Assault weapons again.

[VBshooter]

I find it nice of these former ambassadors and others to try and influence our government into lower itself to their Draconian gun control level..

US-Mexico groups urges new US assault weapons ban
By CATHERINE E. SHOICHET, AP




MEXICO CITY — The United States should reinstate a Clinton-era ban on assault weapons to prevent such guns from reaching Mexican drug cartels, former officials from both countries said in a report released Tuesday.

The group, which includes two former U.S. ambassadors to Mexico, also said the U.S. should do more to stop the smuggling of firearms and ammunition into Mexico by stepping up investigations of gun dealers and more strictly regulating gun shows.

The Binational Task Force on the United States-Mexico Border listed the assault weapons ban as a step the U.S. should take immediately to improve security in both countries. The 10-year ban expired in 2004.

"Improving our efforts ... will weaken the drug cartels and disrupt their illegal activities, and make it easier ultimately to dismantle and destroy them," said Robert Bonner, co-chairman of the group and former head of both the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and Customs and Border Protection agency.

U.S. and Mexican officials say drug cartels frequently use assault rifles, which are banned in Mexico but easily purchased in the United States.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon launched a nationwide crackdown on drug cartels when he took office in December 2006. The offensive has been met with unprecedented violence, leaving more than 13,800 people dead.

During his run for office, President Barack Obama promised to push to reinstate the ban. He has since said he would rather enforce existing laws that make it illegal to send assault weapons across the border.

Other recommendations related to border security included restructuring Mexico's law enforcement operations to create a counterpart to the U.S. Border Patrol, increasing U.S. assistance to Mexico to build up law enforcement and reducing demand for drugs in the United States through more treatment programs.

[BluemontGlock]

Finish the Wall,...

[WRW]

Finish the Wall,...

It is odd that got left out of the recommendations.

[VBshooter]

Of course it got left out..It would actually work!

[Vahunter]

Finish the Wall,...

And include armed guards .

[jdonovan]

And prosecute the illegal crosser.

Each time they cross and get caught we send them back and let them try again tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day... and eventually they succeed.

If there is no penalty for trying to cross illegally then there is no incentive to stop trying.

[zephyp]

They are grasping at straws. The war on drugs is being lost and someone must be blamed. They have already laid the groundwork for that to be us. We must keep watch for activity concerning the CIFTA treaty. This was sent the senate back in April and has been held in abeyance. They can dust that off at any time and put it up for vote. Then we are screwed. Everyone should get letters and calls ready to flood both senators' offices.

[VBshooter]

And keep your ears open for any mention of a POS named Harold Koh, He is Obamas State Departmet legal adviser and as anti gun as they come. His idea of utopia is the US in lock step with the rest of the world bounded by treaty after treaty to follow the sick idea of international law. He will be involved heavily in the CIFTA push when they try again to get the Senate to buy into it. THe United States is the United Nations prize if they can get these idiots to sign,Our sovereignty is gone out the window and we become bound by that treaty and be subservient to all that world order crap that the UN spews.. Please pay close attention to this!!!!!!!!!!

[GS78]

I think I just made a huge profit on my earlier purchases...

[VBshooter]

And so it begins... Obama admistration changes stance on gun treaty,,,THis is just the beginning...There will be more to come ,,all they need is a foothold...

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms trade
Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDT
Email | Print | Share| Reprints | Single Page[-] Text [+] More News
Armed violence kills 2,000 a day worldwide: groups
Tuesday, 6 Oct 2009 08:04pm EDT By Arshad Mohammed
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."

"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.

While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.

"The shift in position by the world's biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers," Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.

However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus "could fatally weaken a final deal."

"Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International's policy adviser Debbie Hillier.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.

Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.

Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.

The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals.

Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.

The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.

The U.S. lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.

A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012

[zephyp]

Thanks, Spence. By Constitution all treaties must be ratified by the senate. The news clip said a negotiated treaty by 2012. We have 33-34 senate seats up for re-election in 2010. The way we beat this is to start beating the drum now to get conservatives back in power in the senate. I dont think its going to do much good to start sending letters. We need to get organized and support the conservative ticket. IMO our time and effort will be better spent that way.

[VBshooter]

Yes Sir that is the hot ticket,,, Get the dead beats out and bring in the varsity. Letters can still be sent but new bodies will be a better way to go IMO too.Shame there isn't a way to keep Koh, Holder and Hillary occupied with a Bake Sale or something till then,, Those are three weasels I do not trust.., Sad state of affairs when that is offered as Americas best huh?

[zephyp]

Yes Sir that is the hot ticket,,, Get the dead beats out and bring in the varsity. Letters can still be sent but new bodies will be a better way to go IMO too.Shame there isn't a way to keep Koh, Holder and Hillary occupied with a Bake Sale or something till then,, Those are three weasels I do not trust.., Sad state of affairs when that is offered as Americas best huh?

The problem is they are not America's best. Nazi Germany maybe.

[VBshooter]

Exactly,,, they aren't . the problem is that they hold any position in the government at all... I wouldn't let any of those self annointing egos sit in my bathroom. Let alone hold any sort of government office..

[GS78]

All these stories are just baby steps towards their real , and stated goal of a nationwide gun round-up. We are witnessing the laying of a foundation to end our second ammendment rights. The international community does not observe the second ammendment.

[zephyp]

All these stories are just baby steps towards their real , and stated goal of a nationwide gun round-up. We are witnessing the laying of a foundation to end our second ammendment rights. The international community does not observe the second ammendment.

The baby steps are all of the other issues that we have largely ignored in our quest to keep our gun rights. Taxes, limiting 1st amendment, social programs, immigration, cap and trade, health care, etc. We will all scream bloody murder when they come to take our guns but what about these other issues? Recall that the Revolutionary War was fought with guns - it was not about guns. It was about the assault on other rights and liberties.

IMHO they see that we the people are ready to accept this assault on the 2nd Amendment. Why do I say this? Look around at what is happening. The US started its slide towards this a long time ago. We've let them chip away at other things and we've done hardly nothing to stop them. This is the reason I'm trying to get everyone on board to fight other issues. These people figure that since we've allowed them to take all the other liberties that most will sit idly by thinking there is nothing that can be done when they come for our guns.

We must stand and fight them on all issues not just the 2nd Amendment. Its like a dam. They've weakned the dam and it may soon all come tumbling down. I'm astonished that only a very few of you see this or at least come on line and say you do. We all say that we love America and wish to keep her the way our Founders set it out. Its not just about guns. Its about our rights and freedoms as a whole.

Its like protecting our homes. We dont want to fight scumbags in the living room. We would prefer to stop them at the gate. Friends, the enemy has long since breached the gate and they are standing in our front yards. Soon they will be in our front rooms. We must not allow them to advance their socialist agenda any longer.

[VBshooter]

The war is this way men!!!!