OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
05-02-2009, 05:46 AM
#1
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: My Range in Central NY
Posts: 320
OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading
-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who “wasn’t going to take
away our guns”?
Well, guess what?
Less than 100 days into his administration, he’s never met a gun he
didn’t hate.
A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and
bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn’t have the
political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that
didn’t keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun
owners.
It’s called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit
Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives,
and Other Related Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title
masks a really nasty piece of work.
First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the “illicit”
manufacture of firearms, what does that mean?
1. “Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of
firearms [or] ammunition ... without a license....”
Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm
from a kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.”
Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit
manufacturing.” And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a
firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words,
come within the screwy definition of “illicit manufacturing.”
2. “Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition.
“[A]ny other weapon” is a “firearm,” according to the treaty --
and
the term “weapon” is nowhere defined.
So, is a BB gun a “firearm”? Probably.
A toy gun? Possibly.
A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.
If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama
administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some
of the other provisions in the treaty:
* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to
adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize
illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.
Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and
modifying
or assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama
administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the
basis of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress
to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases.
* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized
acts should include “association or conspiracy” in connection with
said offenses -- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by
regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun
clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.
* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to “adopt
such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over
the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention”
under a variety of circumstances.
We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its
streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico
to define offenses “committed in its territory” in a very broad
way.
And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX
of the proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the
treaty to demand to extradition of American gun dealers.
Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful
American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute
through “other means of peaceful settlement.”
Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on
the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this
provision in a pro-gun manner?
* Microstamping. Article VI requires “appropriate markings” on
firearms. And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be
used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a
requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which
are not technologically possible or which are possible only at a
prohibitively expensive cost.
* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any
records, for a “reasonable time,” that the government determines to
be
necessary to trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly
repeal portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to
require a national registry or database.
ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American
Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in
Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.
Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your
Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Senator:
I am urging you, in the strongest terms, to oppose the Inter-American
Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in
Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.
This anti-gun treaty was written by international bureaucrats who are
either stupid or virulently anti-gun -- or both.
This treaty could very well ban the ability to reload ammunition, to
put new stocks on rifles lawfully owned by American citizens, and,
possibly, even ban BB guns!
There are too many problems with this treaty to mention them all in
this letter. The rest can be read on the website of Gun Owners of
America at:
http://www.gunowners.org/fs0901.htm
Please do not tell me the treaty has not yet been abused in this way
by the bevy of Third World countries which have signed it. We do not
expect the real ramifications of the treaty to become clear until the
big prize -- the U.S. -- has stepped into the trap.
For all of these reasons, I must insist that you oppose ratification
of the treaty.
Sincerely,
-- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama? The guy who “wasn’t going to take
away our guns”?
Well, guess what?
Less than 100 days into his administration, he’s never met a gun he
didn’t hate.
A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and
bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn’t have the
political power to take away our semi-automatics. Nevertheless, that
didn’t keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun
owners.
It’s called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit
Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives,
and Other Related Materials. To be sure, this imponderable title
masks a really nasty piece of work.
First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the “illicit”
manufacture of firearms, what does that mean?
1. “Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of
firearms [or] ammunition ... without a license....”
Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm
from a kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.”
Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit
manufacturing.” And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a
firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words,
come within the screwy definition of “illicit manufacturing.”
2. “Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition.
“[A]ny other weapon” is a “firearm,” according to the treaty --
and
the term “weapon” is nowhere defined.
So, is a BB gun a “firearm”? Probably.
A toy gun? Possibly.
A pistol grip or firing pin? Probably. And who knows what else.
If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama
administration could have a heyday in enforcing them. Consider some
of the other provisions in the treaty:
* Banning reloading. In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to
adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize
illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms.
Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and
modifying
or assembling a firearm in any way. This would mean that the Obama
administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the
basis of this treaty -- just as it is currently circumventing Congress
to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases.
