OT: Colorado shooting

Kenny Cole · #1 07-26-2012, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Frank,

You are referring to the UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty in which meetings have been going on all month in New York City. I've been following this closely. Yes, this is an attmept to take guns out of the hands of private ownership. Some say that would never happen in this country, but pre-conference position papers call for exactly that. Any treaty with the UN would supersede the 2nd Ammendment. Anybody that doesn't believe that can look it up. It's a fact!

Fortunately, we have the NRA there on our side to make sure our own government doesn't undermine the Constitution. We also have many senators on our side as any such treaty would have to be ratified by two-thirds of the Senate. In fact, 57 senators signed a letter and sent it to Barry Soetoro to remind him of that. In other words, it wouldn't pass Senate approval.

The sad thing is that they try to keep things like this quiet. You don't hear anything about it on the news and I bet you that many gun owners don't even know what's going on. It might be signed, but it will never be ratified.

Edited to change my wording (for Peter)

Unless the Supreme Court has overruled Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), I'm pretty doubtful that treaties supersede the Constitution.

Peter_Spaeth · #2 07-26-2012, 09:53 PM

Kenny you are right, a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution.

vintagetoppsguy · #3 07-26-2012, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kenny you are right, a treaty cannot supersede the Constitution.

My premises was made on Article VI. Section 2 which says, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…”

If I’m interpreting it wrong, then my apologies. I don’t want to give out false information.

Edited to add:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Unless the Supreme Court has overruled Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), I'm pretty doubtful that treaties supersede the Constitution.

Supreme Court Justices Ginsburg and Breyer have both said that international law should take precedence over US law.

nolemmings · #4 07-26-2012, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Unless the Supreme Court has overruled Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), I'm pretty doubtful that treaties supersede the Constitution.

Duh. Kenny shame on you for pointing out the obvious.

teetwoohsix · #5 07-27-2012, 12:44 AM

Words of wisdom:

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?opti...talk&Itemid=69

Sincerely, Clayton

Peter_Spaeth · #6 07-27-2012, 06:42 AM

David, as I understand it that provision means a treaty takes precedence over the laws of any state -- it's a federalism provision. A law passed by Congress is also the supreme law of the land, but is still subject to the Constitution -- as is a treaty.

HOF Auto Rookies · #7 07-27-2012, 10:21 AM

Wow, I did not think that this thread would go in the direction it has gone.

Sorry I even started this thread

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Vintage baseball Stuff in Colorado and Wyoming?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	7	07-31-2012 02:13 PM
c1960's Rawlings field and court dimensions poster & shooting trophy plaque	CarltonHendricks	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	0	01-03-2012 11:48 PM
COLORADO AVALANCHE PETER FORSBERG JERSEY - FOR SALE	Archive	Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T	0	01-22-2009 06:58 PM