Hi folks.
I had a call today from the NRA. They've never called me before, and I'm not a member, so I thought that was interesting for starters.
Anyway, they played me a message from Wayne la Pierre, and then asked me if I wanted to join. The gist of the message was that we taxpayers are funding a completely outrageous meeting at the UN in which the US may sign a treaty that will give other countries (such as China) the right to impose restrictions on US gunowners.
I respect the fact that the NRA was not repeating any of the more absurd versions of this story that are going around (e.g., that the President has already signed this treaty and that our rights are already in jeopardy). Nonetheless, I'm having trouble working out how much of this is a legitimate, factual account of the situation, and how much is scaremongering. I've done some research online, but I figure some of you people might already be knowledgeable on the matter and might have something to share.
My own take is that we haven't signed any such treaty, that people are perfectly entitled in a free country to discuss such things, that there is no such thing as a treaty that can circumvent congress (it would still need 2/3 majority support), and that a treaty in any case could not undermine the Constitution and the rights it protects. Still, I accept that there may be politicians who might try to use such means (however impractical) to build support for gun control, and I respect any effort to bring that to my attention. But I also despise any attempt to mislead me about the actual state of the threat.
What do you think? What is your take? Have you received one of these calls?
Cheers,
Kleinzeit
I had a call today from the NRA. They've never called me before, and I'm not a member, so I thought that was interesting for starters.
Anyway, they played me a message from Wayne la Pierre, and then asked me if I wanted to join. The gist of the message was that we taxpayers are funding a completely outrageous meeting at the UN in which the US may sign a treaty that will give other countries (such as China) the right to impose restrictions on US gunowners.
I respect the fact that the NRA was not repeating any of the more absurd versions of this story that are going around (e.g., that the President has already signed this treaty and that our rights are already in jeopardy). Nonetheless, I'm having trouble working out how much of this is a legitimate, factual account of the situation, and how much is scaremongering. I've done some research online, but I figure some of you people might already be knowledgeable on the matter and might have something to share.
My own take is that we haven't signed any such treaty, that people are perfectly entitled in a free country to discuss such things, that there is no such thing as a treaty that can circumvent congress (it would still need 2/3 majority support), and that a treaty in any case could not undermine the Constitution and the rights it protects. Still, I accept that there may be politicians who might try to use such means (however impractical) to build support for gun control, and I respect any effort to bring that to my attention. But I also despise any attempt to mislead me about the actual state of the threat.
What do you think? What is your take? Have you received one of these calls?
Cheers,
Kleinzeit