Dear Rand Paul, Im not sure how I ended up on your mailing list, but it probably has to do with the myriad persons who believe my email address to be their own. I wanted to thank you for sending me your delightful warning concerning the UN Small Arms Treaty and how Obama is coming to take all of our guns. Especially the following: In fact, Article V of the Treaty mandates countries establish a National Control List -- or NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION database! You and I both know gun registration is just the first step toward outright CONFISCATION. Im glad you know what I know, because Ive apparently been wrong about it all these years. I better keep a close watch on my car, house, etc because those all have registration databases too. However Im not sure were using the same definition of mandates. Id imagine that you know and I know that mandates means essentially the same thing as order or require. However what the treaty says (its really not very long - un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/ATT_text_%28As_adopted_by_the_GA%29-E.pdf - should be a piece of cake for anyone who can make it through Atlas Shrugged and Hayek) is encouraged. Last time I checked encouraged doesnt mean anything close to mandated, otherwise our nations grandparents would have long ago forced Americas youth to dress nicely, go to a good school, and make an honest man/woman out of our significant others already. If youd read the rest of the treaty youd see that the control list is primarily focused on the *export & import* of arms - which is something we already do. The encouragement to document end users part comes from regulating imported arms such that whomever were importing them from can make sure theyre going to the intended buyers. Theres nothing in there that would in any way impede the US manufacture of arms and ammo for the domestic market, protecting valuable arms manufacturing jobs here in the US of A. The thing that really confuses me is that right at the very beginning it says Reaffirming the sovereign right of any State to regulate and control conventional arms exclusively within its territory, pursuant to its own legal or constitutional system, I know the UN put that statement in italics, and who reads *those,* right? But still, maybe you can find the time to explain to me how this is an attempt by the United Nations to subvert or supersede your Constitutional rights [that] must be opposed? so I can have some hard facts to justify your encouragement to please agree to make a generous contribution of $250, $100, $50 or even just $35? - or does please agree actually constitute an order now - Im a little fuzzy. Thanks for your assistance in this matter, Gene
Posted on: Sat, 24 May 2014 03:15:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015