Obama Sends Signed U.N. Arms Trade Treaty to Senate for Approval

President Obama (Photo: Associated Press)

President Obama (Photo: Associated Press)

In what is an apparent last-ditch effort to push through some form of gun control, the Obama administration transmitted the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty to the Senate for ratification last week.

Approved by the U.N. in April 2013, and subsequently signed by Secretary of State John Kerry the following Sept., the Arms Trade Treaty seeks to place tighter restrictions on global arms dealing.

“The Treaty is designed to regulate the international trade in conventional arms — including small arms, tanks, combat aircraft, and warships — and to reduce the risk that international arms transfers will be used to commit atrocities, without impeding the legitimate arms trade,” said Obama in a press release.

What’s funny is that the Arms Trade Treaty is DOA — dead on arrival. Over 50 senators have already expressed stern opposition to the deal, citing concerns in several letters to the president over its efficacy to stop bad actors from obtaining arms, its overly broad and ambiguous language, and its capacity to threaten the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

Yet, despite the strong opposition, the Obama administration has plowed ahead in the hope that the miraculous happens, that the Senate ratifies the Arms Trade Treaty.

“I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty, and that it give its advice and consent to ratification of the Treaty, subject to the understandings and declarations set forth in the accompanying report,” Obama said in the press release.

This week, upon receiving the transmission from the White House, Sen. Bob Corker once again reiterated his objection to the Arms Trade Treaty.

“Since 2012, many senators, including myself, have expressed opposition to the small arms treaty, citing an array of concerns with Second Amendment rights,” said Sen. Corker (R-TN).

“Nothing has changed over the last four years to suggest the treaty is in our national interest, and it will remain dead in the water,” Corker added. “I reiterate my strong opposition and will work with my colleagues to protect the rights of Americans.”

Like all gun control legislation, the Arms Trade Treaty starts from the flawed premise that one more law, or in this case international treaty, is all that’s needed to stop bad actors from behaving badly. Of course, that’s absurd. Criminals, by definition, flout the law. So do failed states and rogue superpowers. We can sanction Russia, China, Iran or whomever we wish for breaking international law or violating the provisions of a treaty, but does that stop them from continuing to do so? Not usually. In most cases, it just hardens their resolve to stick it to us even more.

{ 104 comments… add one }
  • Matthew December 19, 2016, 9:27 pm

    This treaty has NOTHING to do with domestic gun ownership. It’s about the international export of weapons. Don’t let the facts get in the way of your crazy outbursts though. Another irresponsible “article” by GunsAmerica designed to whip up the nutters. Tell me more about Jade Helm part 6 while you’re at it.

    • ejharb January 2, 2017, 12:18 pm

      Just want to know if you were born stupid or did you get in from the water.
      Nah, actually I care less. Gfy libtard

    • PATRIOT 2010 January 12, 2017, 8:13 pm

      Then explain why the thermal scope I recently bought had to comply with ITAR requirements as to the end user and was not to be exported. And this is just for a scope. If this foolishness is ratified by the Senate, I have no doubt it will apply to firearms as well.

  • Bill Brewer December 19, 2016, 7:55 pm

    I love the comments on this site because some people made comments and never read the treaty or understand how the government works. I suggest they learn how treaties are negotiated and then sent to the senate for ratification and Gunsamerica should be honest and help to explain the process. It is actually detailed in the US Constitution.

    Why would anyone be against the treaty unless they have not bothered to read it. THe link is in the article. The Treaty is designed to regulate the international trade in conventional arms — including small arms, tanks, combat aircraft, and warships — and to reduce the risk that international arms transfers will be used to commit atrocities, without impeding the legitimate arms trade,” said Obama in a press release.

    The Treaty explicitly reaffirms the sovereign right of each country to decide for itself, pursuant to its own constitutional and legal system, how to deal with conventional arms that are traded exclusively within its borders. It also recognizes that legitimate purposes and interests exist for both individuals and governments to own, transfer, and use conventional arms. The Treaty is fully consistent with the domestic rights of U.S. citizens, including those guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

    I wish that people would read a future law or treaty and wish Guns america would take a non Partisan take instead of being short sited. Will this treaty stop you from buying or trading in Guns in the USA. Read it yourself instead of someone else deciding for you because they will get dontations to their campaign funds.

    Bill

  • Russell Nauta December 18, 2016, 1:45 pm

    Isn’t this approach ass-backwards? It has been my understanding that the senate would present a “Proposed Bill” to the president for signing into law??

  • peter rogala December 17, 2016, 6:03 pm

    NEVER FORGET ‘OBAMAISM!!!!!!!!!

  • Chuck December 17, 2016, 4:57 pm

    Since POS John Kerry eagerly signed this in 2012, the GOP has repeatedly told Oshitbag that the treaty is DOA. News flash muzzie ahole, it is still DOA.

  • darrell December 17, 2016, 11:08 am

    The Far Left Zealots will be the biggest problem this country faces the next four years despite controlling both houses and the White house.

    • Charlie BROWN December 17, 2016, 7:55 pm

      Probably best just to shoot them,

  • Beachhawk December 17, 2016, 1:35 am

    What doesn’t Obama understand about dead on arrival?

  • Dennis Zanone December 16, 2016, 11:46 pm

    It’s all about the legacy he is trying to leave. The whole idea is against the constitution of the USA and is a political ploy. Good guys are responsible with guns and bad guys don’t care about the law.

