Thursday, December 29, 2011

House Bill Would Cut Off All U.S. Funding For U.N. If Anti Firearms Treaty is Adopted


JUST SAY "NO" TO THE UNITED NATIONS


  AND, CONGRESSMAN JOE WALSH SAID EXACTLY THAT


A major foe of anti gun rights efforts, and Tea Party favorite, Illinois Congressman, Joe Walsh, and 20 other co-sponsors have introduced a bill that would strip the United Nations of all United States funding if the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty is adopted. Obama's State Department reversed its position against anti Second Amendment Treaties in 2009 after Obama put the United States under his heavy hand. Stripping American taxpayer's funding would be a good step toward sending the UN to Europe and on into oblivion, where it belongs.

The Bill blasts any treaty that would pose a threat to national security or infringe or abridge the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms or any other Constitutionally protected rights of our citizens. Citing the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, the Bill specifically forbids American United Nations funding if such a restrictive treaty is adopted.
However, on the unlikely chance that the bill is passed by the House and Harry Reid’s Senate, it’s a sure thing that Obama’s veto pen will be full of ink when the bill hits his desk.

Anti Gun Non Government Organizations such as IANSA, and domestic gun rights control groups are giddy with the prospects of the complete world ban of semiautomatic firearms and high capacity magazines. You know who these domestic groups are. IANSA works closely with the United Nations in gun rights control lawmaking. These groups ignore the undeniable fact that criminals who possess hundreds of thousands of guns will only give them up from their proverbial cold, dead hands or when they are cuffed behind bars. Getting caught with illegal guns and spending time behind bars is just a cost of doing business for the career criminal or the common gang banger street thug.
Here's the very interesting full Bill... 


(Visit our other blog:  armedselfdefense.blogspot.com)

Burglar Shot By Accomplice... and Other Random Acts Of Justice



Second Amendment Protection Act of 2011

112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 3594
To express the sense of the Congress that the United States should not
adopt any treaty that poses a threat to national sovereignty or abridges
any rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution, such as the
right to keep and bear arms, and to withhold funding from the United
Nations unless the President certifies that the United Nations has not
taken action to restrict, attempt to restrict, or otherwise adversely infringe upon the rights of
individuals in the United States to keep and bear arms, or abridge any of the other
constitutionally protected rights of citizens of the United States.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
DECEMBER 7, 2011
Mr. WALSH of Illinois (for himself, Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. POSEY, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. BARTON of
Texas, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, and Mr.
BROUN of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to
the Committee on Foreign Affairs
A BILL
To express the sense of the Congress that the United States
should not adopt any treaty that poses a threat to national sovereignty or abridges any rights
guaranteed by the United States Constitution, such as the right to
keep and bear arms, and to withhold funding from the
United Nations unless the President certifies that the
United Nations has not taken action to restrict, attempt
to restrict, or otherwise adversely infringe upon the
rights of individuals in the United States to keep and
bear arms, or abridge any of the other constitutionally
protected rights of citizens of the United States.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Second Amendment
5 Protection Act of 2011’’.
6 SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.
7 (a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds that—
8 (1) it is the constitutional power of Congress to
9 determine United States foreign policy through the
10 ratification of international treaties and adoption of
11 laws;
12 (2) by prematurely signing treaties and execu-
13 tive agreements, Presidents of the United States
14 have opened the door for international organizations
15 to unilaterally regulate the lives of citizens of the
16 United States;
17 (3) these international agreements, laws, and
18 regulations are being applied domestically in the
19 United States through the Supremacy Clause, which
20 states, ‘‘This Constitution, and the Laws of the
21 United States which shall be made in Pursuance
22 thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be
23 made, under the Authority of the United States,
24 shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the
1 Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any
2 Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to
3 the contrary notwithstanding’’;
4 (4) the Supremacy Clause is useful to supersede
5 conflicting Federal and State laws;
6 (5) international and transnational organiza-
7 tions force their rules on people of the United States
8 through conventions, multilateral agreements, and
9 nonratified treaties, such as agreements that affect
10 the private ownership of firearms by law-abiding citi-
11 zens; and
12 (6) United States sovereignty is risked by do-
13 mestic legal applicability of international treaties
14 and executive agreements that have not been voted
15 on and congressionally adopted through formal proc-
16 esses which pose a threat to national sovereignty
17 and the liberty of the people of the United States,
18 including fundamental rights guaranteed under the
19 United States Constitution, such as the right to
20 keep and bear arms.
21 (b) SENSE OF THE CONGRESS.—That it is the sense
22 of the Congress that the United States should not adopt
23 any treaty that poses a threat to national sovereignty or
24 abridges the rights guaranteed by the United States Con-
25 stitution, such as the right to keep and bear arms, and
1 should cease the provision of financial support to any enti-
2 ty that does so.
3 SEC. 3. CONDITIONAL PROHIBITION ON UNITED NATIONS
4 FUNDING.
5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi-
6 sion of law, the United States may not provide any fund-
7 ing to the United Nations for a fiscal year unless, before
8 the last day of the preceding fiscal year, the President
9 makes the certification described in subsection (b).
10 (b) CERTIFICATION.—The certification described in
11 this subsection is a certification submitted to the Congress
12 by the President, that states that the United Nations has
13 not taken action to restrict, attempt to restrict, or other-
14 wise adversely infringe on the rights of individuals in the
15 United States to possess a firearm or ammunition, includ-
16 ing by imposing burdens on international commerce, or
17 abridge any of the other constitutionally protected rights
18 of citizens of the United States. 

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are Damn straight on that! Try to take our guns and this country WILL have a Revolution. WE WILL DIE PROTECTING OUR RIGHTS.

Anonymous said...

HELL YEA!