Pres. Obama is undermining not just the 1st but also the 2nd Amendment

Pres. Obama has been undermining our 1st Amendment rights.  As a refresher, this is the first article of the Bill of Rights:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

However, he is also going after the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Obama is undermining this through an international treaty, the Arms Trade Treaty, which would effectively impose a new form of gun control on the citizens of the United States through, your guessed it, the UN.

You might want to look at this short video which explains the situation. HERE.  There is a CNS story HERE.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Andy Lucy says:

    It doesn’t worry me… I don’t own any guns. They scare me. They make loud noises and hurt people.

    **walks away whistling, looking at the sky**

  2. On a bright note: I saw a great bumper sticker the other day

    1/20/13 An end of an error! Pray God that it be so!

  3. HyacinthClare says:

    Representative Allen West a day or so ago said that he “mandated” that everybody in America buy a Glock 9mm. My husband and I are out shopping this afternoon.

  4. wmeyer says:

    I pray Allen West finds his way to the White House, perhaps in 2017, and with super majorities in both houses of Congress. He will have his work cut out for him.

    I note in passing that the reason Congress cannot fix the cost of health care is that it has been largely their creation.

  5. majuscule says:

    I’m sharing that video with some freedom loving friends (one a Protestant and one a lapsed Catholic) and stressing that I got the link from a PRIEST.

  6. HighMass says:

    We need to pray this person out of office, retirement time obama

  7. gambletrainman says:

    I’ve gotten this message on several e-mails during the last two years. I’ve checked it out on a website called “snopes”, and they insist it is false. First, Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with this, and, second, it would have to take congressional approval, with 2/3 of the states to ratify it. They claim this is one of those scare tactics to get everyone “up in arms” (no pun intended). Check out the snopes sight, and in the box, type in “Arms Trade Agreement” (I don’t know how to provide the link)

  8. tioedong says:

    Obama can negotiate and accept the treaty, and he can tell his minions in the administration to make regulations trying to impose it on the US, but it ain’t law until two thirds of the Senate says it’s okay.

    Here in the Philippines, guns were confiscated under Marcos, so everyone has to get a license to own a gun. Of course, in the Philippines, no one bothers to follow any law, so most middle class folks hide their guns, and every business has a couple of security guards out front with rifles to protect them.

  9. frjim4321 says:

    Well, I really don’t buy into to the Henny Penny logic that the election this (coincidentally black) candidate would mean the end of civilization as we know it.

    The fact is we don’t have an infinity of choices; we have either Barack or Mitt. Even if there was a shade of truth to the specious claims that Barack is a “socialist,” frankly I would rather take my chances with a maybe, sorta, kinda socialist than a for-sure oligarch.

    And since my best friend in my entire life was murdered by a low-IQ with a gun in the summer of 1978 I really don’t have the SLIGHTEST problem with gun control, so all the more power to The President.

    Barry is +2.7 in the RCP metapoll. It’s not looking too bad for the moderates and the liberals right now.

  10. AnnAsher says:

    Yep ok definitely going to the auction I was considering where there are guns on the lot. Time to exercise my right before its lost.

  11. frjim4321 says:

    the election this (coincidentally black) candidate


    the election of this (coincidentally black) candidate

  12. Supertradmum says:

    I have heard stories from my friends in Ireland how guns were hidden in penal times, and up into the 1920s. One story related to me recently, by a friend who grew up near the border, was rather funny, as the British soldiers were going house to house collecting guns on the border, the Republicans and the Loyalists were helping each other hide guns. One neighbor on the Republican side had help from the Loyalist neighbor, who took the guns out back and hid them in his house. Neither side wanted official interference of what was seen as a basic right.

  13. JKnott says:

    Dictators and Gun Control

    What a wicked, insidious move on the part of this evil presidency. There is no aspect of our country that he has not strategically attacked in a manner to leave us vulnerable and boxed in the hopes that we will not be able to defend our freedoms, our citizens, or afford to do it. It is beyond belief why he has not been tried for treason and for breaking his oath of office many times over .

  14. Gulielmus says:

    Yep, this is a fraud. It’s such an oddity– there are plenty of legitimate claims to be made in opposition to President Obama and his policies, abortion being the highest example in my estimation. And yet there seem to be those who think that it’s not enough, so we need to fabricate worse things. That undermines the just opposition in the minds of those less opposed, once the errors are revealed (as they always are, eventually)

    I feel much the same about some internet claims about Archbishop Bugnini. There are PLENTY of things to criticize him for, things that he actually said and did. So why falsify? What purpose does that serve except to make his critics seem unbalanced?

  15. EXCHIEF says:

    Any attempt to confiscate guns in this country will unquestionably result in armed resistance. There are certain things you don’t mess with. I actually hope we sign the treaty–that might just guarantee the Marxist’s defeat in November.

  16. acardnal says:

    @frjim4321: actually Obama is not black. He is mixed race: white mother/black father.

  17. AnAmericanMother says:

    For once, I agree with you. Obama’s not a socialist.
    He’s an out and out Marxist. Raised by, educated by, associating with, appointing them in his administration . . . Just yesterday one of his minions said it was a great thing that the Chinese can get stuff done with a committee of three instead of all that messy voting stuff . . . !
    And he’s not only not “black”, he’s not even authentically African-American, since he is the son of a Kenyan, raised in Indonesia and then in Hawaii by his privileged white family.
    That’s why he hung out at Rev’d Wright’s poisonous ‘church’ – to try to get some street cred.
    On another point, my sister was murdered by an evil man, who employed a gun. I don’t make the mistake of investing tools like guns, gasoline, or automobiles with human qualities, or excusing humans who misuse them from moral responsibility.

  18. moon1234 says:

    The arms control treaty affects sales of arms between countries and would have no effect on the sales and ownership of guns made in the US. It WOULD make it much harder for US citizens to purchase guns imported from other countries. It is also illegal, as ruled by the supreme court, for a “treaty” to limit a constitutional right.

    The president can NOT ratify a treaty either. It requires a 2/3 majority of the senate to ratify a treaty. There is no way the republicans are going to sign a treaty that restricts the sale of any kind of arms.

    I am sure that Obama will try to pull some kind of stunt and then try to enforce it TSA style. It is not going to work. They all know that Americans will shoot back.

  19. gambletrainman says:

    “I’m sure that Obama will try to pull some kind of stunt then try to enforce it TSA style, It is not going to work. They all know that Americans will shoot back”

    That’s what scares me. The few Americans who have some sort of “common sense” may try to resist Obummer’s stunts, but the general public is so mesmerized about the way he does things, they won’t know they’ve been had until it’s too late, and by then, I’m afraid he will be a dictator (he’s already half-way there, anyway). He’s going to figure a way to enforce things his way, and no one will be able to stop him. Look at the health care. Everybody, including the liberal news media was so sure the healthcare would be found unconstitutional, but, at the last moment, CJ Roberts changed sides. Remember what the theological doctor Pelosi said some months ago: “If the courts rule against us, we have an alternative plan. We WILL get this through”. Was Roberts threatened to change sides? Only time will tell. That happened once before. Before James Earl Ray was executed for killing Martin Luther King, King’s wife and son had an interview with him, and they were convinced Ray did not kill Dr. King. They went to the judge and presented the evidence, enough to re-open the case. The judge was threatened by the feds to shut up or else they would have him barred from ever practicing again. The judge then reversed his decision, and Ray was executed.

    A guy with whom I graduated from high school, has told me several times that he can sleep well at nights, knowing we are in the safe hands of Obama. The WaPo shows a map of the US that shows Obama only carrying a handful of states—and that is a liberal newspaper. I just hope the prediction is right, although I don’t have that much faith in Romney. After all, he’s the one who signed Massachusetts healthcare into law, upon which is what Obama’s healthcare is based.

  20. Clinton R. says:

    And while we are on the topic of Obama and guns, I wonder if his favorite movie is “Fast and Furious”?

  21. Supertradmum says:

    frjim4321, Obama is a Black Liberation Theology Christian. He and family went for 17 years to Jeremiah Wright’s church in Chicago and you can look up the website and read some of the books sold there. They believe the Blacks are the Chosen People, not the Jews; they believe in a Marxists battle of the social classes; they also believe in a militant Messiah; and that violence is ok to bring about the Kingdom of God. There are many references online which are scholarly on this theological school. Mr. Wright is giving a talk in Washington soon, or already has…He was my senator in Illinois, although I did not vote for him and I can assure you he has always been left a la socialist, if not Marxist, which I think he is from my studies on his influences and work in Chicago. And, he brought he Chicago people to Washington as his advisers–most, not all, as you know, are still there.

  22. Sissy says:

    frjim4321 said: “The fact is we don’t have an infinity of choices; we have either Barack or Mitt. Even if there was a shade of truth to the specious claims that Barack is a “socialist,” frankly I would rather take my chances with a maybe, sorta, kinda socialist than a for-sure oligarch.”

    Surely you take “Barak’ at his word? He joined the New Party of Chicago in the mid-1990s and even ran on their ticket for public office. The New Party was an openly socialist party with members who were avowed Marxists, anarchists, Maoist, and Trotskyites. Why would someone who wasn’t a fellow traveler wish to associate himself with folks who espouse the communist philosophy?

    But putting that aside, Mr. Obama supported and voted for the proposition that children born alive after an abortion attempt were not entitled to medical care. According to his own statements, this class of patient had no right to health care because their mothers didn’t want them. Can you pull the lever for a man so depraved? His views on abortion are the most extreme of any politician in the U. S.

  23. Kerry says:

    One wonders if abortion supporters would change their minds if .22 caliber bullets were used instead of knives… And only the proper authorities should have firearms, “Jahwohl!”?
    I think cars should be taken away from everyone, because I know someone who was killed in a car crash. I also think only the approved authorities should have the free press, because…

    I am continually amazed by this reasoning: “Someone did something bad. He used a particular tool to do it. Therefore, let us take all these same tools away from everyone else who did not do something bad.” Sound like the “One man with a collar abused a child in his care, therefore all men with collars must have their collars taken away from them, as it is obvious abuse is caused by collars. Yes, it is as clear as the sun!” My favorite Cooper quote: “The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.”

  24. LisaP. says:

    frjim, what rule says you can’t be a socialist and an oligarch? Most of the best communists and fascists were also on the top ten oligarch lists. In any case, President Obama certainly falls into the oligarch category also (no one I know gets his breaks and his salary without ever having run a Taco Bell drive through, even). So we have a plutocratic oligarch vs. a plutocratic oligarchic socialist / Marxist. Doesn’t make me love Romney, but don’t mistake that for me seeing no distinction between them. Certainly don’t mistake that for me believing the three-label guy beats out the two-label guy.

    As for the other, I had a student when I was a young teacher who was murdered with a kitchen knife. By another student. Neither Rhodes scholars. Doesn’t take much brains to figure out how to kill someone, and it doesn’t take a gun.

    I’ve come to find it distasteful when unConstitutional and dangerous public policy is sold using the personal tragedies of people who cannot express their own opinions on the matter. I’m very sorry for your murdered friend and for all those who loved him, including yourself, but I have no idea what his opinion is on gun control. I know plenty of folks who have similar personal stories where their experience has led them to become capable defenders of the lives of those they love.

  25. mightyduk says:

    I’ve checked it out on a website called “snopes”, and they insist it is false. First, Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with this, and, second, it would have to take congressional approval, with 2/3 of the states to ratify it

    1. Snopes is run by left wingers who support Obama…. check snopes to find that’s true

    2. The states do not need to ratify a treaty, and a treaty ratified by the Senate has the force of the constitution

    I find it a little ironic, in the midst of a case where the president finds it in his authority to not enforce the law with regard to a broad category of illegal aliens, where the congress has decided it’s within their authority to force citizens to buy a product, where the government has conspired to arm violent foreign gangs in an attempt to villify law abiding gun owners and dealers… we STILL have a large number of people willing to defend this scofflaw president’s actions in regard to international treaties whose clear aims are to infringe on our national sovereignty. Not only does this involve the small arms treaty, but also the law of the sea treaty, and much more.

    The fact is we do not have the language of this treaty because “we have to pass the bill so we can see what’s in it”. It may not contain language that violates the 2nd amendment, but it will contain language that requires signatory states to more actively track gun ownership, which opens the door to such action by the federal government. We know that the BATF has been caught trying to create an illegal gun registry in the past, they will certainly use the treaty to defend such efforts, even if not passed by the senate.

  26. AnAmericanMother says:

    Precisely. Col. Cooper was a wise man. I corresponded with him a bit and thought he had his head on very straight.
    It always astonishes me that liberals constantly excuse human evil – “she was abused as a child” – “he grew up in poverty” – “he is borderline retarded/ ADD/ addicted” – but want to blame inanimate objects.

  27. Sissy says:

    So right, Kerry. Great Britain has seen a huge rise in knife attacks. I suppose there will be calls to outlaw knives…in fact, I’m sure some have already tried. So what should be outlawed after that? Baseball bats, bricks, wire, rat poison? Murders are caused by murderers; the means used are irrelevant. How is it just to punish law-abiding citizens for the deeds of miscreants?

  28. dburnette10 says:

    This whole conversation reminds of a re-run scene from a 70’s era tv show. I don’t remember the name of it, but the daughter is trying to convince dad that guns should be outlawed, and his response is “would it make you feel any better they were thrown out of windows?” I get Canadian news where I live, as we’re too far away from Seattle to get US news. The amount of stabbings they have in either Victoria or Vancouver is ridiculous. One weekend we had to drive over to Seattle, and at the “magic spot” we switched to US stations. It didn’t sound like they had it any better than we do, either with armed crime or medical infrastructure. On our way home we, kept count of weapon references and strike references and the two countries stacked up pretty evenly. I’m pretty sure that bad guys will just find the next legal weapon (if they bother to be that law abiding) and bureaucrats will always look at (their own) bottom line first.

Comments are closed.