Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/06/07/u-n-agreement-should-have-all-gun-owners-up-in-arms/

OOOOBAAAAMMMMAAAA!!!

Point 4 seems a little paranoid.

if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate

How is this attributed to Obama?

Lol.

1. Enact tougher licensing requirements, creating additional bureaucratic red tape for legal firearms ownership.

So, make it harder for convicted felons or those with diagnosed psychological disorders that would make it dangerous to possess a firearm? Fine by me.

2. Confiscate and destroy all “unauthorized” civilian firearms (exempting those owned by our government of course).

Given that any unauthorized firearms will, under this law/set of laws, be owned by the people mentioned above in 1, this is again fine by me. Plus it'll punish people who do dumb gak like convert flare guns for shotgun shells or try and home-build their guns.

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).

Fine by me personally, although I appreciate that people are upset that it bans any and all magazine-based semi-automatics (Especially since I can't think of a one-shot pistol that doesn't use black powder and a firing cap or flint :/ ). However, given the difficulty in regulating magazine sizes to all hold X bullets or less, and given the ability to import or illegally obtain larger magazines to circumvent this limit, this is a logical step.

Create an international gun registry, clearly setting the stage for full-scale gun confiscation.

This does seem a bit paranoid. But even if accurate, this only helps police internationally.

For example, if Johnny Nutjob has holed up in his house with hostages, right now the SWAT has to go in with no idea of what to expect. If they were able to simply pull up Mr. Nutjob's gun owner profile on the registry, they might be able to see he has purchased and owns a hunting rifle, three shotguns, and a pair of pistols, and they can plan accordingly in light of this knowledge.

Similarly, an international registry would tie in with point 1, making it harder for Bob Schmoe to sell his shotgun to Joe Nutjob, as it would have to go through the registry to avoid legal issues. This would remove a lot of the current issues with the ability to acquire firearms without background checks at gun shows, as doing so would incur a huge financial penalty (And given that their name would have been on the registry, they know that Bob sold it to Joe since the gun serial # 123456 was last in Bob's possession and he didn't report a theft of the gun)

Ahtman wrote:

if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate

How is this attributed to Obama?

you have that backwards
How is this NOT attributed to Obama?

Point 2 is effectively impossible to enforce.

I have to say I agree the first 2 points.

You can get a gun in America way too easy, no background checks, nothing.

But the third one isn't really necessary as the first 2 points would help manage the criminals and mentally unstable and it is no point punishing people who abide by the law.

4th point is just as silly it just punishes honest people and won't stop the illegal trafficking of guns.

This is nothing more than hot air.

Not sure if Obama would actually signed it or the Senate would pass it. We opted out the Landmine Agreement the UN press for awhile back

Jihadin wrote:Not sure if Obama would actually signed it or the Senate would pass it. We opted out the Landmine Agreement the UN press for awhile back

He would sign it in his second term. If he signed before then, it would amount to an auto-loss.

Hell if does signed it we might as well pay our UN dues we stopped paying a long long time ago. I see this going to SCOTUS

I like this part:

While the terms have yet to be made public, if passed by the U.N. and ratified by our Senate, it will almost certainly force the U.S. to:

He may as well have said "I'm trying to scare you, here's how:"

Even if this is ratified by the Senate, multinational treaties of this scale are always so incredibly vague (and completely unenforceable against first-world nations) that its essentially impossible to know how signatory states will actually attempt to put them into effect domestically. Then, of course, there's always the ability to challenge any law made to bring the US into compliance with the treaty (whatever that may mean) in court.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Point 4 seems a little paranoid.

Except its accurate.

They're making it harder to buy guns =/= They're trampling over the 2nd amendment.

Seriously, it's like every time something gets changed everybody gets up in arms and is prepared to revolt against the government. Obama might not be a 2nd Amendment enthusiast but it doesn't necessarily mean he'll opt into it.

The gaps in the logic are entertaining. Nation Gun Registry =/= Full Scale Gun Confiscation.

Haha..

IF passed by the UN, AND ratified by the senate...

So who gives a flying feth then?!

They could at least wait until it IS passed by the UN, and actually looks like being somewhere close to even being considered to be ratified by the senate, before they write all this gak.

Frazzled wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Point 4 seems a little paranoid.

