• Main Firearms Community Concerns About the Programme of Action (POA) 
• Speech by John Bolton, United States Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control & International Security Affairs
• List of Firearms Community Groups Speaking
• Speeches of Firearms Community Groups
• Press Release: UN Arms Conference to Revise Draft
• Programme of Action (POA)
  
  Back to News Page

* An ongoing, and unresolved, issue is the definition of a "small arm". There are several different definitions in the two reports that lead to the Conference. These definitions are very broad and would essentially cover almost all civilian firearms.

Back to Contents at Top of Page

Small arms and light weapons, in our understanding, are the strictly military arms — automatic rifles, machine guns, shoulder-fired missile and rocket systems, light mortars — that are contributing to continued violence and suffering in regions of conflict around the world. We separate these military arms from firearms such as hunting rifles and pistols, which are commonly owned and used by citizens in many countries. As U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has said, "just as the First and Fourth Amendments secure individual rights of speech and security respectively, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms." The United States believes that the responsible use of firearms is a legitimate aspect of national life. Like many countries, the United States has a cultural tradition of hunting and sport shooting. We, therefore, do not begin with the presumption that all small arms and light weapons are the same or that they are all problematic. It is the illicit trade in military small arms and light weapons that we are gathered here to address and that should properly concern us.

The United States goes to great lengths to ensure that small arms and light weapons transferred under our jurisdiction are' done so with the utmost responsibility. The transfer of all military articles of U.S. origin are subject to extremely rigorous procedures under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations. All U.S. exports of defense articles and services, including small arms and light weapons, must be approved by the Department of State. Assurances must be given by the importing country that arms will be used in a manner consistent with our criteria for arms exports: they must not contribute to regional instability, arms races, terrorism, proliferation, or violations of human rights. Arms of U.S. origin can not be retransferred without approval by the United States. To ensure that arms are delivered to legitimate end-users, our government rigorously monitors arms transfers, investigating suspicious activity and acting quickly to curtail exports to those recipients who do not meet our strict criteria for responsible use. In the past five years, the United States has conducted thousands of end-use checks, interdicted thousands of illicit arms shipments at U.S. ports of exit, and cut-off exports entirely to five countries due to their failure to properly manage U.S. origin defense articles.

All commercial exporters of arms in the United States must be registered as brokers and submit each transaction for government licensing approval. Our brokering law is comprehensive, extending over citizens and foreign nationals in the United States, and also U.S. citizens operating abroad. Believing that it is in our interest to stem the illicit trade in military arms, the United States has avidly promoted and supported such international activities as the Wassenaar Arrangement and the UN Register of Conventional Arms. Bilaterally, we offer our financial and technical assistance all over the world to mitigate the illicit trade in SA/LW. We have worked-with countries to develop national legislation to regulate exports and imports of arms, and to better enforce their laws. We have provided training, technical assistance, and funds to improve border security and curb arms smuggling in many areas of the world where this problem is rampant. And in the past year, we have instituted a program to assist countries in conflict-prone regions to secure or destroy excess and illicit stocks of small arms and light weapons.

We are proud of our record, and would hope that the Program of Action would encourage all nations to adopt similar practices. Our practical experience with these problems reflects our view of how best to prevent the illicit trade in SA/LW. Our focus is on addressing the problem where it is most acute and the risks are highest: regions of conflict and instability. We strongly support measures in the draft Program of Action calling for effective export and import controls, restraint in trade to regions of conflict, observance and enforcement of UNSC embargoes, strict regulation of arms brokers, transparency in exports, and improving security of arms stockpiles and destruction of excess. These measures, taken together, form the core of a regime that, if accepted by all countries, would greatly mitigate the problems we all have gathered here to address.

