you'll find out when the Senate ratifies the Treaty,and Obama signs it!

The U.S. Senate already has signaled that it would not ratify such a treaty even if the POTUS were to sign it.

Oh, so now you understand why the murder of U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens was talked about in the U.S. news and not all of the murders in places like Chicago.

always did, people will watch anything about the 'ruling class' meeting with unnatural ends

what I didnt understand was why it was so MAJOR, considering the region of the world he was in

I have a brother who was in afghanistan, I am blessed he was finally able to leave, but I would not have found it quite so shocking had he not,,, he chose to go there knowing the risks,,,,,

46 Senators are for it!



The anti-gun senators are all Democrats or so-called Independents.

Senate Bill 139 passed 53-46. 46 US Senators voted against this: “To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”

Wizbang reported:

Fortunately, the odious, anti-American treaty was again voted down by the full Senate, but 46 Senators voted in favor of handing over our Constitutional rights to the UN.

Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) offered Amendment 139 that was passed with a 53 to 46 vote. His Amendment contained language to affirm that foreign treaties would not trump the U.S. Constitution.

“Mr. President,” Inhofe said on the floor of the Senate, “I want to make sure that everyone understands what the United Nations trade treaty is. The trade treaty is a treaty that cedes our authority to have trade agreements with our allies in terms of trading arms.”

He went on to say, “I want to very briefly read this so nobody over there or over here misunderstands what this amendment does. This is right out of the amendment. Uphold the Second Amendment rights, that is one thing. And secondly, prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations arms trade treaties.”

But many Democrats simply didn’t agree with Inhofe’s insistence that the U.S. Constitution trump the UN.

Forty-six Democrats-Independents favored ceding your Constitutional rights over to the United Nations.
Unreal.

Boxer - (D-CA)
Feinstein - (D-CA)
Bennett - (D-CO)
Udall - (D-CO)
Blumenthal - (D-CT)
Murphy - (D-CT)
Carper - (D-DE)
Coons - (D-DE)
Nelson - (D-FL)
Hirono - (D-HI)
Schatz - (D-HI)
Harkin - (D-IA)
Durbin - (D-IL)
Landries - (D-LA)
Cowan - (D-MA)
Warren - (D-MA)
Cardin - (D-MD)
Mikulski - (D-MD)
King - (I-ME)
Levin - (D-MI)
Franken - (D-MN)
Kiobuchar - (D-MN)
McCaskill - (D-MO)
Baucus - (D-MT)
Menendez - (D-NJ)
Udall - (D-NM)
Reid - (D-NV)
Gillibrand - (D-NY)
Schumer - (D-NY)
Brown - (D-OH)
Merkley - (D-OR)
Wyden - (D-OR)
Casey - (D-PA)
Reed - (D-RI)
Whitehouse - (D-RI)
Johnson - (D-SD)
Kaine - (D-VA)
Warner - (D-VA)
Leahy - (D-VT)
Sanders - (I-VT)
Cantwell - (D-WA)
Murray - (D-WA)
Baldwin - (D-WI)
Rockefeller - (D-WV)

Just because they signed it, does not mean the UN has authority. Such a charge would require 2/3 of the states to change the constitution. If they try, we need the cops to go into congress and make some arrest and charge them with federal crimes.

now thats a point thats significant

the justice system isnt perfect, and that is something that always troubled me

the dichotomy that says you are innocent until proven guilty,, but you can be arrested and incarcerated without being proven guilty

and the public perception is more often of guilt, once an arrest is made,,,,than it is of innocence, because we also know that prosecutors dont usually want to bring a trial without evidence or some solid belief they can convict

so, the reality seems more like guilty until proven innocent,,,

and thats unfortunate for those who are arrested and later found not guilty,,

Has anyone noticed that there is not one Proposed Law to Disarm the Criminal? Only the Law Abiding Citizens are to face being Disarmed by the various laws being put forward.

Not only that, but the Obama Administration isn't Enforcing a Single Law aimed at Disarming Criminals; Straw Buyers, Felons with Guns, Perjury on Background Forms.