* Banning gun clubs. Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized
acts should include “association or conspiracy” in connection with
said offenses -- which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by
regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun
clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership.
* Extraditing US gun dealers. Article V requires each party to “adopt
such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over
the offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention”
under a variety of circumstances.
We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its
streets are flowing with blood. And we know it is possible for Mexico
to define offenses “committed in its territory” in a very broad
way.
And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX
of the proposed treaty. So we know that Mexico could try to use the
treaty to demand to extradition of American gun dealers.
Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful
American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute
through “other means of peaceful settlement.”
Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on
the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this
provision in a pro-gun manner?
* Microstamping. Article VI requires “appropriate markings” on
firearms. And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be
used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition -- a
requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which
are not technologically possible or which are possible only at a
prohibitively expensive cost.
* Gun registration. Article XI requires the maintenance of any
records, for a “reasonable time,” that the government determines to
be
necessary to trace firearms. This provision would almost certainly
repeal portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to
require a national registry or database.
ACTION: Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American
Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in
Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.
Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send your
Senators the pre-written e-mail message below.
----- Pre-written letter -----
Dear Senator:
I am urging you, in the strongest terms, to oppose the Inter-American
Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in
Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials.
This anti-gun treaty was written by international bureaucrats who are
either stupid or virulently anti-gun -- or both.
This treaty could very well ban the ability to reload ammunition, to
put new stocks on rifles lawfully owned by American citizens, and,
possibly, even ban BB guns!
There are too many problems with this treaty to mention them all in
this letter. The rest can be read on the website of Gun Owners of
America at:
http://www.gunowners.org/fs0901.htm
Please do not tell me the treaty has not yet been abused in this way
by the bevy of Third World countries which have signed it. We do not
expect the real ramifications of the treaty to become clear until the
big prize -- the U.S. -- has stepped into the trap.
For all of these reasons, I must insist that you oppose ratification
of the treaty.
Sincerely,
05-03-2009, 04:02 AM
#4
Spike
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
Well armed, perhaps. But we are not united in any way to oppose these laws. Most do not support any organization working to stop these silly and worthless changes. We, all of us, will complain about the NRA asking for too much money, or claim "I do not use that rifle or shotgun or whatever" and think the changes will not affect all of us. As a group, we are, all of us, apathetic.
I do believe we must be much more vocal in our protests, and support financially as much as we can.
This topic ia as appropriate in a black powder forum as it would be anywhere else.
I do believe we must be much more vocal in our protests, and support financially as much as we can.
This topic ia as appropriate in a black powder forum as it would be anywhere else.
05-03-2009, 04:34 AM
#5
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: My Range in Central NY
Posts: 320
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
Thank you DaveF,
I agree with you and find the real problem with Sheeple is kb1's response!
Here is a CNN video on the subject: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...n?iref=24hours
Maybe this will get the Sheeples attention:
Education Bill A Threat To Gun Rights
By Allen Quist
Bills are being introduced in Congress that, if passed, will require schools to teach our children that there is no right to keep and bear arms. That is, these bills will make an anti-right to bear arms education program the law of the land. The bills will accomplish this by writing much of the Marc Tucker education plan into law. The most significant of these bills so far is the SPEAK Act (S 224, HR 325), also referred to as the Dodd-Ehlers bill. Future bills will likely be forthcoming to implement other features of the Tucker plan, a plan that is hostile to our right to bear arms.
http://gunowners.org/op0713.htm
I agree with you and find the real problem with Sheeple is kb1's response!