  • Richard December 16, 2016, 10:19 pm

    If Obama signs a treaty that is “repugnant” to the “Constitution for the United States of America” he has directly committed TREASON. This is also true of a Senator or Representative. There are NO if, ands or buts. AS such that signature of the ?President”? and the signatures of the Senators and the Representatives who signed it are equally treasonous and invalid from the moment they signed it. This treaty is invalid from the moment it was signed AND the UN is responsible for knowing that it is. It doesn’t matter whether the UN accepts or NOT!

    …And there is NO statute of limitations on Fraud, Treason or Murder. If Obama and the Senators and Representatives loses this bet they could ALL go down big-time! …as they deserve!

  • Mark From Bristol December 16, 2016, 8:52 pm

    Never underestimate rabidly anti-American, Barrack Hussein or how low he’ll stoop. Congress will be out of session for the Christmas Holidays, and although such a treaty requires 2/3’s Senate approval according to Article II, Section II of OUR Constitution, our president has made unconstitutional appointments that require Senate confirmation and he did so while Congress was in session.

    Here in part is what Article II, Section II of OUR Constitution says…”He (the President) shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur……The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session”.

    In January 2012, while Congress was in session and Barrack Hussein claimed that they were not, Barrack Hussein illegally appointed Richard Cordray to the position of Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a position newly created by Congress that requires Senate Confirmation. For the most part, Congress was on Christmas break when that occurred, but suspecting shenanigans by Barrack Hussein, both the House and Senate left enough members behind so that Congress legally remained in Congress, a co-equal branch of government of both the Executive and Legislative Branches. Barrack Hussein took it upon himself to illegally declare Congress out of session and illegally appointed Cordray. Congress could have and should have impeached Barrack Hussein, but did not. Fast forward to now. It takes 2/3’s of the Senate to ratify such a treaty, for the most part Congress is about to go home for Christmas break, but suspecting more shenanigans by outgoing Barrack Hussein, they are once again leaving just enough members of Congress to legally still be in session. Expect Barrack Hussein to declare them out of session and declare that such a treaty couldn’t wait, so he will try to pass and sign the treaty on his own, something that he has no Constitutional authority EVEN IF Congress is or was out of session. Remember, we are dealing with rabidly anti-American, Barrack Hussein here…a very recently wounded lame duck whom has spent his entire life wiping his rean end with OUR Constitution.

    • Bill m December 17, 2016, 3:48 am

      His presidency has been based on false documents by the looks of things as of late. Everything all his bullshit should be overturned. His pedigree is forged. If congress doesn’t grow a pair & do their fucking job ( wich they won’t) then we the people have but to turn to our law enforcement & military to step up.
      Where are the leaders of military he’s fired? & when are they coming out of the closet?

  • Bill Soileau December 16, 2016, 7:45 pm

    Well, Dumbo is running out of time, Hitlery has played her last card (a joker), the U.N. making choices for us to listen to, etc… I just read a professor called the law on a deputy sheriff for wearing his uniform, badge and pistol belt in New Orleans at Loyola University. We have these cup cakes protesting and rioting, a football player taking a knee to protest the National Anthem, a U.S Army major murdering people at Ft. Hood and still keeping his full pay while in prison, a deserter in combat that caused the deaths of his own comrades and being pardoned, Hillary selling out our secret intel,money sent to Iran on an unmarked plane at night ,Benghazi,the list goes on and on….. Our forefathers fought the largest and best trained, equipped and most diciplined army and navy in the world, TWICE and won ! They were farmers, doctors, lawyers,ordinary people tired of being pushed around, they rose up, made a stand and overcame tremendous odds ! I was Regular Army, retired now and well, let’s make America great again,Merry Christmas to you all.

    • akaryu December 16, 2016, 9:08 pm

      AMEN to that!

      • Javier December 18, 2016, 12:02 am

        Double AMEN to that! and Merry Christmas & Happy New Year !!

    • Don Craft December 18, 2016, 8:21 am

      Damn right brother, ATC ret USN

  • S. Velez December 16, 2016, 6:00 pm

    What’s happening with this people. Learn from the election. You gun grabbers are a minority in USA and the UN don’t have any morality and authority to talk about the law of the land THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE SECOND AMMENDMENT.

    • R. Bice December 16, 2016, 8:10 pm

      That’s not exactly true S. Velez. Obummer signed the US up to participate in the UN Small Arms Treaty in 2013. He hasn’t acted on it yet but as of today December 16th 2016 he just introduced it into the Senate. That’s how they will come and get our guns. It will be the UN, who is already in our country with 30,000 men and equipment already here in our Country.

      • Ruppert Jenkins December 16, 2016, 11:46 pm

        So, 30,000 UN forces are going to take away 300 Million guns from 80 million armed Americans?
        HAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAH Now, that’s pretty funny.
        Math is not your strong suit.

        • Bill Brewer December 19, 2016, 8:18 pm

          The UN does not have troops or black helicopters that are set to invade the USA. COnspiracy theories. First all troops under the UN are volunteered by their countries. So if an invasion force of 30,000 troops would need an invasion fleet and aircraft carriers so they would be seen by satellite’s.

          If you have so little faith in this countries institution and Military then why are you still here? Our constitutional government has lasted since 1790. ( The declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776) then we had a weak central government under the Articles of Confederation. ) So if you want to debate US history please study it first.

