Gun Control

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
For some reason we've been relatively silent on a subject that is going to have large repercussions and very soon.

Obama, the Campaigner in Chief, during his campaign speech the other day (cleverly disguised as a 'press conference'), mentioned that the US is pretty much at fault for giving guns to the Narco Traficantes in Mexico. Hillary has been seen going about suggesting the same thing, as well as some others in his administration.

This is spurious and weak for several reasons.

1. What types of weapons are being used by the Traficantes?

The fully automatic weapons, mortars and submarines being used by the Traficantes are not sold at your local Gun Show and the ones that are (the fully automatic weapons) occasionally sold there are only sold with the approval and licensing of the ATF. You aren't getting a submarine or a mortar there, it just isn't happening.

2. What laws regulate the fully automatic weapons?

In order to be allowed to purchase and sell such weapons you must have a permit issued by the ATF, as well as a $200 tax stamp. You have to jump through some loops to get this permit and it does not mean you have unlimited access to as many fully automatic weapons as you can get your hands on, they are relatively rare at the local Gun show.

This is most certainly not a pathway for the amount of weapons used by the Traficantes in Mexico.

3. The Mexican government, although they have access to the weapons, refuse to give serial numbers for tracking purposes to allow people to check on the origination point of the weapons. Such information is available, they simply reject any reasonable request for verification. There is a reason for this rejection, and it isn't because it is "obvious" where the weapons are coming from.

When you see the pictures of the dead Traficante, look at the weapon and ask yourself when the last time you saw a Chinese burp gun sold at the local weapons shop.

This is an example of Rahm Emanuel's "never let a good crisis" go by unused. Some people would call this dancing on the grave of innocents. If they are successful in getting people to think that legal purchases of such weapons are somehow getting to Mexico and restrict access to the citizen it would be a "victory" for gun controllers, but it would be based on simple and direct lying.

The most likely place these people are getting these weapons are from people who were cops but also work for the Traficantes, and many of the US weapons that are available to them.... Wait for it....

Were sold to them, or given to them, by the US State department.
 
65% of the american people do not believe the US governments claims that the drug cartels are getting their weapons from the US. I'm not worried about this congress implementing an AWB off of this border war with the drug runners. What I AM concerned about is having Rahm Emanuel trump up some sort of 'clear and present danger' crap to implement a ban using national security and bypassing congress altogether.

The southern states would take great offense to that kind of power play.
 
65% of the american people do not believe the US governments claims that the drug cartels are getting their weapons from the US. I'm not worried about this congress implementing an AWB off of this border war with the drug runners. What I AM concerned about is having Rahm Emanuel trump up some sort of 'clear and present danger' crap to implement a ban using national security and bypassing congress altogether.

The southern states would take great offense to that kind of power play.
It appears to be the direction it is going.
 
if anything is every packaged into a bill the NRA will be all over it and it will get media attention.
 
if anything is every packaged into a bill the NRA will be all over it and it will get media attention.
The problem is Mr. Never Let a Good Crisis Go Unused will likely not let it get to legislation. If it does it will likely cover for a power grab from the Executive as everybody's attention is on the bill some Executive order will be signed and implemented because it is "State Foreign Policy" as it is "effecting the legitimate Mexican Government". IMO, this is far more of a danger than some uber-strict legislation making it past all those blue-dog democrats in office.

They'll use this trumped up "crisis" to just take what they want. It is not the legal sale of arms in the US that gets them weapons, not even close. It worries me that even 35% think that it is the case. You have to be deliberately stupid to think it is.
 
Actually, no. No it doesn't.

You fuckers are crazy.
Wow, not one reason, just nothing. You've really gone downhill.

Please, tell me how it doesn't appear that way to me, since you've become such an expert on how things appear to me. I expect you to follow me around and post one-liners that have no bearing on the discussion, but it is a recent phenomena that you seem to have such "insight" into my opinions and thoughts.

When there are three people in the Administration pushing it, including the President himself, as the way they are getting those weapons it does appear, to me, to be going in that direction. I'd like to nip that in the bud.
 
