In browsing through the latest issue of "Canadian Marksman" (the Dominon of Canada Rifle Association's quarterly publication), I happened to run across an ad by HPS, on page 33.

HPS manufactures rifles, accessories, and ammunition in Gloucestershire, England. The ad is for match ammo (Their specialty ammo includes "Target Master Ammunition" which is sold & used world-wide in national and international high-power matches such as at Bisley, the upcoming Palma matches in India, Bloemfontaine RSA, the Canadian Nationals, etc.)

Anyway, what caught my eye was this statement in a sidebar of their ad....

"HPS is an HSE Licensed Manufacturer of ammunition since 1993. All HPS ammunition is CIP approved, packaged, and labelled according to UN regulations for UK and international transport. HPS are also liability insured."

Since when, and with what source for its real or imagined authority, does the UN purport to regulate international shipping of anything by manufacturers from sovereign nations acting within the laws of their own countries?

I find this more than a bit scary as it suggests a "world government" authority I did not believe currently existed. I have long suspected the UN of having such aspirations, but does it currently actually have the authority to set world wide regulations on packaging and labelling ammo by commercial manufacturers?

/

Yes, Virginia, there is a U.N. with ambition.

So far it has been agreements brokered between willing countries. The "World Bank" loans to poor countries is a rip off, but encouraged...

I suspect this reflects some civilian agreement about "hazardous" chemical anything between willing countries. But you think these folks don't want more power. Most members are from dictatorships anyway.

Yes, they want the power to "tax." As it has been said, "the power to tax is the power to destroy." You may recall the small revolt when US soldiers were ask to accept leadership from non-U.S. officers and wear the blue berret...

Basically "authority" comes from the end of a gun barrel as Mao correctly stated and the U.N. has some "gun barrels" at this time and "more" coming??? They hope so. Luck to us all.

/

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
No typo!

UN agreement on the proliferation of small arms !

Isn't that "agreement" the idiocy which was sponsored largely by the Norwegian government? I can see where it can bind the signing governments into giving up their sovereignty (the same way a treaty can), but it surely cannot be interpreted by any sane person to bind the whole world whether they agree to it or not! And what, if any, enforcement power is attached to it?

Regulations, kiss my foot!!



(Not intended to rebuff or be rude to you, Alf. Intended to show my disdain, disrespect, and hatred for this whole process of amalgmizing the wolrd into a mush-headed commanality of tyranny by the self-appointed "elite" over the common man. Makes one wonder if maybe the 9/11 folks just picked the wrong target(s) in New York....)

/

ALF
I had more trouble getting my cameras on a plane then I did getting my guns and ammo airborne! This was flying from east to west in the USA not out of the country.

The labeling is just stickers on boxes that may or may not cross international lines. The next time you receive a hazmat shipment, look for the UN label that tells you what kind of chemicals are in the shipment. On cases of ammo, you'll see an ORM-D label and lettering that will tell you the contents are "1.4S UN 0012, cartridges, small arms." That is its UN label. The labeling is just a way for anybody in any port around the world to look up in a book as to what exactly is in the boxes, crates or con-exes...

all the more reason for the US to get the hell out of the UN & quite financing that organization

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Yes, that is correct ! When I started moving my gun collection piecemeal out of South Africa all went smoothly untill this reguluation came into effect, then every time a export permit was issued at had to be ratified by a designated UN representative.

This took time because they would only convene at certain times to ratify the permits.

I believe the USA is not a signatory to this "agreement"

The U.S. has so far steadfastly refused to become a party to what in effect amounts to a surrender of national sovereignty to the morons who run the U.N. Hopefully, it will remain this way, BUT as we all know, treaties and international agreements are supreme, even trumping the Constitution in this regard. "One world" indeed!

With either Obama or Hillary as POTUS, AND the Dems running Congress, there are no guarantees! Yet another threat to be aware of.

/

quote:

all the more reason for the US to get the hell out of the UN & quite financing that organization

When I was young, I used to think the billboards I saw on the highways here in the US that said; "Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US", was done by a bunch of right wing wierdo's. Now that I are one, nothing could be more logical.

Ladies and Gentelmen:

Please correct me if my historical analysis is flawed.

