Kerry Says US Will Sign UN Arms Treaty

[Ken]

This is how DICTATORS and DESPOTS rule, isn't it?

"Secretary of State John Kerry says that the U.S. will sign a controversial United Nations treaty on arms control in spite of bipartisan opposition from lawmakers.

Kerry released a written statement on Monday saying the U.S. "welcomes" the next phase for the treaty, which the U.N. General Assembly approved on April 2 but which gun rights advocates on Capitol Hill fear could lead to new gun control measures domestically."


Kerry Says US Will Sign UN Arms Treaty, Ignores Congressional Opposition

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2VCKOLlhG

Guests can not see images in the messages. Please register in the forum.

[oldtrap59]

Amen brother. Will leave it at that. I doubt if I were to put my feelings into words they would be allowed anyway.

Oldtrap

[Ken]

United States Constitution - Article VI, Paragraph 2

"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."

Apparently, this administration doesn't quite understand that the Constitution itself reigns supreme, even over Laws and Treaties. Federal laws and treaties are only supreme if they are consistent with the provisions of the Constitution. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803) We have an administration comprised of a bunch of third rate buffoon lawyers trying to destroy our nation.

[Solar Geek]

Agree with Ken 100%. If a treaty is made that is not "under the Authority of the United States" i.e conflicts with the Constitution or any part of it, then the treaty is unlawful and can be challenged. "Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the Constitution supersedes international treaties ratified by the United States Senate."
Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_v._Covert

[canid]

Tell me: can you reach back in your memory and find me an administration which has?

[crashdive123]

While this sure sucks......the good news is that this stands no chance of being ratified by the Senate. The bad news is that it will sit there, signed, waiting for a Senate that will ratify it regardless of how long that takes.

[Rick]

It's supposed to regulate international trade in conventional weapons. Gosh, I sure thought we had laws for that. Good to know I can purchase a full auto AK47 from Russia until it gets signed.

[Rick]

I thought I would share part of the response I received from one of my Senators on this subject.

"Thank you for taking the time to contact my office about the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. Like you, I believe that, although treaties do not trump the Constitution, the United States should not enter into any trade agreements that violate Second Amendment rights.

As you may know, during the Senate budget debate, Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe introduced an amendment that would prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty in order to uphold the Second Amendment. This amendment passed, 53-46, with my support..."

[redneckidokie]

Well all I can say is ^*&*&(*^%$@#$%^&&**)(_)()(+_)+_)&^%$#!
The U.N. can kiss my +_)(*&^%$#@!@#$%^&*()
And that is about all I have to say on that. The rest is tooo harsh.