Pajamas Media

57 Comments

1. pedro:

HMMMM.HMMMM.

Apr 3, 2009 - 3:59 am 2. eon:

There were apparently two totally different sets of hearings in the Senate on this subject this week. In the one columnist David Harsanyi recounted in his recent column, this happened;

“During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week, titled ‘Law Enforcement Responses to Mexican Drug Cartels’, one senator after another tried to induce law-enforcement officials, who have every motivation to play along, to claim that military-style arms are streaming into Mexico from the United States.

“Not one expert agreed.

“The Los Angeles Times, in fact, recently reported that the ‘enhanced weaponry’ used by drug cartels ‘represents a wide sampling from the international arms bazaar, with grenades and launchers produced by U.S, South Korean, Israeli, Spanish or formwer Soviet bloc manufacturers. Many had been sold legally to governments, including Mexico’s, and then were diverted into the black market.’”

In short, aid we send to the Mexican government to fight the cartels has a better than even chance of being diverted to the cartels.

The “other” hearing was the one AP reported. There, Senator John Kerry, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives stated unequivocally that all arms in cartel hands came from U.S. civilan sources. Period. And made all their usual demands for re-instating the assault weapon ban, “one gun a month” and “must show need” laws, and eventual national registration and confiscation- “to save the children of Mexico”, in Kerry’s words. (As the old saying goes, “Whenever a politician waishes to lie most egregiously, he holds up a child.”)

At no point did they mention the small but important fact that the primary sources of the drugs that are bankrolling this civil war are the Far East (heroin) and Colombia (cocaine), specifically the Fuerza Armada Revolutionario Colombiana (FARC), the Communist guerrillas who have been trying to conquer Colombia for fifty years and have moved into the drug trade to bankroll their revolution. The Mexican cartels don’t produce many drugs on their own- they just take the middleman’s cut. The idea of reducing demand up here was never mentioned, either. (Mustn’t offend the “heads”, oh, excuse me, I mean “those more enlightened and sensitive than the common herd”. Just keep dumping on law-abiding citizens we hate for not being as “enlightened” as we imagine ourselves to be. Yes, gun owners.) Legalization of said drugs was, of course, put forward as an option- but softly, softly.

I can only conclude that the only thing our “enlightened leaders”, in government and the media, are serious about, is how much they hate, fear, and despise law-abiding American citizens who happen to own firearms. They certainly seem unmoved by the damage narcotics do to our society- in fact, they don’t seem to define the results as damage at all.

And as far as Mexico goes, if it wasn’t a (spuriously) useful club to pummel those “trigger-happy rednecks” with, they wouldn’t care about it, either.

clear ether

eon

Apr 3, 2009 - 4:34 am 3. e:

I’m getting very tired of hearing in the media that a simple assault weapons ban would solve all of Mexico’s problems.

The world’s gone mad.

Apr 3, 2009 - 4:50 am 4. Leigh Thelmadatter:

I don’t see the Mexican government suddenly changing its gun laws on its own volition. This country has a long history (at least as far as Mexico City is concerned), stretching back to before the Conquest, of a small privileged minority controlling a large, disenfranchised majority and despite the progress Mexico HAS made in this respect (the demise of the one-party PRI state), the fact of the matter is that those in the upper-classes, in their bubble in Mexico City, are scared to death of an armed populace.

However, such may come about with or without the government’s blessing. Mexico is not a monolith. The north of Mexico is similar to the US west in a number of ways, cowboys and far more independent-mindedness than those of the central (where I live) and south, primarily because this region had no experience with domination until the Spanish came, and even then it was relatively weak. The Mexico City government’s hold here is still quite weak compared to the rest of the country. This is part of the reason why the cartels have been successful in pushing out and co-opting government authority as much as they have.

What Calderon is desperately trying to prove to the “norteños” is that the government can take back control and re-establish law and order. If he fails, and there is every chance that he can fail, then the citizenry of the northern states (and perhaps Michoacan but that is far less likely despite the violence there) will either decide to make the cartels their de-facto government or decide to arm themselves illegally, and push the government to recognize their re-claimed right to arm themselves (a la Pancho Villa). Either way, they will stick it to Mexico City.

Apr 3, 2009 - 6:46 am 5. Bob Owens:

Also keep in mind that a bit of investigative reporting by a team of reporters found that the claim being made that 90% of the guns being used by cartels come from the U.S. is based upon the fact that of the guns turned over to the U.S. for testing, 90% of those are of U.S. origin.

The fact is that the much larger group of firearms recovered in Mexico are never submitted to the U.S. government for tracing because they clearly come from other countries.

