BREAKING: U.N. Passes Arms Trade Treaty

Free Syrian Army soldiers in Idlib

“The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to approve the first-ever treaty to regulate the enormous global trade in conventional weapons,” the New York Times reports. [Click here to read.] Despite previously stating that it would only support the Arms Trade Treaty if the document had consensus, the U.S. joined 152 other countries in voting for the agreement, which bans sales to “unauthorized end user or end users.” Although the treaty ties exports of tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber weapons, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles and launchers, small arms and light weapons and ammunition to “humanitarian” concerns, it’s not expected to have much impact on the international arms trade, save becoming another stick to beat-up freelance arms dealers (when desired). Domestically, it must be ratified by the U.S. Senate and signed by the Prez. Ain’t gonna happen.


  1. avatar Rebecca says:

    I say again: this is not the change I voted for. WTH, Mr. President?

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Maybe not — but if you voted for Obama, it’s the change you deserve. So sorry.

      1. avatar Charles5 says:


      2. avatar ammo-Zombie says:


        when god really wants to punish you he gives you your fondest wish……

      3. avatar Rebecca says:

        Ouch. You’re right, but *ouch*.

        1. avatar Jason says:

          Makes me wonder what change you did want? Stronger teacher’s unions? More generous retirement plans for the public sector? Gay marriage?

        2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          Voted with those feelings, eh Rebecca? I have zero sympathy.

        3. avatar ProfBathrobe says:

          Live and learn I guess. I wasn’t interested in policy at all until my rights came under fire.

        4. avatar Totenglocke says:

          And how many of the people mocking her for voting for the authoritarian Obama voted for Romney and McCain (who are both openly anti-Second Amendment)? I know from reading this site for a couple of years that very few people here are pro-freedom, most just want their views forced upon others and merely differ in which views they want to be made mandatory.

        5. avatar GS650G says:

          And I guess any other 3rd party choices were valid choices? In a two party system there isn’t much choice.

      4. avatar Guardian says:

        So true/Sarcasm**** We all know that Mittler Romney would have done nothing to push gun control measures in the aftermath of Sandy Hook.

        1. avatar Jason says:

          Extreme hyperbole by trying to equate someone who killed millions of Jews to someone who has conservative principles doesn’t help your case. Mitt was pretty clear in the debate about his view on guns. Who knows what would have happened if Mitt had been elected but it wasn’t a big stretch to know that this would happen under Obama.

        2. avatar Matt in FL says:

          I agree with Jason. I’m not going to say for sure that this couldn’t have happened under Romney, but I feel pretty secure in saying that I don’t think Romney had this in the drawer waiting on the right moment. I’m equally secure in saying that Obama (or at least the Congressional Democrats) did.

        3. avatar Bob Fairlane says:

          Why were “millions of jews” in a European country? Oh, right, same reason they are in America (to attack and defame white people).

        4. avatar Sammy says:

          Re: Romney

          Deflection is not discourse. The point is barry was, is and will always be a collectivist who misrepresents (lies about) anything he talks about. We had 4 years of this man’s actions and the consequences there of to evaluate. Romney wasn’t the only other choice.

      5. avatar BradN says:

        I voted for Obama the first time because anybody was better than the F-up that was the Bush Administration. McCain and Palin terrified me. The second time around, Obama sure didn’t get my vote. Anyone that votes for either of the two reigning parties deserves what they get. I learned my lesson the first time.

        1. avatar Harold says:

          Agree only I never voted for him the first time, and if you think Obama is bad Hilary will be much worse.

        2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          All I can tell you is that during the Bush years I didn’t awaken every single morning to have my gut punched when scanning the Drudge headlines like I have during the Obama years.

        3. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

          Clinton taught me my lesson when I was first eligible to vote in 1992, largely as a response to Bush I’s lie about No New Taxes. Haven’t voted for a R or D for president since.

        4. avatar neiowa says:

          What seperates the US from the cesspool of politics in Britain (or europun in general)? Two party system. You think it’s bad now? Change it to some moronic multiparty parlimentary system (think the UN). Every pissant with 4 buddies must get his butt kissed in order to form a “coalition”.

          Get involved in the system and understanding how it works (properly). Then fix it. And much is broken right now. In both parties and big bloated out of control gov’t (spending) is at the heart of it.

      6. avatar Accur81 says:

        100% Agree. 1/2 The nation fell for “Hope and Change” ver 2.0. Well, here it comes.

        1. avatar Jesus says:

          I’m still calling BS for Florida going to Obama.