      • Pauly_B December 19, 2016, 7:57 pm

        Bring it! We will slaughter Oshitbag’s army of little UN faggots and then go after all the treasonous liberal fucktards, in Washington, including Ohomo, and all the other degenerate dem-o-rats that need to be strung up for treason!

  • the real ski December 16, 2016, 5:55 pm

    Of course Obama is going to do this! He is not just the quintessinal politician, but a quintessinal Chicogo politian to boot. So he is going to do like every presidential lame duck has done, good or bad, since JQ Adams-try to flush all that he can down the pipe & hope that something sqeezes out of the joints along the utway. We all can thank God that we have a congress that mostly has been able to stop this shyster. He will go down in history as our first elected african american president but go down he is and history will tell the tale if American history gets around to not being politically sanitized by our educational system like it has been for the last 50 years. Aloha Barak. Somehow those two words just down sound island

  • bob tolomeo December 16, 2016, 5:32 pm

    once a loser always a loser-the worst president the US has ever seen

  • Mike Watkins December 16, 2016, 4:11 pm

    B. H. Obama–I pronounce it “B-Ho-Bama”–is just taking one final bow towards his idiot, unAmerican, limp-dick, socialist, Demostupid base, and his one-world George Soros worshipping supporters. One last reminder that He was the ONE: The Messiah who would have made this country so much better had it not been for the fascist evil racist Neanderthal Republicans.

    Ignore him. He’s an unmourned part of history, to true Americans.

    But nevertheless: write or email or call your Senators to remind them this Sovereign Nation of the United States of America bows to NO ONE in matters of our EXCEPTIONALISM and our GOD-GIVEN and CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS.

  • Campbell A King December 16, 2016, 3:48 pm

    This rotten sob is on tv right now talking about needing ground troops in Syria after drawing a red line ,then running like hell..Carry on Borock,,the father of ISIS !

  • bbill December 16, 2016, 3:23 pm

    the worst part of this is that Obamas bitch mitch will not stop this travesty.

  • Tim December 16, 2016, 3:17 pm

    The right to keep and bear arms is not only guaranteed by the constitution, it is guaranteed with the arms we bear.

    • deanbob December 16, 2016, 4:49 pm

      That’s precisely why our founding fathers put the 2a there!

  • DannyMac December 16, 2016, 1:53 pm

    HaHa..UN troops..they drop and run after the first rounds come-a-flying in.Fucking Obama this asshole can’t
    leave soon enough..it’s interesting that during his first term in office he didn’t touch anything on gun control..he
    didn’t really talk about it at all..now he’s a fucking monster on the subject..would someone dispatch this douche.

    • Jonathan Olenick December 16, 2016, 3:48 pm

      An international treaty cannot supersede the U.S. constitution. Jon

      • james December 17, 2016, 12:53 am

        An international Treaty is the only thing that is above the law and does have the power to negate articles of the constitution, especially those in the Bill of Rights. We should amend our constitution to strip it of this vulnerability. The only time elements of the constitution should be at risk is that we are defeated in war and it is part of our surrender agreement.

        • Denali Dan December 18, 2016, 4:54 am

          Regan recognized the UN law enforcement arm INTERPOL, but gave them no power. An addition to that recognition by O bummer Dec 19, 2009, gave INTERPOL enforcement powers above the Constitution, and gave them an office within the Justice Dept. O Bummer’s original purpose was to go after Bush, Rumsfeld, Chaney, for war crimes and tried by UN tribunal. The arrests were to be made by INTERPOL. INTERPOL’s office is able to collect the FBI’s background info, which is supposed to be disposed of by congressional order, which is how they have been registering firearms ever since they were prevented from keeping that info. Originally the info was collected by a university for the FBI, then transferred to the Canadian Computer system until INTERPOL could come online. Being arrested by INTERPOL is like being arrested in any foreign country where we have no Constitutional protections.
          We need to not only dump this treaty, but dispose of INTERPOL, and remove the UN from The United States soil.

          • Bill Brewer December 19, 2016, 9:05 pm

            What is Interpol? INTERPOL is the world’s largest international police organization, with 190 member countries.
            Our role is to enable police around the world to work together to make the world a safer place. Our high-tech infrastructure of technical and operational support helps meet the growing challenges of fighting crime in the 21st century.

            All INTERPOL member countries are connected through a secure communications system known as I-24/7. This gives police real-time access to criminal databases containing millions of records. Our unique system of Notices is used to alert member countries to fugitives, dangerous criminals, missing persons or weapons threats.

            They do not have Police forces that can go into another country. The Fbi or other police agency can send them information about someone they are looking for and what country and they can send the information to the local police department.

            I wish people would choose to become educated instead of listening to others. DO your own research.

  • Law dawg December 16, 2016, 1:44 pm

    Has anyone ever thought about how degenerates like dumbama, lesbianillary, pedifile “bubba” Billy, John “ketchup boy” Kerry. Nancy”Prozac queen” pelozi, and Harry”I’m a fag” Reid have progressed and prospers through out the years…. it’s called “EVIL”. They are evil, evil, evil. We the God fearing people of our country need to stop evil, them. “The candle of the wicked shall be put out.”. Piss on obama and the evil ones who have put him in the presidency and who have backed him.

