Previous Post
Next Post

U.N. gun control sculpture (courtesy

NSSF Press Release:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) strongly objects to the last-minute reversal on the U.S. government position regarding the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. In the closing hours of negotiations on Thursday, March 28, the government abandoned its previous insistence that the treaty be approved only through achieving “consensus” of all the member states. Requiring consensus had been the United States position going back to earlier administrations . . .

At the end of the session, a U.S. government spokesperson told reporters “It’s important to the United States and the defense of our interests to insist on consensus. But every state in this process has always been conscious of the fact that if consensus is not reached in this process, that there are other ways to adopt this treaty, including via a vote of the General Assembly.” The spokesperson went on to say that the United States would vote “yes” on the treaty in the General Assembly, regardless of the positions of other member states. By abandoning the requirement for consensus the United States is assuring passage of the treaty by the United Nations.

“This abrupt about-face on the long-standing United States requirement for ‘consensus’ illustrates that the Obama Administration wants a sweeping U.N. arms control treaty,” said Lawrence Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. “We are troubled by the timing of the Obama Administration’s decision to abandon consensus on the eve of the Senate debate on pending gun control measures. The United Nations treaty would have a broad impact on the U.S. firearms industry and its base of consumers in the U.S.”

Industry analysts have identified three major areas of concern with the treaty text. The treaty clearly covers trade in civilian firearms, not just military arms and equipment. It will have a major impact on the importation of firearms to the United States, which is a substantial source for the consumer market. And it will impose new regulations on the “transit” of firearms, the term defined so broadly that it would cover all everything from container ships stopping at ports to individuals who are traveling internationally with a single firearm for hunting or other sporting purposes.

“We hope that the Members of the U.S. Senate are closely watching the White House abandon its principles and promises in the rush to ramrod this flawed treaty into effect. Not only will they later be asked to ratify this attack on our constitution and sovereignty, but they will also be lavished with new promises from the administration in its drive to push a broad gun control agenda through the U.S. Senate when it returns from recess. They would be right to question those promises strongly,” concluded Keane.

[h/t Roger]

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Call you Senator tell them not only oppose Obama’s gun grab but this new world government wanting to disarm you.

  2. It would still have to be ratified by the Senate and even then, treaties do not trump the Constitution.

      • …then the only thing we can do is write our politician masters a letter telling them to behave. They ignore it and tell us to FOAD, life goes on. 🙁

    • They don’t trump the Constitution, but forget any AKs coming in or Mosins or anything else made abroad. Also kiss goodbye traveling the world with your firearm.

      • … or the ammo, if you’ve already got such a boomstick. Kis mil-surp importations goodbye, I’d bet.

      • AK-Builder sells flats. And Dies. And rivets. And… And….
        Nodak Spud bends them, puts in the center support, lower rails and heat treats them and sells them as 100% lowers.

        And just how hard is it to:
        – make a barrel?
        – make the trunnions?
        – make the FCG?

        How many mechanics shops are there in the country?…..

        Easiest gun in the world to make and it will go underground if they try to ban it.

        Oh, and not forward assist needed.

      • undoubtedly the cheap 5.45mm ammunition and surplus magazines. I hope im wrong with that assertion.

    • Even if it doesn’t trump the constitution, it can stop gun imports at the source. Think of all the imported guns that could disappear from gun stores.

      • Unfortunately, our Congress can’t stop the UN from passing such a treaty with other nation states. If the other nations elect to ratify this treaty and we do not, we are still screwed when it comes to imports.

    • Yeah okay…and Feinstein and Bloombetg dont really want to disarm us. Their legislation is truly for the kids.

    • You would think that the Constitution would trump the SAFE Act, and that common sense would trump Obamacare. This administration has its own concerns, and it does not appear that the sovereignty of our Constituion is one of them.

    • Reread Article 6, Paragraph 2:

      This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

      I don’t know the legal definition of “trump” as you have used it, but a ratified treaty is the law of the land.

