

What is the international arms trade and who are the major players? - rdl
http://blog.priceonomics.com/post/48362796795/the-business-of-blowing-people-up

======
rdl
The whole first half of the post is kind of off-target, IMO, because it is
dollar weighted, vs. type of weapon weighted.

The US predominately sells two things: big "weapons systems" (radars,
aircraft, etc.) to middle tier countries, and a comprehensive range of small
arms both domestically and to allied countries.

The weapons which primarily affect individuals and civilians in conflict are
small arms, landmines, and certain ISR and ground attack resources. As a
percentage of the total, it's about 1%. It doesn't hurt the life of a guy in
Jordan that his neighbors have F-16s with top-end avionics. It does matter to
a guy in the Congo that a box of cheap AK-47s has arrived.

Within the US, arms are both an economic issue (LockMart, etc. are huge
employers, and wisely spread production/employment across congressional
districts), and a civil rights issue (for small arms; no one really cares
about F-16s for private ownership). Either issue is more than enough to keep
the industry safe.

Russia, etc. are the same.

What I'd really like to see is a great analysis of the domestic small arms
market -- who makes primers, who makes powder, brass, rifles, importation
permits for foreign mil surplus, foreign current manufacture, etc. That is
vastly more relevant to the 2A issues than who makes radars.

~~~
aptimpropriety
I think you're right - the post fails to address how big of a necessary / not
necessarily negative component of our foreign policy/diplomacy is centered
around arms trade. I'm no expert on the subject, but have worked with people
with experience in this area. One thing I remember is hearing that the US has
the distinction/disadvantage in the business of refusing to work with bribes.

My question to you - if you thought the article was off-target, why submit it?
Seems pretty disingenuous to me.

~~~
rdl
The foreign policy aspects are just that we give financial aid to countries
who then are only allowed to buy our weapons -- in some cases we give aid to
our enemies (Pakistan, Egypt) to turn them into dependent friends, or to
"sterilize" our air to our actual allies (e.g. Israel). Outside of our top end
weapons systems (many of which, like the F-22, we refuse to sell), no one is
clamoring for US small arms or other weapons; if we weren't giving them money,
they'd be just as happy with Russian or Chinese arms.

They addressed the issue in the second half. But, this is the world of TL;DR.

------
jessriedel
> Approximately $11.7 billion worth of guns are sold in the United States and
> there are 30,000+ deaths in America each year tied to gun violence.

That first number is a more important than the second by more than an order of
magnitude. Keep in mind George Will's statistic that the US spends more than
$2 billion on Easter candy each year.

~~~
bcl
The 30,000 number is BS. They are likely including suicides. Here are the
homicide numbers for 2011 - [http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-
the-u.s/2011/c...](http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-
the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20)

Actual total for 2011 is 8583.

------
tnuc
It's funny how much money is in weapons and how the media reports it.

[http://www.economist.com/news/world-week/21576445-kals-
carto...](http://www.economist.com/news/world-week/21576445-kals-cartoon)

------
benhodges
Is this really appropriate for Hacker News?

~~~
rdl
I blindly post any priceonomics blog entry because they tend to be awesome,
not specific to the subject matter.

~~~
benhodges
The numbers and analysis are interesting, but the article seems to me to have
some anti-NRA, pro-gun/arms control bias. I think they're usually fairly
neutral.

I predict we'll see another re-hashing of the gun control / second amendment
debate here in the comments.

There have been a few submissions lately that make me wonder if Hacker News is
headed in the direction of Reddit. I don't mean to pick on yours particularly,
the timing was just convenient.

~~~
rdl
Yeah, I agree it wasn't the best priceonomics blog post. I'd be fine with a
really strong/insightful analysis of the firearms or weapons industry (the way
all their other posts have been in the past), but this one looks mostly
political.

Interesting "priceonomics-worthy" aspects of the global arms trade would be:

1) Longevity of weapons -- I mean, I saw _maxim guns_ in Afghanistan. 2) The
weird market in EUCs, embargoes, etc. 3) Stuff like Brown Moses/CJ Chivers
where they analyze the weird origins of weapons used in current conflicts
(e.g. Syria and Libya) -- weird low-volume US prototypes found in Libya, and
Croatian knockoffs of other designs as part of some "elimination of stocks" by
post-Balkan countries.

The NRA/domestic politics parts are the least interesting. Outside of small
arms, the NRA has basically no relationship to the munitions industry, either.

------
Evbn
Too soon.

~~~
jabbernotty
Too soon since what?