There are, however, aspects of the draft Program of Action that we cannot support. Some activities inscribed in the Program are beyond the scope of what is appropriate for international action and should remain issues for national lawmakers in member states. Other proposals divert our attention from practical, effective measures to attack the problem of the illicit trade in SA/LW where it is most needed. This diffusion of focus is, indeed, the Program's chief defect, mixing together as it does legitimate areas for international cooperation and action and areas that are properly left to decisions made through the exercise of popular sovereignty by participating governments:

• We do not support measures that would constrain legal trade and legal manufacturing of small arms and light weapons. The vast majority of arms transfers in the world are routine and not problematic. Each member state of the United Nations has the right to manufacture and export arms for purposes of national defense. Diversions of the legal arms trade that become "illicit" are best dealt with through effective export controls. To label all manufacturing and trade as "part of the problem" is inaccurate and counterproductive. Accordingly, we would ask that language in Section II, paragraph 4 be changed to establish the principle of legitimacy of the legal trade, manufacturing and possession of small arms and light weapons, and acknowledge countries that already have in place adequate laws, regulations and procedures over the manufacture, stockpiling, transfer and possession of small arms and light weapons.

• We do not support the promotion of international advocacy activity by international or non-governmental organizations, particularly when those political or policy views advocated are not consistent with the views of all member states. What individual governments do in this regard is for them to decide, but we do not regard the international governmental support of particular political viewpoints to be consistent with democratic principles. Accordingly, the provisions of the draft Program that contemplate such activity should be modified or eliminated.

• We do not support measures that prohibit civilian possession of small arms. This is outside the mandate for this Conference set forth in UNGA Resolution 54/54V. We agree with the recommendation of the 1999 UN Panel of Governmental Experts that laws and procedures governing the possession of small arms by civilians are properly left to individual member states. The United States will not join consensus on a final document that contains measures abrogating the Constitutional right to bear arms. We request that Section- II, para 20, which refers to restrictions on the civilian possession of arms to be eliminated from the Program of Action, and that other provisions which purport to require national regulation of the lawful possession of firearms such as Section II, paras 7 and 10-.be modified to confine their reach to illicit international activities.

• We do not support measures limiting trade in SA/LW solely to governments. This proposal, we believe, is both conceptually and practically flawed. It is so broad that in the absence of a clear definition of small arms and light weapons, it could be construed as outlawing legitimate international trade in all firearms. Violent non-state groups at whom this proposal is presumably aimed are unlikely to obtain arms through authorized channels. Many of them continue to receive arms despite being subject to legally-binding UNSC embargoes. Perhaps most important, this proposal would preclude assistance to an oppressed non-state group defending itself from a genocidal government. Distinctions between governments and non-governments are irrelevant in determining responsible and irresponsible end-users of arms.

• The United States also will not, support a mandatory Review Conference, as outlined in Section IV, which serves only to institutionalize and bureaucratize this process. We would prefer that meetings to review progress on the implementation of the Program of Action be decided by member states as needed, responding not to an arbitrary timetable, but specific problems faced in addressing the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. Neither will we, at this time, commit to begin negotiations and reach agreement on any legally binding instruments, the feasibility and necessity of which may be in question and in need of review over time.

Through its national practices, laws, and assistance programs, through its diplomatic engagement in all regions of the world, the United States has demonstrated its commitment to countering the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. During the next two weeks, we will work cooperatively with all member states to develop a final document which is legitimate, practical, effective, and which can be accepted by all nations.  As we work toward this goal over the next two weeks, we must keep in mind those suffering in the regions of the world where help is most desperately needed and for whom the success of this Conference is most crucial.

Mr. President, The World Forum supports the efforts of the United Nations to stop the proliferation of illegal small arms and to fight against organised criminality. We are a pro-active organisation. We seek not to oppose, but to assist. Over the past two years we have held three workshops to assist the UN in its efforts. The latest of these was in London April 27, at the Imperial War Museum. Copies of our reports, on firearms marking and the definition of a weapon of war, are available for your use.

Mr. President, many of you are aware of the proposal the firearms manufacturers have made to create a system of self-regulation on the marking and tracing of firearms. I am pleased to say that this is our initiative. We look forward to working with you and especially other member States that have also concentrated on these matters.

Mr. President I will leave to other members of the firearms community the task of making more extensive statements. I will conclude by saying that you have my best wishes and support in your efforts for a successful Conference. Thank you.