  3. Aside from the obvious stupidity involved in ATTEMPTING to adopt this treaty on US soil there’s a few extra hurdles. Like the sovereign nature of the Constitution regarding treaties, the amendment recently brought into effect adding to this fact, and the fact that the Senate does NOT have any new reason to ratify this treaty.

    This is not what the American people want. Foreign powers deciding domestic policy is destined for failure on so many levels that if anything would cause an armed revolt, mass panic, or civil unrest towards the government that this would be as high on the list as suddenly unplugging the Internet across the continent.

    • Considering how this administration views the constitution
      and follows there own laws, those hurdles don’t seem that
      big. It’d be nice to be able to count on voters to throw up
      opposition, but I doubt more than 20% actually know
      what this treaty says. The rest have either been mislead or
      don’t care.

      • This really isn’t on people’s radar right now and the media frenzy over guns means people will go along with anything they say.

      • The Obama regime,the “progressives” in congress, and their henchmen in the leftist media view the Constitution as nothing more than a deodorant disk in the urinal of life. Boehner and the establishment GOP are, at minimum cowards, and more likely complicit.

  4. This wouldn’t be a big deal if the USA treated UN treaties the same as everyone else. Practically every other country signs these things and then completely ignores them and does whatever the hell they want. America is the only country that will take this seriously.

    • Since the adoption of the Geneva Convention, I doubt a single U.S. PoW has been treated in accordance with it, even by its adopters. My father certainly wasn’t, after he was captured in the Battle of the Bulge. And he probably had it better than most.

      • Don’t even get me started on the Geneva Conventions. They were written by despots for the protection of their conscripts (slaves), not terrorists who travel 1000 miles on their own accord to slaughter civilians.

        It was no mistake naming to your father’s generation as the “greatest generation”.

        • Oh Puh-effen-lease. Pee-yuke.

          The ‘greatest generation’ is the ones who are all in favor of what is happening.

          My old man did the ‘police action’ in Korea. He hates all the vomitous bs spewed by the WWII’ers who have ruined our entire country.

          “Greatest ruin of a civilization” is what they are. My Grandpa who did I and II warned me of the coming s-storm. And it is here…

        • Since 9/11, the only people traveling 1000 miles to slaughter non combatants has been the US military.

          The terrorists in the United States should be arrested, tried, and convicted. We should have a sane immigration policy that keeps them out and if they are overseas they are none of our business.

          Diversity brought us 9/11, not the failure of the US to bomb enough foreign nations in the years leading up to it.

        • 16v, you’re confusing the “greatest generation” with the “hippie” generation.

          cs, ever hear of “Al-Qaeda in Iraq”?

        • the Geneva Convention is important because it was intended to keep us from supporting, on a systematic scale, brutish behavior.

          Unfortunately, thinking such as yourself is infecting the minds of our military leadership and those within the echelons of intelligence. “by any means necessary” and other such BS.

          Thats all fine and dandy until such brutish behavior is turned on you when you are declared a “enemy combatant”. You didn’t do it and are truly innocent? well good luck defending yourself when you will not be given access to a lawyer and are in some secret military prison getting electrocuted or drowned.

          When are we going to start living by and supporting the principles that we claim to live by and support?

          The fact is that most Americans idiotically support and believe in torture, completely oblivious to the fact that they will find themselves upon the rack shortly.

          Diversity did not cause 9/11. Muslims, like patriotic Americans, are all trapped in a sad system that only intends to profit from the immense pain and suffering caused by the impending conflict between thesis and antithesis.

      • Those captured by Rommel were treated in accordance with it, at least until they were handed off to the German POW system.

        He at least was a gentleman.

        • Rommel was a rare breed.

          A soldier known for his chivalry and honor.

          Many senior officers in the German Army were honorable men. The fact that they were led by disgusting and egomaniacal charlatans was truly a historical shame. So many brilliant military minds destroyed under the banner of irrational stupidity.