  • norman w December 16, 2016, 1:39 pm

    No way should or will the Senate approve this abomination; if the US cowers to the corrupt UN, its sovereignty is gone forever.
    This is a last gasp attempt by the Traitor-in-Charge to plunge the US into the 3rd World of tyranny under a future dictatorship, either socialist, communist, or Islamic government. Call or write your Congressman and demand they deep-six this abomination.

  • Sean December 16, 2016, 1:37 pm

    January 20th can’t come fast enough…. I’m glad the Senators aren’t fooled by nobama’s last ditch gun control /ban efforts. Is he the first president who actually hated what America is all about?

  • JoshO December 16, 2016, 1:26 pm

    The nice thing about the UN is that those little blue helmets make for easy target identification.

  • gary December 16, 2016, 1:19 pm

    this is nothing but TREASON (as against the CONSTITUTION)< held for a squad of good men to make practice of. (IN MY OPINION) which he has not yet signed away as being illegal to have!!!!!!!!

  • Dag December 16, 2016, 1:17 pm

    Why should the UN have any regulation concerning the USA Constitution. Our founding fathers have proved time any again to be smarter than any President since. I have learned that if obama wants something it’s usually not what’s best for America.

    • Steve December 19, 2016, 7:18 pm

      Let the UN just try and enforce this or anything else in America! America should kick the UN out then withdraw. Obama isn’t getting any of his sleezey bills through. Bitch Kerry won’t be forgotten soon either, and not for anything good!

  • Jim December 16, 2016, 1:05 pm

    NO! The UN has no right or power to take away a right given to us by the US Constitution. Americans must and WILL stand up and refuse to give up our firearms without cause. The ONLY people in the US that should not be allowed to have a firearm are those who are mentally incompetent or have a felony criminal record. The 2nd Amendment was and is important enough to be second only to the Freedom of Speech which is what the 1st Amendment is all about. The Senate CANNOT and MUST NOT approve this ‘Treaty’.

  • Larry December 16, 2016, 12:47 pm

    Our jug eared little Marxist POTUS will try to violate the US Constitution with his last dying breath! May that event be soon.

  • James Currier December 16, 2016, 12:39 pm

    any representative or senator who signs that should be IMMEDIATELY IMPEACHED, STRIPPED OF THEIR CITIZENSHIP AND DEPORTED TO SOMALIA.

  • JOHN T. FOX December 16, 2016, 12:32 pm

    THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WHILE EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT. ANTI-GUN NUTS SIMPLY NEVER LEARN THAT GUN CONTROL IS THE TOOL OF TYRANTS AND CRIMINALS! IF YOU WANT TO STOP CRIME THEN PUT $1,000 BOUNTY’S ON THE SCALPS OF CRIMINALS. DEAD CRIMINALS DO NOT COMMIT FUTURE CRIMES! PUT $1,000,000 BOUNTY’S ON THE SCALPS OF ANY POLITICIAN PERCEIVED TO BE IMMORAL, UNETHICAL OR A TRAITOR! BOTH PROBLEMS WOULD IN SHORT ORDER BE SOLVED!

    • Larry December 16, 2016, 12:50 pm

      Wow, I sure like that suggestion. Thanks, John. This could generate into a whole new shooting sport for American enjoyment.

    • norman w December 16, 2016, 1:44 pm

      Great idea; and while we’re at it, a $100K bounty on lobbyists and those promoting splinter group rights over and above rights held by the majority of legal Americans.

      • Just1Spark December 16, 2016, 7:29 pm

        To be fair, you do know the NRA are lobbyists also, right?

      • Brian December 16, 2016, 8:08 pm

        At that pay scale, five shots and I’d be economically comfortable for the next twenty years!

  • Bob December 16, 2016, 12:20 pm

    Sounds like it’s time for a 100 – MILLION man march on the UN, just to show them what they’d be up against if they tried to mess with the 2nd Amendment. Imagine looking out the window and seeing THAT coming your way. Afterwards, perhaps a side trip to the White House.

    • Chip Nichols December 16, 2016, 12:50 pm

      Agreed. Unfortunately, as we saw with the latest California election, most gun owners, at least the passive ones, refuse to participate. Maybe out of fear of ridicule, or worse identification as a gun owner…the progressive left has suceeded in their agenda of shaming law-abiding gun owners into submission for the most part…at least in liberal controlled areas

    • norman w December 16, 2016, 1:47 pm

      DC’s not big enough for that; a million-man armed march should bring the treasonists to heel; the worst could be removed to the nearest tall tree or lamppost for a noon necktie party!

  • Robert December 16, 2016, 12:01 pm

    Looks like Obama is trying to keep busy….The polar vortex has killed is golf playing……..No elections looming, so flying all over the country to pick funding for the party. This computer hacking has reached the end….He’s bored…….

  • ~ Occams December 16, 2016, 11:52 am

    Epitome of the word ‘turd’

  • Robert Van Istendal December 16, 2016, 11:40 am

    These Senators wont listen to this idiot, why would they compromise their own home protection by agreeing with Obama and sign this treaty.

    • Edward J. Minor December 16, 2016, 12:13 pm

      I hope that they take the appropriate action and file it in circular file 13.

