As has been noted by many, the forcible citizen disarmament lobby's latest attempt to justify draconian gun laws is the rather . . . peculiar argument that "lax U.S. gun laws" are to blame for the bloody chaos in Mexico. The Brady Campaign is continuing this theme (it's apparently the best the other side can come up with), in its latest press release.
“Our polices help enable this cross-border violence,” said Helmke at a news conference in Washington D.C. “For too long, we have been putting our own citizens at risk by making it so easy for criminals to get guns. Now our neighbors are threatened as well, and our national security is at risk. We must do more to keep dangerous weapons away from dangerous people.”Left unmentioned is the fact that the Mexican drug cartels are waging their war with hardware one will never find at a U.S. gun show or shop.
“Mexican criminals, and traffickers who supply them, cannot get the guns they need in Mexico because of Mexico’s strong gun laws,” said Helmke. In the United States, however – especially in the border states of Texas and Arizona – virtually non-existent gun laws enable access to a ready supply of guns including assault weapons and .50 caliber sniper rifles.What was omitted here is that according to the BATFE, #1-Brady-Campaign-ranked California is the state that is the second largest source of guns used in Mexican crime (unmentioned by the Brady Campaign press release, despite it being a larger source than Arizona). California has highly touted (by the Brady Campaign) anti-trafficking laws like "one gun a month," universal background checks, no "gun show loophole," mandatory waiting periods, etc., and extremely expansive bans of so-called "assault weapons."
The best part of the press release, though, comes next.
“Existing laws are so weak that even one of the most notorious dealer supplying the cartels, the owner of X-Caliber gun shop in Phoenix that allegedly supplied 700 guns to Mexican drug gangs, had all criminal charges brought against him dismissed recently. As the X-Caliber case shows, ‘enforcing the laws on the books’ will never be enough: we need stronger laws, and strong enforcement of those laws.”I mentioned George Iknadosian's vindication last week. Get this, though--Helmke doesn't regret that a man was dragged into court despite there being no case against him. Helmke's lament, instead, is that there wasn't some law that Iknadosian was guilty of violating.
Who's bitter now, Paul?