How many of the cartels weapons come from somewhere other than the United States?

83%

The story told by the BATF, Kerry, Obama, Holder, etc is a complete and not even very complex lie.

Apr 3, 2009 - 6:50 am 6. savage24:

The biggest share of the M16 rifles that the cartels have came from the US Government. These rifles were given to the Mexican Army. A real solution would be ” Stop Doing Business With Corupt Governments”. The sad part of this is, with the Obama crowd it’s blame the American people for everything.Truth doesn’t stand a chance.

Apr 3, 2009 - 6:53 am 7. Steve P.:

Bob Owens writes: “Yes, there are small arms and ammunition being smuggled illegally into Mexico by cartels battling the authorities and each other for supremacy. Yes, many of those firearms presently come from the United States, but they are brought in by cartels that specialize in international smuggling.”

You write that as if somehow our responsibility for this crisis is mitigated by the fact that it’s not Americans who are smuggling the guns but Mexicans that are sneaking into America, buying arms wholesale from us and then sneaking back over the border. What’s the difference? They’re getting American guns from American sellers and using them to murder law enforcement.

And the reason they come here to shop for guns is not simply the proximity, it’s because we have some of the most lax gun laws in the world. If it were easier to get guns somewhere else, they would. But since we make it so easy for them to get the cop killer ammo they love, why should they go elsewhere?

And using Iraq as a model for anything, especially winning the drug war, is about the most absurd idea I’ve ever heard.

Apr 3, 2009 - 7:01 am 8. goy:

Two things…

One: there’s a very different risk-vs.-reward dynamic in play in Mexico than we saw in Iraq, so it’s not clear the same approach would be successful. Drug trafficking promises enormous financial rewards for the relatively mild risk being taken by cartel members, i.e., given the fact that the U.S. Military isn’t breathing directly down their necks and – short of a “Needless™, Pre-emptive war” aimed at keeping the violence from spreading into the U.S. – isn’t likely to promise direct support to any local militias who might take up arms against them. In Iraq, the reward was purely abstract – being part of islamist resurgence, “power”, … etc. Whatever you want to call it, it wasn’t near the inducement to keep fighting that millions in drug money offers to anyone with the audacity to go after it.

Two: let’s please not kid ourselves that – all of a sudden – the U.S. State Dept. gives a flying fig about Mexico’s violence. Confiscating firearms in the U.S. is pretty much the only thing remaining on the Left’s to-do list, after (see Tom Blumer’s article):

- SSI privatization is likely no longer feasible.
- The money market has been completely derailed through GSE insolvency.
- The number of Americans who pay no income tax (i.e., government employees plus the 50%+ filers with no or ‘negative’ tax liability) now comprises an electoral majority.
- Nationalization of industry is now accepted precedent.
- A plurality of Americans have been convinced that it is immoral to use our own natural resources.
- And now our judiciary has embarked upon legal misfeasance apparently intended to prove that, yes, our Constitution is in fact a suicide pact.

“Common sense” gun laws will be making a comeback in the wake of these leftist successes, the only questions are when and how much open deceit and intellectual dishonesty they’ll employ in that effort.

Apr 3, 2009 - 7:07 am 9. Jim:

I can agree with most of this. Most of the weapons do NOT come from the US, but the left WILL use this to force their anti gun agenda. This is what most people voted for, whether they realized it at the time or not. We’ll see what happens, but I have no faith in the politicians that are in charge of our government. And it is Supposed to be OUR government.

As an aside; Goy, I can agree with almost everything you said. However, government employees (at least the ones that are not elected or appointed) DO pay taxes. It’s still a net loss to our taxes overall, as they do not pay back their entire salaries and benefits, but they do pay.

Apr 3, 2009 - 7:28 am 10. goy:

Yes Jim – the abbreviated point was that we now have a majority of the electorate vested in maintaining a status quo where some 9M citizens are forced to carry over 60% of the total income tax burden, and some 90-odd million citizens are forced to shoulder the entire income tax burden for a nation of well over 300M, plus millions of illegals.

Politicians who promise to preserve this dangerously unbalanced situation have an enormous advantage – even when they’re transparently lying through their teeth about 95% of Americans getting a tax cut or no one earning less than $250k seeing a tax increase.

Apr 3, 2009 - 7:48 am 11. Bob Owens:

Steve P writes:

You write that as if somehow our responsibility for this crisis is mitigated by the fact that it’s not Americans who are smuggling the guns but Mexicans that are sneaking into America, buying arms wholesale from us and then sneaking back over the border. What’s the difference? They’re getting American guns from American sellers and using them to murder law enforcement.

The difference, Steve P, is that you seem to be an advocate for punishing law-abiding citizens for actions of criminals.

He continues:

And the reason they come here to shop for guns is not simply the proximity, it’s because we have some of the most lax gun laws in the world. If it were easier to get guns somewhere else, they would. But since we make it so easy for them to get the cop killer ammo they love, why should they go elsewhere?

For criminal syndicates with global reach, it is indeed easier to get many kinds of weapons somewhere else, and far cheaper at that. That is why there are criminal syndicates that specialize in weapons smuggling, buying machine guns, grenades, rockets, and other weapons on the black market in South America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia, and then shipping them to Mexico where they are resold to the cartels for a handsome profit. That is after all, why 83% of the guns recovered by Mexican police come from these areas… those that didn’t come from the Mexican Army, that is.

From weapons to ammunition, it can all be found cheaper outside of the United States than inside it, and many of their weapons can’t be bought here at any price.

The only reason that some American weapons are being found in Mexican hands is that until Obama was elected, the supply of guns on this side of the border allowed the cartels to up-gun their forces more quickly than waiting for an overseas shipment. Now that most popular weapons and ammunition are more months-long backorders here, expect the cheaper price and increased rate of fire of black market weaponry to squeeze would be America-to-Mexico smugglers out of the market almost entirely.

And Steve P, “cop killer” ammo is a media created myth. Most centerfire rifle ammunition common in big game hunting will penetrate the common body armor classes worn by police, and BATF has been in charge of identifying true armor-piercing ammunition, which has been illegal in the United States for decades.

Apr 3, 2009 - 8:01 am 12. John Galt:

According to one source I read over 83% of the guns used by the Mexican drug dealers in Mexico come from countries other than Mexico.
=======================
The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.

While 90 percent of the guns traced to the U.S. actually originated in the United States, the percent traced to the U.S. is only about 17 percent of the total number of guns reaching Mexico.

By William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott

FOXNews.com

Thursday, April 02, 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/

The Marxist leftist are are lying in order to attempt to violate the American Constitution.

Unfortunately Mr. Owens wrote his article without having all the facts. Worse yet PM published it.

Apr 3, 2009 - 8:36 am 13. John Galt:

Corr:

I meant to say “from countries other than America”

Apr 3, 2009 - 8:37 am 14. Bob Owens:

Galt,

The Fox story in no way invalidates what I wrote nor disagreed with it in any way, shape, or form.

Did you actually read what I wrote, or just “assume” something, with predictably bad results?

Apr 3, 2009 - 8:49 am 15. Old Soldier:

Steve P.
“we have some of the most lax gun laws in the world… so easy for them to get the cop killer ammo they love, why should they go elsewhere?”

Please describe where gun laws are so “lax” that it is legal to sell guns and ammo to an illegal immigrant.

Please describe “cop killer” ammo to me (brand and product name would helpful).

I will answer your question for you. They will go elsewhere (Central America, corrupt Mexican military and police sources) because those sources are far cheaper and have real military equipment (not semi-auto look-alikes).

Apr 3, 2009 - 8:59 am 16. Brian Richard Allen:

America’s feral gummint does own responsibility for the breakdown of law south of our border in the same way it owns responsibility for the monetary disaster whose iceberg-like tip has recently intruded into the national consciousness.

Although the unlawful, illegal, un-Constitutional and feckless Federal Reserve has engineered the mechanics of the recent and of every other of the very many monetary mess-ups it has made since its creation, at the root of the feral gummmint’s every problem is the policy that ensures that at every level of lawmaking, bureaucracy, policing, lawyering, accounting and banking, all of the money (and all of the power that attaches to it) finds its way into the hands of America’s and of the world’s most evil men.

And the policy is Prohibition.

Just as all of the equipment and the hundreds of fixed and rotary-winged aircraft upon which the likes of The Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics Matters and Law Enforcement’s “Air Wing’s” hapless former “director,” John McLaughlan and every other of that corrupt institution’s other members of the permanently parasitical class squander Scores of Millions of Dollars of the confiscated wealth of productive Americans eventuall finds its way into the hands of other evil men, so does much of the armament and ammunition lavished upon Mexico’s corrupt police and military find its way — along with several hundred thousand deserters — into the hands of Mexico’s mass-murderers.

The “drug war” — only ever being waged by such hapless liars and idiots as State’s Air Wing’s Mr McLaughlin and his ilk, every one of them, before being dredged by various layers of gummint from the detritus at the talent pool’s bottom, having been ten times tossed back by the many first, second, third, fourth and fifth-class United States employers who fish and sein and net and trawl and long-line and exhaust the pool’s talent — was of course, except to those parasites sucking from its public trough siphons, lost long before it started. And has so corrupted every one it has touched as to have made it Tequilla Sunrise difficult to tell its “good” men from its “bad.”