British Shooting Sports Council (BSSC) - United Kingdom
Patrick Johnson - crime and illegal firearm increase after new gun legislation

If, at the personal level of the perpetrator and the victim, there are two ‘sides’ then as a Police Officer who devoted over thirty years service to public safety I have seen both sides at first hand. But here today in this Conference I do not believe there are any ‘sides’. All of us stand against the illicit. The people for whom I speak, i.e. the legal firearms community, support the desire of this Conference to reduce, if not eliminate, suffering caused by armed conflict.
However, in pursuing that noble objective those same people would not want you to unwittingly make legitimate hunters and sporting shooters victims of the process. They are not the problem, but could be part of the solution. Hunters and sporting shooters hold a wealth of technical knowledge which would be helpful to all of us – not only in respect of marking and recording, but also in other facets of the Proposed Program of Action.

Like many of you I am a parent and grandparent. I have no wish to see any of your or my offspring suffer in whatever context. Equally I wish my children and grandchildren to peacefully enjoy their heritage and to continue to participate in activities which have a long and honourable history.

I urge you to fight the illicit wherever it appears and offer the full support of those for whom I speak in your efforts. But in so doing I also urge you not to damage legitimate hunting and sporting shooting. I believe that in the preamble you should acknowledge the legitimate use or possession of firearms by individuals for, inter alia, hunting, sport shooting and collecting and you should ensure that nothing in the Program of Action should diminish or affect such interests or rights.

Canadian Institute for Legislative Action (CILA)
Tony Bernardo - the longest international border in the world, by two of the most heavily armed nations and there has never been an incident

I live in a country of pristine lakes and untamed wilderness. A land that, more so than most, was founded with a rifle in one hand and a beaver pelt in the other. Canada is indeed the land of the hunter. A land that, to use the popular phrase, is truly awash with small arms, most of them unregistered and uncontrolled. Firearms are an integral part of our Canadian heritage. We are proud of this for it is a heritage of hard work and courage in the face of adversity. Canadians citizens own as many as 15 million small arms, one of the highest rates of private firearms ownership in the world. And this has taught us some interesting lessons.

Do firearms create violence? No, if the simple presence of privately owned small arms sparked violence amongst the citizenry, Canada would be bathed in blood. But it’s not. Canada enjoys one of the lowest murder and violent crime rates in the world.
Do firearms create international conflict? Canadians are privileged to share the longest undefended border in the world with our friend and partner, the United States. Yet, despite the presence of millions of privately owned, unregistered firearms, we coexist in an unparalleled peace. Indeed, the relationship shared by our two countries is the envy of the world.
Do the presence of so many small arms create poverty? Once again, no. The United Nations has consistently rated Canada, along with Norway and the United States, one of the best places in the world to live.  Interestingly, all three countries have very high rates of civilian firearms ownership. Canada is a modern, prosperous country and small arms have not made it less so.

I am compelled to speak out on behalf of Canada’s First Nations. Some of our indigenous peoples depend on firearms for their very existence. Under treaty obligation, the government of Canada still provides surplus military firearms and ammunition to our First Nations peoples living in the harsh environment of Canada’s north. In the land of the midnight sun, guns mean survival. How will the “no transfer to non state actor” provisions in the Draft Plan of Action interact with this sacred trust? Clearly, the mere presence of large numbers of small arms are not the root cause of turmoil and Canada is manifest proof of this. Canadians have resolved to settle our conflicts with words, not bullets.

Few things are simple. Other factors, far more than the mere existence of firearms, create the environment of conflict that the United Nations has toiled so long to heal. We implore you to concentrate your efforts upon fully automatic “Weapons of War” and “Illicit Trade”, not the firearms of our heritage. Canada’s five million firearms owners wish you well in your struggle to bring peace to this Earth.

Forum Waffenrecht (FW) - Germany
Joachim Streitberger - Germany probably has more illegal firearms in the world (est 15 million) and there is little firearm crime, of course what there is, is from illegal guns

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, My organisation, a German firearms legislation group, is working to prevent crime and the misuse of firearms by means of legislation. In Germany, many points included in the proposed Programme of Action, have been translated into action for many years.

• All firearms must be marked.

• Sale or re-sale, import and export must be recorded.

• The purchase of a firearm requires an official permission.

• Fully automatic firearms are totally banned.

