The Danger of International Arms Control

Whether we in the United State like it or not, some regime of very strict international control on small arms is probably coming down the pike sometime soon.   Kim du Toit talks about the drying up of South African surplus ammo.  I got a few bags of the stuff, and it was good.  I’m sorry to see it dry up.  Kim tells us:

Of course, maybe the reporter just got the thing wrong—yeah I know, reporters never get gun facts wrong—but it’s still clear that Armscor’s fine 7.62x51mm, even though not specifically mentioned in the report, will soon disappear, because the ANC government of South Africa are turning into a bunch of quivering gun-fearing wussies. The move to end “small-arms proliferation” is no doubt inspired by a desire to forestall the day when some embittered group might be angry enough to rise up against them.

We may be winning here at home on the gun issue, but the rest of the world has a consensus that ordinary people are not to be trusted with arms. Most of the cheap surplus ammo that’s available to shooters on the US market comes from overseas sources.  These sources are all vulnerable to pressure from international gun control organizations like IASNA.  It’s a strong possibility we could lose them.  Imagine trying to shoot Kalashnikov, SKS, or your Saiga hunting rifle without a cheap source of ammunition from Wolf.  Russia has fought these treaties so far, but there’s no guarantee that things will stay that way.

Consider this too, C&R collectors, where are most of the interesting pieces coming from these days?  Century and a number of other importers that cater to the C&R market would be out of business in a heartbeat if overseas sources of surplus rifles were to dry up because the international consensus is that surplus small arms be cut up and melted down.

But it gets even better.   All the candidates that the military has been considering to replace the M16/M4 system have been European companies, namely Heckler & Koch and FN Herstal.  As it stands right now, H&K doesn’t seem to want to sell anything that looks politically incorrect to civilians.  Try getting a semi-auto G36.  They stated if the XM8 were adopted, there would be no civilian sales.   Same for the 416.  H&K, a German company, already doesn’t care about your gun rights.   FN has been very kind to the domestic shooter market, and has introduced the PS90 and is working on a semi-automatic version of the SCAR.  They definitely aren’t concerned too much about political correctness.  But FN is a Belgian company, and they will be subject to pressure from their government and subject to the treaties it signs.

Even consider the Glock that I own is produced by an Austrian company, and you’ll see why I think, as shooters, collectors, and people interested in lawful self-defense, we probably have it better today than we will in the future.   Eventually I expect an international arms treaty to shut down the export of these items into the United States for civilian consumption.  We can win all we want at home, but I don’t see us winning internationally.  Spend just 5 minutes talking about the gun issue to a European, and you’ll see what I mean.  Guns are evil to most of the rest of the world, and certainly that’s the prevailing attitude among the European political elite.

That’s why at the NRA convention next week, I’m going to be taking a serious look at Smith & Wesson’s new offerings.  Their M&P line of pistols looks good to me on paper, and I’d like to handle one.   I’ve seen a few of their ARs at gun shows, and while I’ve never shot one, what I have heard from others is they are making a solid product.  Smith & Wesson is American owned, and we don’t have to worry as much about people like Rebecca Peters lobbying them to shut down civilian sales.  In this country, at least for now, we can tell people like her to go to hell.

4 thoughts on “The Danger of International Arms Control”

  1. If there is one thing that sort of gives me hope about all this, it’s the Russian tendency to enjoy telling people “tought shitski, comrade” and doing whatever the hell they want.

    Of course, a government that’s trying to curry favor with the “international community” might be more interested in international money than their own economy.

  2. I figure as long as they have shitty, corrupt government, we’re safe. As soon as they become a liberal democracy, we’re screwed :)

Comments are closed.