Except its accurate.

Oh no, I'm not going to fight over that point with you Frazz, you'll beat me down with Weiner logic and I'll be out of the discussion before I can blink. Going to prempt such tactics.

Look at Sigs eyes... how can you not agree.

mattyrm wrote:Haha..

IF passed by the UN, AND ratified by the senate...

So who gives a flying feth then?!

They could at least wait until it IS passed by the UN, and actually looks like being somewhere close to even being considered to be ratified by the senate, before they write all this gak.

People always need a scapegoat when they can't deal with their own problems, or having a scapegoat helps them.

I've seen people try to blame the fact they can't get a job on obama, yet all they do is sit on their ass at home as if a job is going to just come to them.

Frazzled wrote:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:Point 4 seems a little paranoid.

Except its accurate.

The only portions of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects that could even be construed to mean that are:

7. To ensure that henceforth licensed manufacturers apply an appropriate and reliable marking on each small arm and light weapon as an integral part of the production process. This marking should be unique and should identify the country of manufacture and also provide information that enables the national authorities of that country to identify the manufacturer and serial number so that the authorities concerned can identify and trace each weapon.

...and...

9. To ensure that comprehensive and accurate records are kept for as long as possible on the manufacture, holding and transfer of small arms and light weapons under their jurisdiction. These records should be organized and maintained in such a way as to ensure that accurate information can be promptly retrieved and collated by competent national authorities.

...and...

5. States and international and regional organizations should, where appropriate, cooperate, develop and strengthen partnerships to share resources and information on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.

All of which are already done by the US.

As far as what the UN itself will do:

33. To request the Secretary-General of the United Nations, within existing resources, through the Department for Disarmament Affairs, to collate and circulate data and information provided by States on a voluntary basis and including national reports, on implementation by those States of the Programme of Action.

Which, again, it already does via ECOSOC.

Frazz...look away from the eyes....it is not your friend....yet

I think everyone fails to see what's going on...the world governments are in on the zombie apocalypse. They regulate guns, take them away, and we have no defense to the walking dead. Then when the population is low enough, and a few people are safely underground, they virus bomb the surface and wipe out the zombies. Clever...almost too clever...but I caught on.

This is probably the fault of Agenda 21. According to everybody on Facebook they are responsible for everything.

Also found this:

LOL UN troops

Jihadin wrote:Hell if does signed it we might as well pay our UN dues we stopped paying a long long time ago. I see this going to SCOTUS

Internaitonal treaties do not abbrograte our rights under the Constitution, much to politician's chagrin.

d-usa wrote:This is probably the fault of Agenda 21. According to everybody on Facebook they are responsible for everything.

Also found this:

I feel like that's meant to be a joke/troll. Because of :
"and your bibles" and "Jesus didn't need to vote and neither do you"

And after searching ERAFN I'm now certain.

Whats shameful about it...people believe it

I was hoping the joke was obvious. Sad thing is that I could see some of the people that this is making fun of actually thinking this is real..

d-usa wrote:I was hoping the joke was obvious. Sad thing is that I could see some of the people that this is making fun of actually thinking this is real..

The sad thing is in this day and age it could have been legit, which says a lot.

......

I had the NRA already call me about this in a 8 minute long scare tactic speech that was poorly written and full of bad logic like above. It was targeting people who don't have knowledge of how things really work or who just want to be angry about a non issue. At the end of the speech they had a poll with more scare tactic BS. I am sure most callers not wanting to hear this BS hung up long before the end further skewing their poll, I just wanted to be removed from their list.


And no this will not happen in our day and age due to reality.

I'm with Jihadin on this one. UN troops? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha x 10000 to the power of infinity (If that's possible)

HonorHarrington wrote:The sad thing is in this day and age it could have been legit, which says a lot.

Tbh I'd see that image like some sort of intelligence test.
And considering that the poster urges people to stay home* it'd be a win-win for Obama either way.

*: only at this point I realized the picture for what it was - damn shame, the "[...] take away your guns. And your bibles." line had me cracking.

Alas, as much as the US need this, I don't see it happening anytime soon. Too many idiots in politics, too much gun lobby influence, and too many voters not fact-checking what they are told by sources like OP's website. Maybe in another decade or two.