  • Don Richardson December 16, 2016, 10:18 am

    This is very simply an attempt to eliminate the 2nd amendment by giving the United Nations control of our firearms rights. While the text is somewhat vague and sounds relatively innocuous, note that it gives the U.N. control, thus destroying our sovereign control of firearms rights. And considering that most of the countries in the U.N. are anti-America, and most have few or no rights for their citizens to own firearms, the idea that they should be able to tell us what our rights are is scary. It would be laughable except that some people actually think it is a good idea for the citizens of the United States of America to give up their freedoms and be controlled by this version of a one world government (the United Nations). IF you do not want to be slaves to the global elite, now might be a good time to write a friendly letter to (or call) your senators and explain to them why you think the freedoms guaranteed by (not granted by) the constitution are important.

    • Chip Nichols December 16, 2016, 12:52 pm

      And our soverignity over to the UN…

    • Daniel Carper December 16, 2016, 1:00 pm

      This is just another attempt to defy our moral and legal right to own guns in America. There’s no business for the UN to control any laws in the United States, especially when it affects our Second Amendment Rights! This is nothing more than blatant hatred and selfishness knowing that the average citizen of the United States is not the cause of the many shootings occurring throughout our country. No matter what laws that are approved for gun control, the criminals will always have guns through the “Black Market” and not through utilizing the controlled process of owning weapons. What about the Secret Service and Police Officers?The next thing I feel that we will have to fight, is the now so called White House staff, attempting to disarm our very own Military Service Perssonel assigned in the Continental United States. For those individuals fighting to eliminate our Second Ammendment, would probably think otherwise if thier lives were put in harms way. By the way, it’s absurd that the Congress, Senators etc. follow their own set of laws by giving themselves an annual raise of outrageous amounts and our very own Military, Veterans, and Social Security recipients etc. get awarded from only 0.3-2.1 percent so called raises with reasons that the overall affects the Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) Index is too low to allow any additional funding for raises. With the way the majority of our government is so-called running this country, they should be FIRED and every person in this country should be forced to pay in to Social Security and retire with the same concept that the average men and women are forced to receive. We’re the ones who voted them in and we should be the one controlling them. Different laws should NOT be accepted. “ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL”……..

  • Robert H Raymond December 16, 2016, 10:00 am

    Obama is a fool and Chicago proves It!!!!! Obama for 8 years has tried to destroy America and make it Africa 2 in ordet to collapse the constitution and the bill of rights!!!!!! impeach him or start impeachment and take all his powers away unti the bastard is gone and out of America!!!!!!!

  • BigC December 16, 2016, 9:56 am

    Lame Duck presidents should NEVER be allowed to make binding contracts that will affect America ad infinitum, especially anti-American clowns like this guy!!!!!!

  • BigC December 16, 2016, 9:53 am

    The day I see this clown leave the White House permanently, will be one of the happiest days of my 70 years!!!!!

    • Larry December 16, 2016, 12:51 pm

      Me 2.

  • Z December 16, 2016, 9:42 am

    Another Obama Don’t Care stunt only !!!

    Walk the Plank O’bum …

  • enlistedswine December 16, 2016, 9:27 am

    Having read many of comments placed on this and other websites concerning Bama and Billary it boggles my mind how two people could hate a group of Americans who are employed and paying the taxes that keeps these two well above living the high life. I get the whole “I hate the white race” thing with both of these characters but you need someone to work and pay taxes while a LARGE portion of the population stays at home, makes babies, and is given subsidies for each child. Back in the late 80’s, (Pittsburgh), if you were on welfare, for each child born under the welfare system, you were given either $200 or $400 a month per child to feed, clothe, and educate (am researching the exact subsidy). Having at least four would put you in a “comfortable” living environment while in HUD housing. To what end do the two mentioned above allow more welfare, WIC, urban housing “communities” to spring up when jobs are being transferred overseas. I just don’t understand the financial reasoning behind this type of thinking. Eventually, the welfare group will overpopulate and the taxable working class will be the minority. How do you continue to pay for all the “programs” that keep the welfare populace sitting on the porch? Back to Pittsburgh. A few years back, Pitt decided to “re-evaluate” (assess) all properties housed within the city limits. One reason for this was people were moving out of the city for lack of services being removed due to “financial instability.” I remember one parking space downtown assessed for $250,000; that is not a typo (in the city now not on the outskirts). The whole thing failed miserably as the folks still residing in the city limits (Pitt is spread out with neighborhoods) held meetings and damn near wanted to hang the mayor. I’m putting this out there as a not very academically educated person and attempting to figure out how do we keep people from purposely finding work while the working class pays for all this and the same working class is diminished to the point of losing their homes, and these same working folks who are now living out of their cars or in “camps” will be denied the very welfare that the second and third generation professional non-working folks are entitled. I’m off topic here so my apologizes to all especially the moderators of this site.

    • Jeff December 16, 2016, 10:45 am

      Off-Topic is one thing…. Reminiscing and rambling another. I get it, a lot of people are unemployed and scamming the system. But despite all o the complaining and whining about Obummer, the unemployment rate is extremely low, and apparently, at least in my area this has to be true. We have Help Wanted signs EVERYWHERE, and the jobs in some cases pay $17.50/hr Full Health insurance after 2 weeks, and a $2000 hiring bonus after 3 months of work. 90% of the positions are unfilled. This particular job is unskilled labor in a warehouse setting. Why are the positions unfilled? Lack of applicants. The same with nearly any Help Wanted sign hanging on literally thousands of businesses in this area. No they don’t all pay this well, some are only $10.50/hr to start, but is it better to not work? WTF? The area in case you want to rush off and move here is the St. Paul/Minneapolis area and surrounding Suburbs. Yes it is the freeze your nuts off Capitol of the continental USA, but come on, how is this possible? Yes, yes we have a large minority population that is unemployed, for whatever reason, I’m not getting in to this. I’m just saying if I was young and looking for a job it would literally be pick and choose your job! I grew up in the 1980’s and we took any job we could get! I am lucky enough to be retired at a rather young age, but the 17.50/hr +benefits and hiring bonus is a temptation, and if I didn’t already cut wood, take care of the lawn and snow for church, mow an 8 acre lawn, plow snow and upkeep on a rental property, I might just try it out!

