AMERICAN's take note!

[DaveInDenver]

So dwh had a terrible boating accident, did ya?

[Scott C]

In very,very deep water.

[Hill, Bill E.]

In very,very deep water.

What a coincidence! I had my canoe turn over in Lake Superior, while bringing my entire collection out to Isle Royal to show a friend of mine.

Very, very deep water...............

[K2ZJ]

What a coincidence! I had my canoe turn over in Lake Superior, while bringing my entire collection out to Isle Royal to show a friend of mine.

Very, very deep water...............

What timing, I can't believe I lent you all my guns that morning! I wish I had the money to replace them.

[cnynrat]

The U.N. Committee charged with developing the draft of this treaty to be voted on by the General Assembly failed to reach agreement on a draft last week, so it appears this is dead for the time being. See the news report below:

Washington Post Arms Trade Treaty Article

As noted in the article the treaty may come up for reconsideration later this year, or perhaps next year. The U.S., China, and Russia all stated that they needed more time to consider the treaty, so that's what scuttled it this time around. Frankly, I predict it will come back, but I also think those countries that do major business in arms trade (see list above) will continue to have objections.

Some may observe that the current administration may be marking time until they have "more flexibility."

Given the recent rash of tragic boating accidents the government may be wise to develop training programs to increase boating safety.

[DiploStrat]

The least bit of research will show that:

-- This was a U.S. proposal TO the United Nations, not vice versa, during the Kennedy administration. It is worth noting that the U.S. and the USSR would retain armed forces of "only" 2 million troops, each. Read the full text here: http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html

-- The context is missing as there was no way that that USSR would ever agree to any of this.

-- Nothing in this proposal has anything to do with internal peacekeeping, only international conflict.

Much of what is in this document has been accomplished through the START and test ban treaties. Ironically, this proposal, if adopted would have addressed two of today's hot ticket items - nuclear weapons held by Pakistan and India and Iran's development of nuclear weapons.

The current small arms discussions cover INTERNATIONAL trade in small arms, not domestic holdings. Again, there is little chance of these treaties being adopted as Russian and China make too much money selling small arms.

People, don't be mislead by fear mongers. Do some homework and get back to traveling!

[cnynrat]

The least bit of research will show that:

-- This was a U.S. proposal TO the United Nations, not vice versa, during the Kennedy administration. It is worth noting that the U.S. and the USSR would retain armed forces of "only" 2 million troops, each. Read the full text here: http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html

-- The context is missing as there was no way that that USSR would ever agree to any of this.

-- Nothing in this proposal has anything to do with internal peacekeeping, only international conflict.

Much of what is in this document has been accomplished through the START and test ban treaties. Ironically, this proposal, if adopted would have addressed two of today's hot ticket items - nuclear weapons held by Pakistan and India and Iran's development of nuclear weapons.

The current small arms discussions cover INTERNATIONAL trade in small arms, not domestic holdings. Again, there is little chance of these treaties being adopted as Russian and China make too much money selling small arms.

People, don't be mislead by fear mongers. Do some homework and get back to traveling!

Hey, you're undercutting one of the NRA's chief fund raising tools!

[DiploStrat]

Hey, you're undercutting one of the NRA's chief fund raising tools!

The NRA of today has long since lost any connection with the intent of its "founding fathers."

[TACODOC]

Hey, you're undercutting one of the NRA's chief fund raising tools!

LOL

[TACODOC]

The NRA of today has long since lost any connection with the intent of its "founding fathers."

Which is why I support Gun Owners of America

http://gunowners.org/