So repeal Prohibition, already and, by a stroke of the president’s pen, rid the world of all of the crime it causes, including in Mexico — and begin the healing process that will eventually restore to the forces of Good, the world’s wealth and the power that goes with it — and the moral authority long ago stripped away from every layer of every affected government — and from every bureaucrat, politician and policeman.

Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifO’ZEROcated 90028 — and the Far Abroad

Apr 3, 2009 - 9:24 am 17. stace:

At least she’s no longer a lawmaker, but Hillary Clinton is contributing to this meme, too. Last week in Mexico she said that our 10 year assault weapon ban was one of the tools that drove down our crime rate.

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2009/03/27/secretary-of-state-clinton-on-last-nights-on-the-record/

Apr 3, 2009 - 9:36 am 18. goy:

@17 stace: - … Hillary Clinton is contributing to this meme …
I just ate lunch, so I skipped the video.

But I’ll guess Closet HillRaiser GvS didn’t call her on this outright lie intended for an ignorant, gullible public. The AWB deceitfully addressed a class of weapons that were typically involved in less than 2% of crime nationally. Thus, any violent crime reduction attributable to the AWB per se would not have been statistically measurable. Greta would know that.

The goal of the defunct AWB was to have “living” legislation that could be tweaked as needed to ban an ever-widening selection of firearms. With an AWB in place, all that’s needed to ban a particular model is to have it classified as an “assault weapon” and add it to the list. Some years ago CT came dangerously close to having all semi-automatic rifles banned in this way.

The key to understanding motivation for an AWB is the fact that – unlike the terms “assault rifle”, “battle rifle” or “semiautomatic rifle” – the term “assault weapon” has no inherent meaning and, thus, can be used to ban whatever the legislator wishes simply by making an arbitrary list of characteristics or makes/models and adding to that list as desired – kind of a “bill of attainder”, but for firearms.

Interestingly, the meaningless “assault weapon” term is much like other favorite leftist newspeak terms, like “social justice”, “sustainability” and “climate change”, which have whatever meaning a given leftist wants to apply to a given situation.

Apr 3, 2009 - 10:27 am 19. Frank:

You should have lived in Maryland during the AWG ban. I thought for a while my muzzle-loading 1861 Springfield Rifle Musket was going to be considered an assault weapon because it could fix a bayonet.

Apr 3, 2009 - 11:08 am 20. Steve P.:

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Mr. Owens.

I am not advocating punishing law-abiding citizens for actions of criminals. However, if American guns are being sold to Mexican Zetas, then obviously somewhere in that transaction is a law-breaking American citizen who ought to be punished.

Additionally, according to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, American gun sellers supply the cartels with 95-100% of their guns. Even if this is a gross exaggeration on the part of the ATF, which is entirely plausible, we’re still most likely looking at a frightening stat of 60-70%.

So that still leaves us with the undeniable fact that American guns and American sellers are a huge part of the problem, but even moreso are the American narcotics laws that fund this war.

If you change the narcotics laws, you won’t need to change the gun laws because the huge $ hit that the cartels will take from removing the product from the black market will make it very difficult for them to afford the arsenal they currently enjoy.

Apr 3, 2009 - 12:03 pm 21. Old Soldier:

Steve- Read the article that John Galt linked. The ATF is full of crap. Their numbers fall apart with the smallest bit of investigative reporting.

“In fact, it’s not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.” Of that 17% – many were originally sold to Mexican law enforcement or military agencies – then ended up in the hands of the drug cartels.

I say again – they don’t want no stinking high-priced gun-store semi-automatic rifles. They want the real military stuff – cheap.

Apr 3, 2009 - 12:47 pm 22. The UnPatriot:

Steve P.

I really am trying to get my head around your logic. You have simply restated (and inflated) the already discredited statistic about Mexican firearm sourcing. By quoting ATF instead of Hillary Clinton does not change this fact. If ATF truly has independent, verifiable data, let’s see it. Also, promoting a completely made up, arbitrary “most likely … 60-70%” number is, I hate to say it as you seem to be making an effort to be reasonable in your last post, dishonest.

Additionally, please explain to us all how is limiting access to firearms to “law-abiding citizens” for any reason not punishing those self same “law-abiding citizens.”

–The UnPatriot

Apr 3, 2009 - 1:16 pm 23. goy:

- The ATF is full of crap. Their numbers fall apart with the smallest bit of investigative reporting.