• Manufacturers and dealers are under permanent control of the State.

• All firearms must be stored in legally defined gun safes.

In Germany there are about 10 million legally held firearms. Even politicians state that the group of legal firearms owners cause no danger to public safety. Despite Germany‘s very stringent firearms law and its effective law enforcement system, there are more than 20 million illegal firearms in circulation. It is important to know, that even these 20 million illegal firearms rarely appear in criminal incidents. The rate of crimes involving any use of a firearm - legal or illegal - is 0.1 % of all crimes. This figure has been stable for many years.
After the opening of the Iron Curtain ten years ago, Germany has been flooded with thousands of AK 47.

In view of the experiences of the last years made in countries, which had banned some types of private firearms, we would propose that the conference should carefully weigh all the possible measures and take into consideration that

• there is no relation between the number of firearms and the misuse of firearms

• firearms do not cause conflicts among people. The truth is that conflicts attract firearms

• to eradicate firearms from societies means to disarm law-abiding citizen and to encourage criminals. Criminals – by definition – do not respect the laws.

Mr. President let me conclude: Every reasonable man supports the wish to eradicate violence from society and establish public safety. Experiences in my country have shown that the drying up of the illegal firearms market takes a very long time, if it is – at all – feasible. We fully support the marking and tracing as sensible means to start combating the illegal flow of small arms. We are convinced that a differentiated discussion must be the basis to come to the co-operation of all concerned groups of citizens, that is so much needed.

National Rifle Association of America (NRA)
Thomas Mason

Mr. President: I speak to you today on behalf of the four and a half million members of the National Rifle Association of America. We view efforts to curtail the illicit trade in US-defined Small Arms and Light Weapons as legitimate but would be totally remiss not to express the extreme concern of our membership over potential outcomes of this conference.

Throughout the preparatory phase prior of this conference and last week much has been said and proposed.  In reference to our concern, the legitimate domestic rights of U.S. citizens to own and use firearms, we have received conflicting signals from significant participants. Some assure us that the end result will have no impact on lawful civilian ownership, others propose that it could, should, must and will.

We cannot ignore aspects of the Program of Action that could affect civilian firearms ownership in the U.S. and in fact, worldwide. Mr. President, we would ask the conference to acknowledge our concerns as legitimate.

Single Action Shooting Society (SASS) - United States
Gerald Baker - the heritage of western shooting to America

Mr. President I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak to this Conference. It is an honor for my organization to be present here. Mr. President, I am Gerald Baker, and I represent the Single Action Shooting Society or as we like to call it SASS. Basically, ours is a shooting sport that uses antique weapons to compete in situations where the targets and the style of shooting imitates the American Old West. I am sure everybody here is familiar with the romance and stories of that era. We have 40,000 members and are one of the fastest growing shooting sports in the world. Now why would an organization such as ours be making a statement at a United Nations Conference such as this? 

Mr. President, the answer is this. We are concerned about the issues this Conference is addressing, but at the same time we are also concerned that the Conference may not recognize nor appreciate the validity of shooting sports because they involve firearms. Numerous sports involve weapons or some kind of conflict.  Fencing, archery, kendo, Karate, wrestling and boxing are just a few examples.
Mr. President the origins of these sports, including cowboy action shooting, do not, in the least bit, diminish their validity. They are integral parts of our cultures. Our countries’ cultures and histories are more than just abstractions. They are real, like food, language, manners and the wonderful various sports that people participate in throughout the world. Cowboy action shooting is just one of those sports.

Mr. President, we ask the Conference respect this and not demonize nor negatively categorize us. We are part of living history, part of a wonderful heritage. We are not part of the problem. Thank you Mr. President.

South African Gunowners’ Association (SAGA)
Alex Holmes- mainly about unintended consequences eg Airlines banning transportation of guns (even hunting) to Africa.

Our continent, Africa, has a sad and ongoing history of turmoil and armed conflict. Given that tragic fact we would strongly support effective measures to reduce the terrible toll in human life that these conflicts exact. However we are greatly concerned that there is a danger of a lack of focus on the real issues.

