ATF data defy theory (GOP/NRA Big Lie Fairy Tale), tie U.S. gun flow to cartels

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/22/MNCU1KE0CH.DTL

The claim that Mexican cartels rely on huge stocks of military surplus weaponry from civil wars in Central America is the mantra of pro-gun organizations fearful that linking drug violence to U.S.-purchased weapons could lead to more gun control.

Though gun-rights advocates and at least one prominent U.S. senator ferociously stand by that politically charged theory, federal firearms data show only a tiny percentage originate south of Mexico's border.

Indeed, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and others have cited the Mexico-bound flow of weapons from firearms dealers in border states including Texas and California in arguing for restoring the expired federal assault-weapons ban and other gun restrictions.

In response to a query from Feinstein, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reported last month that of the 29,284 weapons recovered in Mexico and submitted for tracing in 2009 and 2010, a total of 20,504 - 70 percent - were "United States-sourced firearms." Virtually all of the remaining weapons were not traceable because insufficient information was submitted.

<more>

:popcorn:

Note the use of AND: "recovered in Mexico AND submitted for tracing"

This means that these guns were not ALL the guns recovered in Mexico. That number is mysteriously not discussed by the ATF, Mexico, or idiots.

I recommend taking a critical thinking course before leaving college.

ps. But I enjoy seeing how much time you dedicate to failing.

Please continue to do so....

they've confiscated - the ones they thought came from the US in the first place. So it's not a surprise that a high percentage of them were US sourced. Second, "United States-sourced" doesn't preclude those surplus military weapons from Central American countries, does it?

This is an old story, intended to deflect attention from ATF's horrific fuckup. However, I don't think it should really matter - even if 100% of cartel guns were purchased in US gun shops and smuggled across the border, it's not an argument for gun control. It's still about drugs...

want to test all welfare recipients for drugs why not gun owners...they should have to get their gun licenses renewed every year and have a drug test.

There has never been an academic discipline which, when in moments of intellectual extremis, has been wielded about so wildly than psychology; after all "some sort" seems to suggest a "sort" of slop-ass, fill in the blank answer passed about the room. "Sort" of like "literacy" tests for blacks in the South through the early 1960s.

in this country - I suggest that violence in Mexico is not an argument for more of those laws. Rather, we should do something about the underlying cause of the violence, which is the drug trade. I'm fond of legalization, myself.

You don't really think it's a good idea to drug test welfare recipients or gun owners, do you? Personally, I think intrusive and unjustified drug tests are too commonly accepted as it is...

everything now...getting a job almost any kind of a job then I say they should drug test gun owners..I guess that there are some jobs maybe they should drug test but once we opened that door
it has become part of everyday life...

it end?

the door to drug testing it seems to me that it is in every part of our lives..and so I say why not gun owners...

any political event. Hey, how about we drug test everyone that posts on the internet or writes an editorial. I see where you are going with this. There really is no need for a constitution, after all, it's for the children right?

crap...people read that in different ways...the right to bear arms but how many arms and what kind do we have a right to bear...machine guns, missiles???

Drug tests for everyone for anything, that is your logical progression.

What kind of arms has pretty well been determined. Non-area affect, man portable arms that would be of service should the militia be called upon. I don't really agree with the man portable part but that is what has been come up with. Machine guns? The 86 ban has not been challenged yet but Heller pretty much asked for a challenge on it and indicated where that ruling would go.

I prefer to oppose unjustified drug tests (and other intrusions into privacy) wherever we meet them, rather than shrug them off as a fact of life and make use of them when it's politically expedient...

Let's look at arms manufacturers and their enablers. The profits for selling arms have always been high and the ethically challenged have no problem collecting them.

"if I don't do it, someone else will".

The manufacture and sale of weapons should have the same moral stigma attached to it as the selling of other human beings.

Granted that some people will always find a way to kill others, but there is no reason to make it easier.

Or is it okay when the state owns arms, just not the little people?

And please - address what I said.

The manufacture and sale of armaments should have as much moral stigma attached as the selling of human beings.

Don't be dense.

There are more than enough guns on the planet at this moment. It's time to stop making more.

You can't have it both ways. That's the thing about a moral stigma. Either the police are tarred with the same stigma, or it doesn't stick. The hypocrisy inherent in that situation is untenable.



Okay, now you've went from the silly to the absurd. How would you propose to implement this? Are we to have only state ran facilities to make guns for the limited number needed for police?