      • Shecky December 16, 2016, 12:08 pm

        It shows we have unemployment rate of 4.9% as a nation…..if that were the case that lock step hillary would have been president. The jobs your talking about don’t work for heads of households, THEY WORK FOR KIDS! If everything was roses Trump wouldn’t have been elected by the biggest margin in modern times….real jobs are not out there. The number that is 4.9% is also misleading as many have just given up trying to find a job so they aren’t showing. We have the biggest homeless problem since EVER and until real jobs are made available it isn’t going to get any better.

        Back on subject…anything obeyme wants he should never get. The Obamas and clintons should be sent to what ever country bests suits their agenda and never let back in the US.

        • Jeff December 16, 2016, 2:11 pm

          First of all I sure as hell did not say everything was roses, and in a sad way I’m damned happy Trump beat the piece of shit Hilary because we sure as hell can’t allow her agenda and cronies to even sniff the seats in the White House.
          On the other hand, you are apparently of the I’d rather sit at home and let (insert whomever supports you) support me because I am worth $35/hr while $36,000/yr including insurance and a bonus is for “kids”. I have a nephew that feels the same way, meanwhile his wife works 3 part-time jobs and his dad (my brother) is his back-up bank when he needs a new car, snowmobile, Christmas presents for his kids etc. Why? Because he is not working for less than $30/hr
          And the homeless problem is nothing compared to what it has been in the past! You seem to make up whatever fits how you feel about a subject. The 1890’s the 1920’s 1930’s all had multiples of per/capita homeless than we do now.
          The real issue with homelessness now is it has increased dramatically due to severe HUD cuts. This started in the early 1980s with the most severe slash, and who was responsible for that?
          No Party is perfect and no policy will fix everyone’s problems, but people like yourself who apparently believe everything the media throws out about job pay, and the fantasy that the only jobs out there are for kids, are part of the problem. It is easy to complain about how tough things are, and another to do something for yourself. And if you are able for others.

          • Just1Spark December 16, 2016, 7:44 pm

            Its the same in Indiana. Theres help wanted signs everywhere. My company pays one of the best wages/benefits around. And we cant get enough people to apply. And if we do get people in the door, they dont last. They cant be bothered to get out of bed 5days in a row for work.

            And heres why. THE GOVT PAYS TO GOOD.

            More and more companies are finding that after the last economy ‘collapse’, the GOOD employees arent venturing out of their existing jobs to look for ‘better’. They are staying the course. (uncertain times and all)

            And the vast majority of people out there that we can get to fill out an application, are the ‘system players’. They are on the govt tit, but need a surgery, or their govtmoney train about to run out, or what ever. And long story short, once they have put in enough time, they quit, and play the “get paid to sit on the couch game” again.

            Theres also a govt program that will pay you (your company) 50% of a persons wages back.
            Thats just one of the FAKE numbers that the govt inflates their ‘unemployment numbers’ with.

            We have done that one. Maybe still are. ?

            Are you seeing a trend?
            Whats the root of the problem?

  • R. Joseph DeValue December 16, 2016, 9:13 am

    Obama is finished so therefore anything he submits should be ignored! C’mon folks let’s use common sense. We’ve come this far, let’s not blow it!

  • thebiggourdhead December 16, 2016, 9:03 am

    Oshitbag is going to keep trying to f**k America until his last day in office.

  • MB December 16, 2016, 8:25 am

    O B A M A…..One Big Ass Mistake America! He and Hillary should both be prosecuted. Trump’s election was a rejection of both of them and their wacko, blame America first party. Good riddance!

    • DT December 16, 2016, 8:51 am

      Watch next week. Nancy Pelosi’s daughter is leading a movement to get 38 electors to change their vote for Hillary, which by the way is legal in 27 states. They plan to do it and not really announce it until inauguration day. These criminals worked too hard and spent too much money to let the power slip through their hands and any attempts to push back will be met with their domestic army (DHS).

      • Jahon Tassemen December 16, 2016, 9:40 am

        If the Electoral College revolts the best they can to is throw the decision to the House Speaker to choose who will be President. There is no way Hillary will be sworn in.

      • WJ December 16, 2016, 10:16 am

        I think the whole Pelosi family should be put in an asylum.They clearly have mental problems and Nancy has for sure fallen off the deep end.

      • Jeffrey Slocum December 16, 2016, 10:57 am

        The fact your so called “don’t announce it” attempt to sway the Electoral College to change their vote, was on every major news outlet in America, and the fact they have already stated they have no intention on going against the voters, makes it seem as if your news source is desperate for a scandal to increase their ratings.. Let’s face facts, a lot of whining pukes are upset they didn’t win the election and are trying everything they can to change the outcome or get a do-over. Let’s also remember who we are dealing with, most were either raised with participation trophies for any event they ever played in, or raised children to believe they deserved a trophy for “trying their best” even if they finished last…..