Actually, this looks to be a case of intentionally misquoting the ATF in order to lie about what they reported. According to La Jeunesse / Lott:

In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced — and of those, 90 percent — 5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover — were found to have come from the U.S.

So the 90% figure is accurate as far as it goes – it’s just that the ATF was not reporting on all firearms used in Mexican crimes, they were reporting on only a fraction of those firearms. Anyone quoting this “90%” figure as Steve P or Hillary have is either intentionally lying about it or willfully maintaining ignorance about it, since the facts on this have been widely reported at this point.

What’s troubling about this is the magnitude of the lie these politicians are spewing, and the fact that it is so easily debunked. This indicates they’re convinced that the majority of the American public is either completely ignorant of the facts and/or can’t discover them on their own, or that they’re willing to go along with the lie. Either way, it’s a clear indication that gun-grabbing is once again on the agenda in D.C.

Apr 3, 2009 - 1:37 pm 24. robotech master:

To 7. Steve P

I wholeheartedly agree that we need to stop the smuggling even if its only a few percent of the total weapons… however banning US citizens from buying guns isn’t going to do that…

However shutting down the border and locking it up tight will pretty much stop almost all weapons smuggling. Plus you also understand many of the weapons being transferred to mexico through legal means are by those who are duel citizens who come to buy guns in the US to protect them from the cartels. Those guns are then stolen or have their owners killed and are taken by the cartels… or mislabeled as cartel weapons and sent back to the US.

The only fix is to close the border period.

Apr 3, 2009 - 4:16 pm 25. Tonya:

#24 Robotech Master

I agree, close the border. This will solve all problems.

Do not forget about the human trafficking that is going on in Texas. I’m sure it goes on in other border states. The illegals bring over the little girls and sell them. This has been on the prime time news.

Apr 3, 2009 - 5:10 pm 26. Bill N:

Wait a minute here. Are you telling me that Mexican citizens cannot legally own guns? Then how in the world can they have a problem with violent gangs? If guns are outlawed, as you say they are in Mexico, how can there be gun violence? Or could it be that gun laws don’t work and actually make lawlessness worse? Hmmmmmmm?

Apr 3, 2009 - 9:10 pm 27. Ranger8-89:

I’ve been here in Iraq for the past 3 yrs and I can definately say arming the citizens truely changed the game. The fact that they can fight back as a community against AQI made the surge a success. I do belive without a doubt if the citizens of Mexico were armed, the cartels wouldnt broker near the power that they do. Reality is he who is armed makes the rules.

Apr 3, 2009 - 10:12 pm 28. bill-tb:

Bravo, arm the Mexicans. Oh ohh what will the aristocracy do when the peons come for them next.

Maybe we could try this in New York?

Apr 4, 2009 - 7:31 am 29. Sam:

Keep hacking at the leaves folks. We can strike the root by legalizing drugs thus ending the enormous monetary incentive of the cartels.

Apr 4, 2009 - 8:13 am 30. Gringo:

Leigh Thelmadatter:
Either way, they( the northern Mexicans) will stick it to Mexico City.

Which reminds one of graffiti one occasionally sees in northern Mexico:”Haga patria. Mate un chilango.”
Forge the fatherland. Kill a chilango ( someone from Mexico City.)

Apr 4, 2009 - 9:22 am 31. M. Simon:

Mexico is not Iraq. Mexico is Afghanistan.

Apr 4, 2009 - 9:31 am 32. M. Simon:

Bob says:

The spike in violence due to heavily armed gangs in Mexico can be rectified, but not through the failed model of near-complete prohibition.

Now if only that could be applied to drugs we might get some where.

Apr 4, 2009 - 9:33 am 33. M. Simon:

eon says:

Mustn’t offend the “heads”

You wanted a war on heads. You got one. Quitcherbitchen.

You want a war on heads. The heads want a war on guns.

Seems fair to me.

Apr 4, 2009 - 9:43 am 34. Tony:

Wait a minute, dincha ever see “The Magnificent Seven?” The specific problem is that the peaceful Mexicans only have pitchforks, they don’t fight the banditos. Spreading guns around isn’t going to turn them into Yul Brynner.

Apr 4, 2009 - 9:52 am 35. Cattle Baron:

“What’s troubling about this is the magnitude of the lie these politicians are spewing, and the fact that it is so easily debunked. This indicates they’re convinced that the majority of the American public is either completely ignorant of the facts…”

Of course they’re convinced. Given the dumbing-down of American public education over the years, one cannot expect there to be a large number of critical thinkers among the general public. What can be expected are large numbers of people whose emotions can be easily exploited by selective reporting of “facts”, generating sympathy for whatever issue leftists think needs addressing, from “bonuses” to “gun-control”.

