S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

What's going on in Washington, D.C.?

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Post Reply
tbranch
Senior Member
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Plano, TX

S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by tbranch »

I found this bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... =s110-2433

The following is in the Q&A:
What does this legislation say about gun control? Could this be an attempt to legislate gun control without much publicity?

A1: If passed, this legislation passes the authority to ban small weapons from the US government to the UN. If and when the UN demands enforcement, it would be mandatory for the current President and governing body to enforce it within the US borders. This would stand unless the current wording and intent of the legislation is changed or rejected. [Answer submitted on Nov 3, 2008 6:52 AM]

A2: The Millennium Development Project also includes an elimination of all small arms which means all your guns. [Answer submitted on Nov 3, 2008 7:37 AM]
Thoughts?

Tom
Image
galvestonredneck
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: South Dakota

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by galvestonredneck »

Tom,
I expect bans on FUTURE sales of firearms and limits like we had in the 90's under Bill Clinton. I think it would be imposible for any President to go from house to house colecting guns. You and I both know it would result in something like a street war and no president could get away with that nationwide. Whats more, there is a real question any LEO would act on such an order. Sure the President can pull off a Waco type of raid and get away with it, but no way will that happen in citys and towns in this country. After all, a president rules "by the consent of the governed". A LOT of the people who don't own guns are NOT anti gunners and would stand up on our side in such a case. Whats more, UN actions would not go over well here even with Americans that don't own guns. I am sure the result would be a black market and something like the movie Red Dawn as a result. IMHO

Galveston Redneck
Galveston Redneck
One COLD Texan
User avatar
Purplehood
Senior Member
Posts: 4638
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by Purplehood »

This UN - connection thing is the one really worrisome issue that I watch closely. It is my pet conspiracy theory. I dread the thought of the UN ever dictating anything to the US.
Life NRA
USMC 76-93
USAR 99-07 (Retired)
OEF 06-07
User avatar
The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts: 26884
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by The Annoyed Man »

Purplehood wrote:This UN - connection thing is the one really worrisome issue that I watch closely. It is my pet conspiracy theory. I dread the thought of the UN ever dictating anything to the US.
Welcome to Obama's world. They LUV them some Obama!

Washington Post
At the U.N., Many Hope for an Obama Win
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 26, 2008; A17
UNITED NATIONS -- There are no "Obama 2008" buttons, banners or T-shirts visible here at U.N. headquarters, but it might be difficult to find a sliver of territory in the United States more enthusiastic over the prospect of the Illinois senator winning the White House.

An informal survey of more than two dozen U.N. staff members and foreign delegates showed that the overwhelming majority would prefer that Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, saying they think that the Democrat would usher in a new agenda of multilateralism after an era marked by Republican disdain for the world body.

Obama supporters hail from Russia, Canada, France, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Indonesia and elsewhere. One American employee here seemed puzzled that he was being asked whether Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was even a consideration. "Obama was and is unstoppable," the official said. "Please, God, let him win," he added.

"It would be hard to find anybody, I think, at the U.N. who would not believe that Obama would be a considerable improvement over any other alternative," said William H. Luers, executive director of the United Nations Association. "It's been a bad eight years, and there is a lot of bad feeling over it."

Conservatives who are skeptical of the United Nations said they are not surprised by the political tilt. "The fact is that most conservatives, most Republicans don't worship at the altar in New York, and I think that aggravates them more than anything else," said John R. Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "What they want is the bending of the knee, and they'll get it from an Obama administration."

The candidates have said little about their plans for the United Nations, but Obama has highlighted his desire to pursue diplomacy more assertively than the Bush administration, whereas McCain has called for the establishment of a league of democracies, which many here fear is code for sidelining the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has avoided showing a public preference about the presidential campaign -- although he has hinted at a soft spot for Obama in private gatherings, according to U.N. officials. His top advisers say they think McCain and Obama would support many of Ban's priorities, including restraints on production of greenhouse gases that fuel climate change.

"The secretary general and the Secretariat of the United Nations take no position on the U.S. election," said Ban's chief spokeswoman, Michele Montas. "The secretary general deeply respects the democratic process, and he looks forward to working with whomever the American people choose."

Many U.N. rank and file are less circumspect, saying they see in Obama's multicultural background -- a Kenyan father, an Indonesian stepfather and a mother and grandparents from Kansas -- a reflection of themselves. "We do not consider him an African American," said Congo's U.N. ambassador, Atoki Ileka. "We consider him an African."

One U.N. official threw a party over the summer and asked guests to place stickers of either an elephant or a donkey on the front door to show their political preference. At the end of the night, the door was covered with about 30 donkeys and two elephants. "We found out that one of the Republicans was an American and the other couldn't vote," according to a U.N. official who attended. "So we convinced the American to vote for Obama."

"I have not heard a single person who will support McCain; if they do, they are in hiding," said another U.N. Obama booster from an African country. "The majority of people here believe in multilateralism," he said. "The Republicans were constantly questioning the relevance of the United Nations."

For the small minority of U.N. officials who have stuck with McCain -- only two of 28 U.N. officials and diplomats questioned said they favored the Arizona senator -- life in Turtle Bay can seem lonely. "I keep my mouth shut," said one American official here who plans to vote for McCain. "Everyone is knocking on wood, counting the days to the elections. Some Americans here are planning to move to Washington," in search of jobs in an Obama administration.

"It will be devastating if Obama loses," the official said. "There has been such an amount of faith placed on the outcome."