In particular the overly broad definition of small arms, to include sporting firearms, and the call to restrict legitimate civilian possession of sporting arms, are problematic. These issues are contentious and endanger the success of this conference. Restrictions on the possession of sporting arms will serve no purpose in reducing armed conflict and simply distract attention and resources away from the core issue, the transfer of military weapons.

Throughout this conference we have seen continuous reference to wars, mentioned in the same breath as civilian possession of sporting arms. This falsely suggests that the one causes the other. Wars are not fought with sporting arms but with military weapons. We believe that a proper and accurate definition of military small arms would allow broader support and in so doing strengthen the proposed agreement. Too broad a definition also opens the door to unintended consequences.

In Africa hunting plays a considerable role in the economies and foreign exchange earnings of many countries. Hundreds of millions of dollars flow into these countries annually as a direct result of hunting activity. We must assume that this conference has no intention of interfering with such legitimate activities. However, if the proposed definition of small arms is accepted, this can and will happen.

The United Kingdom recently banned the export of firearms to Zimbabwe. They used the same broad definitions proposed here. British Airways immediately enforced this ban and refused to transport hunting firearms to Zimbabwe. They also misinterpreted a similar ban on Tanzania. The net result was a huge loss in legitimate income to these countries. The possibility of regional embargoes will increase the risks of such unintended consequences. It is entirely feasible that a poorly worded definition, applied on a regional basis, could have disastrous effects on the entire safari industry.

We implore the delegations gathered here to carefully consider these concerns and to return the focus clearly to the real issue, the illicit trade in military weapons.

Sporting Clays of America (SCA) - United States
Judge William Harsha- rights of sport shooting.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the conference. My name is William H. Harsha and I appear on behalf of the Sporting Clays of America NGO, an organization that sanctions clay target shooting competitions in the U.S. Professionally, I am a judge on the court of appeals in the state of Ohio. I have held that position for the last 13 years. Thus, I have personal knowledge of the suffering that the illegal use of weapons can cause. As an amateur shooter who often is joined by my wife at the target range, I also know that the proper use of firearms is a legitimate form of recreation.

I come before you today with two goals. First, I seek a formal acknowledgement from the conference that sport or recreational shooting is a legitimate use of firearms that is not contributing to the international crisis you are gathered to address. Second, I ask that you adopt a definition of “small arms” that reflects your acknowledgement of that legitimacy.

One need look no further than the Olympics to realize that sport shooting is a legitimate use of firearms. The first modern Olympics in 1896, contained 2 rifle and 3 pistol events. 17 shooting events will be contested at the 2004 Athens games. Like many of the countries that participate in Olympic shooting, the United States has a cultural tradition of hunting and sport shooting. Last year over 19 million Americans went hunting with firearms. Over 15 million Americans participated in target shooting, and 25% of them were females. By comparison 16 million Americans played baseball, 13 million played soccer or football and 10 million played tennis.

Shooting sports pump $30 billion thru our national economy annually. That’s more than the annual sales of world giants Coca-Cola and Microsoft. Proposals to control small arms must take into account such differences in national perspectives. You must resist the temptation to remake our national perspective so that it conforms to your own.

Some NGOs and others are using the conference to promote an agenda aimed at totally banning civilian possession of firearms. Expanding your agenda beyond illegal military weapons of war is counterproductive because it will prevent a consensus on a problem that drastically needs action.

“Small arms” should be defined as “military weapons of war that are designed for full automatic fire”. This definition is consistent with fundamental characteristics of the weapons that are causing havoc in the areas of conflict. In contrast, sporting or civilian arms are primarily designed and used for recreational, self-defense or collecting purposes. If the conference retains its focus on the illegal military weapons of war that are designed for full automatic fire, most of the NGO’s from the sport shooting community will support your efforts to reach a true international consensus. By simply defining “small arms” as “military weapons of war that are designed for full automatic fire”, you will have taken a giant step toward international consensus. Thank you.

Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia (SSAA)
Keith Tidswell

The appeal of the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia to the delegates gathered here at this conference is that each government and law enforcement agency should seek to form a partnership with the hunters, collectors, and shooting sports so that we can all help in making our world a safer place. We submit that the focus should be on having an impact on the illicit activities surrounding small arms. It is disappointing that some see this effort as a, “you and us situation” but I point out that we are the legitimate firearms community and are at least equal in our abhorrence of illicit activities.