You've concocted this crazy-ass conspiracy whereby the President is going to unilaterally implement a new assault weapons ban by Executive Order and say that it appear the direction we are headed. Based on what? Your fevered imagination?

It's nutzo stuff.

Edit: It may appear that way to you, but you are fucking crazy if that's what you really think is going on here.
 
You've concocted this crazy-ass conspiracy whereby the President is going to unilaterally implement a new assault weapons ban by Executive Order and say that it appear the direction we are headed. Based on what? Your fevered imagination?

It's nutzo stuff.

Edit: It may appear that way to you, but you are fucking crazy if that's what you really think is going on here.
I've concocted no such thing. We've said we are worried it will go in that direction and believe that when the Administration starts saying such things as a matter of course that there is a reason.

Again, I prefer to nip that in the bud. To show people what direction this can go and get people to voice their concern. A populist will defer to the people.

You again have nothing other than your own opinion on what I think. Your expertise in this area is thin, extremely so. Tell us what you think instead of trying to tell me what I think.
 
No administration is going to mention a problem, name what they think is a crucial link or cause for it, and then let it go.

If they brought it up they are intending to take some action on it.

Now, it could be that a strong reaction at the beginning can change the direction that politicians take it.
 
It is my opinion that people should listen carefully to what leaders are saying, because they do not take up causes frivolously. That freedoms are lost on poor attention to detail and those who do not jealously guard them.

Many people would support such action because they are willing to give up this freedom for others in order to make themselves "safer". Just as there were many willing to have their phone calls tapped because they had "nothing to fear". Policy can, and has in the past, been implemented by the Executive (not this one yet) that can effect your freedoms. Paying attention and voicing an opinion is the right thing to do, even if you think it is "batsh*t crazy".
 
No administration is going to mention a problem, name what they think is a crucial link or cause for it, and then let it go.

If they brought it up they are intending to take some action on it.

Now, it could be that a strong reaction at the beginning can change the direction that politicians take it.
Exactly. Leaders do not take up causes frivolously.

Well stated.
 
No administration is going to mention a problem, name what they think is a crucial link or cause for it, and then let it go.

If they brought it up they are intending to take some action on it.

Now, it could be that a strong reaction at the beginning can change the direction that politicians take it.


The action they are taking is to arm-up the Mexican government, not to disarm the American people.
 
The action they are taking is to arm-up the Mexican government, not to disarm the American people.

right. that is why H Clinton at state is lying to the people by saying that the US is responsible for the drug and gun trade in Mexico. That is why Emanuel is lying about 95% of the guns used by the cartels come from the US. That is why they are holding ambassadorial meetings with Mexico to discuss how to seriously reduce the amount of guns flowing in to Mexico from the US. That is why 65% of the US people do not believe the governmet about 95% of those cartel weapons coming from the US, yet they STILL are pushing that bullshit. The executive branch is STILL pushing that BS because congress is not about to take it on their own and lose democrat power again. Executive branch action is the ONLY method that the democrats have left to implement an AWB and the THEORY is that they may use national security as the reason for doing so.
 
The action they are taking is to arm-up the Mexican government, not to disarm the American people.
Which is the most likely source of the weapons to begin with.

But first you begin with a false assumption, an argument from ignorance, that isn't the action they are taking. It is firstly the excuse they are going to use to put federal forces on the border where they will work "hand in hand" with the current Mexican Government to "stop the trafficking of weapons" that are "causing this". (Of course ignoring the trafficking of humans that is fed in large part by the Narco Traficantes and who are paid back by the trafficking of drugs and other means but heck, why pay attention to a real problem?)

We know that it is the first step because they have directly stated so.

This is a false premise, and that is the point of this thread. IMO, this administration is using this to attempt to "alarm" people into thinking legal weapons sales are somehow causing this. If they are successful in this misdirection then more "logical" steps will follow. This thread is my first attempt to ensure such misdirection falls on deaf ears. We'd have to be blind to believe it. Their weapons are not sourced from the US except those that were given or sold to their government by our government and have changed sides with the person they were assigned to.
 
Back
Top