Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Texas AG to Obama: I’ll sue if U.N. Arms Treaty is ratified

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Texas AG to Obama: I’ll sue if U.N. Arms Treaty is ratified

    Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott wrote a letter to President Obama on Tuesday saying that the state will head to court over the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty should Mr. Obama sign it and the U.S. Senate ratify it.
    “The UN has concluded its negotiations on the Arms Trade Treaty,” Mr. Abbotwrites. “It is now up to you to sign it — or reject it. Do not sign this treaty.”

    Mr. Abbott writes that he understands the apparent purpose is to combat illegal arms trafficking around the world, but that the treaty could draw law-abiding gun owners and gun operators “into a complex web of bureaucratic red tape created by a new department at the UN devoted to overseeing the treaty.”

    “As with most so-called international-law documents promulgated by the UN, the draft treaty is not written using the precise, unambiguous language required of a good legal document,” he continues. “Instead, the treaty employs sweeping rhetoric and imprecise terminology that could be used by those who seek to undermine our liberties to impose any number of restrictions on the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms.”
    Darryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, said the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights groups have distorted the meaning of the treaty. He said it is about the global trade of dangerous weapons, not individual rights within the United States.

    “It does not affect, in any way whatsoever, the ability of an individual American to go down to Kmart and purchase a hunting rifle,” he said. “This is not about what one person in Colorado might sell to a person in Wyoming.”
    White House press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday that the White House was pleased with Tuesday’s overwhelming vote by the U.N. General Assembly to pass the treaty, but “as is the case with all treaties of this nature, we will follow normal procedures to conduct a thorough review of the treaty text to determine whether to sign the treaty.”

    The U.S. Senate recently approved a nonbonding amendment opposing the treaty.

    Mr. Abbott goes on to write that the U.N. “cannot be trusted” with the United States’ Bill of Rights, and that it includes “foreign governments that have shown hostility to the kinds of constitutional liberties guaranteed to Americans. All Americans are harmed when unaccountable international bodies like the UN are empowered to interfere with our protected freedoms.”

    “If the UN Arms Trade Treaty is not stopped at the federal level, I — and my fellow state attorneys general — will take up the fight to preserve the Constitution. Ratification of this treaty would compel immediate legal action to enforce the Constitution’s guarantee that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” he concluded.

    © Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2PMFOzLsk
    Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
    I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

  • #2
    Why waste the time? It's not like anyone in Texas would acknowledge any UN mandate anyway.

    Comment


    • #3
      Fuck those blue helmet assholes.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's only posturing. I wish that Greg Abbott would roll down a steep hill backwards sometimes. He does some really stupid shit. This being one of those times.

        Comment


        • #5
          It will not pass the Senate anyway. They need 67 Senators to vote for it pass. Will not happen.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by racrguy View Post
            It's only posturing. I wish that Greg Abbott would roll down a steep hill backwards sometimes. He does some really stupid shit. This being one of those times.
            Please explain. Do you think the treaty is a good idea?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by line-em-up View Post
              Please explain. Do you think the treaty is a good idea?
              IDGAF what a treaty says. Unless it's ratified it isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

              (I'm not necessarily talking about you in this instance)
              When will you fucking mouth breathers learn that the president can sign all the treaties he wants and it doesn't mean dick. Nothing. He can sign a treaty that gives Bozo the fucking Clown all of the property the US Government owns and it's not worth a fucking thing.

              Comment


              • #8
                Ok. That is a good explanation to me. My main concern would be that he would sign an agreement to let the UN make policy and that they could eventually use that agreement to do whatever they want. So, without the ratification, then it doesn't matter what they agree to in the treaty. Would the president have the ability to unilaterally ratify it and force us to honor the treaty?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by line-em-up View Post
                  Ok. That is a good explanation to me. My main concern would be that he would sign an agreement to let the UN make policy and that they could eventually use that agreement to do whatever they want. So, without the ratification, then it doesn't matter what they agree to in the treaty.
                  Exactly. The POTUS can sign it if he wants to, it's only symbolic. We can literally wipe our asses with it.
                  Would the president have the ability to unilaterally ratify it and force us to honor the treaty?
                  No. It requires a two thirds vote in the Senate before it's ratified. Like Dacotua said, 67 votes. It will require a super majority by either party in order to ratify something using partisan methods.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by racrguy View Post
                    Exactly. The POTUS can sign it if he wants to, it's only symbolic. We can literally wipe our asses with it.


                    No. It requires a two thirds vote in the Senate before it's ratified. Like Dacotua said, 67 votes. It will require a super majority by either party in order to ratify something using partisan methods.
                    and when did laws stop him yet. Hes trampled on about every one so far what makes you think this is any different? Constitution has his foot prints all over it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by sig239 View Post
                      and when did laws stop him yet. Hes trampled on about every one so far what makes you think this is any different? Constitution has his foot prints all over it.
                      Yeah. Obama was the only one to do that. No other president EVER circumvented the constitution. Get outta here with that shit.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Except that what the other presidents have done in the past can't be changed or prevented now. That doesn't mean we shouldn't stop this one or any future presidents from doing it. Especially if they are attempting to "fundamentally change" our country or give our sovereignty away.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by racrguy View Post
                          IDGAF what a treaty says. Unless it's ratified it isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

                          (I'm not necessarily talking about you in this instance)
                          When will you fucking mouth breathers learn that the president can sign all the treaties he wants and it doesn't mean dick. Nothing. He can sign a treaty that gives Bozo the fucking Clown all of the property the US Government owns and it's not worth a fucking thing.
                          Unless the US government actually abides by the treaty, which it usually does.

                          Stevo
                          Originally posted by SSMAN
                          ...Welcome to the land of "Fuck it". No body cares, and if they do, no body cares.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by line-em-up View Post
                            Except that what the other presidents have done in the past can't be changed or prevented now.
                            False. You can repeal laws, we just need a congress with enough sack to do it.
                            That doesn't mean we shouldn't stop this one or any future presidents from doing it. Especially if they are attempting to "fundamentally change" our country or give our sovereignty away.
                            Some change I can get behind, some change I cannot. I do agree with you that we should stop current and future presidents from trampling the constitution. The feeling I got from where Sig was going was he was going to gloss over some things that Bush II did and harp solely on the actions of Obama. After all, that seems to be the go-to thing for the forums. "BUSH GOOD, OBAMA BAD!"

                            Originally posted by stevo View Post
                            Unless the US government actually abides by the treaty, which it usually does.

                            Stevo
                            Then take it up with Congress because they're the ones not fully following the rules that govern them.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by racrguy View Post


                              Then take it up with Congress because they're the ones not fully following the rules that govern them.
                              The last I checked, Congress was part of the government.....

                              Stevo
                              Originally posted by SSMAN
                              ...Welcome to the land of "Fuck it". No body cares, and if they do, no body cares.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X