Time for Congress to Act is Now.

[jbdhere]

This is my most important letter written to Congress. We must all write, call and visit Congress Now before Obama follows through on his threats.

Sir,
Once Obama signs the UN Arms Treaty he will have effectively declared war on US Patriots who swore and Oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

It will be up to you and all members of Congress to stop the madness. Once he signs the treaty he can arbitrarily sign executive orders in the "spirit" of the treaty to honor the wishes of the other signatories

All US Patriots, will defend their rights with what ever force is needed. Force which will exceed any force directed against them. Make no mistake, Patriots will defend other Patriots with their lives.

You sir by not stopping Obama have allowed our country to come to this point of no return. Only you can stop Obama and his end-run around the Constitution.

 

[Walken]

The US Senate is responsible for ratifying treaties. Obama can do whatever he wants with the treaty, it has no legal significance.

 

[blckevo]

O lord

 

[Spike_351]

that sounds more like indirectly inciting civil war. I wouldn't doubt it if they take it that way as well. You may want to rephrase the letter.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Step away from the talk radio and infowars-type paranoia and do your own research. As has been discussed here ad nauseum:

1) 2/3 of the Senate has to approve any treaty.
2) The treaty creates no new laws inside of a country.
3) The treaty has no enforcement mechanisms of any kind, even if a signatory breaks the treaty.
4) Any signatory can leave at any time without penalty.

The full treaty is online, read it yourself. The Senate clause is in the Constitution, read it yourself. Nothing to panic about.

Oh, and this belongs in the politics section.

 

[mbills2223]

Have you sent it yet? Run it by a proofreader before you do...

 

[buckstopshere]

Have you sent it yet? Run it by a proofreader before you do...

After the proof reader, I'd run it by the shredder.

There are plenty of issues to worry about with the current administration. This isn't one of them IMO.

 

[mbills2223]

After the proof reader, I'd run it by the shredder.

There are plenty of issues to worry about with the current administration. This isn't one of them IMO.

Hahahaha

I was hoping the proofreader would just take care of that in his/her frustration

 

[JBTate]

The big issue is that even though it has ZERO chance of being ratified, once it's signed by the POTUS any future Senate can decide to vote on ratification. Which means some moron (ie: Fienstien) could push for another vote and some day they just might get the numbers they need. I agree though that there are MUCH greater threats facing us today than this. However, signing the treaty is yet another baby step in the wrong direction.

 

[jbdhere]

Until the Senate votes it down Obama has the chance to do real harm. Maybe some of you should do some research. So sorry I posted it here. I thought there might be a few stand up types here that would see the need to let congress know we need their help. Guess I was wrong.

By the way you might want to re-read it. I made no threats.

Don't worry however this is my last post and my last comment.

 

[Mgderf]

Your O.P. can be construed as threatening, and that's not generally received well by the current administration.

 

[mbills2223]

Folks here are just trying to give you advice and discuss what YOU posted. If you don't want input, you should not put it on an open forum.

 

[buckstopshere]

Until the Senate votes it down Obama has the chance to do real harm. Maybe some of you should do some research. So sorry I posted it here. I thought there might be a few stand up types here that would see the need to let congress know we need their help. Guess I was wrong.

By the way you might want to re-read it. I made no threats.

Don't worry however this is my last post and my last comment.

Why make this your last post? You didn't get the response you want so you take your ball and go home? Is that being a stand up guy?

Your passion is there, I just think you're directing it at a non-issue. But that's just my opinion.

 

[GunSlinger]

Perhaps this should be moved to the "Politics" sub-forum. I'm sure it would get a lot of play there.

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

The OP is precisely why the general public are under the impression all gun owners are absolute whackjobs. The craziest are always the loudest, unfortunately.

 

[Slawburger]

1) Probably should be moved to the correct forum.
2) The tone of the letter might not be appropriate to send to a Senator.
3) There is legitimate and real concern about the impact of signed but unratified treaties.

See the linked excerpt (or download the entire pdf article) from the Harvard International Law Journal concerning the "object and purpose obligation" of the Vienna Convention.
Unratified Treaties, Domestic Politics, and the U.S. Constitution | Harvard ILJ

 

[Stschil]

OP, The (p)Resident has absolutely no Constitutional Authority to use Executive Order 'in the spirit of the Treaty' if said treaty isn't ratified.

Perhaps you should take your own advice and do some research.

 

[jbdhere]

I have only been reading the response to this string but see few really get it yet so here is a little reading for you. Maybe to save you a little time, start about page 202.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...64i_-yrdWEWpgSMzQ&sig2=aUfPqF5Fdh4AD6Kf3RwVuA

 

[LEaSH]

I thought you said you were not going comment anymore.

 

[Stschil]

I have only been reading the response to this string but see few really get it yet so here is a little reading for you. Maybe to save you a little time, start about page 202.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...64i_-yrdWEWpgSMzQ&sig2=aUfPqF5Fdh4AD6Kf3RwVuA

And a little reading for you:

First read the title page of your link. "A Study" which would indicate these are guidelines and explainations. As for page 202, it explains that the President has the power to recind or suspend an agreement (Treaty) without the approval of Congress, (later stating that such agreements made in time of peace arent necessarily useful or sacrosanct in wartime) not that the power exists to enter into one.


Article II, US Constitution, Section 2:

...(The President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Bold inserts of emphasis by me.