  5. Potential impacts of this treaty:

    An embargo on gun parts imported into the United States. No more Brazilian-sourced frames for Springfield Armory, no more factory spare parts for foreign made firearms.

    An end to imported firearms entirely. No more CZs, HKs, Springfield XD’s or Made in Italy Berettas and German Sigs. That’s bad news because even though some firms have US facilities, theyre already full to the brim making contract orders already. Constrained supply and high demand means shortages, with the attendant price spike.

    Long term, its an effective way to increase our reliance on domestic firearms and parts suppliers; which in turn means the government has more power to disarm us via the Force of Bureaucracy. First they shut down the flow of arms and ammo from foreign countries, and then turn up the regulatory heat so that domestic suppliers of guns , ammo, and dealers go out of business. Shazam! De facto gun ban.

  6. Looks like Molon Labe Industries was very timely in their upcoming targets depicting UN troops.

  7. When will violence against tyrants become a threat that is taken seriously by these politicians?

  8. I wonder if people ever read the previous criticisms…

    This isn’t about what the Senate would have to do. This is about the US supporting something that would, through other means, damage the industry – and thus availability. They want to drive up costs, create side-channel attacks to the ~ability~ of citizens to own affordable arms and ammunition, etc.

    They want to make it harder and harder for “common folk” to exercise their rights. It’s no different than excessive licensing and regulation elsewhere.

    Ultimately the Administration knows it can’t take a front-door approach. So it’ll take a bunch of back-door approaches to achieving their goals. In their mind they create a hostile business climate, a hostile trade climate, a hostile travel climate, and hostile privacy climate, a hostile training requirement, ..

    And then – in the end – the “Progressives” get to say `we never took away your rights` – the market just got too expensive and that’s ~your~ fault evil Capitalists. Boo hoo the weapons are gone because it’s too expensive and you can’t train with them to be “safe” and secure.

    This is a side-channel attack on our rights. -Pk

  9. I’m sure my senators, the two Dems from Colorado, are just wetting themselves with joy at the prospect of this treaty. Plus the One will be here next week to appear with Hickenlooper to stump for gun control. Pardon me while I get ill.

  10. Well, whatever happens in the UN and whatever happens in the US Senate really doesn’t matter all that much. The citizens of this country will still retain their inalienable rights. If they want to get all sporty about it, they may well find out just what a profoundly bad idea that would be. The poor dumb bastards.

      • Nope, never have.

        Some treaties are good. Some, not so much. What I’m saying is that if a really egregious treaty comes along that severely impacts the fundamental, essential, inalienable human, civil, natural, per-existing and Constitutionally protected rights of American citizens, rights that are subject neither to the rule of the majority, extra-national influence, or arguments based on social utility or somebody’s feelings, then those who author, ratify and enforce such a treaty may well be in for a very rude awakening. Sure, that will pretty much suck all the way around, but there you have it and that’s just how it goes sometimes.

  11. Look for full de facto firearm registration to follow…… under the guise of firearm tracing. There’s only one way to fully track U.S. firearms found on foreign soil – and that’s to track ALL guns in the U.S. so they can then trace the ones found elsewhere.

    The administration intends to ram this down our throats.

    Tin foil hat? Just wait and see.

    • A “conspiracy theorist” is someone who notices things without official permission — and a “terrorist” is anybody who challenges the government’s monopoly on violence.

  12. I’ve always respected his openness and honesty(wink and a nod)….did we expect something else?
    One day closer….

  13. This is better. No trying to pretend like you care about my right to duck hunt, no pretending this will save the children, this is the Administration at it’s most honest: We will cut off your right to keep and bear, using any means necessary. Even if we have to bring the white trucks and blue helmets into it.
    Suits me fine, gentlemen. I never enjoyed playing grab-ass, so let’s get down to business.

    Too bad nobody actually pays attention to what the UN does anyway….

