important step because, as history has shown, all Tyrants started by disarming the people. Since Congress has so far thwarted Obama from taking our guns at every step, the U.N. Treaty is his attempt to get around them, and the Constitution.
As I pointed out in my opening, Obama has put out the idea that he can get around the Constitution by signing Treaties, issuing Executive Orders, and ignring the Constitution and the Supreme Court, which he has already done a number of times.
But the Supreme Court has, on every occassion, upheld the Constitution – and it will, until it is stacked with enough Leftist choices, such as Kagan and Sotomayor. They only need one more, since nobody seems to care anymore if the new Justices follow the law or make new law according to their personal beliefs. So far, in Reid vs, Covert, the Court ruled, “…no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, whch is free from the constraints of the Constitution”. Also, “…an international accord that is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution is void under U.S. Domestic law, the same as any other Federal law in conflict with the Constitution. I believe Obama is not at all opposed to inoring the Court an the Constitution, and the Eric Holder Department of Justice would not be averse to enforcing the President’s law-breaking.
So I assure you that the U.N. Small Arms Treaty would not supercede the U.S. Constitution, no matter what the President and the Media say, but I cannot assure you that the U.S. Constitution will be followed by President Obama or Eric Holder. The only assurance we can have, is if we ALL understand the truth by researching for ourselves, and then bombard our Senators and Congresspeople with the news that we know the truth, and will not tolerate their ignoring it.