We are involved in safety training to many thousands of people from all walks of life and teach responsible use. We teach safe handling and storage. We are involved in many recreational and competitive shooting disciplines from local club to Olympic level. Our hunters are involved in working closely with national park authorities in programs that benefit endangered species. Our collecting organizations can and do play a very useful role in helping law enforcement to solve crimes by identify unusual firearms or ammunition. We work closely with police and maintain a web site that lists stolen firearms and we have been instrumental in tracing a number of items.
We would like to see this conference make it clear that the firearms we use in our legal and legitimate recreational pursuits are protected so that the heritage that is ours can be passed on to future generations in a more peaceful world.

We have enjoyed working closely with Ambassador Lauriola in the development of the United Nations firearms protocol. We are proud of our contribution to the United Nations and we will continue to offer the peoples of the world our skills and expertise in trying to make the world a better place for all to live.

Fair Trade Group (FAIR) - United States
Robert Talley- about fair international trade and existing strict USA conditions

Thank you Mr. President: My name is Rob Talley and I serve as the Executive Director of the FAIR Trade Group, an organization representing the interests of businesses involved in the legal import and export of firearms across international boundaries. It is very important that we clarify at the outset that our membership supports efforts to minimize global violence and restrict the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons. However, we are concerned that the well-meaning efforts of this Conference will have an unintentional negative impact on legitimate business transactions.

Specifically: The failure of the Plan of Action to clearly define “small arms” effectively limits the international scope of the Programme. Without a reliable and clear definition, business transactions will be restricted, as definitional conflicts among states result in an inability of businesses to attain appropriately required permits. We recommend that establishing one clear definition will be the key to a working international system.
Second, the recommendation that export and import control regimes for firearms commerce include end use certificates will prevent trade with countries that do not or can not provide such documentation. We recommend that there are other methods to attain a similar goal.
Third, steps by this conference to enforce and require eradication of weapons deemed surplus by participating nations fails to recognize the interests of legitimate collectors and sporting enthusiasts whose lawful acquisition of these same weapons would: One, remove them from regions of concern; Two, introduce them into a regulated and controlled system; And three, provide controlling governments--many of which are financially struggling--with foreign currency.

On behalf of its membership, the FAIR Trade Group urges consideration of the interests and views of those who are intimately familiar with the practical implications of the initiatives under discussion.

Federation of European Societies of Arms Collectors (FESAC) - The Netherlands
Jas van Driel- firearm collectors being a legitimate "hobby" and many collections important to history of the world

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, as a representative of the Federation of European Societies of Arms Collectors, I thank you for this opportunity to present our point of view on the program of action. FESAC welcomes it as a means to alleviate the suffering of people in post conflict areas and will gladly provide the expertise to make this program work.

Collectors, whether private individuals or public museums, are the custodians of our technical, historical and cultural heritage. Whether we like it or not, weapons form an essential part of that heritage. They have always been in the forefront of technological development, from steel making to ergonomics, from chemistry to mass production techniques and have had more influence on the course of history than anything else. If we do not conserve the artefacts of this heritage, important information about our history and ourselves will be lost forever. How can we understand the French revolution when we do not know that the storming of the Bastille was not meant to liberate prisoners but mainly to obtain gunpowder? 

Collectors do not appear in crime statistics. The weapons they own are a small fraction of the firearms that are legally held by civilians. Their knowledge and expertise is, however, greatly out of proportion to their numbers. In order to preserve this expertise it is essential that collectors can obtain items for their collections. We ask you to allow, in paragraphs 13 and 16 of section 2, that small arms and light weapons can be supplied not only to governments but also to persons or entities authorized by those governments.

If paragraph 20 of section two (with its emphasis on restrictions to the private ownership of military weapons) is retained, FESAC asks you to add a clause to that paragraph safeguarding the position of the collectors. Even examples of small arms and light weapons are important artefacts that deserve to be preserved for future generations of researchers. After all, today's weapons are tomorrow's antiques.

