UN resolution 2117: http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/List-Of-Traitors.htm#.VFV2-cmwUQM These are the senators who wanted to vote away the rights of the 2nd Amendment.

bcheary Loc: Jacksonville, FL

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/List-Of-Traitors.htm#.VFV2-cmwUQM

These are the senators who wanted to vote away the rights of the 2nd Amendment.

nakkh Loc: San Mateo, Ca

American resolution 89686: Bcheary is a lying dumbass...

bcheary wrote:

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/List-Of-Traitors.htm#.VFV2-cmwUQM

These are the senators who wanted to vote away the rights of the 2nd Amendment.

Huey Driver Loc: Texas

Gee, surprise, mostly all Demorats were in favor of this.

bcheary wrote:

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/l/List-Of-Traitors.htm#.VFV2-cmwUQM

These are the senators who wanted to vote away the rights of the 2nd Amendment.

davidheald1942 Loc: Mars (the planet)

nakkh wrote:

American resolution 89686: Bcheary is a lying dumbass...

you are a certified idiot too.
r.

OldDoc Loc: New York

Please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp for the facts. Although some commenters in this thread are not deterred by facts, it is good for the rest of us to be aware of the foolishness that is taken as gospel by some.

bcheary Loc: Jacksonville, FL

Huey Driver wrote:

Gee, surprise, mostly all Demorats were in favor of this.

:lol: :lol: :thumbup: :thumbup:

bcheary Loc: Jacksonville, FL

OldDoc wrote:

Please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp for the facts. Although some commenters in this thread are not deterred by facts, it is good for the rest of us to be aware of the foolishness that is taken as gospel by some.

If you read my post, the resolution was not passed by a majority vote in the senate, thanks to the republicans. Forty four democrats and two independents sided with the resolution. Snopes was referring to someone who had posted that the resolution had passed.

lightcatcher Loc: Farmington, NM (4 corners)

bcheary wrote:

If you read my post, the resolution was not passed by a majority vote in the senate, thanks to the republicans. Forty four democrats and two independents sided with the resolution. Snopes was referring to someone who had posted that the resolution had passed.

Yes thankfully, and yes I researched it.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

bcheary Loc: Jacksonville, FL

lightcatcher wrote:

Yes thankfully, and yes I researched it.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

:thumbup: :thumbup: :-D

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

davidheald1942 wrote:

you are a certified idiot too.
r.

Agreed! :thumbup:

phcaan Loc: Willow Springs, MO

OldDoc wrote:

Please see http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/untreaty.asp for the facts. Although some commenters in this thread are not deterred by facts, it is good for the rest of us to be aware of the foolishness that is taken as gospel by some.

Sorry OldDoc, I am not buying the so called snopes opinion, this organization is so into the liberal agenda that they slant any question to the left.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

phcaan wrote:

Sorry OldDoc, I am not buying the so called snopes opinion, this organization is so into the liberal agenda that they slant any question to the left.

And so are many others with higher intellect. They have come to fully realize Snopes is NOT non-partisan. Those libtards have been carrying obama's water for six long years.

Black Bart Loc: Indiana

phcaan wrote:

Sorry OldDoc, I am not buying the so called snopes opinion, this organization is so into the liberal agenda that they slant any question to the left.

True but it did say Hillary was trying to get this deal done. Something that needs to be brought up when she runs for Prez.

OldDoc Loc: New York

phcaan wrote:

Sorry OldDoc, I am not buying the so called snopes opinion, this organization is so into the liberal agenda that they slant any question to the left.

Did you bother to look at actual photographs of the ring - it clearly has no foreign writing on it - it is just decorated with common scrolling. The left/right bias of any site is irrelevant when you let your eyes do the looking. Unless, of course, you are blinded by ideology.

OldDoc Loc: New York

Jakebrake wrote:

And so are many others with higher intellect. They have come to fully realize Snopes is NOT non-partisan. Those libtards have been carrying obama's water for six long years.

Actually, Snopes has been online for far longer than that. The main complaint is that they don't apply confirmation bias to anything. I have used them for many years as part of my course in information literacy, and have found them to hoist all sides of the political spectrum onto a petard when needed. Oh...by the way, "obama's" should be "Obama,s", but I'll put that down to a typo, not a deliberate sign of disrespect to the individual who won presidential election twice.