Jun 072011
 

I have never been a big defender of the United Nations. The organization has done nothing to protect nations or individuals. They stand by and let people die right in front of them. The UN has become an organization where petty tyrants while denying rights to their own people have used it as a forum to denounce the United States for any and all perceived injustices. The organization has become a test bed for liberal policies as it supports free abortions on demand and disavows Christianity in all forms. It has become a place where successful countries like the United States is expected to conform to flawed treaties like Kyoto while smaller and developing countries (like China) are allowed a free pass. And now the UN wants to take your guns as well.

A new treaty supported by the UN, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama would call for the US to:

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.
2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).
3. Ban the trade, sale and private ownership of all semi-automatic weapons (any that have magazines even though they still operate in the same one trigger pull – one single “bang” manner as revolvers, a simple fact the ant-gun media never seem to grasp).
4. Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.
5. In short, overriding our national sovereignty, and in the process, providing license for the federal government to assert preemptive powers over state regulatory powers guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment in addition to our Second Amendment rights.

Called the U.N. Arms Treaty Resolution, the treaty has firm support in the Obama administration who has a rabid anti-gun political history while in the Senate and even as president. He even voted against a law in Illinois which was modeled after the Texas Castle law allowing someone to defend themselves and their ‘castle’ if they have reason to believe someone is attempting to break into their domicile or have reason to believe they are in danger. Interestingly the then Senator Obama voted against this law.

Liberal will say that no one needs to carry a weapon except for the police since it is law enforcements’ job to protect people. This is a complete fallacy. Not only does law enforcement not always defend you, they have no obligation to do so. Under an 1856 Supreme Court ruling and upheld in 1982 and 2005, the courts ruled that “We held that the so-called “substantive” component of the Due Process Clause does not “requir[e] the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors.”

In 1982 the In 1982, the U.S. Court of Appeals said that

“…there is no Constitutional right to be protected by the state against criminals or madmen. The Constitution does not require Federal or State government to provide services, even so elementary a service as maintaining law and order.”

So, what does all this mean. It means that people can not expect law enforcement to protect them. They must depend on themselves. Without weapons people are incapable of defending themselves either from criminals or from a corrupt government.

Much is made of Adolf Hitler and his war against the Jews. Some historians will say that the German leader actually loosened laws allowing gun ownership. This is just partially correct. Hitler made it easier for everyone to own guns, except Jews.

The Berlin Police President, Count Wolf Heinrich von Helldorf, announced that as a result of a police activity in the last few weeks the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been “disarmed” with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.

And how did Hitler find out who owned guns? That was easy.

Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.

And now the UN wants to ban weapons in the United States. Finding out who currently owns guns will not be hard either as guns are registered. If you think Barack Obama will stand up to the United Nations taking of your weapons, guess again. He wants to take our weapons, he wants the American people to be un-armed. Our founding fathers wrote the Second Amendment to the Constitution for a reason: people without weapons can not defend themselves, their property or their country. Hitler knew this and so does our President. Makes you wonder what the Barack Obama has in mind.

Hat Tip: Forbes

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

 Posted by at 5:20 pm

  2 Responses to “UN Wants to Take Our Guns; Obama and Clinton Support This Action”

  1. Good thing Obama is on the way out. That man has done nothing good since being in office and it’s time he goes. The people see him for what he is. Had no business being in there in the first place.

  2. beware my friends…. during times of war the President can STOP election, and DECLARE HIMSELF president for another 4 years….

 Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *