Senator Saxby Chambliss UN arms treaty reply

[Sagan]

You're failing to put on your tin-foil hat, or it isn't on tight enough to restrict all blood-flow to your brain. Remedy that and the numerous threads on this topic will likely start to make sense. If you fail to do that, however, you might wonder how a treaty (which cannot over-ride the Constitution) would invalidate part of the Constitution even though the treaty has yet to be written (meaning it's tough for it to contain anything, much less something which is a threat to our rights) and it hasn't been signed (tough to sign something which hasn't been written) and that it hasn't been ratified (tough for the Senate to ratify a treaty which hasn't been written or signed). Those little logical problems which make this seem like something that only a lemming would complain about can all be overlooked however if you blindly do what chain e-mails tell you to do or if you utilize a tin-foil hat to restrict or stop blood flow to the parts of your brain where critical thinking occur.

Sorry bro, you are incorrect here. A treaty ratified by congress has the same effect as an amendment to the Constitution. And since a late amendment overrides an earlier one...

 

[JDG.]

As we can also see by current events, that sometimes government doesnt communicate proplerly and laws get passed without following rules. Thats some food for thought too

 

[Laxguy59]

The biggest problem I have with the treaty is that it plays the decider of winner and losers in revolutions, civil wars, etc... one side is okay to ship to, the other no. This idea that they have the morality to choose is retarded.

Plus won't Russia and China simply veto this due to their excessive arms dealings

 

[JDG.]

And it will put a block on my CZ adiction. No say's me!