Unholy Trio: Gun Control, the UN and Obama

Share

Copyright 2012 Susan Stamper Brown

Welcome to President Obama’s second term, America — that special place where ridiculousness replaces raison d’être, and presidents give us things like gun control a’ la United Nations.

Obviously, Obama understood he would never get the support needed for a gun control bill from Congress, so the astute Constitutional professor chose to skirt around the Constitution by signing on to the United Nations (UN) Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) shortly after his re-election. Liberals certainly know how to get what they want, ethics aside. Remember in 2010, when former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described how liberals would circumvent the electorate to pass Obamacare? Pelosi said they would “…go through the gate. If the gate’s closed, we’ll go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we’ll pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, we’ll parachute in.” And parachute they did.
Now Obama’s doing the same thing with gun control. On one hand, we have the administration telling us they are committed to protecting our Second Amendment rights; while on the other hand, the president is joining alliances with UN gun grabbers by giving them the green light for the ATT. In the real world, presidents work in conjunction with Congress to pass laws, but in Obama Land anything goes.
The administration claims ATT primarily applies to exporting weapons, thus posing zero threat to gun ownership domestically. ATT’s verbiage, instructing nations to “take the necessary legislative and administrative measure to adapt, as necessary, national laws and regulations to implement the obligations of this treaty, is too gray, hence leaving room to dilute or supersede the Second Amendment.
It is clear Obama’s been a gun control advocate all along although he was too cowardly to admit it before re-election. According to the Washington Post, last year Obama told gun control activist Sarah Brady, whose husband Jim was shot during the Reagan assassination attempt in 1981, that gun control was “very much on his agenda…but under the radar.” History will not be kind to America’s 44th president who promised transparency, but governed mostly under the radar.
Of course, the UN wants us to believe that global gun control is for our own good and granting them authority to force us to register our guns with them will prevent weapons from getting into the “wrong people’s” hands, and will somehow make the world a safer place. For whom might it be safer? The easy answer is criminals.
In reality, government is the real problem. Case in point: that little scandal affectionately codenamed “Fast and Furious,” wherein the Justice Department made the injudicious decision to sell weapons to those linked to the Mexican drug cartel in Arizona. Their plan backfired when the weapons “walked” across the border into Mexico and into the hands of cartel thugs. It should have been codenamed “Dumb and Dumber.” And more than 50 million Americans voted to give them a second term.
The United Nations needs to mind its own business and stay out of ours, thank you. And President Obama needs to get over his attitude about those who, as he once put it, are bitter because they “cling to guns or religion.” Before he came along, we had the Constitution, need I say more? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist, or even this blond columnist, to deduce that if the UN is given an open door into our personal lives by way of the ATT, gun confiscations will, at some point, follow.

6 Responses to Unholy Trio: Gun Control, the UN and Obama

  • Susan, this piece would cause anyone who read it to think that the U.S. is now under the jurisdiction of this treaty. You and I both know that this is as far from the truth as you can get. U.S. ratification would require passage by a 2/3 majority of the U.S. Senate in addition to presidential approval. At last check, 58 Senators have stated that they are against ratification.
    In other words, this treaty will never hold any sway in the U.S.
    Basically, it’s politics. The administration knows that this treaty will never be ratified, but, they can appeal to their base by saying they support gun control. We all know that in the next four years, there will be little or no talk about gun control from the administration. Wasn’t Obama supposed to already take everyone’s guns away? That’s what we were all told when he was first elected. Instead, gun sales are at record highs with no slowing in sight.
    What purpose did this editorial serve other than to rile up gun owners with a tried and true ‘boogey man?’

  • Interesting poster, how old is it? Ban Ki Moon took office as UN sec. general Jan. 1st 2007.

  • “The United Nations needs to mind its own business and stay out of ours, thank you. And President Obama needs to get over his attitude about those who, as he once put it, are bitter because they “cling to guns or religion.” Before he came along, we had the Constitution, need I say more? It doesn’t take a rocket scientist, or even this blond columnist, to deduce that if the UN is given an open door into our personal lives by way of the ATT, gun confiscations will, at some point, follow.”

    you’d have to be seriously unhinged to believe this bit of scare mongering. You’re being intellectually dishonest here and it reflects poorly as your role as “journalist”

  • What a bunch of malarky. How paranoid can one get? Are yoou still afraid that a mouse is going to run up your leg? Just one hint, a mouse is pretty damn hard to hit even with an AK47 or 50 caliber sniper rifle.

  • The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is not a threat to Second Amendment rights. The ATT is a threat to the fire arms manufacturers and gun dealers. A sale is a sale, whether to law abiding citizens, terrorists, drug traffickers or criminal
    cartels. Any law or treaty that would limit sales to only law abiding citizens would put a huge dent into gun sales. That’s the real issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Categories