It seems that the Dems and the Media only want Criminals to have Guns; Leaving Everyone Else Dependent on the State for their Security.

the laws are already there"
Under the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, certain categories of persons are not eligible to possess a firearm or ammunition. These include
◦
Fugitives from justice

◦
Illegal aliens

◦
Unlawful users of certain drugs

◦
Those committed to a mental institution

◦
Those convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment for more than one year (which generally covers felonies)

◦
Those convicted of crimes of domestic violence


The federal law not only creates a permanent ban on gun ownership for anyone convicted of a felony, it even applies to those under indictment for a felony





and the presidential cabinet doesnt disarm criminals, thats what police officers and atf do


look up gunrunners busted, and you will find plenty of examples of the laws being enforced to disarm criminals,,,,

lots of "D's" in that list... stupid liberals

Involuntarily For Two Years, but Still has Rights to Already Owned Under Strict Provisions Provisionally but still Maintain Rights to Already Owned

All the stories are from Line Prosecutors, not Appointed Officers; none from Illinois that I saw. Over half the stories are about Gunrunner Holder and his arming of Criminals; more Proof on Obama wants only wants Criminals Armed & Dangerous.

It's part of the DemonCratic Plan to make the Masses even More Dependent on the State for their Security.

so now the presidents administration is in illinois?

I thought the issue was that noone is trying to keep guns out of 'criminals' hands,, which can be researched to see it is untrue,,,,

prosecutors prosecute based on the LAW, laws are made by government,,,

gunrunning was but one type of CRIME I gave as an example, law enforcement and legislation have continued to do some things to try and keep 'criminals' from having guns although possibly not enough

The U.S. Attorney that oversees the State of IL is Dead Last in Prosecuting (90th out of 90 Districts) Federal Gun Laws; despite having the Most Violent City in the Country with the Highest Crime Rate.
One is Twice as Likely to be Killed in Chicago by a Criminal than a U.S, Service Member is to die in Afghanistan; yet to Own a Gun to Defend Oneself is Unconstitutionally Outlawed whereas Criminals Walk Around Free to Violate the Gun Laws along with a Number of Other Laws.

listen to what this 15 year has to say

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L_-N9_tnWBo#!

there are other ways to skin a Cat!
Look how emasculated the 2nd Amendment has become,and there was never a drive to change the Constitution!

Doesn't it scare you when you have nearly half of your US Senators vote and believe that the Untied Nations ought to have more say in the Affairs of the USofA than the US-Citizens?

Just curious. Has anyone Actually read the UN resolution or just listen to the hype on it?

The UN Small Arms Treaty has no effect on Domestic sales or Private Ownership.
............................................................


Resolution adopted by the General Assembly
64/48. The arms trade treaty


Recalling its resolutions 46/36L of 9 December 1991, 51/45N of 10 December 1996, 51/47B of 10 December 1996, 56/24V of 24 December 2001,60/69 and 60/82 of 8 December 2005, 61/89 of 6 December 2006 and 63/240 of 24 December 2008,



Acknowledging also
the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms
and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership, exclusively within their territory,

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/64/48



However, concern over the destruction of second amendment rights has led to substantial political pressure not to pursue the ATT, and has prevented an agreement from being reached in 2009 and 2012. This fear is baseless. The US Government and the UN have demonstrated their opposition to international regulation of domestic gun production, sales, and ownership. Additionally, courts would likely find that the scope of the second amendment does not provide for the absolute protection of ability to purchase any gun.


Similarly, in 2009 the UN explicitly acknowledged the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership (UN Resolution 64/48). These principles have been repeatedly stated, and firmly held to; the Obama administration led the UN to reach an agreement that the ATT would only
be produced based on census (armscontrol.org), and; Senator Jon Tester authored a letter, signed by 12 other Democratic Senators, expressing support for the ATT, and reaffirming the commitment to protect the Second Amendment (nraila.org). Consequently, the protection of the Second Amendment is among the chief concerns for US negotiators (state.gov, nraila.org).





Finally, courts are likely to find that the complication of the importation of conventional weapons is not prohibited by the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court stated that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” Id. at 2816. The Court in Heller went on further to recognize that there is a difference between weapons and the Second Amendment only protects the right to carry weapons which are “in common use at the time.” Id. at 2786. Indeed, the Second Amendment is not absolute. Courts have denied second amendment protection of the possession of assault weapons or a .50 Caliber BMG rifle (People v. James); of the ability for a person subject to a domestic violence restraining order to possess a firearm (United States v. Knight), or; from the complication of gun possession regulations by the legislature (Kachalsky v. Cacae). Consequently, it is highly unlikely that a court would find regulations put in place by the legislature which still allows the purchasing of internationally made conventional weapons to be a violation of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is not absolute, and is unlikely to protect a US citizen from increased wait time when acquiring an imported weapon, or from the registration requirements attacked with the weapon.



