How Soon Will Obama Attack the 2nd? Right Away!

For four years Obama has pretty much avoided gun owners because he knew the issue is political poison.

Now that he has a "mandate" for 4 more years, and as he said to Dimitri Medveydev, "I will have more freedom," the gloves have come off.

On Nov 7th, the Administration announced they are open to a renewed discussion of the UN Arms Trade Treaty.  The ATT failed to make headway in August after the US declared it was not appropriate to include civilian small arms.  So now, with more freedom, Obama is changing the US position and has invited new talks about worldwide gun control on March 18-28. Of course, Obama loves Executive Orders and will likely use them to implement many of the details of the ATT without a Congress-ratified Treaty. Thankfully, many Senators have reaffirmmed they will not support the ATT.  But that may not be enough to thwart the executive orders.  See here: US-senator-moran-reaffirms-senate-opposition-to-un-arms-trade-treaty

Diane Feinstein has also announced renewed efforts to re-invent the Assault Weapons Ban, her creation in 1994 that died in 2004 with no renewal support in the Congress.  This time she even wants to confiscate the "evil" black guns, as well as most semi-auto rifles and shotguns.

And there is talk of Susan Rice becoming the next Secretary of State.  Rice has been the UN Ambassador, and is very anti-gun.

And of course, Obama may very well be able to get two more Supreme Court judges appointed.  It is likely they will be like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan and be anti-gun, regardless of what they say in their confirmation hearings.  Both the aforementioned essentially lied about how they would treat settled case law and historical precedent concerning the 2nd and the recent Heller and MacDonald cases.

Elections have consequences.  One of them will be a savage battle over 2nd Amendment rights.  I find it sad that so many Democrats can't seem to understand that they have actually voted for politicians who will destroy their basic civil rights when given the chance.  Obama and crew now have that chance.

P.S.  In the previous 4 years, Obama and Crew did all they could, albeit under the radar to destroy the 2nd Amendment:
- Executive order for the border states of CA, AZ, NM, TX so that gun dealers must reprot a sale of more that one semi-auto rifle in a week to one person.
- Banned re-import of 600,000 M1 Garands and M1 Carbines from Korea.  These are WW!! rifles with historical interest and not remotely of interest to criminals.
- DOJ spent enormous respources on opposing 2nd Amendment rights in the Supreme Court and at the state level.  Think Washington, DC gun ban, for one.
- And famously, Obama promised Sarah Brady that in his second term he would take up her cause openly, no longer "under the radar."
- And not least, his declaration in the 2nd debate that he will support a renewed "assault" weapons ban.

UN Tyranny: The Food Police

I am not a fan of the United Nations.  Let me explain a little.  When I was a teenager, lying in the grass with my friend Jack on a warm summer evening, a favorite game was to wonder on how we could make the world better, IF we were the benevolent dictators of the world.  From the optimistic naivete of youth we were convinced we would solve all the problems.

Fast forward 40 years.  Now that I have a little experience of the real world, I recognize that even benevolent dictators are dangerous to individual freedom.  Because they don't think the same as I do and I want to make choices they probably would not make.

That is the problem with the UN.  It thinks it is that benevolent dictator.  Trouble is, its ideas of what is best for the world as a whole or for the individual is rarely the same as the choices those individuals would make.  Indeed, their version of "best for the world" is a far, far distance from what most people think is best.

Why is this?  It is because the UN is an association of governments.  Not of individuals.  And the majority of those governments are not any way close to being benevolent or even democratic.  Governments want what is best for them, and rarely what is best for their citizens.

So we come to the Food Police.  This latest UN effort is to develop guidelines for food production, processing and consumption that would be equal worldwide.  Sounds good, right?  Well, what if it means rules that outlaw foods you like?  What if it includes taxes on foods like soda pop, white rice, Twinkies, and salty bacon that are intended to price those items out of reach of most people?  Except the rich, of course.  The UN is discussing such rules this week in New York.  And you can't do much about it because your government is probably one of teh ones that supports this concept. 

Wasn't there once a guy named George Orwell?  Back in 1984, I think.