Apr 4, 2009 - 10:04 am 36. Tara:

great job at pointing out that the cartels are also arms traffickers and deal with an international network from china to israel, north korea, etc. however, you’re wrong about average mexicans not being armed. even though gun laws are ’strict’ on the books in mexico doesn’t mean anyone respects them. mexico is a gun culture, and has been since the spanish conquistadores descended on the area–which is also how long mexico has been dysfunctional.

Apr 4, 2009 - 12:31 pm 37. Tara:

forgot to mention that the mexican people buy guns from cartel dealers in mexico. i would guess that most of the small-arms trade of guns from the u.s. are intended for this market, while the insurgency-type violence of the cartels is armed internationally.

Apr 4, 2009 - 12:40 pm 38. AlexinCT:

You are missing the point people. This is just one of the many excuses & lies a totalitarian government, trying to seal its grip on power, would invoke to increase its ability to circumvent the second amendment, and control gun ownership by by their citizens, or outright ban it. Facts mean nothing. the agenda is to create fear and sympathy for a massive reduction of gun rights followed by confiscation.

Americans should be frightened that our own government and elite are calling for draconian reductions in our second Amendment rights. And at a time where our government has abandoned fiscal sanity and is rapidly turning the economy of our country into a third world one, while they use the crisis of their own making to increase their own power and grip on it. What’s next? Will they claim that any information not vetted by the government harms the Canadians, and completely subsume whatever small segment of free press we have to government censor ship?

Be afraid.

Apr 4, 2009 - 1:00 pm 39. COL.SEBASTIAN MORAN:

STEVE P.
#7
Precisely where did you come up with the idea that we have some of the “the most lax gun laws in the world”. An iota of research into the subject would prove that this observation of yours (and every other one you burden us with) is pure and simple horse manure (I’m trying to remain polite). Lord, you sound like another Brady a$$hole – “cop killer ammo”. Do you know how to think for yourself, or do you simply consume and digest every particle of Lib crap you can come up with ? Please don’t burden the readers of this site with any more of your sophomoric garbage.
S.M.

Apr 4, 2009 - 1:21 pm 40. COL.SEBASTIAN MORAN:

STEVE P.
#7
BTW – define “cop killer ammo” for those of us who are members of the shooting fraternity…..
S.M.

Apr 4, 2009 - 1:23 pm 41. Mike:

re: Tony and the “Magnificent Seven”:

Right movie, wrong conclusion: Until those peaceful farmers admitted to themselves (as the old man told them) that they had to fight, they were and would always be victims.

In order to stand a chance in that fight, they needed a) to know how and b) have the proper weapons.

Calvera and his crew were well-armed and experienced. The farmers were neither. So, they sought support from outside and convinced Yul Brynner, Charles Bronson, et al to help.

The good citizens of Mexico – if they want an end to that violence – need to be armed to fight latter-day Calveras. Peace through strength.

Apr 4, 2009 - 2:21 pm 42. augustr:

I haven’t read all the comments but maybe we should build a wall between the countries to slow the smuggling both directions!

Apr 4, 2009 - 3:51 pm 43. Swen Swenson:

An interesting article and I’m all for an armed citizenry here and abroad. One minor quibble though:

The same smuggling networks that bring bulky shipments of cocaine, heroin, and marijuana across the borders of multiple nations as far away as Afghanistan can easily bring in shipments of relatively compact goods such as small arms and ammunition.

I don’t know the current street price for various drugs, or for full-auto weaponry for that matter, but I’d be willing to bet that a pound of heroin could be traded for hundreds of pounds of small arms ammo. Pound for pound the drugs are all much more valuable — more “compact” if you will — than an equal value of arms and ammunition.

It is a minor quibble though, as the smugglers who bring in semi-trailer-loads of drugs should have no problem bringing in semi-trailer-loads of guns and ammo. I’m sure they look at it as the insurance that covers their main money import.

Apr 4, 2009 - 6:42 pm 44. M. Report:

Mexico would be a good proving ground for the
robotic targeted assassination devices the US
is developing to put an end to terrorist groups;
the Drug Lords’ organizations fit the definition.

Apr 4, 2009 - 7:23 pm 45. Ulises Jorge:

I think that you are looking at the wrong model to apply to Mexico. In many ways Mexico is very different from Iraq, and flooding the country with legal weapons as you propose may not work. Or maybe it would, I don’t know but… something similar to Colombia’s Democratic Security Policy could.

