Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« An interesting comparison.... | Main | The government will protect you... »

GREAT coverage of guns and Mexico

Posted by David Hardy · 2 April 2009 10:42 AM

On FoxNews. A great story that I'd say is the definitive piece to date, and will remain so for quite a time.

8 Comments | Leave a comment

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | April 2, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply

"There's lies, damned lies, and statistics."

jdberger | April 2, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply

Let's see if anyone besides the LA Times (who was kudo'd) runs with it....

Carl in Chicago | April 2, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply

I believe that there is far more of this issue remaining to be developed and communicated.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-
Examiner~y2009m4d2-Do-US-government-arms-exports-play-a-part-in-arming-Mexican-cartels

Perhaps the main point of the article above is one that's not yet being discussed elsewhere.

Regardless what proportion of cartel arms originate in the US, the primary question is this:

Of those cartel arms and munitions that originated from the United States, what proportion originated from the civilian arms market, and what proportion originated from State and Defense Department authorized governmental arms sales to foreign nations (Mexico, Central, and South America)?

Secondarily, the point of the article is to communicate that it's absurd, and wholly unacceptable, that any new prohibition on US civilian firearms purchase and possession be predicated on the misuse of arms by foreign criminals, and particularly, when it's likely that our own government authorized sales of those very arms to foreign nations.

Finally, don't forget that all this discussion takes place under a guarantee of law, which reads "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Not to mention the Heller decision, which made clear that commonly owned firearms (such as non-military semiautomatic "assault weapons") meet the criteria of protected arms.

Fox News has some recent coverage, entitled "The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S." But the article largely fails to develop the distinction between civilian market arms and inter-government market arms. The distinction, and the associated data, is crucial to any meaningful discussion of this issue, and any policy based on such a discussion.

AvgJoe | April 2, 2009 12:05 PM | Reply

Just this past Sunday in a round table talk on fox news. One of the guest stated that only a small part of the firearms in Mexico come from the US. One of the talking heads whom is a guest on fox news Juan whatever his last name is. Said that 90 percent is the correct number and want on with the full on liberal line of BS. I turned off fox news and haven't tuned back in. Fox news has a bad habit of taking decent Americans thunder and spinning it. Look at Glenn Beck taking the thunder on FEMA camps and using a jack a$$ to counter FEMA camps with BS. This in MHO is being done with full intent to take the sheeple off guard and get their mind set to block out information as propaganda. Using the First Amendment to feed propaganda so the Constitution can be destroyed by evil is treason. But I'm not a lawyer, I'm the guy who gets in the jury box, guilty! LOL!

Turk Turon | April 2, 2009 12:30 PM | Reply

Great find! Thanks, Dave.

Chris (Mainsail) | April 2, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply

Like most gun control ideas, this one fly right into the face of logic, gets caught in the engines, and the plane crashes (and not into the Hudson).

How could anyone believe for even one second that an illegal organization could or would buy arms piecemeal like that? It would be a logistical nightmare! If you’re going to supply an army, you want to buy a lot of guns all at once. Then you commonality of parts and ammunition as well as having your troops are all armed at the same time. I guess the idiots that spew this nonsense haven’t been in a gun store lately, but you’d be hard pressed to arm an army of three with the same type of weapon if you shopped there.

fwb | April 2, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply

The idiots that spew this garbage haven't touched a firearm.

As I have continuously written ALL over the net since the first appearance of this "news", those drug dealers must be REALLY dumb if they buy NFA weapons in the US for about $14k per pop when they can get them throughout most of the world for about $15 a piece with no background check.

Tiochfaidh ar la!

Alan A. | April 3, 2009 8:40 AM | Reply

AVGJOE,
Fox News is far better than the other networks. PRI just aired a piece about the FOX piece as news and stated that Holder reacted to the piece by saying that the percentage is irrelevant and any percentage is too much. The piece also repeatedly equated M16s and fully automatic weapons with what was being purchased in the U.S. at gunshows and gun shops. They aired the controversy over one lie and at the same time supplemented it with another.

Juan (whatshisname - from PBS) is obviously on that show to give his opinion. The failure is on the others in the panel who don't challange him. I didn't see that particular discussion, but I know they are frequently composed of New York or D.C. urbanites who don't know squat about ANY firearms issues other than what the politicians spew out.

Leave a comment