Is It Possible for the United Nations to Repeal the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution?
By 10 July 2012– Posted on
Here’s a good question, the answer to which we should learn very quickly:
Is it possible for the United Nations to repeal the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution?
According to political commentator, Dick Morris, who seems to be the authority on UN treaties, a treaty has the same authority as a constitutional amendment, and the only way to do away with a treaty, once it is signed by the President and ratified by the United States Senate, is with a constitutional amendment for that purpose, a difficult and lengthy process. Just as it was necessary to pass the 21st Amendment to repeal the 18th Amendment (Prohibition), so would it be necessary, if Morris is correct, to pass a constitutional amendment to unwind us from a treaty that was properly signed and ratified. A simple act of Congress could not do it! So, treaties are serious, serious business, indeed! How, you might ask, does all of this relate to the original question? Just this way:
There are two treaties that could well be ratified by a lame-duck Senate after the general election this November, that, if ratified, would cede precious American sovereignty to the United Nations and effectively put an end to our 236 year old republici. That statement is not an exaggeration! One treaty has already been signed by the president, and the other will probably be signed shortly. As you should know, Democrats, and let’s call them what they are – socialists – control the Senate, and, while they do not have 67 votes – the number necessary to ratify a treaty – there are enough limp-wristed Republicans, including lame-duck Richard Lugar, who may well vote to ratify it, too, to put them over the top.
1. The U.N. Small Arms Treaty
This treaty, which President Obama is now preparing to sign, would give the United Nations the power to regulate firearms within the United States and would, therefore, effectively repeal the Second Amendment to our Constitution! It is, in every way, a circumvention of Congress and the Constitution.
So, the answer is yes, it is possible for the United nations, with the willing participation of traitors in the White House and in Congress, to repeal our Second Amendment, and, while we were at it, we also answered another interesting question:
Why has the most radical president in U.S. history not brought up the subject of gun control during his first four years in office?
The answer is, of course, that he had planned all along to have this treaty do for him what he could not possibly have convinced Congress to do – to give up American Second Amendment rights to the United Nations!
2. The U.N. Law of the Sea Treaty
Again, according to Dick Morris, the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty:
- would require the US to give to the UN Seabed Authority half of our royalties from offshore mining and oil drilling
- would also create a legal framework to require us to curb carbon emissions in order to reduce “thermal pollution” of the oceans
- would give the UN authority to regulate U.S. ponds, lakes, and rivers, because water from them may flow into the ocean, and U.S. air quality, because it could migrate to areas over the ocean
This treaty, another attempt to circumvent Congress and the Constitution, is already signed and will soon be coming up for Senate ratification!
As you can see, if these treaties are ratified and become United States law, there will no longer be any such thing as United States sovereignty, and the rights that we all crow about, but do little to protect, will be cast into the ash bin of history. We will not be able to go where we want when we want, own our own homes, own automobiles, grow our own food, work for whom we want, send our children to the schools that we want them to attend, or many other things that a free people have the ability to do. How do we know this? Because the U.N. has said so! Socialists will tell us what they intend to do to us if we are just not too lazy, or too stupid, or too lazy and stupid, to listen.
If you get nothing else out of this article, please get this: We should not doubt for a single moment that there are many people in this country who will not stand for this kind of an assault upon their liberty. It is quite probable that they will take up arms against this attempt to kill their republic, and a second civil war will ensue with the United Nations directing foreign forces against United States citizens. Such thoughts paint a dark and ugly picture, but that picture could well become reality if these treaties are ratified.
There is one way, and one way only, to prevent the horrors of war from again staining the soil of our homeland with the blood of its own citizens, and that is with a truly massive public outcry against these treaties! Just throwing the bums out, while useful for other purposes and highly recommended, will not help this, since a lame-duck Senate, full of disgruntled senators who have lost their jobs, can still vote after the election to ratify these treaties. They must be made to know that their reputations, their precious “legacies”, and even their future financial security will be threatened should they vote for ratification. And, they must be made to understand that they will forever be known as traitors to the cause of liberty and to the greatest country the world has ever known.
The trouble is that, if a massive public outcry is what we need to save this country, there doesn’t seem to be one brewing. Will one arise, or…
Will we become known as the generation that lost the second greatest gift ever given to a people anywhere in the history of the world?
We cannot know it today, but we may well find out later that Obama’s plan to kill this republic was never an 8 year plan, but was always a 4 year plan, with these treaties as the final blow. I hope and pray that the American people will rise up and throw a huge monkey wrench into this president’s socialist political machine, and that brings us to a third, and final, question, the most important one, but one that, for today, must remain unanswered …
If they do not want to see the specter of civil war darken the horizons of this country once again and the blood of friends and neighbors – or perhaps their own or that of their children – spilled upon American soil by foreign forces under United Nations command, then they had darn well better!
What can you do? Where can you start? A good place to start might be to go to this page, sponsored by the John Birch Society, and submit the form to let your Representatives and Senators know that you want them to use all of their power and influence to get President Obama to not sign the Arms Control Treaty, otherwise to oppose ratification of both treaties by the Senate.
Then, get up off of your butts, turn off the TV, and participate in the political process. Go to the local meetings of your party. Join organizations like the local Tea Party and the John Birch Society, who have been fighting for your rights while you were watching television. Go to the meetings, and participate.
Call and write – really write, not just email – your representatives, and do it often. This is a privilege that many other countries do not have but which we exercise way too little. Remember, that which is not exercised, becomes atrophied.
Learn the Constitution and what your federal government is supposed to be doing, and then compare that to what it is doing. Love and revere the document that, in so very few words, founded the greatest nation in the history of the world, and if you do not agree totally with that last statement, then why have you read this far? Find something else to do, and waste neither your time nor mine.
Learn about rights – what they are, where they come from, and to whom they belong. Cherish the idea that charity is more than a duty, it is an honor and a privilege that belongs to the individual alone and is not something that the government can do for you with someone else’s money.
Finally, hold fast to the principle that, if the federal government is not specifically authorized in the Constitution to do something, then it should either quit doing it get an amendment passed that makes it okay.
If we – not you, but we – are not willing to do these few simple things, and perhaps a few others, then we truly do not deserve the blessing of liberty that has been our heritage for more than two hundred years, and it will be only right, just, and moral that we lose it! Lose, however, may not be the best word, because it implies a lack of intent. Indeed, to willingly remain ignorant and sedentary is a choice, so, if liberty leaves us, it will not be because we lost it, but because we gave it away.
Let us not lose it, and let us not give it away.