For any collector authenticity is essential. A weapon that is deactivated loses most, if not all, of its collectors' value. Moreover, it makes it impossible to perform historical or technical research on those weapons or demonstrate them for educational purposes. Paragraph 18 of section 2 holds the risk that irreplaceable collectors' pieces are, effectively, destroyed by being "disabled". This serves no practical purpose and may even prove counterproductive. Collectors, researchers and museums should be able to keep the weapons in their original condition; it is the essence of collecting. FESAC proposes to remove the obligation to disable weapons that are "retained for other purposes" and replace it by a requirement to provide adequate security.

A problem for collectors as well as those who have to work with this program of action, is the lack of a proper definition of the term "small arms and light weapons". Its present unclear definition includes all types of weapons, even hunting- and sports weapons. It even includes antiques. Adding the rather vague term "produced to military specification" does not improve things. We should not forget that flintlock muskets were also "produced to military specification". It is no use including antiques into the program of action and run the risk of not being taken seriously.

The definition should be such that it targets the weapons that are the real cause of the problems in post conflict areas, like full-automatic assault rifles and machineguns. It is no use destroying collectors' weapons that are legally held by collectors in stable, democratic countries, while leaving the Kalashnikovs in place in war-ravaged lands.

Collectors are uniquely qualified to provide expertise on firearms. By preserving the artefacts of our past and our present, they can make sure that history is not rewritten to fit the fashion of the day and help keep us from making the same mistakes all over again. Please allow them the means to do that. 

Safari Club International (SCI) - United States
Richard Parsons- hunting and similar to SA

More than US$200 million annually in benefits to third world countries are imperilled. Unless an exemption is created for sport hunters for the transportation of firearms!

Examples of Annual Financial Benefits:
South Africa: US$38.4 Million    Botswana: US$20 Million    Zambia: US$12 Million
Namibia: US $26.7 Million    Zimbabwe: US$70 Million    Tanzania: US$34 Million

International Sport Hunting Occurs in many countries:
US, Canada, Mexico, UK, Hungary, Rumania, Tanzania, South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, Cameroon, Congo, Pakistan, China, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Khyrgyzstan, Khazakstan, Argentina

Special programs direct the benefits to impoverished rural communities in Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Tanzania, Canada (Inuit settlements in the Arctic), Pakistan, Namibia, Botswana

License and Trophy fees fund government wildlife conservation programs and Sport hunting provides conservation incentives. This is a recognized principle of the Convention on Biological Diversity and is endorsed as a policy of the World Conservation Union.

Back to Contents at Top of Page

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Only one thing is certain at the midway point of a U.N. conference on small arms: a proposed action plan to curb the illegal trade will have to be rewritten because of irreconcilable differences between the United States and others. Diplomats begin intense negotiations on the draft Monday - leaving just two days for 189 nations to agree on how to curb the lucrative and illegal trade in small arms that kill hundreds of thousands of people every year. Countries staked out their negotiating positions but little progress was made during the first half of the two-week conference, which wraps up July 20.

Two hours after it opened, the United States came out strongly against several elements of the draft and left almost no room for compromise. Although the conference is focused on illegal trade and does not effect domestic laws concerning private ownership, U.S. Undersecretary of State John Bolton hammered away about America’s constitutional right to bear arms and hinted that the United States was prepared to walk away empty-handed rather than concede on key issues.

U.N. officials had taken pains before the conference to ensure Americans, and specifically the pro-gun lobby, that it had nothing to fear from the gathering. The United Nations even issued a fact sheet entitled "Setting the Record Straight." But by week’s end diplomats and allies were clearly losing patience with the Bush administration’s stance, which many privately suggested was targeted mostly for a U.S. audience.

Bolton’s speech was probably "not the best way to start negotiations", said Charles Josselin, France’s minister for cooperation. "There will have to be concessions on all sides and to come with the firm intention of not moving on one’s position is not decent," Josselin said.
Even U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan seemed irked by the ruckus. "Do not be distracted by statements made by others that the U.N. wants to get weapons away from people who legally own them," Annan said during a stop in Berlin. "One has a right to own a weapon, maybe, but we also have a right to protect innocent people in our community."

