Obama’s goal of permanently renewing the ban appears to be a longshot
 

There may be hope yet, but I won't hold my breath


.

Full Article

An insult to my gender, IMO. She obviously has lived too long under the protection of very brave MEN!:munchin GRRRRRRRR!

Holly

I will have to politely disagree, I think there are some very brave women that fall in this category as well.

No ban instead he will order that ATF to suspend a dealers license for the smallest of clerical infractions. That is what Corzine did here in Jersey his first year in office. Five shops with 10 miles of my house went out of business within 10 month period. The state police were in those shops constantly looking for anything to shut them down. I don't trust that crowd when they say that they are just going to enforce the current laws. Their track records don't match the official line.

Here's another "internet rumor". This one's from Gun Owners of America. They tend to be a bit vitriolic in their defense of the 2nd Ammendment but they are also usually a couple steps ahead of the other watchdog organizations. I cleaned most of the political/write a letter to your legislators data at the end just to make it easier to post. :munchin

Grass Roots North Carolina, P.O. Box 10684, Raleigh, NC 27605
919-664-8565, www.grnc.org, GRNC Alert Hotline: (919) 562-4137

GRNC Alert 04-22-09:
Reloading in the Crosshairs

The following comes to us from our friends at Gun Owners of America. Please contact our Senators with your concerns.

Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading -- Even BB guns could be on the chopping block

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.

Maybe they should read the entire Convention instead of 'parsing' its contents to support a presupposed point-of-view on their parts. For example -

GRNC claims:

Convention says (Art 1 - Definitions):

GRNC claims:

Convention states:

And this Article of the Convention seems pretty important to me.


And so on. It's all right here at the Deptatment of International Law - Organization of American States in Washington, DC.

http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-63.html

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Richard - I did say vitriolic. :p GoA uses a lot of hyperbole to make their point; that doesn't mean their concerns aren't legitimate. Unfortunately your quote of Art I doesn't ease the fears about illicit assembly. Buying an AK parts kit and assembling it to a "home-made" receiver, something perfectly legal today, could become illegal under this treaty. I have enough friends with the appropriate liscenses that I'm conversant with current enforcement policies/actions. Trust me - the times, they be a changing.

Oh, I agree with that one, too. Personally, I don't trust any of 'em on either side of the aisles any further than I can reach out and touch them with my Full-Bore Winchester Model 25.

As for 'illicit' - it does say from components or parts illicitly trafficked and that illicitly trafficked means from or across the territory of one State Party to that of another State Party, if any one of the States Parties concerned does not authorize it.

I knda read it to say if everything you're doing is within the existing laws/agreements of your country - OK; if not - well... :confused:

But maybe that's why I never sought to go to law school - probably would've made a lousy lawyer. ;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin

Afchic,

My sincerest appologies for the error in my post! The Women who serve alongside the Men in Our Armed Forces, are just as Courageous and Brave!

In was not/never would be my intention to insult You or Any other woman in uniform. My thoughts and prayes are out daily to ALL WHO SERVE.

Sincerely,

Holly

Back to topic...

Easiest, cleanest way to screw us is for BHO to send a gun-unfriendly ambassador to the U.N. to sign on to anything that would hogtie gun owners.

Anyone remember what the sculpture in front of the U.N. is?????:rolleyes:

Are you referring to this one?

Bingo. I'm sure it is to remind us all of the problem of world hunger.

GRRRRR...... This only seems to be a long uphill battle for the next four years for us. Everyday it seems as if they are trying to in anyway find new ways to snuff out our gun rights. I was wondering why so many folks on our local outdoors forum were trying to buy up all the powder and primers they could. I figured there were more important things to figure out like tax reform, unemployment in America, and our strategy for finishing Afghanistan and Iraq. Instead it seems to me he finds it more important to make friends with our enemies and alienate his own nation. I didn't vote for this fella. All I know to do is buy your friends an associate membership (since they are only $10) to the NRA or contribute financially to those on the hill fighting for us. Only time will tell on this issue.

Is it time to start profiling State Troopers?
 

I would think that 99.999% of them are on our side.

I don't want to confront our guys in "Blue", there are too many I call friends.

What if we just shoot them in the knee with rubber bullets and keep on eye on the ones that limp?

Twisted Gun

United Nations Sculpture Garden, most notable for the "twisted gun" sculpture, one of the most photographed spots at the UN. This sculpture was a gift from the Government of Luxembourg presented to the United Nations in 1988. It consists of a large replica in bronze of a 45-calibre revolver, the barrel of which is tied into a knot. It was created in 1980 as a peace symbol by artist Karl Fredrik Reutersward, and is located in the Visitor's Plaza, facing First Avenue at 45th Street.

http://www.virtualnyctour.com/directory.php?id=634

They should give him a "twisted gun" exactly like the one he created and let him walk down 1st ave. and 45th st. at 3 am in the morning and by himself using it for his protection in NYC especially,in that area......:rolleyes: Good luck,Karl....... :boohoo

GB TFS :munchin