Obviously if you make something illegal to produce, that makes the problem go away, right? *cough* 500 to 700 metric tons of cocaine enter the US each year.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/in-southern-mexico-a-neglected-frontier/2011/06/20/AGt74KeH_story_1.html

Attempting to gin up a moral panic is counter-productive when the majority of people disagree with you.

And some S&W and Colt stocks.

Might as well profit from the continuing blood trade.

That's really what it's all about-- not forcing or encouraging people to buy guns, but insuring that they retain the ability to make the choice for themselves.

The gun industry is rather small. If you added them all together, you still wouldn't get a fortune 500 company.

GoneOffShore (1000+ posts) Sun Jul-24-11 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. OK -You're very convincing - I'll go out and buy a Glock tomorrow.
And some S&W and Colt stocks.

Might as well profit from the continuing blood trade.

Thats what I did, nice return so far.

manufacturers combined wouldn't make the Fortune 500.

The manufacture and sale of weapons should have the same moral stigma attached to it as the selling of other human beings.

Why stop there? Why not; 'trres should be made of cotton candy, and bridges of chocolate bars'? It certainly isn't any more absurd.

But until you can, why should the rights of others be infringed because some people misbehave? Even setting aside the Constitutional point, which is treated with an unfortunate disdain by some gun control advocates around here, guns serve a wide range of safe, legal and ethical purposes. Your argument is based on the mistaken assumption that they are only for (improper) killing.

Your slavery analogy sounds deep, but it's ludicrous. Making and selling guns should have the same moral standing as making hammers, or any other tool.

labs that will be doing the testing. It is about private profit.

point out how ineffective drug prohibitionist laws have been, but that should be obvious.

BTW, your statement "...they should have to get their gun licenses renewed every year..." begs the question. The vast majority of states do not license gun ownership.

Yours, for government intrusion, SteveM

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

What's yours?

:shrug:

so far it's very murky. You apparently think some actions regarding guns are desirable or necessary but so far I haven't seen any actual suggestions from you. If you could wave a magic wand and "fix" whatever you perceive as the "problem", what would the "fix" amount to?

:popcorn: :popcorn:

the length of the border. That should keep those icky guns out. They already heavily defend their southern border to keep illegal immigration under control. They can't send the army to partol their northern border because their army tends to want to help the cartels smuggls stuff for cash. Also, what percentage of those "American sourced" firearms came from Mexican armories? Quite a corruption problem down there, and there have been cases of army units selling guns and grenades and RPG's and grenade launchers to the Zetas. Guns and grenades and launchers that were sold to them by the US government.

And 6pack, I'll give you 500 dollars if you personally are able to walk into a gun shop/gun show/Walmart and buy a functional machine gun, grenade launcher (40mm-either M79 or M203) or live explosive grenades (40mm chalk rounds don't count, since they are legal to own), either 40mm or hand grenades. You have to pay cash, show no ID, and walk out without having to fill out any paperwork. Video of the sale is expected, and required for payment-simply because I trust you no further than I could throw you.

So what do you say, jpak, deal? Or are you going to act like you didn't even see this post and continue on "yup"ing?

You see, the government keeps track of the number of weapon traces it makes..

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09781t.pdf, http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/issue_brief_mexico_2010.pdf

When you add up the last three years- you get- 20,594.

If course, we know from Calderon's own words that over 75,000 were seized in the last three years

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/05/mexican_president_challenges_c.html



What's that percentage? 27%

Oh wait, looking further..

http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=NewsRoom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=8a7bfcd5-5056-8059-76fa-8dece24f4615&IsTextOnly=False&IsPrint=true



This is the same Acting Director Melson who had a video feed of the fast and furious operation to his computer?

Riiiiiight.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:rofl:

these claims:

linking drug violence to U.S.-purchased weapons or other claims like 'Mexican violence is fueled by US guns'. It is completely absurd idiocy.

Drug violence is fueled by drug prohibition and cash. Nothing else. This:



can and will overcome ANY obstacle between Mexican drug gangsters and weapons..including walls, and US gun control laws. Anyone who doesn't agree with this is simple minded. End raygun's war on drugs, decriminalize or legalize. Spend the obscene amount of money currently being spent to fight raygun's war on addiction services and health care. Problem(s) solved.

It was actually a different Republican that started the war on drugs... The so-called war on drugs was started by Nixon.

:toast:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9252490

But don't take this as me trying to dissuade you from Regan bashing. PATCO strike, Reganomics, Iran-Contra, etc...