By Friday, delegates had heard more than 140 speeches from both wealthy and war-ravaged nations that buy and supply the small arms light enough for children to carry and cheap enough for rebels and bandits to buy. The U.N. estimates some 500 million small arms are in circulation in the world, used in 46 current conflicts, and causing over 1,000 deaths a day.

Many nations here, including the United States, favor measures such as marking and tracing schemes to curb the illicit trade. But Washington opposes a legally-binding plan that would, among other things, prevent governments from supplying small arms to rebel groups. U.S. officials say the clause would rob them of future foreign policy options, such as helping to overthrow a threatening regime. Critics argue that by rejecting the clause, the United States is leasing dictators with that same option.

The Bush administration also opposes blanket references in the current draft to "small arms and light weapons." The United Nations lists small arms as weapons designed for personal use and light weapons as those designed for use by several persons serving as a crew. Examples of small arms include revolvers and self-loading pistols, rifles and submachine guns. The United States believes that the conference needs to focus on the illegal trade in military-style weapons only and not firearms such as pistols and hunting rifles U.S. citizens are allowed to own.

On Friday, conference president Camilo Reyes of Colombia, went home to revise the draft. Even with alterations, diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said they were preparing for long nights of negotiations starting Monday.

Back to Contents at Top of Page

 -- put in place adequate laws, regulations and administrative procedures to exercise effective control over the production of small arms and light weapons within their areas of jurisdiction, and over the export, import, transit or retransfer of such weapons, in order to prevent illegal manufacture of and illicit trafficking in these weapons,
or their diversion to unauthorized recipients; 

-- establish national coordination agencies responsible for policy guidance, research and monitoring of efforts to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade, including aspects of the illicit manufacture, control, trafficking, circulation, brokering, trade, as well as tracing, finance, collection and destruction of small arms and light weapons;

 -- identify groups and individuals engaged in the illegal manufacture, trade, stockpiling, transfer, possession, as well as financing for acquisition, of illicit small arms and light weapons, and take action under appropriate national law against such groups and individuals;

 -- ensure responsibility for all small arms and light weapons held and issued by the State and effective measures for tracing such weapons;

-- put in place and implement adequate laws, regulations and administrative procedures to ensure the effective control over the export and transit of small arms and light weapons, including the use of authenticated end-user certificates;

-- make every effort, without prejudice to the right of States to re-export small arms and light weapons that they have previously imported, to notify the original exporting State in accordance with their bilateral agreements before the retransfer of those weapons; 

-- and develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes, including effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons, particularly in post-conflict zones, as well as address the special needs of children affected by armed conflict.

At the regional level, States undertook to:

-- encourage regional negotiations with the aim of concluding relevant legally binding instruments aimed at preventing, combating and eradicating the illicit trade, and where they do exist to ratify and fully implement them; 

-- encourage the strengthening and establishing of moratoria or similar initiatives in affected regions or subregions on the transfer and manufacture of small arms and light weapons and/or regional action programmes to prevent, combat and eradicate the illicit trade, and to respect such moratoria, similar initiatives and/or action programmes; 

  -- and establish, where appropriate, subregional or regional mechanisms, in particular trans-border customs cooperation and networks for information-sharing among law-enforcement, border and customs control agencies.

Among measures at the global level, States and the World Customs Organization would be encouraged to enhance cooperation with the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) to identify those groups and individuals engaged in the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects, in order to allow national authorities to proceed against them in accordance with their national laws.

With regard to implementation, international cooperation and assistance, States undertook to encourage the establishment and strengthening of cooperation and partnerships at all levels among international and intergovernmental organizations and civil society, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international financial institutions.

States and appropriate international and regional organizations in a position to do so should, upon request of the relevant authorities, seriously consider rendering assistance, including technical and financial support where needed, such as small arms funds.

In addition, States undertook to cooperate with each other, including on the basis of the relevant existing regional and global legally binding instruments, in tracing illicit small arms and light weapons, particularly by strengthening mechanisms based on the exchange of relevant information.  They are encouraged to exchange information on a voluntary basis on their national marking systems on small arms and light weapons.

Back to Contents at Top of Page