Here is a CNN video on the subject: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bes...n?iref=24hours
Maybe this will get the Sheeples attention:
Education Bill A Threat To Gun Rights
By Allen Quist
Bills are being introduced in Congress that, if passed, will require schools to teach our children that there is no right to keep and bear arms. That is, these bills will make an anti-right to bear arms education program the law of the land. The bills will accomplish this by writing much of the Marc Tucker education plan into law. The most significant of these bills so far is the SPEAK Act (S 224, HR 325), also referred to as the Dodd-Ehlers bill. Future bills will likely be forthcoming to implement other features of the Tucker plan, a plan that is hostile to our right to bear arms.
http://gunowners.org/op0713.htm
05-03-2009, 04:54 AM
#6
Spike
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lloydminster, Saskatchewan
Posts: 71
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
When I was quite a bit younger, my father was always preparing for gun control up here in Canada. He stocked up on reloading components so much so that I have bee shooting for 25 years and have not had to buy any powder. At the time I thought that he was just on a rant. But guess what we have in Canada now, gun control. I reapplied for my firearms license and up here you have to have your partner sign off that they are okay with you having firearms. Received a reply in the mail on friday stating that I must apply for a long term authorization to transport (must have a gun club membership)and/or a gun collector status to keep my handguns.
Take these matters seriously if you do not want to have rights taken away. The only thing these laws are going to do is make criminals of the average joe owning firearms. The real criminals don't care about gun regulations and certainly will not be registering their firearms. Gun crimes certainly have not disappeared in Canada since the gun controls were introduced.
Take these matters seriously if you do not want to have rights taken away. The only thing these laws are going to do is make criminals of the average joe owning firearms. The real criminals don't care about gun regulations and certainly will not be registering their firearms. Gun crimes certainly have not disappeared in Canada since the gun controls were introduced.
05-03-2009, 07:47 AM
#7
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 12,745
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
Its responses like kb1's and the "whatever" attitude that has gotten this country into the mess it is in today. Not only with gun control but with the government in general.
And as for organizing, we have the tool right here to organize. Start with the local community, township, county, state, etc until we do what is right.
Most of the prople in this country do not have any semlance of a backbone. And I for one am sick of letting the minority have its way.
And as for organizing, we have the tool right here to organize. Start with the local community, township, county, state, etc until we do what is right.
Most of the prople in this country do not have any semlance of a backbone. And I for one am sick of letting the minority have its way.
05-03-2009, 10:53 AM
#8
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,703
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
Screwbolts
Do you remember back a few yearssss back when the American Government decided to deal with the Native American problem in the west.... they decided that Native American children should be removed from the family and sent to schools so that they could be educated properly. This education was to educate their heritage out of them and make them good American Citizens. It failed then also.
I appologize to any that I may have offended with my writing above, but this method and the method that Screwbolts discusses in my mind is really close to un-constitutional.
Government especially big government is always somewhat dangerous and should be monitored. We have a small group of people in a small area DC doing what they think or have been paid for or lobbied to think is the best.
If the masses follow then most assuredly the masses will not be heard. Why does it take a big threating mess to rally the mass?
Sorry... wish people would look more at history of how governments can manipulate people especially of they have the power - for this statement power ='s money...
Education Bill A Threat To Gun Rights
I appologize to any that I may have offended with my writing above, but this method and the method that Screwbolts discusses in my mind is really close to un-constitutional.
Government especially big government is always somewhat dangerous and should be monitored. We have a small group of people in a small area DC doing what they think or have been paid for or lobbied to think is the best.
If the masses follow then most assuredly the masses will not be heard. Why does it take a big threating mess to rally the mass?
Sorry... wish people would look more at history of how governments can manipulate people especially of they have the power - for this statement power ='s money...
05-03-2009, 11:37 AM
#9
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: River Ridge, LA (Suburb of New Orleans)
Posts: 10,917
RE: OFF Topic but relevent, Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns
I agree there's a BIG problem with the Federal government in the educational system - where the Federal government DOES NOT BELONG. But states take the federal money and can't kick the feds out.
Instead of teaching reading, writing and `rithmnatic as they should, schools areindoctrinating kids in social philosophy and political correctness.
Instead of teaching reading, writing and `rithmnatic as they should, schools areindoctrinating kids in social philosophy and political correctness.