        2. avatar Matt in FL says:

          You can call BS all you want. The math doesn’t lie.

        3. avatar Accur81 says:

          The math may lie, but I wouldn’t put it past voter fraud. Good thing all these Dems oppose voter ID.

      7. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        Realizing the mistake is an excellent step. Wish more Obama voters would. Much rides on 2014. If enough grabbers get voted out, it just might be possible to ride out the Obama second term without irreparable damage (at the federal level at least).

    2. avatar Randy Drescher says:

      Same here Rebecca, Try to do some decent after asshole bush & I get kicked in the teeth for it, Randy

    3. avatar theaton says:

      If you voted for Obama, this IS the change you voted for! He said what he was going to do when he was running for President. Did you think his talk about redistribution of wealth and transforming America was just BS?

    4. avatar mp504 says:

      So Rebecca how does it feel to not only vote stupid, but to knowingly vote stupid? Not the change you wanted? You are a perfect example of why people should not think. You and those like you, should be required to register with the state as a test subject for frontal lobatomy experimentation.

  2. avatar eugene says:

    anyone have cliff notes on the effects of this?

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      This is the Cliff Note: FLASHPOINT DEAD AHEAD!

    2. avatar Jason says:

      We really don’t know because it is all about how the new powers are used. What it does is empower governments to regulate international small arms trafficking, but it may be able to be stretched to include civilian disarmament (something many UN states openly support).

    3. avatar theaton says:

      No treaty can violate the Constitution of the United States. They’ll try and if we let them, we deserve whatever comes.

  3. avatar mlopilato says:

    With zero power to enforce.

    1. avatar MikeP says:

      I’ll repeat it again as I always do on this topic: we don’t even have to ratify this for it to affect the firearms market domestically. Many popular rifles (well, some of my favorites, at least) are mil-surp imported from around the world in order to get rid of “obsolete” (I’ll take it!) inventory and make some scratch in the process.

      Same goes for (formerly) inexpensive mil-surp ammo, much of which is the only affordable feeding option for the aforementioned mil-surp rifles. Beyond mil-surp, some of the least expensive quality ammo for something like a Mauser or Mosin is something like Privi Partisan … made in Serbia. Likewise for reloading components … affordable 8mm brass and bullets are, again, Privi. Imported. There’s the inexpensive Ruskie stuff (Wolf, TulAmmo, Monarch, etc).

      Then there are modern firearms. Shotguns (usually with scull-pattern cammo) made in Turkey and rebranded Weatherby upon import. Many inexpensive “US branded” options are actually likewise imported and rebranded. Springfield Armory M1As are put together with many foreign-sourced parts (barrels I believe are made in Canada, receivers elsewhere, etc). XDs/XDMs made in Croatia. Walther (Germany). Sig (Germany too, though I think they do have US production). Taurus (Brazil). Glock (Austria).

      I think I’ve made that point. Now on to the other. Many of these countries *will* become signatories of this treaty. Depending upon its implementation, many signatory nations may decide, or be required, to cease exports to non-signatory nations. Further, one of the provisions (not sure if its still in there) required the companies who export to “prove” that their products will not be used to “violate human rights” before they would be “permitted” by their signatory sovereign to export. This may even includ exports of replacement parts, magazines, etc. I won’t hold my breath until someone figures out what, precisely, the scope of “violate human rights” would be, nor how one would go about proving their product wouldn’t be used for that purpose.

      So we don’t have to enforce squat. While my possible scenario doesn’t eliminate firearms completely from the market, the affordable imported options could be gone, and the money left chasing what is left would bid prices up. Further.

      1. avatar Ben says:

        Possibly some foreign gun makers could start manufacturing in the US, but such a move would still probably raise prices.

      2. avatar Human Being says:

        It’s not just modern rifles either. The Browning/FN/Winchester 1886 and 1892 model lever-action guns are all made by Miroku in Japan.

  4. avatar Powers says:

    Cliff Notes:
    Total BS. F the UN. Worthless and incompetent corrupt organization of the worst people there are..politicians who think they know better and want control.

    As for how it will affect the is kinda weird. Some of the language on controlling exports and manufacture is vague. Some say it can be construed to effect private citizens and others say it only applies to large manufacturers. But large manufacturers sell to pvt citizens…no matter what it seems to be bad and I also look forward to a guide or synopsis of the actual effects it will have on the US.