U. N. sanctioned wars: Korea, Viet Nam, Persian Gulf I, Yugoslavia and Persian Gulf II.

The reason for their existence is . . . ? Answer: a self supporting bureacracy interested only in increasing its reach and power, coupled with exceptional corruption that would make a Byzantine blush.

My answer: Dump our (USA) participation and financing today.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Yes, that is correct ! When I started moving my gun collection piecemeal out of South Africa all went smoothly untill this reguluation came into effect, then every time a export permit was issued at had to be ratified by a designated UN representative.

Did they ask for a bribe?

Well the U N can kiss my ASS !.

They can't regulate themselves let alone anything else !. A miserable excuse for an organization .

Why don't they step up in the Sudan and put an end to that Asshole pretending to be running that country .

Maybe they had a hand in helping AEY out of Miami FL. , on the Ammo Deal ( Some Deal !! ).

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23829935/

What the hell our own government can't control anything either . It pisses me off when shit heads cut corners an undermine the Men & Women in our Armed Services for a profit !.

Far as I'm concerned contractors who profiter in times of war should be Executed for treason !.

Shoot Straight Know Your Target . ...

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Alberta Canuck

Problem is many African countries have gone with it! and it is enforced! You do not have the permits, you do not fly or post your ammo or guns!

The intent as usual is not so much the curtailling of the movement of sporting arms by individuals for own use, it is more the curtailling of the movement of small arms and ammo used in conflict, it gives law enforcement teeth to go after gun traffickers. Sadly this impacts on us a sportsmen.

As an individual travelling or wishing to transport arms and or ammunition over the world things have gotten tough and of the toughest places today is America !

Every time this topic comes up our American friends pipe up and berate other countries for going with some form of gun control, but they forget that their own country has today of strictest rules and protocols when it comes to the movement of sporting arms or arms related goods across their borders.

Alf-

I am afraid I believe you are mistaken about the very core of this effort. SOME of the signatories to this agreement are interested in controlling the flow of small military arms. Many more are interested as much or more in bringing duplication of current British &/or other European firearms laws to EVERY country in the world. You are right that they are aided and abetted by our government. All persons who have ambitions of personal power over others fear those whom they want to rule. Especially if the ruled might have the arms and abilities to resist being ruled involuntarily. Our government is no different on that score.

Any country which wants to arrest and punish gun traffickers has the power and authority to do so within its own borders, under its own laws. Are you suggesting the U.N. should have super-national police authority so it can arrest gun traffickers within any nation, whether that nation wants them arrested or not?


And who will try those accused "violators"? And what assurances of a fair trial will they have? Would you like them tried by Bill Clinton, or George Bush? I wouldn't. How about under the civil rights guarantees of the People's Republic of China? No? Then by whom?

There are NO officials elected to office in the U.N. by the popular vote of the people of the world, thus no way of holding them to answer to the people of the world. Right & True, that is not feasible. Which is exactly why the U.N. should not be viewed as a feasible democratic structure either.

Now, to the person here who commented on UN sanctioned (and established) labelling. Dear Sir: I believe you have missed my point. My point has not to do with ammo exclusively OR labelling exclusively either. My point is that the U.N. was NEVER intended to be a world sovereign at ANY level. It does not have the right under its charter to establish regulations over sovereign nations in ANY field of endeavor. I was in San Francisco when & where the U.N. was first established, and, believe me, that was not the basis on which it was sold to the gullible who allowed it to be brought into existance.

I would go even farther than Dr. K. I believe any person who acts to diminish the sovereignty of his own country over its own people is a traitor to his country and his fellow countrymen. The differences and variations in government and laws are the primary things which preserve the freedoms of us all. If we do not have the right to be different at the most basic levels (and in all things) we really DO become the slaves of a very small elitist group.

With that, I will leave this thread to be transferred to the political forum or dropped altogther.

Mark my words, we will ALL rue the day the U.N. was ever established. Like a cancer, it should be fought and destroyed as quickly as possible. I am NOT suggesting that it be done with bullets, but with our withdrawal and the closing of the trough at which those porkers feed on our money and then have the audacity and arrogance to propose that THEY are better than you & I, and should rule US.

END OF RANT

**GOOD** rant.