Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 11:43:54 AM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Nice try Thompson, I was quoting Ken there, if you have a grammatical beef, it's with HIS source...


Ken, look up the definition of in Pursuance thereof, you'll find it means the Constitution trumps treaties.

And as I have repeatedly told you there is nothing in the UN Charter that violates the Constitution therefore it is the law.


Shall NOT be infringed keeps going right over your head, doesn't it Ken?


_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 11:48:35 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		the constitution doesnt say that though.  It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it says nothing regarding what can be kept and born in the way of arms.  

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:00:54 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 199 (1796): "the Supreme Court held that the supremacy clause rendered null and void a state constitutional or statutory provision which was inconsistent with a treaty executed by the Federal Government"


This has nothing to do with it. The claim is that the US Constitution is supreme to treaties. State Constitutions fall under Federal supremacy, too, be it US Constitution, Federal Law or International Treaties.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:01:47 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

the constitution doesnt say that though.  It says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it says nothing regarding what can be kept and born in the way of arms.  

At that time they allowed up to and including cannons.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:03:02 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		And who would give a fuck about that?  They allowed keeping slaves too. 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:03:16 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 199 (1796): "the Supreme Court held that the supremacy clause rendered null and void a state constitutional or statutory provision which was inconsistent with a treaty executed by the Federal Government"


This has nothing to do with it. The claim is that the US Constitution is supreme to treaties. State Constitutions fall under Federal supremacy, too, be it US Constitution, Federal Law or International Treaties.

Treaties have been nulified by the courts because they required the government to violate the constitution.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:07:05 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Nice try Thompson, I was quoting Ken there, if you have a grammatical beef, it's with HIS source...


Ken, look up the definition of in Pursuance thereof, you'll find it means the Constitution trumps treaties.

And as I have repeatedly told you there is nothing in the UN Charter that violates the Constitution therefore it is the law.


Shall NOT be infringed keeps going right over your head, doesn't it Ken?


Neither the UN Charter or this new treaty affects that. Why don't you try reading things before you fly off the handle?

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:11:40 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Neither the UN Charter or this new treaty affects that. Why don't you try reading things before you fly off the handle?


The treaty would virtually repeal the 2nd

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:14:04 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And who would give a fuck about that?  They allowed keeping slaves too. 

The question was what arms would they allow. The fact that they had no problem with private individuals owning cannon is relevant to that question, slavery is ,obviously , a red herring.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:14:19 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

Neither the UN Charter or this new treaty affects that. Why don't you try reading things before you fly off the handle?


The treaty would virtually repeal the 2nd


No, it would not.  You do not know what  is in the treaty obviously, what does the treaty say in a paragraph or less?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:15:10 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

Neither the UN Charter or this new treaty affects that. Why don't you try reading things before you fly off the handle?


The treaty would virtually repeal the 2nd

No. It would not.
http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/Draft_ATT_text_27_Mar_2013-E.pdf

You guys need to stop listening to Rush and FNC and actually investigate things for yourself.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:15:32 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 199 (1796): "the Supreme Court held that the supremacy clause rendered null and void a state constitutional or statutory provision which was inconsistent with a treaty executed by the Federal Government"

This has nothing to do with it. The claim is that the US Constitution is supreme to treaties. State Constitutions fall under Federal supremacy, too, be it US Constitution, Federal Law or International Treaties.

Treaties have been nulified by the courts because they required the government to violate the constitution.


Exactly. The US Constitution is Supreme Law of the Land. Treaties are subordinate to the US Constitution, but still supreme to State Constitutions.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:18:31 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline 		The relevant part is that non government entities would have to be controled (to the satisfaction of the UN).
It would put major restrictions on NON GOVERNMENT ENTITIES. That would be private ownership.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:20:18 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		And our bill of rights does not extend to the countries of the world, nor does our constitution.  So, we are all set.  Besides which, the US isn't at all shy about breaking UN treaties or resolutions when they want to, there are no consequences for the US in doing so.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:20:31 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 199 (1796): "the Supreme Court held that the supremacy clause rendered null and void a state constitutional or statutory provision which was inconsistent with a treaty executed by the Federal Government"

This has nothing to do with it. The claim is that the US Constitution is supreme to treaties. State Constitutions fall under Federal supremacy, too, be it US Constitution, Federal Law or International Treaties.

Treaties have been nulified by the courts because they required the government to violate the constitution.


Exactly. The US Constitution is Supreme Law of the Land. Treaties are subordinate to the US Constitution, but still supreme to State Constitutions.


No treaty ratified by the senate has ever been overturned in the courts.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:29:33 PM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


and if anyone thinks there is anything more than simple "coincidence" you are a batshit crazy fucking conspiracy theorist




Many an economist will tell you that nothing gets a country back to work like gearing up for war.

Seem to recall Hitler was Time magazine's man of the year for ultimately dragging Germany out of the great depression. Which was probably a fair call at the time (pre WWII), despite Scientologists making yardage (at "Time") via 20-20 hindsight.

So the guy was building more than highly visible autobahn mega structures - who really knew the consequences until it was too late?

Focus.

_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:33:47 PM   
FunCouple5280


Posts: 559
Joined: 10/30/2012
Status: offline 		Hogwash.

The US should be rich after our current excursion in the sandbox

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:49:28 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


and if anyone thinks there is anything more than simple "coincidence" you are a batshit crazy fucking conspiracy theorist




Many an economist will tell you that nothing gets a country back to work like gearing up for war.

Seem to recall Hitler was Time magazine's man of the year for ultimately dragging Germany out of the great depression. Which was probably a fair call at the time (pre WWII), despite Scientologists making yardage (at "Time") via 20-20 hindsight.

So the guy was building more than highly visible autobahn mega structures - who really knew the consequences until it was too late?

Focus.

War footing creates jobs but is highly inflationary and can destroy an economy, see Viet Nam.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:51:47 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

who really knew the consequences until it was too late?


Anyone who had read Mien Kampf.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty - 4/5/2013 1:57:07 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		Oh, is the text of the treaty a reprisal of Mein Kampf? 

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: UN passes Small Arms Treaty Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.105