        • Just1Spark December 16, 2016, 7:49 pm

          Im curious, who would possibly switch sides, specifically to the side that is threatening peoples lives, and playing dirty? Im mean, I wouldnt switch sides just for that reason alone, knowing exactly what types of people I would be helping to get into power. lol wtf

          But ofcourse, we know what makes the govt run. $$$$$$$$$$
          I dont see why it has been so hard to convert these electors. Theres plenty of $$ to buy them off.

  • Allacrossamerica December 16, 2016, 8:16 am

    As I’ve stated in prior comments this MMF in our White House will be most dangerous in his last days. In case you’re wondering what MMF stands for, the first two letters are Muslim Marxists…….I let you guess what the “F” stands for.
    This POS belongs in a cell next to the bitch

    • KimberproSS December 16, 2016, 9:54 am

      I guessed the second “M” was mother..

  • Mort Leith December 16, 2016, 7:46 am

    BOTH ODumbo AND Hanoi John Kerry should be impeached asap for this blatant traitorous act of signing anything that clearly violates our Constitution 2nd Amendment rights !

  • jadwinjim December 16, 2016, 7:39 am

    Rule of thumb: If Obama wants approval for anything from either Congress or The Senate the answer should be “No F’en Way”

  • Jay December 16, 2016, 7:36 am

    The anti American president tries real hard to kill us all, one step at a time! The real danger here is that with the presidents signature this travesty of a treaty, or should I say a side step to registration of not only firearms but ammunition also of the end user, once signed it’s just one step from approval and stays there unless another president removes it from the order of things. Meaning Trump can undo what the obozo has done but again obozo was never intent on making Trumps transition to the presidency a smooth one!

  • Paul rovira December 16, 2016, 6:11 am

    President lame duck Obama IS a musilum he hates our country he would like nothing more then to see our country fall to a religion that hates us meanwhile those animals our here on welfare the women having babies like Ginipigs just come and see in NYC hospitals

  • Erick December 16, 2016, 5:59 am

    Come on people, we don’t need guns to protect ourselves; we have Dear Leader and 25-star General Super Obama! He will single-handedly protect each and everyone one of us through his super powers. Once he gets a distress call, he will put down his golf clubs and hop in his eco-friendly, 100% carbon-neutral, private jet and rescue everyone in need. If he’s required to rubber-stamp a few thousand pages of legislation to save the universe, his amazing abilities get it done 1000 times quicker than anyone else! Of course, some are in more need than others – like his corporate friends, billionaire donors, and globalist elites – but we can wait for his Excellency a few extra hours, right? Nothing truly evil ever happens in just a few measly hours!
    I sleep well knowing that Dear Leader Captain Supreme is watching over us and cares deeply for every one of his sheep!

    • Charles December 16, 2016, 7:01 am

      That is why I sleep with my .45 under my pillow.

    • Abner T December 16, 2016, 8:07 am

      That’s “taxpayer-funded private jet, along with his taxpayer-funded secret service detail”… BTW

  • Tejano Viejo December 16, 2016, 5:49 am

    Fo’getta’boutit !!! … Ain’tgonnahoppen !!!

  • Joe December 16, 2016, 5:22 am

    January 20th can’t come soon enough !!

  • Shavager December 16, 2016, 4:56 am

    Obama simply refuses to limit his actions to CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES! In a landmark case, “Reid v Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957), the United States Supreme Court effectively DECLARED ANY TREATY OR INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT THAT CONFLICTS WITH THE CONSTITUTION ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL! “NO agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on Congress, or ANY other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution.” Further, the Court added: “an international agreement that is inconsistent with the U.S. CONSTITUTION IS VOID UNDER DOMESTIC U.S. LAW, the same as any other Federal law in conflict with the Constitution.” The Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution supercedes ANY international treaties ratified by the U.S. Senate.

    • Joe McHugh December 16, 2016, 6:38 am

      Shavager, You are correct about unconstitutional treaties being void and unenforceable. However, even a piece of work like the
      U.N. Arms Trade Treaty is enforceable once it is signed by the President or his representative. It remains the law of the land until the Senate of the United States votes against ratification. That’s exactly why Harry Reid did not allow a Republican majority floor vote on this treaty. When the Republicans won the majority status, Mitch McConnell did not think that the treaty was worth his attention. Worse, there is no time limit on scheduling an up or down vote in the Senate.

      The reason for the lack of a time limit has to do with the time it took for the sailing ships to bring the treaty document to the United States, and the additional time it took for all of the Senators to convene to conduct a vote. Obviously, the Founding Fathers did not foresee the despicable behavior of a Senator such as Harry Reid, or the RINO behavior of Senator McConnell.

      The natural question arises, namely why didn’t obama issue an executive order to severely restrict firearms, based on the vague provisions of the Arms Control Treaty? This is why, he knew that the Republicans in the Senate would vote not to ratify the treaty and thereby kill it outright. So obama bided his time while Harry Reid stalled a vote on ratification. obama must have thought that the Hildabeast would win the election, and that the Democrats would also win the majority rule in the Senate.