  5. avatar Stacy says:

    Yesterday’s foil-hat conspiracy theory, today’s headline. I think Obama has brought us more of these moments than anyone prior…

    1. avatar Human Being says:

      I don’t know of anyone in so high an office with as much contempt for rule of law and their own regulations. One follows the other. But until it does it sounds tin-foil because it would otherwise be so out of the norm for how things are (or have-been) done.

  6. avatar C says:

    “If you don’t do as we say, we will be very angry with you, and write you a letter telling you how angry we are.” …unless you are a friend of ours, then we’ll slip you some cash under the table.

    1. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      Ohh you’we bweakin’ my balls, Hans!

  7. avatar Joel says:

    None. This is intended to restrict arms sales to countries and groups that are known to be trouble, not legitimate trade. See those people in the picure at the top of this story? If you’re not one of them you needn’t worry. And no, this does not give some UN sponsored organization control over us. Conspiracy theories begin in 3…2…1….

    1. avatar MikeP says:

      You mean groups their governments have designated as known maybe possible terrorists? Like US gun owners?

  8. avatar Chris Adams says:

    Couldn’t foreign manufacturers open up shops in the US to skirt around importing or exporting restrictions? Sig Sauer, Berretta, anyone else make all their guns sold in the US here in the US?

    1. avatar Ben says:

      I think Taurus manufacturers some domestically, maybe in Miami?

    2. avatar Taylor says:

      The Treaty is intended to make it so countries like Somalia or Myanmar won’t be able to import new weapons. It won’t kill global gun trade altogether. Some speculate that the U.N. is using this as an excuse to round up civilian-owned weapons, but this was conjurred by the Tin Foil Hat Society.(lol lol)

  9. avatar Okierim says:

    Don’t count the senate out yet, despite the vote a few days ago, this will come up again… And Obama will use to curb the 2A…this is the house that he is building..

  10. avatar Loyd says:

    Cliff notes:

    The UN General Assembly has no power administrative or legislative power. The Security Council is the only actual decision making power in the UN. Any vote by the General Assembly is strictly a feel-good “hey who thinks this is a good idea?” measure with no power to enact or ratify treaties. If you want an idea on how the Security Council would vote on it, Russia and China both abstained the GA vote, and they both have veto powers on the SC.

    1. avatar C says:

      and running guns is like the Russian national pastime.

      1. avatar Loyd says:

        The five biggest gun runners in the world are the 5 perminant members of the UNSC (US, UK, Russia, China, France). The Arms Trade Treaty is just removing the second tier competition.

        1. avatar 16V says:

          Precisely. This will in no way impede the efforts of the world’s largest arms producers to sell product above board to whomever they wish.

          Nor will it make any of the UNSC govs unable to clandestinely arm whatever shady group(s) they see as serving their national interest.

          It will just twist the torniquet a little tighter on the flow to us serfs.

  11. avatar Rambeast says:

    “Each State Party shall adopt national legislation or other appropriate national measures regulations and policies as may be necessary to implement the obligations of this Treaty”

    Gotta love the vague nature of the language.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      Insert executive order here

  12. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    How is the CIA supposed to arm Al-Queda sympathizers and overthrow foreign regimes if they can’t traffic weapons? Oh wait, they probably get an exemption. Now I can rest easy.

  13. avatar aweds says:

    The US government is the largest arms dealer on the planet. Congress will never ratify this and hurt its own sales. It’s just more UN blather and Democratic posturing.

  14. avatar Ensitue says:

    And ObamaCare would NEVER pass the US Supreme Court Challange

  15. avatar Shenandoah says:

    Screw you guys, I’m going home. (Cartman voice)

  16. avatar BadKarma525 says:

    All this anti-american bull$#!t is giving me the worst headache ever…

    1. avatar Human Being says:

      Never go to Europe for a “relaxing vacation”.

  17. avatar Silver says:

    Wanna hear a good joke?

    The UN.

  18. avatar Dodie Bishoff says:

    I have to agree with former posters…A man who wouldn’t even salute our flag…???…His wife says for the first time in her adult life she’s proud of her country?.??….Boy what warning signals…A light went off in my head…. And people voted for him ?.??…I think I’d just keep it to yourself, because you people have destroyed our country…You get what you deserve, but a tragedy the rest of us have to suffer for your ignorance…

    1. Sorry, Dodie Biishoff, but there is no non-debunked confirmation that Barack Obama ever failed to salute the flag. If you want to read how the false rumors that he failed to do so got started, check out this URL:

      1. avatar Chuck conly says:

        Sorry, Snopes is another Obama excuse maker! Covering up everything! Not a credable source!

