Two Threats to Survival Preppers

I have talked to over a dozen people since Obama was re-elected about what that means to Survival Preppers. It seems many are now concerned that without the need or chance to be re-elected second Obama administration can implement not only economic regulations that will hurt preppers but the Government is in position to implement changes to our second amendment freedoms as well as our very liberty.

Some of these people I have talked to cannot articulate what they are concerned about other than gun control. They have some vision of impending economic doom,.... and as middle of the road as I am, I can't say that they are completly mistaken.

I think besides the chance of an economic collapse being greater with a continuation of the the fiscal policies of the last four years, the real two possible threats to preppers are the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the United Nations Small Arms Treaty.

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

The NDAA authorizes the military to: 1) detainment of persons captured within the United States of America without charge or trial, 2) prosecute said persons through military tribunals for persons captured within the United States 3) the transfer of persons captured within the United States of America to foreign nations (foreign jurisdictions).

Of course this is in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America. But the Government's point is to trust them, they will be very select in using the provisions of the NDAA on American citizens. In fact Senator Carl Levin stated on the floor of the Senate that the NDAA did not pertain to citizens of the U.S. But not we now know that the Office of the President of the United States, requested that such restriction be removed from the 2012 NDAA.

What is more troubling is that the NDAA passed the Senate. An amendment from Senator Udall to forbid the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, was was rejected by a vote of 38–60, along party lines.

What this means is that most of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendment rights that U.S. citizens have enjoyed for a couple hundred years now can be taken away by the U.S Government, presumably the Justice Department, using military assets which are free of restrictions of statutory authority that Federal Law Enforcement agencies have. Potential loses of these rights:

The right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures (4th Amendment);
The right to be free from charge for an infamous or capitol crime until presentment or indictment by a Grand Jury (5th Amendment;
The right to be free from deprivation of life, liberty, or property, without Due Process of law (5th Amendment);
The right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury of our peers in the State or District where the alleged crime shall have been committed (6th Amendment);
The right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation and to confront witnesses (6th Amendment);
The right to Legal Counsel (6th Amendment; and even the right to be free from excessive bail and fines, and cruel and unusual punishment with comes from the 8th Amendment;

The threat here is possible and becomes real if the Government continues to lump survival preppers into anti-government threats groups like the right wing militas and anarchists, like they have with various "intelligence reports" from Department of Homeland Security.

UN Arms Treaty,..and It Will Happen

I previously wrote about this back in August - that post is here.

If you think that a conservative House of Representatives would not allow this happen, you are both right and wroing. If it was in the power of the House it would not happen, but the House is not a player in approval/disapproval of this treaty.  Let me write that again"  It does not matter what Congress wants or does not want - this power is in the President's hands.

If two thirds of the U.N. main body (general membership - not the security council) votes for this treaty, then this treaty becomes defacto law for at least four years unless rejected by the President or the Senate. If this treaty goes into effect it will have the effect of a Constitutional Amendment. Let me say that again,....If this treaty goes into effect it will have the effect of a Constitutional Amendment superceding the 2nd Amendment. The Supreme Court precedence is that International Treaties, that the U.S. is a signature to, trumps U.S. Law. And again, the U.S. will be de facto signatures unless either the President or the Senate reject it.

And speaking of the Senate,....figure the odds on a newly re-elected Barack Obama rejecting this Treaty. Figure the odds on Senator Harry Reid even allowing a vote on this in the Senate. And what is scary is that only a reported 51 Senators, prior to the last election, were against the original treaty. The new Senate will have even more Senators supporting this treaty. The treaty would require nations to register guns and their owners.

Certain types of guns will be outlawed. And the subsequent U.S. Government performance in the treaty provisions will most assuredly require no notice inspections of those people considered to own "arsenals".

The threat here is probably that the UN Arms Treaty will effect gun onwers and since Survival preppers are indivudually responsible for their own security, the ability to own guns and buy ammuniton will certainly be adversely effected by the UN Arms Treaty.

This threat is probable and becomes real if the Government decides to enact compliance with the teay by going after the Survival community because we are open, easy and law abdiing targets,...read "easy targets" to score some initial victories in removing the "excessive guns threats". And since Preppers are preparing to survive a sceanrio where there is not government, we could be seen as "anarchists planning for no government".

Very scary times my friends.

For more information, I suggest going to the excellent Town Hall article on the UN Arms Treaty