    • If they bring the white trucks and blue helmets into it, the lead will start flying.
      I’m beginning to think that Claire Wolfe’s saying about living in an awkward time has passed it’s expiration date.

  14. If this government supports the formation of public policy by international interests, if they let the EU countries try to take away our fundamental rights, then there will be bloodshed. Start reading the writing on the walls, people.

    • As someone from a EU nation, we’ve got no interest in actively robbing our cousins of their 2A rights (however loudly a few rent-a-mouths like Piers Moron – I mean, Morgan – might squeal, they won’t actually put themselves at any sort of risk by doing more than babbling obediently for the cameras).

      The EU bureaucracy might try to pass some paper and hope nobody notices (they do that a lot), but if they try to actually enforce it then all sorts of problems are going to appear – from the UK military pointing out that they aren’t tasked or funded for the job (nothing about ‘disarming the US’ in the Defence Planning Assumptions or the current capabilities based on them, so either pony up a lot of money – of which there isn’t any – or forget it) to various police and military discovering that it’s got suddenly much harder and more expensive to source weapons and ammunition, and this lovely treaty is much more trouble than it’s worth, and which idiots signed us up to it again?

  15. The UN is a waste of time and tax dollars.

    They should be kicked out of the USA and their building turned into a homeless shelter

  16. In a bizarre sort of way, things like this might actually help our cause (at a price). Restrictions on importation may result in more domestic production along with additional new companies. The price, of course, is that competitive efficiencies are lost, and the result is higher prices.

    I’m no fan of any restrictions on free trade, but increased domestic production of firearms would be a good thing. This same principal also applies at the state level, where the argument that production within a state isn’t subject to inter-state “oversight” by the federal government.

  17. Great, just when AR prices start coming back down, now AKs, Saiga’s etc, and they’re imported ammo are gonna skyrocket.

  18. I really doubt that the Senate will ratify this and I doubt that it will be placed before that body before the 2014 election. That said, we need to make sure that the 2014 election is a clarion call back to founding principles. We need to make 2014 look like what happened in 1994 and 2010 to be the Democrats glory days. We need to crush them, flip the Senate and expand our position in the House. If we don’t, it certainly won’t be the end of the world, it’s just that the world will suck a lot more than it does right now. We’re Americans, we’ll always get by, we’ll always find a way.

  19. The Geneva Convention means NOTHING!

    In every war the USA has been in we have abided by it but our enemies have not.

    We need a policy that we treat the enemies TWICE as bad as they treat ours, ESPECIALLY THEIR OFFICERS.

    • Why stop there? Why take prisoners at all? It’s not like any of OUR people are likely to surrender, right? So, none of OURS will get summary executions in retaliation, right? Nobody WE know will be treated more harshly after capture as a result of harming the surrendered soldiers of an enemy, right? And it’s FAR better to have to fight somebody to the death who just MIGHT have surrendered if promised good treatment, right?

      If you don’t like the Geneva Conventions as morally correct, consider them as pragmatic good sense and good manners.

      I’m afraid, by the way, that you are a bit misinformed about our strict adherence to the Geneva Conventions. . . we do pretty well, but there are some nasty spots in our history.

      • As a teen,I knew a man that had been a prisoner of the Japs in WWII for 3 years and he was tortured without mercy almost every day because they didn’t care about the “rules of WAR” and ignored them.

        I have 3 friends that were tortured by the Vietnease animals for years because they didn’t obey these rules!

        Why should we sit back and allow our people to go through hell while treating their prisoners so well (like handling the hate-filled Koran with white gloves so as not to offend the evil Muslims in our Cuba luxury prison?)

        I say return kindness for kindness and evil for evil. Japan DESERVED being nuked because of how they treated our people. Korea should have been nuked 60 yrs ago and we should wipe them off the map NOW, along with Iran and any other evil nation that gets nukes.

  20. If some UN Gestapo member sets foot my my property they will die!


Comments are closed.