The official, who like all other Secretariat staffers spoke on the condition of anonymity, recalled that Democrats have not always been so supportive of the United Nations, citing the Clinton administration's lone 1996 campaign to block the reelection of then-Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. And some foreign delegations, including Georgia, have been outspoken in their support of the foreign policy approach of McCain, who reacted quickly and sharply to Russian intervention in Georgia.

Still, the Obama candidacy has enormous emotional resonance among delegates from developing countries, particularly for what it says about race in America. They recall that one of the United Nations' most famous civil servants, Ralph Bunche -- an African American who was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his Middle East mediation -- could never have risen to the same heights in U.S. foreign policy circles. And Kofi Annan, the first black U.N. secretary general, said the prospect of an Obama presidency would be "phenomenal."

Even while critics of the Bush administration here root for Obama, they acknowledge that the U.S. attitude toward the United Nations has improved dramatically in recent years, citing cooperation on Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq.

They say President Bush deserves much credit for supporting U.N.-backed initiatives, including the provision of billions of dollars in funding to fight AIDS and malaria in Africa as well as support for the largest expansion of U.N. peacekeeping in history. And they expect that whichever candidate prevails will be compelled by the United States' falling financial fortunes to work more cooperatively with foreign governments.

"We don't have voting rights," said Yukio Takasu, Japan's ambassador to the United Nations.

But, he added, "We expect whoever [wins] in Washington will have a fresh look at the U.N. and the utility of working through the U.N. And, of course, we have to adjust to them."
Those sycophants at the U.N. would like nothing better than to be given control over our 2nd Amendment.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
aardwolf
Senior Member
Posts: 525
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:47 pm
Location: Sugarland, Texas
Contact:

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by aardwolf »

The Annoyed Man wrote:Those sycophants at the U.N. would like nothing better than to be given control over our 2nd Amendment.
Like most criminals, they prefer disarmed victims.
We're here. With gear. Get used to it.
User avatar
Excaliber
Moderator
Posts: 6199
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 9:59 pm
Location: DFW Metro

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by Excaliber »

Russell wrote:You say that they could never get away with banning firearms in the U.S., but remember, it happened in England.
And Canada...and Australia.

In each case, the ruling class of politicians imposed these laws with no support from the population. In each case, violent crime skyrocketed afterward.

Such laws are not designed to increase safety for citizens - they're designed to create a disarmed populace which is totally at the mercy of the ruling class, who create exemptions to those laws for themselves.

The folks who engineered each of the world's most horrific genocides understood this well, and preceded their murderous rampages with prohibition and confiscation of weapons owned by their citizens.

Folks would do well to keep this history in mind when the next "reasonable restriction" laws are peddled as necessary for the common good of citizens who live in the last remaining bastion of freedom on the face of the planet.
Excaliber

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Jeff Cooper
I am not a lawyer. Nothing in any of my posts should be construed as legal or professional advice.
User avatar
anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by anygunanywhere »

Excaliber wrote:
Folks would do well to keep this history in mind when the next "reasonable restriction" laws are peddled as necessary for the common good of citizens who live in the last remaining bastion of freedom on the face of the planet.
Several issues.

1. Supposedly there are over 80,000,000 firearms owners in the US, but only 5,000,000 or so are members of the various 2A support organizations.

2. How many of those in #1 truly would vehemently object and act (appropriately, of course) to any more attempts at "reasonable restrictions" and "common sense gun laws"?

3. The vast majority of those on the government dole will blindly submit to more "protection" by the government.

Anygunanywhere
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand
galvestonredneck
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:07 pm
Location: South Dakota

Re: S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007

Post by galvestonredneck »

Excaliber wrote:
Russell wrote:You say that they could never get away with banning firearms in the U.S., but remember, it happened in England.
And Canada...and Australia.

In each case, the ruling class of politicians imposed these laws with no support from the population. In each case, violent crime skyrocketed afterward.

Such laws are not designed to increase safety for citizens - they're designed to create a disarmed populace which is totally at the mercy of the ruling class, who create exemptions to those laws for themselves.

The folks who engineered each of the world's most horrific genocides understood this well, and preceded their murderous rampages with prohibition and confiscation of weapons owned by their citizens.

Folks would do well to keep this history in mind when the next "reasonable restriction" laws are peddled as necessary for the common good of citizens who live in the last remaining bastion of freedom on the face of the planet.
Do you really believe the goverment could walk up to your door and demand them without a fight? Even if a law was passsed... I was raised in the South, while in the military I served with some "yankees" that were bigger "rednecks" than me. I have not a doubt, This action would be the closest thisng to a civil war the goverment ever atempted. This country is unique, no other country I can think of has gone for hundreds of years without at one time or another disarming there citizens. Even in the old testement you will find one groop "disarming" another groop. We are not England, We are not Australia, and we also are quite different (mindset) than Canada. Perhaps we will BECOME one of those places in manny years, but the mindset of a "American" is quite different than any place in the world. As long as people like My Son In Law are taking kids as young as 4 years old to the deer woods I don't see it comming anytime soon. Yep, things have changed a LOT in the last 40 or so years, we put up with a LOT that we wouldn't have put up with 40 yaers ago; That said, NOBODY will get my gun (or yours I supect) without a real fight. Some things are worth dieing for, and there are MILLIONS of people who think owning guns is way up on that list.

Galveston Redneck
Galveston Redneck
One COLD Texan
Post Reply

Return to “Federal”