Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #1

    Nov 8, 2012, 07:08 AM
    Gun Control... it didn't take long
    I won't go into hysterics that Obama is going to take away our guns.

    Just one question. If the US backs a UN Treaty to restrict small arms ,what is the law of the land ? The treaty ,or the Constitution of the land... specifically the 2nd Amendment ?

    After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks | Reuters
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #2

    Nov 8, 2012, 07:31 AM
    "We will not accept any treaty that infringes on the constitutional rights of our citizens to bear arms," he said.

    One can only hope. What do you bet Obama will continue to be the top gun salesman in the country? All those bitter clingers are probably more bitter today.
    ebaines's Avatar
    ebaines Posts: 12,131, Reputation: 1307
    Expert
     
    #3

    Nov 8, 2012, 11:46 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder
    Just one question. If the US backs a UN Treaty to restrict small arms ,what is the law of the land ? The treaty ,or the Constitution of the land ...specifically the 2nd Amendment ?
    This is not a serious question, is it? The law of the land is whatever our elected representatives and executive branch say it is, as interpreted by the courts.

    And besides, the treaty is about exports of guns, not your right to pack one.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #4

    Nov 8, 2012, 12:45 PM
    Yeah that's the spin they want you to believe . But the last version of the treaty left open “without prejudice to the right of delegations to put forward additional proposals.”
    Now why would they add that ? Because the Non-alligned movement nations and other NGOs want to add language to restrict domestic gun sales too.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #5

    Nov 8, 2012, 02:32 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ebaines View Post
    This is not a serious question, is it? The law of the land is whatever our elected representatives and executive branch say it is, as interpreted by the courts.
    .
    If we are signatories to a treaty ,that becomes the law of the land .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,327, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #6

    Nov 8, 2012, 02:42 PM
    Show me where any treaty trumps US federal law.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #7

    Nov 8, 2012, 02:45 PM
    Worry only if you are involved in "illicit arms trafficking and proliferation."
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #8

    Nov 8, 2012, 02:54 PM
    Article VI, paragraph 2 of the US constitution:

    This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #9

    Nov 8, 2012, 03:10 PM
    What does that have to do with private and legal ownership of weapons?
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #10

    Nov 8, 2012, 03:24 PM
    Tal said "show me" and I did. Read tom's answer here and follow the conversation.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #11

    Nov 8, 2012, 03:35 PM
    No one is going to take away your guns.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #12

    Nov 8, 2012, 03:49 PM
    I made it a point at the start of this conversation that I did not think it was a threat. But it will be impetus for the Obots to make Federal law that restricts the type of guns that can be purchased .
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #13

    Nov 8, 2012, 04:04 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    But it will be impetus for the Obots to make Federal law that restricts the type of guns that can be purchased .
    Bet they won't get that impetus.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 173
    Ultra Member
     
    #14

    Nov 8, 2012, 04:59 PM
    You asked a specific question about law, there are various intrepretations regarding treaty obligations and the constitution of any nation and it sort of works this way, when there is a conflict the treaty obligations prevail and it behoven to the country concerned to amend their laws to fall in line with their treaty obligations after all the treaty has been established under constitutional powers. What this means is no constitutional provision can stand alone for its own sake so the second amandment or any amendment cannot be exorcised from treaty obligations.

    The US therefore has various courses of action:

    Repudiate the treaty and ultimately its membership of the UN

    Amend the Constitution to define classes of weapons under the second amendment


    The second amendment says nothing about the traffic in arms, it refers to a personal right to have arms. There has been a liberal interpretation that it means you can have any arms you want and as many as you want. I doubt that was original intent. It exists because in the early days they didn't intend to have a large standing army. The Constitution confers the power to regulate commerce, therefore movement of arms and sale of arms can be legally restricted without contravening the second amendment rights.

    The issue really isn't hand guns or long arms but the number of weapons in the hands of criminals. In the interests of the public good this cannot be permitted
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #15

    Nov 8, 2012, 05:29 PM
    The real issue is that dictators don't want an armed populace.
    speechlesstx's Avatar
    speechlesstx Posts: 1,111, Reputation: 284
    Ultra Member
     
    #16

    Nov 8, 2012, 06:12 PM
    Exactly right, tom. And that's what amazes me about Obots, they're blind to his imperial presidency... willfully or not.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #17

    Nov 8, 2012, 06:16 PM
    President Obama doesn't want your guns either, He wants you to keep them close by your side.
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #18

    Nov 8, 2012, 06:17 PM
    Hello again, Steve:

    what amazes me about Obots, they're blind to his imperial presidency
    It IS true, that when I walk out of my house every morning, I see an entirely different country than you do.

    Excon
    J_9's Avatar
    J_9 Posts: 40,298, Reputation: 5646
    Expert
     
    #19

    Nov 8, 2012, 06:26 PM
    President Obama doesn't want your guns either, He wants you to keep them close by your side.
    I'm sorry. I have to laugh out loud at this. He doesn't want us to have them at all.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 39,354, Reputation: 5431
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #20

    Nov 8, 2012, 06:43 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by J_9 View Post
    I'm sorry. I have to laugh out loud at this. He doesn't want us to have them at all.
    That's not true at all. Do you have a quote to that effect?

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

I just started birth control 3 weeks ago and my period didn't come yet [ 0 Answers ]

I started ortho tri-cyclen on May 23rd because I have irregular period. I haven't had my period since January & I was put on the pill to regulate my period cycle. I just reached the first pill where I'm suppose to get my period. I'm sexually active & do not use condom. I started getting cramps for...

Does my son's father have any control over where my son and I live and for how long? [ 4 Answers ]

My son's father and I recently split up. I am moving back home to El Paso, Tx to stay with my parents until I can get back on my feet. (We currently live in Houston). My ex agreed to me taking our son with me. He was totally fine with everything yesterday, but this morning he showed me a paper he...

Why is my period lasting so long after birth control [ 1 Answers ]

I usually have regular period- 3-5 days . However I recently insert mirena and now my period is lasting 2 weeks. Why?

How long after being off birth control pills can I get pregnant? [ 1 Answers ]

I have 3 children. The youngest is 10. My husband and I are trying for another baby. I have been on Birth control pills for the past 10 years now. I stopped taking them 6 months ago and still am not pregnant. With my second and third child I was off the BC pills for only a month and got pregnant!...

How long can I stay on birth control pills [ 2 Answers ]

Im 26 years old I had 4 kids but one passed away. Im now on Yasmin birth control pill I have been taking it for 1 year and a half. I don't want anymore kids but afraid I might want in the future. Is it bad to stay on birth control pills for long? And how long is bad? Is it safe to stay on them...


View more questions Search