Members philthygeezer Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 In less than a year the U.S. government has gone from being one of the chief opponents of the proposed UN Small Arms Control Treaty to being a strong supporter. Elections do matter and have consequences. As many predicted, the United States has changed its United Nations Gun Control Treaty position by joining other countries in the UN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jealousblues Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Who knows? I doubt we will end up banning these kinds of weapons here. I know a democrat is in power so everyone is freaking out and being lead to believe we want to take away everyone guns ;-) so anything is possible. I dont see why a responsible citizen shouldnt own a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lug Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I dont see why a responsible citizen shouldnt cling to a gun. Fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jealousblues Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 for what its worth, I dont own, never have owned nor plan to own a gun... just that if you arnt a criminal I dont see why you cant own one.I mean it IS inherently dangerous, but people make legal dangerous decisions all the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GMOGreg Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 for what its worth, I dont own, never have owned nor plan to own a gun...just that if you arnt a criminal I dont see why you cant own one.I mean it IS inherently dangerous, but people make legal dangerous decisions all the time but you dont think criminals retain this right? what if they just shoplifted a can of food? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ezstep Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Who knows?I doubt we will end up banning these kinds of weapons here.I know a democrat is in power so everyone is freaking out and being lead to believe we want to take away everyone guns ;-) so anything is possible.I dont see why a responsible citizen shouldnt own a gun. I doubted that the Gov't would own GM and Chrysler...but they did.My father doubted that the GM stocks/bonds he owned would be nullified by the same government...but they were.I doubted that this Prez would extend the much disliked wiretapping laws...but he did. I have learned not to doubt a lot of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sunburstbasser Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 but you dont think criminals retain this right? what if they just shoplifted a can of food? I draw the line at violent felony convictions. If you have been convicted of something like rape or assault or god forbid murder and are out of prison, you have effectively nullified your own personal right to own a firearm of any kind. Shoplifting isn't a violent crime, so I'd say that a convicted shoplifter hasn't forfeited that right like a convicted armed robber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members FreestyleIntruder Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Jesus {censored}e, this is terrible news! They might stop selling torture chambers to Indonesia and testicle clamps to Saudi Arabia - my BAe Systems shares are {censored}ed now! Bye-bye, SunSeeker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GMOGreg Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I doubted that the Gov't would own GM and Chrysler...but they did.My father doubted that the GM stocks/bonds he owned would be nullified by the same government...but they were.I doubted that this Prez would extend the much disliked wiretapping laws...but he did.I have learned not to doubt a lot of stuff. so you doubt doubt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GMOGreg Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I'd say that a convicted shoplifter hasn't forfeited that right like a convicted armed robber. what if their weapon was a garlic press? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members willsellout Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 what if their weapon was a garlic press? and what if we all {censored} lollipops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members NeonVomit Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Settle down, kids. No one is going to take your toys away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members King Kashue Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 what if their weapon was a garlic press? Did these words in this order make sense when you originally typed it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GMOGreg Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 and what if we all {censored} lollipops? I actually used to work with a guy who had gone to jail for robbing a gas station with a garlic press... he was a nice guy when he was sober. FWIW I wouldnt trust him with anything let alone a gun, especially since last I heard he was back on crack and back in jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GMOGreg Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Did these words in this order make sense when you originally typed it? what was their weapon if a garlic press? :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ezstep Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 so you doubt doubt? No, I don't doubt doubt. (I have learned not to doubt a lot of stuff.) Like a double negative. We Americans have traditionally let someone else (Uncle Sam) do things for us...things that we don't want to do. We need to watch the bean counters more closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jugghaid Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 To answer the original poster, yes this is true. They are using the auspices of preventing international gun smuggling as an excuse for this, and that is one of the many reasons things like kidnappings across the US mexico border have been more widely publicized lately. Justification. While MOST people in this country feel very strongly that we have the right to gun ownership, there ARE many out there who would like that right to no longer exist and to either strongly curtail that right or do away with it altogether. I'll leave it up to the individual to decide what they think the motivation for that would be. Will it come to pass? Time will tell, but I think that the outcry that would comefrom the american public would still hold enough sway to keep it from happening. That and the fact that it is a direct infringement on our soveriegnty and a violation of our national constitution. From a personal perspective, the UN can piss up a rope in general, and on this issue they can go play a long game of "hide and go {censored} yourself" as far as I am concerned. I didn't vote for a "one world" government making decisions on what a US citizen can and can not own, and I will be damned if I will abide by any law to this effect. If they want my weapons back, they will get them back one bullet at a time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J. Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I agree that American citizens won't stand for this type of thing. A nation should never ever cede aspects of sovereignty, especially not to silly UN agreements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lonerstoenr Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 A nation should never ever cede aspects of sovereignty, especially not to silly UN agreements. Yeah, Rwanda should have been free to encourage it's citizens to genocide the UN definitely should have intervened LESS. Indonesia NEVER should have given up East Timor, especially not because the UN was actively working against Indonesian sovereignty. I mean, say what you will about this specific example, but the UN has some flaws but certainly it has stood for some peace and fairness in the world, even at the cost of the 'liberty' of some countries and rulers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members willsellout Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I actually used to work with a guy who had gone to jail for robbing a gas station with a garlic press... he was a nice guy when he was sober. FWIW I wouldnt trust him with anything let alone a gun, especially since last I heard he was back on crack and back in jail. Awesome. I retract my post:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted November 11, 2009 Moderators Share Posted November 11, 2009 Nice {censored} stirring but this nonsense is really getting obnoxious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philthygeezer Posted November 11, 2009 Author Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Yeah, Rwanda should have been free to encourage it's citizens to genocide the UN definitely should have intervened LESS. Indonesia NEVER should have given up East Timor, especially not because the UN was actively working against Indonesian sovereignty. I mean, say what you will about this specific example, but the UN has some flaws but certainly it has stood for some peace and fairness in the world, even at the cost of the 'liberty' of some countries and rulers. Jugghaid knows that I am a huge fan of the UN's role in mediating conflicts between nations and keeping world peace. We've discussed that one tooth and nail. However, I can't help but feel that global civilian disarmament is the dumbest thing I ever heard of in light of the 170 million people who got murdered by their own governments last century. Global government disarmament would be a worthy goal though. The UN is indispensible as an international table. However, I think America should be careful about supporting goals which may be contrary to the nation's stated internal beliefs. I can understand Obama signing onto the deal in order to prevent shipment of illicit arms to oppressive regimes, and I like that part of it. But I think civilian disarmament campaigns are fraught with danger as the balance of power shifts. The UN simply can't accept the responsibility of protecting the people they disarm. In Uganda, meanwhile, the government has been periodically killing civilians, bombing homes, and destroying crops as it seeks to disarm the Karamojong, displacing some 80,000 people. Kopel and his co-authors describe the campaign there as Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philthygeezer Posted November 11, 2009 Author Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 Nice {censored} stirring but this nonsense is really getting obnoxious. I've been here since before the great crash of 2003. I remember when Juggs tracked that Zon thief down. Occasionally I'll come in and post something I saw in the news or on the net, sometimes along with my opinion of it, sometimes with questions. Occasionally I'll ask what pick guard you like best on the bass I'm building. Sometimes others comment and change my opinion. You guys are a rational sounding board as much as a bunch of musicians. Right now, I'm not playing much bass, but I'm watching legislation on free speech and firearms ownership get debated in my country. What better group of people to ask opinions about the topics than a bunch of peaceful Americans who play music? If someone comes out and says, "you're full of poo, and here's why", I'm just as happy as when people agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted November 11, 2009 Moderators Share Posted November 11, 2009 I've been here since 2003. Occasionally I'll come in and post something I saw in the news or on the net, sometimes along with my opinion of it, sometimes with questions. Occasionally I'll ask what pick guard you like best on the bass I'm building. Sometimes others comment and change my opinion. You guys are a rational sounding board as much as a bunch of musicians. Right now, I'm not playing much bass, but I'm watching legislation on free speech and firearms ownership get debated in my country. What better group of people to ask opinions about the topics than a bunch of peaceful Americans who play music? If someone comes out and says, "you're full of poo, and here's why", I'm just as happy as when people agree. I wasn't talking directly to you, but the {censored} stirring over the "OMG this treaty/statute/local ordinance will infringe our Constitutional rights" is obnoxious, tired and juvenile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zachoff Posted November 11, 2009 Members Share Posted November 11, 2009 I hear the Tyrannosaurus went extinct because of a small arms ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.