      November 8, 2016 spelled the effective end of the U.N. Arms Control Treaty. Donald Trump will not issue an executive order against private ownership of firearms, and the Senate will not vote to ratify it. The Senate will probably wait until January 20, 2017 to take a vote on the still enforceable U.N. Arms Control treaty to officially drive a stake in its heart.

      • Jahon Tassemen December 16, 2016, 9:45 am

        I wish Obama had written some executive orders for Gun Control. Then when Trump gets in there and strikes lines thru them.. they can never be rewritten again.. EVER!

    • Harold V Rogers December 16, 2016, 7:57 am

      Do Not let Obama ,Pass Anymore Laws against Our Gun’s Control ! It is Our Rights, he is Placing Infringement Laws that do not set well with Our Agenda !! (Stop Him Now ) Thank You

  • Cigar December 16, 2016, 3:26 am

    Couldn’t agree more with Super G. The treaty has absolutely nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment nor would it impact American rights or gun ownership. It’s opposed by Congress because it might make it slightly less profitable to sell tanks to other countries.

    • Joe McHugh December 16, 2016, 6:49 am

      Cigar, you might want to read the U.N. Arms Control Treaty. It is worded so vaguely, that any leader of a country that signed it could restrict private ownership of firearms based on that treaty. This was not an accident, it was a deliberate move to enable creatures like obama, to make the Second Amendment an irrelevant artifact from 1789.

      The average American citizen is not always aware of what their “trusted” elected officials are doing. We elect these people to represent us, and we give them immense power to make laws and administer them. The U.N. Arms Control Treaty is an example of why the public should be just as interested in what the Congress and the President are doing, as what baseball team is winning. Yeah, I know, the average voter is a low-information person with no desire to be anything else. More’s the pity.

    • Stuart December 16, 2016, 6:55 am

      Nonsense. We don’t sell weapons to our enemies. Russia and China do. We sell to our NATO allies and Japan. As far as the 2nd Amendment and the treaty we would be screwed. Why do you think anti gun Obama is pushing so hard? Would he be supporting this if it were pro gun? Think!

      • Z December 16, 2016, 10:10 am

        Complete bunch of c…
        You should start to thinking, now.
        But looks it’s way TO LATE for you.

      • Jeffrey Slocum December 16, 2016, 12:44 pm

        I hope you are writing in a satirical manner? We sell outside of NATO on a regular basis. Apparently you are just using your comment as a way to get people to actually research who we are selling arms to and have in the past sold to, right? Research (ITAR) for those who are doing so…. And then read how simple it is for I mean why else would you write something so blatantly and obviously false? Oh wait, maybe you are trying to get people to research who the NATO members are versus who we sell arms to so they won’t embarrass themselves and write something so obviously flawed? I’m thinking these things because you do have facts on your comment that are, well, actually FACTS! e.g.
        “As far as the 2nd Amendment and the treaty we would be screwed. Why do you think anti gun Obama is pushing so hard? Would he be supporting this if it were pro gun? ”
        So… Good job?? Non-NATO countries we have or do sell arms to off the top of my head: Afghanistan, Fiji, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Sierra Leone. The list is actually extensive, and very complicated but as I’m sure you know we certainly sell weapons to Non-NATO countries!!

        • Joe McHugh December 17, 2016, 6:23 am

          Jeffrey Slocum, your comments to Stuart are basically correct, but obama couldn’t care less about arms trading between countries. His overriding concern about small arms are the same as they have always been, namely the private ownership of firearms in America.

          obama would use this arms control treaty to justify severe restrictions on the sales of firearms inside of the United States. The Arms Control Treaty provisions are rather vague. They are so vague that they could be used for anti Second Amendment regulation. Example: The U.N. Arms Control Treaty allows the signatory nations to restrict or outlaw any small arms that could be used to destabilize the government. If you are thinking that this means fully automatic machine guns you are partially correct. It could also mean a high power bolt action rifle with a telescope for long range sniping. You know, just like the hunting rifles that millions of American sportsmen use.

          The key point to keep in mind is that the wording of the U.N.Arms Control Treaty is vague, and that the treaty enables government leaders to use it for international and DOMESTIC firearms control. This is yet another obama manipulation aimed at making the Bill of Rights an irrelevant artifact from the 18th century.

    • Mike December 16, 2016, 5:23 pm

      The founders never put the word ‘abortion’ in the constitution, but, 240 years on, it’s a right. There may not be anything in this treaty as written, to infringe on gun ownership, but later interpretations could go in that direction.

  • SuperG December 14, 2016, 10:50 am

    Let’s get to the real reason why Congress will drop it like a hot rock…it impacts corporate profits. Few Senators give a damn about our rights anymore, but they do care about their bribes. Oops, I meant honorariums. My bad.

    • 33Charlemagne December 16, 2016, 3:42 am

      No let’s really get real! The Senators are much more concerned about the reaction from a particularly motivated interest group, Second Amendment supporters, than they are about the profits of a relatively small industry.

      • Joe McHugh December 16, 2016, 6:55 am

        33Charlemagne, please allow me edit your comment a bit. “The Senators are much more concerned about the reaction from a particularly motivated interest group, Second Amendment supporters than they are about the profits of a relatively small industry, and that’s the way it should be.”. 33Charlemagne, you do feel that way, don’t you?

    • studi30 December 16, 2016, 6:59 am

      Corporate profits are what keep this country alive. Gates, Ford, GM etc. etc. create business and provide jobs for America. Trump will bring it all back here.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend