Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 956 Posted March 12, 2013 I googled PL 87-297 after a friend showed it to me,,,,,very disturbing,,,,,,especially in that it hasn't been thrown out.... CPBC http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/un/do.htm Share this post Link to post
Tell Sackett SASS 18436 344 Posted March 13, 2013 Whatever that creep signed does not override the Constitution. Share this post Link to post
Hacker, SASS #55963 0 Posted March 13, 2013 Some of these old yet still present (if we can believe what is linked in the OP) need to be cleaned out along with a bunch of bad case law and ignorant/incompetent scotus work. Not to mention presidential orders and bad law passed by congress. Spring cleaning? Share this post Link to post
G #1840 0 Posted March 13, 2013 The links do not appear to point to anything remotely like what was presented. The document linked at the bottom looks like the John Birch Society stuff from the 60s Share this post Link to post
Wolfpack Jack 0 Posted March 13, 2013 I followed the link to the site, every time I clicked on one of the links to the supposed law, I ended up on some page called FindLaw which is trying to sell something. Share this post Link to post
Cheyenne Culpepper 32827 956 Posted March 14, 2013 I followed the link to the site, every time I clicked on one of the links to the supposed law, I ended up on some page called FindLaw which is trying to sell something. then just search pl 87-297 you'll have a choice.. cpbc Share this post Link to post
Allie Mo, SASS No. 25217 6,267 Posted March 14, 2013 Hi Folks, I prefer to go to the source, in this case the US Government. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-75/pdf/STATUTE-75-Pg631.pdf Regards, Allie Mo Share this post Link to post
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 821 Posted March 14, 2013 It doesn't bother me, because I don't pay any Federal income tax anyway, because the income tax is unconstitutional, because Ohio was never properly made a state in the first place. So the so-called "public laws" don't apply. You could look it up. Share this post Link to post
G #1840 0 Posted March 14, 2013 I read Allie's linked document and found NO reference to the things mentioned in the OP. It seems to be an order to allow negotiations on disarmament and the structure for the negotiations. A word search did not find United Nations, Soviet, Russian anywhere in the doc. Share this post Link to post
Stoneburner 0 Posted March 15, 2013 I read Allie's linked document and found NO reference to the things mentioned in the OP. It seems to be an order to allow negotiations on disarmament and the structure for the negotiations. A word search did not find United Nations, Soviet, Russian anywhere in the doc. I agree. I have not had a chance to look at this in-depth (I also downloaded it directly from the government), but a cursory examination leads me to believe it is about disarmament and arms control as they relate to nuclear weapons, NOT personal firearms. If we consider the historical context, nuclear weapons were at the front of everyone's mind at the time, but if this law was really about private firearms, then the assassination of JFK would have given LBJ the perfect rationale for seizure of personal weapons. I think bringing up laws like this for our fellow shooters to look at is a great idea. We're all understandably jittery about any law that is seemingly anti-gun, but we can also show that we are responsible citizens and look at things carefully before raising the general alarm. Share this post Link to post
Utah Bob #35998 15,262 Posted March 15, 2013 I am not concerned. In my opinion this just distracts folks from the more immediate threat of our state and Federal legislatures. Share this post Link to post
Guest Texas Jack Black Posted March 15, 2013 Sky falling again, I hope you all know the looney leftys are loving all this. :wacko: Share this post Link to post