http://nationalsecuritylawbrief.com/2012/08/20/the-arms-trade-treaty-and-the-second-amendment/

Back to OP however:


One afternoon, a 37-year-old mother of two heard a knock at the front door of her home. At first, the woman assumed the visitor was a solicitor and told her 9-year-old twins not to answer. When the knocking continued and the door bell began ringing repeatedly, the woman called her husband at work. Her husband advised her and the children to hide while he called 911. The family hid in a crawlspace in the attic. Meanwhile, the intruder had forced his way into the home using a crowbar. After rummaging through the home, the intruder worked his way to the attic where he was met with a .38-cal. revolver. The woman fired six times. The intruder was later transported to a local medical center and was expected to survive his multiple gunshot wounds. (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Loganville, GA, 1/5/13)


Bryan Lee, owner of the Almond Avenue Pharmacy, had no choice but to fire his .45-cal. pistol when a 31-year-old male entered his store firing a similar model. The gunman entered the store and immediately fired multiple rounds striking Lee’s mother, Sophie Lee, in the leg. Bryan Lee returned fire, causing the man to flee. He collapsed a block away and later died at a local hospital. Lee was unharmed and his mother was expected to make a quick recovery. Lee said, “We just did what we had to do to survive.” (The Fresno Bee, Madera, CA, 1/11/13)


Roger Mundell, Jr. entered his garage one morning only to be confronted by a seemingly rabid bobcat that had gained entry through an open door. The bobcat attacked Mundell, biting him in the face and clawing at his arms. Mundell was able to escape the garage and thought the bobcat was still trapped inside. Before he could warn his 15-year-old nephew, Michael, of the danger, the bobcat was spotted nearby. The cat lunged at Michael grabbing him by the arm. As Mundell tried to pull the cat off of his nephew, his wife, Cindy, then retrieved a firearm and handed it to Mundell who shot the bobcat. The family was treated for injuries and vaccinated for rabies. It was later determined that the bobcat was, in fact, rabid. (Spencer New Leader, Amherst, MA, 1/18/13)


Hasib Kuric, a homeless man living behind a gas station, spotted two men putting on masks and gloves outside the building. Kuric ran inside to warn the clerk, Leonard Carr. The men followed Kuric inside and began shooting. Carr retrieved his own firearm and returned fire. One of the masked men was fatally wounded while the other fled and was arrested a few blocks away. He was charged with two counts of second-degree Attempted Felony Murder, one count of second-degree Felony Murder and one count of Armed Occupied Burglary. Kuric and Carr were not injured. (Local10.com, Hollywood, FL, 1/15/13)


After confronting a man lurking in his front yard the previous morning, Clint Lowery called police a second time when the same man tried to gain entry by forcing open the door to his home. With his 2-year-old daughter sleeping inside, Lowery did what he had to do to ensure his family’s safety. Lowery met the intruder on the front porch with a 12-ga. shotgun and held him there until police arrived. Lowry said, “I just did whatever anybody would do to protect their family.” (Peninsula Daily News, Port Angeles, WA, 1/23/13)


When two men walked into Rafael Lantigua’s store after dark with their hoods pulled tight exposing only their eyes, he grew suspicious. Understandably so as one of the men produced a gun and pointed it at him. Lantigua quickly reached for his own firearm from his waist band and pointed it in their direction. Both men jumped back in surprise before fleeing the premises. It was last reported that both men were still at large. According to police, Lantigua was unharmed and nothing was stolen from his store. (The Eagle-Tribune, Lawrence, MA, 1/14/13)


Michael and Amy Stephens were at home with their two young daughters when they saw deputies speeding past their home. The couple then overheard on their police scanner that there was a man in the area being sought by police. Michael grabbed a flashlight and headed outside to investigate and to make sure his family’s home was secure. As he stepped outside, he saw the 26-year-old fugitive nearby. Michael attempted to detain him while Amy dialed 911. The fugitive was able to grab Michael’s flashlight and started swinging it wildly over his head. Amy appeared with a .243 rifle and warned the man that she would shoot. Soon after, the fugitive was arrested and booked on several preliminary charges. Michael suffered a few stitches, but was otherwise unharmed. (Daily Inter Lake, Evergreen, MT, 1/5/13)