Fight the U.N. Gun Ban

Of course not. Their intention is that all small arms trade is illegal.

How can you not see this? I don't understand. If they outlawed soapboxes, you'd be pissed as hell.

0 Replies

How about confining First Amendment rights
to government licensed orators ?

0 Replies

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
Why would anyone be for illegal trade of small arms?

Because that is all that will be left once they succeed in eliminating the legal trade.

Except there is no UN treaty to ban legal trade.

There was an attempt at a UN treaty to ban civilian ownership of military small arms.

It was defeated by Bush and Bolton.

0 Replies

oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
Why would anyone be for illegal trade of small arms?

Because that is all that will be left once they succeed in eliminating the legal trade.

Except there is no UN treaty to ban legal trade.

There was an attempt at a UN treaty to ban civilian ownership of military small arms.

It was defeated by Bush and Bolton.

We need W
to lead the charge against gun control in America,
to fully, and radically, annihilate gun control,
the same as slavery was ended in 1865.

0 Replies

Quote:

UN initiates arms trade treaty

By Laura Trevelyan
BBC News, New York

A committee of the UN General Assembly has voted to begin work on an international arms trade treaty.

A total of 139 states voted for the motion, with one against and 24 abstentions.

The treaty would close loopholes in the existing laws which mean guns still end up in conflict zones despite arms embargoes and export controls.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6088200.stm

0 Replies

Nobody needs to be Albert Einstein to comprehend that this UN anti-gun thing is about power and not about protecting anybody from anything. The people behind it are the same people who sat and watched the genocide in Rwanda; they clearly do not give a rat's a$$ about anybody's safety other than their own.

0 Replies

The UN hates our freedom, just like Osama does.

They are preparing for the day that Bush and Bolton are no longer here to tell them where to stick their anti-freedom agenda.

Hopefully the NRA has it in them to fight off the UN's nefarious schemes after the end of the Bush administration.

0 Replies

what would jesus shoot

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

what would jesus shoot

What would Reagan shoot?

0 Replies

Would Reagan shoot Jesus?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Would Reagan shoot Jesus?

Probably.

0 Replies

what would john bolton shoot? (bolton on why he avoided viet nam... "I didn't fancy the idea of dying in a rice paddy")

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

what would john bolton shoot? (bolton on why he avoided viet nam... "I didn't fancy the idea of dying in a rice paddy")

I wouldn't mind seeing Bolton take out IANSA.

0 Replies

I wouldn't mind seeing John Bolton apologize to the families of 50,000 guys who died in his place...

0 Replies

oralloy wrote:

blatham wrote:
what would john bolton shoot? (bolton on why he avoided viet nam... "I didn't fancy the idea of dying in a rice paddy")

I wouldn't mind seeing Bolton take out IANSA.

Would he bravely enter this fight wielding his desk, his financial holdings, or lesser peoples' expendable children?

0 Replies

blacksmithn wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing John Bolton apologize to the families of 50,000 guys who died in his place...

Are you saying that one John Bolton is worth 50,000 other men?
Thats quite an admission on your part.

0 Replies

No, that's quite a misinterpretation on yours.

0 Replies

blacksmithn wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing John Bolton apologize to the families of 50,000 guys who died in his place...

Oh boy.

That's a little funny.

Firstly, I think we can only allow ONE to die in his place, but we have no way of knowing if he would have died.

0 Replies

I think it's funny that this issue, which the NRA and I long ago swept under the bear skin rug, still rates airtime at A2K.

0 Replies

blacksmithn wrote:

No, that's quite a misinterpretation on yours.

How is that?

You claimed that 50,000 guys died in his place.
So,that means that it takes 50,000 men to do what he can do himself.

If you meant that he should apologize to the 1 mans family that died because he didnt go to Vietnam,that would have made more sense.

Now,who is that 1 man?
Where was he from,and who is his family?

Also,is Bolton responsible for the deaths of all of the men that went to Vietnam BEFORE Bolton was eligible to go?
Exactly where do you draw the line as to who took his place?

Did EVERY American that died in Vietnam die because Bolton didnt go?

0 Replies

Fight the U.N. Gun Ban

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know