« New article on Privilege or Immunities | Main | IG report critical of "Operation Gunrunner" »
Thoughts on tracing of guns in Mexico
Here's an AP article on tracing of guns seized in Mexico. A few thoughts:
1. "In all, the military has 305,424 confiscated weapons locked in vaults..." :The Mexican government has handed over information to U.S. authorities to trace 12,073 weapons seized in 2008 crimes..."
Now, that's comparing total to one year's figures. But the major drug wars really got nasty around 2006. A logical conclusion is that only a tiny fraction, 1/6 or less, are being traced, and those most likely chosen as likely originate in the US. Why waste time trying to trace a full auto Bulgarian AK using American records? When the sampling is limited to gun likely to have a US origin, it stands to reason that much of the sample will ... have a US origin.
2. "Some of the more powerful arms, such as M16 machine guns and sniper rifles, are added to the military's own arsenal." Where do you get a full auto M-16? The likely source is Mexico's military, by theft. But those, too, are counted as having American origin.
3. "About a third of the guns submitted for tracing in 2007 were sold by licensed U.S. dealers." Yet later the story says "Most of the guns traced were originally sold by U.S. dealers in border states, with more than half purchased in Texas."
4. Tracing ends when the gun is traced to the dealer who first sold it at retail. So a gun sold legally in 1990, stolen in 2010 and smuggled into Mexico, would count as traced to an American dealer -- but hardly show that the dealer did anything wrong. The story adds, "Indeed, the ATF gave the AP data showing the average "time to crime" - the time between when a gun was sold and when it was seized in a crime - is 14 years. That's an average of four years longer than guns in American crimes, the ATF said." It certainly sounds like the problem isn't with the dealers; they're making legitimate sales, and the guns wind up stolen long after that.
5. You'd think for something of this magnitude, AP would pick a reporter who knew a little about firearms and tracing. The story talks of M-16 machine guns, a 9mm grenade launcher, of AR-15s modified to fire .50 caliber ammo "the kind of high-powered ammunition designed for sniper rifles."
Here's David Codrea's takedown of the story.
9 Comments | Leave a comment
Well, the M16 is a machinegun under American law, and there are conversion uppers that allow an AR15 lower to be used to fire .50BMG.
Basically the math says that only 1.3% of the weapons confiscated by the Mexican authorities can be traced to firearms dealers in the US. Maybe not all Journos can do math, but somebody must somewhere and yet they repeat the lie since it is now a new tool to defend the anti-gun narrative. One must remember that Journalist are in the NEWS business not in the TRUTH business.
DIOMED, Hardy's question of where you get a full auto M16 is not questioning whether something exists, but what the source would actually be.
Wait, if I cannot just drive down to Texas and buy an M-16 or a grenade launcher (or the grenades to put in them), how do the Mexican drug dealers do it?
Something doesn't add up....
Chris - you'd have to go to a gun show to get grenades, as reported in this article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-29/gun-show-nation/
Wait the anti-gunners lied about the statistics, and played with the numbers to make to look worse then it is? I am Shocked I say SHOCKED!
It's shocking how people get hold of them so easily. as the above poster said, if we cannot simply drive to different states how do they manage it?!
ATF has some sincere employees with good intentions.... However,
ATF would get a LOT more support if they would quit lying to Congress and the American People. Their credibility is so low, that most people don't believe anything they say (especially in press conferences) and are afraid to cooperate with them.
For example: ATF (William Hoover, Executive Assistant Director for ATF) testified before Congress (and in press conferences) that 90% of seized Mexican guns come from the United States. We've known it was false and I'm certain he knew it was false. Yet it wasn't until 2010, when the Office of the Inspector General officially discredited that percentage, that the acting director, Melson now says it doesn't really matter whether it's 20% or 80%. We think it does matter. Are the figures politicized (as he now says)? Yes - falsely - especially by ATF!
As we now know, only a small percent of guns seized in Mexico have been successfully traced. ATF now says that 90% of the guns actually traced are from the U.S. This statement is just silly. In fact, the only guns that can be traced are guns from America. There are no other tracing systems in the world. Most of the guns traced are too old (average is over 10 years) to be of any benefit for law enforcement. At this point, we have no idea how many guns are being smuggled to Mexico - but we agree that too many are.
The basis for ATF to trace a firearm is make, model and serial number. Serial numbers on guns are not sacrosanct. Recording of serial numbers by ATF, police or dealers is subject to human error, as it is easy to misread a serial (for example: between the number 0 and the letter O), omit a digit or two, or transpose a couple of numbers. These and similar errors when entering a serial into the tracing system result in false traces.
Criminals can even add a number or letter to a serial on a gun, or completely replace it with a false number. How is a Mexican policeman expected to know? Once a gun is traced, even falsely or in error, and no matter how innocent the buyer, the first owner's personal data is sent to the Mexican police (corrupt??) and permanently retained in the ATF trace file. The buyer (even from 10 or 20 years ago) is automatically a suspect. It is documented that in attempts to accomplish a trace, Law Enforcement will frequently enter partial serial numbers to attempt a match, which results in additional false traces.
ATF calls all traced guns "crime guns", which is simply not true. Some guns are traced in error, and many guns not related to crime are traced. This skews the data to make it nonsensical. This was confirmed by the federal government (Congressional Research Service).
ATF uses the "catch phrase" of "time to crime". This is totally false and only refers to "time to trace". Their phrase is used to mislead readers of their reports. Also confirmed by the Congressional Research Service).
Now, through eTrace (and the Spanish version), ATF is reporting names and addresses of totally innocent American gun owners to corrupt Mexican police. Certainly, there are some smugglers and/or straw buyers among them, and there are some police who are not corrupt, but who's to know? Why don't we simply hand the Mexican police a copy of the Phoenix or El Paso phone book? It's also got some straw buyers and smugglers listed.....
None of us want to see U.S. guns smuggled to Mexico, but there's no point in all American gun buyers becoming ATF and Mexican police suspects!
It now seems the Washington Post has begun a new campaign drumming up sympathy, support and funding for ATF's (underfunded, understaffed, overworked, underpaid) National Tracing Center to make their traces more efficient (i.e. by automation). We have to question the wisdom and value of tracing guns made and sold some 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago. If ATF would quit encouraging and accepting non-crime traces, their workload would drop. But ATF's goal seems to be more money (larger budget) and more and more traces, no matter how old the gun or obsolete the data or who gets reported as a firearms trafficking suspect...
Did you also note this statement regarding the guns turned over for tracing: "particularly on guns from large seizures or notorious crimes". That also narrows the field extensively.