Colombia in 2003 offers a better analogy than Iraq. Colombia at the beginning of this decade faced in the FARC and right-wing paramilitaries a formidable enemy, ruthless and drowning in cash from their narcotics operations. Mexico today faces a similar treat from the drug cartels.

Colombia did receive and continues to receive millions of dollars in U.S. aid, valuable intelligence assistance and training. But Colombia’s Democratic Security Policy recognized that they could not depend only on U.S. help, but that they will have to bear the brunt of the effort to defeat their enemies.

As such, Colombia increased their own defense spending, even going as far as creating a special tax to fund new army units. Today the paramilitaries have demobilized, the FARC is decimated and Colombia’s government is in the driver seat.

Mexico on the other hand acts as if only the U.S. could solve their problems with the drug cartels. I’m astounded at the high expectations that is put on the Merida Initiative, which provides for $400 millions dollars annually in U.S. assistance.

Yet, at the same time Mexico’s government last year spent $19 billion in a fuel subsidy to “shield Mexicans from spiraling world prices”. Just half that amount could fund the equivalent of almost 23 Merida Initiatives.

So I ask: Which is more urgent, saving your countries from the drug cartels or keeping gas prices low? Colombia in 2003 decided that it was the former and acted accordingly. Will Mexico do the same or will they just extend their hand north and expect the U.S. to fight for them?

Apr 4, 2009 - 8:43 pm 46. Mudpie:

All you people that want to lower the price of
drugs by leagalizing it, explain to me how it
will be cheaper after dumbocrates tax it? Check
the price of cigarettes.

Apr 4, 2009 - 8:53 pm 47. Anonymous:

I’d say the answer is to arm the rural citizens of Mexico with military-grade weaponry, but they’d provavly just sell the things. Corruption integral to a society stops any effort at fixing any problem. Our corruption has not quite reached the lowest levels of society yet, but it is working its way downwards. We can’t help Mexico to solve its problems, because we ourselves have become too corrupt to function.

Apr 4, 2009 - 11:11 pm 48. eon:

#33 m.simon;

If you think we have a “war on ‘heads’”, you must be living in Turkey.

If you think we have a “war on drugs”, you are living in a fantasy of your own creation.

What we have is a system that winks at drug use by the “elite’”, and sees it as a mark of social distinction.

We also have de facto legalization of marijuana through the spurious “medical marijuana” dodge at the state level, instead of having a single national standard for the medical use of the active ingredient, tetra-hydra-cannibinol. I’ve long suspected that the reason we don’t is that if such a nationwide standard were to be promulgated, the FDA would be legally mandated to determine the exact beneficial effects and potential side-effects (if any) of oral-respiratory delivered THC. And what if they found that the effects were either (a) minimal compared to more traditional methods (pill, IV, etc.), or (b) worse yet (from the advocates’ POV) just a placebo effect- that is, people were told it works, believe it works, and so it “works” whether it actually does or not?

This would not be happy-making for the heads. The fact that the “advocates” are tap-dancing around this by carefully avoiding asking for just such tests is telling. If they believed it worked, they’d ask. The fact that they don’t tells me that they have about as much confidence in their product’s actual “healing power” as any other snake-oil salesman. therefore, as long as they can keep the issue confused by keeping it “local” (state level), they can play, get high, and thumb their noses at the “straights” without actually having to prove their case- or even prove that they have one.

And our “enlightened leaders” play along for their own reasons. This issue (the Mexican drug/arms trade) is just one more example.

Our “national drug policy” is a sham, and has been since the Fifties. The fact that while you can be arrested for dealing drugs, but not for just “possession for personal use” in most jurisdictions, and that it has been that way since we first gave Harry Anslinger the job of “stopping” the drug trade, is proof positive of that. In the Sixties and Seventies, a bunch of serious “I want to fry my brain” enthusiasts learned to use the loopholes in the laws, and they’ve been doing it ever since. And surprise!- a bunch of them are the ones helping make the laws, and shape our culture, today.

We don’t have a ‘war on drugs’. We have a price-support system for the suppliers, and a large number of supposedly intelligent people who think that they’re smarter, more creative, more attractive, more sophisticated, cooler, and just generally more wonderful when they’re stoned.

They’re wrong. They’re just too stoned to notice that they’re still making fools of themselves.

As for the “war on guns”- it predates the “war on drugs” by generations. Look up the Jim Crow laws sometime, also the Sullivan Law. In all cases, the objective was to disarm people the political leadership wanted to “keep under control”. The names change, but the philosophy remains the same.