  19. avatar Pete says:

    Does this mean iporting sporter ak’s and russian ammo is screwed?

  20. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

    Crap, there goes the rest of the formerly cheap Russian ammo. Even if import isn’t blocked, people will horde it even more now.

  21. avatar ken kish says:

    Could someone tell me how this will ultimately effect us gun loving, law-abiding, US citizens with 2nd Amendment rights.
    Thank you!

  22. This is a good reason why the next US president must withdraw the United States out of the United Nations.

  23. avatar Mmmtacos says:

    Now that we are safe in the bosom of the UN from evil gun traffickers can we start importing firearms without restriction now? Thanks so much, I know y’all will let that one pass.

  24. avatar Lance says:

    Call your Sens its our last line of defense call them.

  25. avatar 2nd Amendment Rules says:

    If one of these UN gestapo people comes on my property they DIE

  26. avatar Ike says:

    I’m going to put on my tinfoil hat and predict:

    Remember that the Senate doesn’t have to ratify a treaty for it to be implemented. If the President or Secretary of State sign it, then it has the force of law unless the Senate repudiates it. If it is never brought before the Senate, it can still have the force of law.

    Even if the Senate doesn’t ratify the UN treaty, ATF, with the full support of the Administration, will immediately begin to implement some “registration” provisions under the guise of additional “tracing”. Check it out. ATF has been working with the UN for years while the provisions of this treaty have been in development – presenting papers, and providing technical consulting on how to implement comprehensive “tracing” (i.e. Registration). Who can stop them (ATF)? Certainly not this administration.

    For a number of years,ATF and the administration have been building a case for modernization (computerization) of the out-of-business dealer records for easier retrieval. In any number of articles, ATF has been whining about their ‘antiquated’ system for tracing firearms sales. They complain about boxes and boxes of paper records that have to be searched. They also complain about ‘antiquated’ microfiche records that have to be searched. In case you’ve forgotten, these are the dealer “Bound Book” and Form 4473s which full registration records of every new and used gun which went through the dealer – then turned over to the ATF Out of Business Record Center – and are now being computerized. The new treaty – ratified or not – will be used as an excuse to computerize more of these records. Even more such records will follow.

    They won’t stop until full firearms registration is implemented.

    Ok, I’ll take off my tinfoil hat now, and get off my soapbox….

  27. Chill out, y’all. Passage of anything by the U. N.’s General Assembly doesn’t mean squat. It’s passage by the Security Council that will set off alarm bells, but that would require that none of the countries that benefit from the arms trade, like the U. S., Russia, and China, not veto it, and perhaps I’m being over-optimistic, but I suspect that at least tweo of those countries will veto. And even the U. N. Arms Treaty passes unanimously, in order for it to be binding on this country it would still have to be ratified by the U. S. Senate, which will likely never happen. But as other posters to this site have pointed out, if the Treaty is fully passed by the U. N., then certain conventional weapons manufactured in foreign countries, like the Norinco offerings from China, are likely to become unavailable or prohibitively expensive, and many enterprising souls will grow wealthy smuggling guns and running a black market in firearms.

  28. Chill out, y’all. Passage of anything by the U. N.’s General Assembly doesn’t mean squat. It’s passage by the Security Council that will set off alarm bells, but that would require that none of the countries that benefit from the arms trade, like the U. S., Russia, and China, not veto it, and perhaps I’m being over-optimistic, but I suspect that at least tweo of those countries will veto. And even the U. N. Arms Treaty passes unanimously, in order for it to be binding on this country it would still, even if signed by the President and the Secretary of State, ultimately have to be ratified by the U. S. Senate, which will likely never happen. But as other posters to this site have pointed out, if the Treaty is fully passed by the U. N., then certain conventional weapons manufactured in foreign countries, like the Norinco offerings from China, are likely to become unavailable or prohibitively expensive, and many enterprising souls will grow wealthy smuggling guns and running a black market in firearms.

    1. avatar Chuck conly says:

      Feinstein’s husband already is running chinese guns to Mexico! He got caught a few years ago! Luckily Klinton covered up for him! But the Mexican government still wants him! On the other hand, The witch herself is on the veterans committee, giving no bid contracts to her husband! Scamming the vets, another democrat pastime! Millions of our tax dollars into their pockets!

  29. avatar Anonymous says:

    This is going to change nothing. Global government bans are about as effective as US government bans.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email