Today the political leadership is anti-gun; no surprise. They are also pro-getting-high; this is only a surprise to anyone who slept through the Clinton Administration. (Suggested reading; “Unlimited Access; An FBI Agent Inside The Clinton White House” by Gary Aldrich. The chapters on the SPIN investigations of the various Clinton staffers who apparently couldn’t function without their Minimum Daily Requirement of pot or coke- and I don’t mean Coke Classic- are hilarious, bordering on surreal.)

A study of history can be very instructive. You should try it sometime.

clear ether

eon

Apr 5, 2009 - 4:50 am 49. amr:

Quite frankly neither government trusts their citizens.

Apr 5, 2009 - 5:09 am 50. Robert:

Steve P., gun control laws are obsolete. Legalizing drugs though, is a good idea. It robs the cartels of their black market drug money that fuels their wars.

Apr 5, 2009 - 6:21 am 51. M. Simon:

eon,

Either the DEA or the FDA has been blocking the studies you ask for for 50 years. I wonder why? Maybe they would give an answer you wouldn’t like.

Apr 5, 2009 - 8:38 am 52. Robert:

For gun control laws being obsolete:

Universal Assemblers

Home made submachine gun (using ordinary home tools)

Apr 5, 2009 - 8:39 am 53. Ulises Jorge:

The Washington Post’s Scott Wilson also thinks that Colombia’s experience is the way to go…but in Afghanistan.

Apr 5, 2009 - 9:04 am 54. craig:

IS it that gun laws are too loose in the U.S. or that the border is too looseley guarded. I say the border is too loose.

Apr 5, 2009 - 9:25 am 55. eon:

#51 M. Simon

You seem to think I’m anti-drug. Surprise; I really don’t care. We tried Prohibition on alcohol, and got nowhere. If people want to inflict damage on their brains, that’s their problem, as long as they don’t harm anyone else in the process. However, if we as a society decide to “legalize drugs”, we have to be ready to accept the consequences. I’ve said that several times here, already.

As for “DEA or FDA” blocking such tests, got proof? I’d be interested in seeing it. On the other side, I see a lot of people marching with signs saying “Marijuana is Good Medicine”, exactly none of whom is an actual M.D., medical researcher, etc. And most of them couldn’t define tetra-hydra-cannibinol to save their lives.

I stand by my professional opinion that the people who are on that side are less interested in easing the pain of chemotherapy patients than they are in appearing smart, sophisticated, compassionate… and of course getting buzzed in the process.

Here’s a challenge, for them and you. If you believe in the usefulness of medical marijuana, and the harmlessness of it or any other drug, then petition your senators and congressmen for hearings to change the Federal laws. Trust me- with the present ruling class in Washington, you will never have a better chance to get things your way. The enlightened Democrats can pass anything on a party-line vote, those evil Rethuglicans can’t stop it, and The One will almost certainly go along with whatever the party leaders on Capitol Hill send to him for his signature. And the media, especially all the celebrity crowd, will cheer all of you on. Not to mention the cocktail-party crowd and the academic “progressive” clique’.

All the stars are aligned in your favor. If you really believe this is the right thing to do, go for it.

It’s the American way.

clear ether

eon

Apr 5, 2009 - 2:30 pm 56. myth buster:

Cop-killer bullets would be any bullet with a Teflon coating. The Teflon reduces friction in Kevlar, allowing the bullet to pierce a bullet-proof vest. They are also illegal to produce or sell in the US.

Apr 5, 2009 - 7:05 pm 57. MEXICAN:

MEXICANS ARE VERY CORRUPT, AMERICANS ARE NOT, IF AMERICANS ARE THE DRUGGIEST PEOPLE ON EARTH IS BECAUSE MEXICANS FORCE THEM TO DO SO, DRUG COMES TO AMERICA BY ART OF MAGIC, DISTRIBUTES ITSELF ALONE, IT IS SOLD BY ALIENS ON EVERY OTHER CORNER, BAZOOKAS USED BY MEXICAN CARTELS ARE MADE IN CHINA WITH A FAKE MADE IN USA SIGN, BECAUSE US ARMY IS UNCAPABLE OF DOING SOMETHING CORRUPT, ECONOMIC CRISIS MIGHT BE CAUSED BY MEXICANS BECAUSE US GOVERNMENT IS COMPOSED BY GREAT HUMAN BEINGS. IM NOT DEFENDING MY GOVERNMENT AS IM NOT BLIND. I HOPE VIOLENCE CROSSES THE BORDER SO YOU CAN STOP TALKING ABOUT THINGS YOU IGNORE.

Apr 5, 2009 - 10:37 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: